skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
“ In the late 1960s, Lockheed and Mcdonnell-Douglas drove each other to ruin by each developing a new aircraft (the L-1011 and the DC-10, respectively) for what turned out to be a very small market: less than 700 aircraft were sold between them. Lockheed ended up abandoning the commercial aircraft market after losing $2.5 billion on the program (~$9 billion in 2023 dollars), and McDonnell-Douglas never recovered, ultimately selling itself to Boeing in 1997 as its market share declined and it was unable to fund the development of new aircraft.”

I don’t think anyone who worked in the industry would attribute the 1997 merger to the DC-10 some 30-40 years earlier. First off, the DC-10 is, as the name implies, a Douglas aircraft. That fiasco did indeed cause a merger, to McDonnell… in 1967.

Also, if McDonnell-Douglas “never recovered”, how did it afford to fund in the 80s and early 90s, the enormously expensive design and development of the C17, entirely with its own money? An effort so expensive no aerospace company ever tried to do it again?

The cause of the 1997 merger was if anything the loss of the JSF contract in 1996 (which became the F35) , which was made necessary by the preceding loss of the ATF contract (which became the F22) and slow sales of the MD-11; most analyses of the 1997 merger focus on the MDC-Boeing rival in commercial airliners, but MDC would have lived through the MD-11 and the merger would have never happened in 1997 if it hadn’t lost two generational fighter contracts. At least, the merger wouldn’t have happened before 9/11.
That sounds wild. Got a reference?
There is no history of new tech not creating more jobs than it displaced. None, zero, zilch. Maybe it will be different this time but with out any evidence to back that up, all of history says that new tech makes more new jobs. So, blocking new tech is protecting a few today and actually preventing more people from having jobs in the near future. Yes, it's no fun for those displaced and we should try to help them but given that more jobs have always been created in the past, protecting those few today means asking more people to go without/starve/be-poor etc. In other words, blocking tech is the exact wrong thing to do if you want more people to have jobs.

https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/michael-webb-ai-jobs...

https://pastebin.com/uix3rgBe
Scott Chacon – So You Think You Know Git – FOSDEM 2024 [video]
> The narrative on Twitter/TikTok that every Millenial and GenZ is starving to death and on the brink of being homeless is really exhausting.

The algorithm has turned (some) people into whiners and doomers. It really sucks to watch them take defeatist attitudes on everything in life.

I see lots of these young 20-somethings on Reddit thinking their lives are over. It's absurd. They have their entire lives ahead of them, and all it takes is one break into a career.

They even think climate change is going to "kill all of us" before they're elderly. That's not even what the science says.

On the topic of having children, though - people aren't having kids because they're choosing to focus on themselves.

There are ten times as many forms of entertainment today as there were in the 1980s, and people can endlessly consume content in their hands. You can go glamping at a music festival, post it on Instagram, and hook up with new friends and romantic partners you meet. All incredibly easily. Our culture has become built around experience and consumption.

I know people in their 40s that are partying, going to clubs and concerts, doing bar crawls, cruises, visiting abroad, jet setting, and climbing the corporate ladder while living incredibly active lives. They don't want to give up their lifestyle to suddenly have to raise children.
Did they add code search now?
A Case for Audio Guides at Museums
If you want to go with Azure Key Vault Cloud HSM then you don't require Physical USB or Token! And Regarding Azure Key Vault Code Signing Certificate and Signing Process you can refer this: https://signmycode.com/resources/how-to-create-private-keys-...!

Also, Azure Key Vault Code Signing Certs starts at just $369.99.yr at SignMyCode.com.

Regarding price hikes, its all about new CA/B regulation about private key storage! https://signmycode.com/blog/ca-b-forum-code-signing-baseline...
> That said, Remarkable the company has been fairly shitty.

Except for the fact that they've released a product that you can do with what you will and use offline.

It seems most other products require you to create an account and log into someone's service to even use the device. They're so scared they can't monetize you!
There's so many google dates to not forget, I've started forgetting them all.
Wikipedia's list is better than the official one because it explains what some of those protocols actually are – especially the early ones which don't have any RFC specified in IANA's registry.

Although, in several cases, there is an RFC, even though IANA's registry doesn't record it. For example, port 1 (tcpmux / TCP Port Service Multiplexer) uses a protocol defined by RFC1078, as Wikipedia's article on it helpfully explains – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_Port_Service_Multiplexer – but IANA's registry doesn't mention that.

Or similarly, port 5 is listed as rje / Remote Job Entry in the registry, but Wikipedia helpfully notes that it is the protocol defined by RFC407 (and maybe RFC725 is a newer version of it?). I doubt that ARPANET RJE protocol (whose syntax resembles FTP, SMTP, etc) ever saw any great amount of implementation; I believe historically the most popular RJE protocols were IBM's (2780/3780 and later Network Job Entry / NJE which was used in RSCS, most notably on BITNET) – but those protocols don't have an assigned port number, since they don't natively run on top of TCP/IP.

There are however some historical mysteries in this IANA registry for which even Wikipedia does not know the answer: the first of many is what ports 2 and 3, "compressnet", were used for. (Edit: What Wikipedia doesn't know, HN does: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37016159
This is rather judgemental.

I don't follow anyone on social media, and I don't post anything about my lifestyle there. It's not a driving force in my life.

I just don't want children. Even if I was bored out of my mind and incapable of travelling, I still wouldn't want them.

People's values have changed. Having babies isn't everyone's cup of tea.
If the layoffs are about "reskilling" as the article claims, does it reflect low confidence in the ability to retrain the existing workforce for the AI future?
I've also noticed this a few years ago, but where is this documented?
Was it already the case in IE6 for example?
Have you found any definitive source, which states this behaviour?
That’s what I was trying to say in my original post. More sleep means less time for the economy. Different people may allocate it differently and some may go for weird schedules. But either way it means less time consuming and less GDP generated.

I’m not sure if there’s „enough“ when people want eternal GDP growth. Including pension funds etc.
Yes. And if you do that today, it’ll reduce one of the major costs. You still have the rest.
No, doesn't look like it. (I had to check.)
I see you didn't get further into my comment than the percent sign.
As a quiet introverted engineer who went out on many dates

as a quiet introverted engineer who almost never went out on dates i have to agree with GP ;-)

actually talking to them about their interests and engaging with that did wonders

completely aside from the topic, this is very important relationship advice.

love means to care about your partner and their interests and goals.

finding a compatible partner means to look for someone whose goals and interests do not conflict with yours. (the need or should not be the same, but it should be possible for each partner to continue to pursue their goals with the strong support of the other partner.)
Ah, I remember Casey Muratori speaking having desktop OS where everything is memory mapped.

I remember reading a book that explains the low level Arduino schematic paired with C code that does exactly what you are describing. Is there any such book for modern microcontrollers?
So if we talk about standards, "my boss can call me out of hours when it is convenient for them and I will make a spot judgement about my availability" appears to be the standard you work to. Which is cool. A little looser than my preferred standard but hey; everyone is a little different. But the law now seems to be that this is illegal and you can launch some sort of action against your company for engaging in this activity. With, for a brief moment, criminal penalties for the the people involved. That seems to me like either a stupid law or a poorly thought out one.

And I'd encourage your boss not to do that if I were you. It was already bad practice and there isn't any point in her taking legal risks.
I think there is a misunderstanding of why cars are dangerous to cyclists and how to fix it. There are only two proven methods, slow car traffic right down til it is essentially co-mingling with pedestrians, or separate the two types of traffic completely. Automating cars changes neither of those. Maybe your lycra clad road cyclist doing 40kmph could co-exist with cars passing them at 60kmph+ but if you wouldn't let your kids cycle there then it's not actually safe. I would not trust a kid riding in a painted bike lane next to Tesla, even if it is less likely to hit them due to distractions there is still a whole host of things that can go wrong and then you face the fundamental issue of a speed and mass mismatch.

Changing the roads and infrastructure is the only way to avoid that fundamental physics problem.
> It's a lot easier to have kids when you have nothing left to lose.

What does that even mean? I also don’t think “nothing left to lose” was really the attitude of the post-War world and (especially) the US.
> Capitalism seems pretty good at advancing technology.

Capitalism is good at providing 'efficiency', nothing more nothing less. It's a dumb (as in not smart not necessarily stupid) filter on economic activity.

I think what they are referring to is that such a system does not prioritize reducing failure rates to zero, it prioritizes reducing costs to zero - 10% is probably an arbitrary lower limit, but the cost of the court fees, medical bills, and manufacturing loss should be greater than the cost of developing and deploying the technology that can reliably reduce rates below X amount.

It's a fairly ruthless algorithm that will justify millions of deaths based upon economics.

Compounding the simple issue above, is when the system attempts to increase efficiency by lowering the cost of legal/medical repercussions e.g. by with-holding blame, fines, and economic relevancy rather than by improving the technology.

E.g. if only 100 people can afford to use a technology then a 1% failure rate is statistically easy to achieve, and efficiently requires very little testing. Applied to a population of millions however that is potentially a mass genocide.

Capitalism has a very dark side, for those willing to look the truth in the face, like with any tool, it can and will be wielded in terrible ways.
your comment doesn't contradict to what I said from math point of view.

35yo still could catch low rate mortgages, and lower prices homes 10 years ago.
Today's 20yo (new generation) is in very larger scrunity.

Also, you didn't support your numbers about age distribution with any kind of references.
I think this is probably true. Historically children would provide for their elders, but that role is fulfilled now more by technology, so in practical terms, they are less needed. It's an emergent trend of humans+technology that acts as a natural limit to our growth, so that as a species we don't just eat all the carrots and die like the rabbits would.

I do fear that Idiocracy might be a little accurate though. The people reproducing currently are the ones who do not consider their future or economics, while the smart ones who do, have less children.
Could be high confidence, but more expensive
which reasons exactly?
Nmap ships with an nmap-services file, which is a lot like /etc/services. However, you might find it interesting because it lists common worm backdoor ports rather than some obscure license server.
You make it sound as if big companies are generally really effective and its enabled by their bureaucracy.
One thing we now had come up three times during the past year was commercial closed source software we had in our eye or were using, where the company was bought, went bust or whatever and took their product down, ceased to do updates etc.

With open source software you at least could pick up the torch yourself or pay someone who does. A particularly bad case involves the software running on our core switches, which we now need to swap out because there won't be any updates soon.

Which is why we want everything to be open source if possible.
Abbey Clancy reckons she was stalked by aliens on the A3
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement
I don't think so, their kids are not robots that can be programmed, they will still choose based on if/when they think they're able to provide for kids.

It'd take regression back to a society where women are considered to have no value outside of being child factories, for parents to be able to indoctrinate their kids into reproducing with no concern for how good of a life they can actually give those kids.
So, later this year, GPT-5 is out, a little bit smarter than GPT-4, and a year later, GPT-6, yet a bit smarter. And every potential and actual employer will want to do what you just described. What do you think is going to happen?
> Maybe it's possible to have profile photos in resumes and to be "ahead of the US in matters of discrimination"

Nope, discrimination is immense here. In US, people at least acknowledge that there is discrimination and something has to be done. Here in EU, we simply deny its existence and accuse the victim of malice and dividing the nation. I actually had this realisation of the issue/difference after a medium stay at US and coming back.
It might make some difference – however, if a person's dating expectations are fundamentally out of sync with what's realistically available to them, having more time to spend on meeting new people might not change the ultimate outcome. What we don't know, is what's the proportion of "probably would have found partner if they'd had more time to look for one" versus "unlikely to have found anybody that would satisfy them no matter how much time they had to look". If it is mostly the former, your proposals might make a big difference; if it is mostly the latter, your proposals are unlikely to change much
Maybe they're just not into it? Some people enjoy living alone without a committed relationship.

A lot of users in this thread assume that everyone's goal is to marry and have children. A lot of people are not interested in that, partly because they have other interests, and partly because the social pressure is not as strong as before.
"... deeming it bad-to-the-point of un-releasability (how they could prove this when no one outside the production had seen it remains a mystery"

Not a mystery at all, the name is enough.
I wonder why they don't have a boat launch directly into the lake.
This[0] wasn't actually used in the game, but it weirdly fits after a couple layers of irony (the game is very anti-violence and makes the point that you, the player, are a murderous psychopath who only needed to walk away the entire time). If you know the full context it's a confusing mix of funny and really dark.

[0] https://youtube.com/watch?v=uvs7LZit3lQ&t=47
I have been building a 3D Scanning App for small businesses
Last year I participated on buildspace.so and built polymuse, a 3d scanning app that does not rely on LiDAR, I published the app on iOS and Android. It's still very early and filled with many bugs. I have zero MRR but got about 1000$ in Sales from the Presale and Lifetime deal.

What should be my game plan now?
It's going to increasingly become a challenge. China's population is contracting.

i think the economic differences and the population density still make immigration a viable strategy for some time to come, despite contracting population everywhere.

the future will be that the population in every larger city will consists of least a quarter chinese and indian (and eventually african as well).
This was my life back with Reader. So strange what my process is like now, so inefficient.
I think calibre will do what you want. Convert to pdf because epub on remarkable2 is significantly slower. You will want to tweak your pdf conversion settings to get the font sized for easy reading.
Me too! Among my cohort of friends that I grew up with, all of us in our early 30's, around 10 people, I'm the only one who is having kids. None of them are even trying to get married. The vast majority of people my age that I meet are not planning to have kids. I can't stop noticing it, and even my wife has started remarking about it now. It honestly does seem like an entire generation has chosen not to have kids..
Video Snippet: The best way to level up your skillset as a web developer
yeah this is not a very good list. if you read "Made in America" (1992) it's clear that the eventual "founding" of Walmart was just a continuation in Sam's entrepreneurial journey that had been steadily gaining momentum for years already with his store management and precursor efforts
Georgia police and FBI conduct Swat-style raids on 'Cop City' activists' homes
You are arguing a meaningless point. The argument form takes what you hope humanity will become as a parameter. You extrapolate from there to determine under what circumstances humanity can become that desired future given the facts we have available.

If we assume that every intelligent species will turn the universe into goo within 10,000 years of achieving human-level technology, then that is only compatible with the fact that the universe is not currently goo under very limited circumstances. Again, I am not arguing that is the future or desirable, I am merely stating that if you believed that then you must also believe that we are also in one of those very limited set of circumstances. Otherwise you need to rethink your beliefs.

The analysis made in the article is: "Assume you want humanity to expand to the stars and that humanity is not special or unique in temperament so aliens will do so as well. Humanity can only come into existence under a limited set of parameters and there are only a limited set of parameters that explain the data we have available."
Fundamental to the whole premise of taxes is that they are applied to net profit. If a company spends $1 to make $10, they get taxed on $9. If they spend $8 to make $10, they get taxed on $2.

Nobody is giving warner bros money. They arent getting a cash tax refund. They just spent more money and made less profit. If they wanted to make zero profit, and pay zero taxes, that is their choice!

If a commpany wants to sell houses at a loss, that is legal, and happens all the time. If they are self dealing, the shareholders could have an issue with it, or the IRS if the CEO doesn't report it.

Guess what, Companies DO give CEOs many millions of dollars of salary and stock. Every bit of that is tax deductible expense for the company.

>Oh well! We can't stop them from wasting their resources if they want to!

It is literally none of your business because they aren't your resources! It is like complaining your neighbors have fun on Sunday instead of working and paying more taxes.
The non-generic special parts that were needed in the past can easily be ignored. At its core it is a generic buffer management protocol and it obviously has all the parts for generic buffer management.
> A film takes hundreds of people to create - how does it feel for them to just have years of their lives fall into the void?

Were they not paid for their labor? It might not feel great, but I struggle to see a moral problem; if a project or even whole company I used to work on/at goes under I might have feelings about it but in the end I shrug and move on (and this is not a hypothetical for me).
It disappoints me that something which severely impacts the lives of perhaps one third of humans isn't better understood.

If it were a prison disease, surely with ~2 billion data points of those with/without dementia, we would have isolated exactly what molecule causes it and how it gets transmitted from person to person.
>Distribution isn't free but it's pretty cheap for getting to sell tickets in major theaters.

Last time I saw numbers on something like this, film advertising costs were generally assumed to be another 50-100% of the production costs. After all, those talk show appearances of all your stars don't come cheap. And your "major theaters" are going to insist on advertising. They're not going to block out precious screens and show times for a movie you're not going to advertise. And that's before we talk about actual physical media distribution, replacements for losses or damaged media, tracking and auditing your ticket sales and everything else that goes into getting eyeballs in front of screens turned into cash in your income bucket.

> And if it's that bad then why don't you sell to a streaming service for one million dollars? Then you only have to deliver a few files and nothing else.

On a multi-million dollar film, that's almost certainly less than the value of the tax write-off, and again may incur costs well and above any revenue. You'll need licensing contracts, lawyer time, accounting time, and again, all the various contractual obligations that kick in on release.

>Contracts based on revenue are fine in this situation, aren't they? If you only get moderately low revenue, then you don't pay much into them.

1) They can still make it impossible to recover enough of the expense costs to make releasing the film worthwhile. As a simplified example, if you spend $50 million making a film, spend $10 million distributing it, earn $15 million in gross revenue, and pay $7 million in gross revenue contracts, you're in the hole an additional $2 million, not counting all the expenses incurred tracking and paying on those contracts.

2) You still need to expect to make your expenses back, regardless. Again in the above example, say instead your gross revenue contracts are only $2 million. Great, you've earned $13 million, on an expenses budget of $60 million. Not even close to beginning to pay for the expenses incurred.
Right, it works well even without it.
I guess you did not have any service running on aws winter 2021? Does not really matter which region, with certain services you could get lucky but basically everything depending on fresh iam creds was down

And if netflix/disney/slack/ring amazon themself can not do it, with a multiple with the ressources i have access to, good luck to you.

there are also times where your company might rely on a single aws product, and it might simply break an integration(aws iot mqtt ->sqs for example) took them 2 days to fix
I sure do! It may also surprise you to hear that I fully support private citizens being able to own and carry guns.

I feel like perhaps I am not communicating my point well here. By giving police guns we are implying that we as a society are OK with them using those weapons. By using those weapons they are likely to kill people. By killing people they are acting as judge jury and executioner. This would seem to imply that we as a society are totally fine with police circumventing the judiciary system.

The argument of course is that cops need guns to protect themselves. Unfortunately guns do not stop bullets. A gun is going to do nothing to stop a cop being shot. Unless they use that gun on the shooter. Thereby again acting as judge jury and executioner. Do you see the problem here?