skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This economic reasoning doesn't make sense to me. If a buyer can't buy because an investor priced them out, they'll become a renter (+1 demand), and that property will become a rental property (+1 supply). These things cancel out. You still haven't explained the imbalance (lack of rental properties versus number of renters) that causes rents to go up.

However, the other poster brought up vacancies, which is a good point. That does give a plausible way that investors can cause rents to go up. But rents are going up even in places where vacancy rates are decreasing, so it's not the full picture.

If you proposed a large vacancy tax as a way to remove this contribution to increasing rents, I'd support that. But the other stuff should not contribute to reducing rents, and it won't be close to a complete solution. Rents should remain high until you build. FWIW, I actually do support all your other proposals too, because reducing prices is good, I just don't think it will solve the rental crisis.
If we cannot regulate companies via a government we control then they will regulate us, and in fact they do as much as they can.
it seems that bringing up Israel in unrelated threads is some new Godwin’s law corollary.
You can manage the files with Calibre[1] and sync them onto an e-reader like the Kobo with a click.

[1] https://calibre-ebook.com/
I don't think fans indicate acceptability. For example, serial killers have fans.
False. The message is the US government doesn’t want Americans to freely speak out against American foreign policy such as the current genocide against the Palestinians.

They want US citizens to communicate on US platforms where they do have influence and control so they can censor speech and continue the capitalist forever wars.
They could be three types on that dimension: 1. Freshly made and delivered locally on hourly scale; 2. Take and bake or fry perhaps same day; and 3. Frozen for longer term.

I find that desis and non-desis alike are samosa fans.
> Also, if the ISP at home can do 10Gbps, 1Gbps, 300 Mbps whatever... I want to be able to use them with a single path, so there is no gain using multiple paths. Eventually, when I have cable+wifi connected at the same time, I use to force one of both, cannot see a reason to prefer using both at the same time.
>

I don't understand why you would want to be able to use them with a single path. the gain would be being able to aggregate them and have individual tcp streams faster than any one IP connection could handle.

Though personally I think the resilience is more appealing. Not having to have a hard cutover when wifi degrades as I walk away would be nice
> tariffs should be equal to what China taxes US firms

We’ve been in a trade war with China for 6 years [1].

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93United_States_...
8 years old.

I took a class using Commodore 64 machines, and when BASIC made them beep in different tones, I was hooked.
"Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" is a very old saying. The sentiment is similar to how many companies have blindly adopted FAANG-style Leetcode interviews even when their work is completely different from what the FAANGs do, as well as the adoption of other fads such as stack ranking. It's easier to imitate the market leaders than it is to innovate or invent, and innovation/invention requires taking risks.
> I am surprised there is such resistance here to be honest.

You’ll probably not be surprised to find out there’s a lot of anti-US sentiment courtesy of Chinese, Russian and Iranian propaganda.

Plenty of younger folks fall for it, same stuff in the 70s and 80s on college campuses with supposedly well educated people talking about how the Soviet Union had higher standards of living than the US, and the “tyranny” was all just American propaganda.
The best time to plant a shade tree was twenty years ago. The second best time is today.

And realpolitik, I get that both parties work for and benefit from the corporations in their own ways, and aren't too keen on legislation that protects individual rights at the expense of corporate control. I just hate the blatant hypocrisy - this TikTok situation has only come about due to the past two+ decades of regulatory abdication.
A beautiful way of putting it. I like this phrasing because I think it shows how progress in science actually elevated our confidence in Newtonian behaviors by having them as a special case of a theory with a stronger foundation.
Let me give the other side of this because I used to believe this too

I'll start with the most important first

1. When you take YC money you get to pay yourself. You wont be paying yourself FAANG money (if that's still achievable nowadays who knows) but you are paying yourself to build a company you own the majority of. So yes, they want you to dig to the center of the earth to find gold but you are being paid to do so.

2. I don't think starting a niche startup is meaningfully easier than starting a startup seeking uber growth. While a tech startup might require more up front knowledge I don't think startup ceos are working harder than the baker that's waking up at 4 am every day.

3. YC has a very good success rate and I think it's related to services they provide founders and the network.

I think if your business falls into the category of hyperscale startup and you are a first time founder I really think YC is worth it. They seem to have a system that works.
Overly zealous opinions of any form are, to me, often eyebrow raising. Yes the acknowledgement of self-promotion gives the guise of candor, but does make clear the attempt to gain by standing on the shoulders of giants to reach the stars. To YC or not to YC is a personal decision that one should make on their own assessment of cost/benefit of doing business - and not be based on the emphasis of talking heads, no matter how they attempt to appeal to the emotions.
Politics aside, how that in principle is different from "hostile takeover" (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hostiletakeover.asp) ?
> Congress is banning a company

It gets banned if it refuses to divest. If China is unwilling to let go of TikTok, even at the cost of tens of billions of dollars, that sort of tells you it has non-economic value.
I think you mean clichés.
Squids don’t have the option and we, admittedly, do. Nature is intrinsically and deeply cruel, but we could choose not to contribute. I think that if we do contribute, we should admit we do it for the pleasure of eating nice tasty meat and just call it worth it. I do agree with the whole hunting is better thing, but I don’t think there’s any objective reason, just vibes.
I also think that, if we can grow like lab meat in the future, we should switch to that. It’s not gonna be viable for a long time tho.
I can see what you mean. Europe should force the US to divest from Facebook and have it transferred fully to European owners.
You could still cheat. It’s not fresh in my memory but the correct page number was distinctive and the incorrect pages did not load instantly, so you could just press all the colours until you saw the right one!