skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As someone from a country where when you ask for a drink, you get like 3x as much vodka as you would in the UK or US, when I was young I typically drank vodka with lemon soda, but when I lived in the UK I switched to vodka red bull. The reasoning was "so little vodka does nothing so let's see if at least the red bull does something" which was at least partially true, although still didn't make up for the lost alcohol content with respect to what I was used to :) Back to my place, I stopped having vodka red bull except very infrequently to remember those times, but here, with serious amounts of vodka, it's quite a bomb.

I've never seen these energy beers (not sure if they were even sold in my country or countries where I lived) but I might have liked them.
Even on Mac OS some system screens are web view :)
my friend, XGBoost is not a neural net-based method, it represents a best-of-breed for an alternative family of methods.

"While the XGBoost model often achieves higher accuracy than a single decision tree, it sacrifices the intrinsic interpretability of decision trees. For example, following the path that a decision tree takes to make its decision is trivial and self-explained, but following the paths of hundreds or thousands of trees is much harder."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XGBoost
What do you gain from your vitriolic hatred?
How does this compare with TempleOS? Sounds quite similar what with the single address space.
I’m not familiar with all of the ones that already exist, but this is clearly trying to replicate the Jeopardy look and feel. Back in the NES days, there were licensed Jeopardy cartridges and board games. Maybe things haved changed… but I’m pretty sure they still protect at least some of the Jeopardy brand.
I’m saying even the inhuman transactional model at least has a concept carved out for like, long-term investment and savings. Just playing Devil’s advocate really.
What would be considered ruined Leaf EV batteries that have significant range loss (20% to 50% degradation, for a car that went around 60 miles with a full battery) are being used to cover peak load right now in California and have been used to do so for years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqlOlqK_ot8

2nd life use cases for cheap, mass produced batteries like this are more common than you think.
This isn't a feudal country and a single magnate leaving will barely affect the economy. What affected the Rust Belt, and is causing problems nationally, is that ultrawealthy people like Jeff Bezos are manipulating the government to change the laws in ways that allow him more concentration of wealth and power at the expense of the middle class. The lack of a middle class is what causes an economy to go down, and that is why the Rust Belt is suffering economically. People like Bezos, the Waltons, the Kochs are causing harm to the economy, they're not propping it up in any sense.
Yes, you could write applets in other languages. The choice was rather narrow, but you could use [Python], [Scala], or [JRuby].

[Python]: https://www.jython.org/jython-old-sites/archive/21/applets/i...

[Scala]: https://cs.trinity.edu/~mlewis/ScalaApplet/scalaWebApplet/We...

[JRuby]: https://www.jruby.org/getting-started — offers to run as an applet in the first few lines.
How many other MEMRIs are there, in this context?
Discussion (221 points, 21 hours ago, 171 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40958465
The Guidelines say that the Trump assassination is off-topic in several ways:

"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon."

This story is about politics, crime and a celebrity. And it is not a new phenomenon in the US, where there have already been several assassination attempts (a few successful) on politicians, including presidents. [1]

The Guidelines also say:

"If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."

Read the Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

---

[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-15/historical-political-...
> You are only taking a significant risk in production investment in an unplanned economy.

Any investment that is a "sure thing" is going to have a very low payoff. Sure things also tend to have a track record of imploding.
Even worse, it'll be spent buying votes (Biden's student debt relieve).

Billions will be allocated for building electric chargers and almost no chargers will be built.

Billions will be allocated for connecting poor people to internet and no people will be connected.

Hundreds of millions will be spent on homeless and will result in increasing homelessness.

A public toilet will be built for $2.5 million.

McKinsey will be paid $4 million for a study telling NY that garbage bins are better than plastic garbage bags.

$11 billion will be spent on 57 miles of rail tracks.

Those are just examples of government waste I can recall from memory.

Discussing levels of taxation is just a sideshow. Sound and fury signifying nothing.

The real problem is that government grows without bounds, more of our money goes to just paying the salaries of bureaucrats and contrary to what you might expect, more bureaucrats leads to making things more difficult and costly for non-government and to just breath-taking inefficiencies and waste of money by government.
CMS: Shopify / Woocommerce + algunos plugin de Yith para que se haga potente en ecommerce
Stripe - Datafast
Estrategias SEO
Linkbuilding
ADS Meta, Google
Mailing - Brevo / Klaviyo
Carritos Abandonados
Automatización - Manychat
Listas de difusiones en WhatsApp para fidelizar al cliente
Code can be deterministic if you're only doing trivial things or have very simple systems. Beyond that it only has sufficient determinism to cross a threshold into being considered useful. Dead letter queues, uncaught errors, kernel panics, race conditions, deadlocks, cosmic bit flips, dumb avoidable bad choices from unexpressive languages, malicious actors, resource constraints, and so on; the real world of software we live in is a duct taped together mess of half measures that only mostly do what we want at its best. So much of the work in product programming is handling all the things that can go wrong.

So yeah, prompt "engineering" is indeed a silly term, but software "engineering" kicked off the dilution of that word ages ago. And GPT models can be inspected and measured for input and output, prompts can be analyzed for their effects and usefulness, temperature settings even directly control some degree of determinism. It's not like models change on a whim unless you're just using end user products. Anthropic, Huggingface, AWS, OpenAI, they let you pick a release model version in your API calls and stick with it for a long time. If you're self hosting a fine tuned Llama 70b, nobody will ever force you to update it if you get it doing a task to your expectations. The quality of deterministic behavior in AI is currently lower than that of Excel or C code, but it's also serving a wholly different purpose, people want it to be creative and create novel nondeterministic outputs, comparing them is a bit silly.
Some people use this term interchangeably. Many layperson's don't know the difference. Although yes, salted and hashed is the way. Encryption means there's a key (which can be compromised) to decrypt it.
Why smart people continue to say this is beyond me. There were so many problems with the USSR - central planning, corruption, bureaucracy, secrecy, misaligned incentives - and it's just not true that everyone was equal. Very few rational people would agree that the USSR is something that we should aspire to.

As far as I can tell, "look how well it worked for the USSR" is just a trope that's trotted out by people who don't want to accept that alternatives to the status quo might be possible.
Or you can just make the right friends in high places and get bailed out from poor fund management:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1261125
I haven't personally written anything beyond this comment, but what I'm getting at is the economic concept of externalities. These are the economic results to the environment/people/society as a whole, that are difficult to measure.

A liquor store opens up next door to your home– economic activity goes up, but drunks sing sea shanties at 2am keeping your family awake, resulting in you losing your job due to bad performance, then property values plummeting.

An oil company moves into town and starts fracking. Quarterly profits are high, and the town's economic activity rises, because it has more patronage at the local pub. There are more jobs, and everyone buys themselves a new pickup. But people get sick, and the water goes brown. A charity purchases hundreds of thousands of plastic bottles of water. Economic activity goes up. Microplastics, people start taking extra time to shower/bathe, wash dishes, and health problems. Profits are up, but did society actually benefit? In the long run, people will move away from the town, leaving it in economic ruin. All because the company did not care about externalities.

One example of this concept is Broken Window Economics. If you broke a window, economic activity/GDP would go up because someone would be employed to fix the broken window. But was anything of value produced? Did society truly benefit?

OP is essentially ignoring externalities. He is making the most of a system designed to benefit him at the expense of poorer people, and washing his hands of any guilt because the effect is invisible to him. But that's a fallacy. The rich get advantages that nobody else gets, like being able to avoid tax in totality (essentially getting a free ride, while everyone else pays for society). There are many other ways that society is wholly optimised to make things better/easier for the rich.

I digress. To answer your question, without pointing out socialist authors (who are right on the money with their criticisms of capitalism), I can really only tell you my own thoughts about it.

I'll leave you with this quote on the tragedy of the commons:

> Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit – in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons. Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all. -- Garrett Hardin, The Tragedy of the Commons
> The tax experiment I'd like to see is a very progressive sales/VAT tax that exempts certain used goods, essentials (groceries, etc) and hits luxuries, sin tax (that burden public healthcare) hard.

I'd like to see this, too, but all you'd get is companies constantly bellyaching about why is my essential product considered a luxury?? And lobbying to get them on the low tax list rather than the high tax list. Every company is going to have their little excuse about why their product isn't really a luxury.
Electricity in Germany is somewhere in the region of 3x as expensive as in Texas. I'd prefer to have cheap power and a contingency plan for a week or so of grid outage than live with those sort of prices.

I've been keeping an eye on how the situation in Germany seems to be developing [0]. It makes for grim reading.

[0] https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/germany
An yet you can still buy cans of other malt drinks with even higher ABV and volume.

An aisle over, you can by 1.75L of vodka for $9.99. That is 40 servings!
They use the same IP and their domains are all listed here: https://verifymail.io/domain/carspure.com

I have to admit that they have improved though as earlier they were all using the same MX records, now at least each domain has its own.
answered elsewhere.

Yes, my bad.
That's why I've always liked Java's take on this. Throw an InterruptedException and the thread is considered terminated once that has dropped all the way through. You can also defer the exception for some time if it takes time to clean something up.

The only issue there is that sometimes library code will incorrectly defer the exception (i.e. suppress it) but otherwise it's pretty good.
I'm totally that, but one side is nuts right now, so I still have to split my vote.
I dont have a dog in this hunt but that seems like a strangely aggressive response. Perhaps the comment meant nothing more than that plaintext HN is a difficult place to start having a discussion that really requires some mathematical machinery, and therefore, since we cant throw around sigmas and integral signs here, we will make some assumptions.

Attacking the comment with sarcasm isn't in the spirit of HN even if you think that is a dumb idea.
If there are two different types of observations, and one parameter can explain both, that is pretty strong evidence. Put differently, dark matter is falsifyable, and experiments have tried to falsify it without success.

Besides the idea 'not all mass can be seen optically' is not that surprising. The many theories on what that mass might be are all speculation, but they are treated as such.
distribution of consumer electronics can mark up the price with 30%-50% and then the retailer adds another 30%-50%, and then the cost of transporation needs to be paid, there is the cost of storage, sales tax, etc etc

so a $1,000 MSRP consumer electronics item might need to be manufactured for a cost of $100-$200.

i think that if one wants to make products in the US, the cost of distribution and retail and transportation needs to be addressed, and it seems nobody wants to touch that hot potato
Every share of an S&P 500 index fund you hold is already 6-7% NVDA, so a lot of investors already have substantial bets on some of these "race horses".
Or is it just that that's the chart you can find with "two minutes' googling" and so that has to be good enough because that's the amount of effort it takes to find something that vaguely seems to satisfy your confirmation bias?

Here's median income going back to 1975 which shows an even larger increase: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
I would say that my examples are rhymes, different developments of the sane theme. They are not literal repetitions, of course; comparable, not identical.
Ask HN: Appraisal Rights in a Merger
I recently learnt that my previous place of work (a non public software startup) is getting merged into a different company. I have a decent number of exercised options and it appears that they all become worthless upon the merger. The acquisition price is about ~1 ARR which seems low considering the company does not have much debt and was profitable not too long ago. From what I can tell, the merger is done by a private equity company looking to expand the product line of one of their portfolio companies.

The merger agreement mentions that certain stockholders are entitled to have the fair value of their shares judicially determined and paid to them by complying with Section 262 of the DGCL. I wasn't asked to vote on the merger, so not sure if the section applies to me.

I am no longer employed with the company, so it is hard to understand what any of that means and if I can do anything to get some money for my shares.

Did anyone have experience with mergers and going through with the fair value evaluation? Or maybe someone can recommend a law firm that may offer a paid consultation?
I think there's another point to be made here that isn't often discussed. Even in a system where people that work hardest/smartest directly translates to the most successful - doesn't mean you have a good system.

Consider an environment where a million engineers are all working on their own startups. 99% of them fail and reward the work put into them with nothing. Some subset of the remainder makes barely enough to survive; a smaller subset makes enough to have a successful business; a smaller subset makes millions, and a smaller subset makes the vast majority of the money available. If the effort put into the thing follows a mostly linear line, but the reward is exponential, is this really a good system? Do the people at the top of this structure deserve the wealth they gain, even if they genuinely the best at what they do?

More and more systems today are winner-take-all. Entertainment is notorious for a tiny number of multi-millionaire artists/actors/comedians/etc., while the vast majority of people that try to make it end up with a succession of part-time jobs that never ends. Even if there's no nepotism or corruption, is a system where the people at the top get everything and the bottom gets nothing a good one?

There's something disturbing about PG's take to me - as if only the most successful are deserving, or worthy - that this warped reward structure isn't inherently unjust. It feels like the kind of justifications nobility and royalty relied on, but for modern times - "I worked hard, I found the market, I did everything right, so naturally I deserve more wealth than a human can use in a thousand lifetimes."

So to be honest, I find almost every single one of PG's points worthless. I don't care how easy it is to start a startup if the chance of real money from it is one in a million. I don't care about how much faster growth is when its billions of dollars for a few dozen people. I don't care if the new wealth is genuinely new instead of inherited, if all we get from it is yet another tiny group of obscenely wealthy people - meet the new boss, same as the old boss. And I especially dislike the idea that the "far left" should be happy that "labor has won". Having a system that picks a few hundred of the "most worthy" each year and adds them to the capital class is by no means what I could consider labor winning.
Is Cannabis an Effective Treatment for Psoriasis?
I don't think any of the wealth inequality experts are arguing for identical wealth. They want to make sure that all tiers of society maintain social mobility and can participate in the American dream. This generally means preventing various stratas from taking unfair advantage of the system, making it more of a level playing field where we can. It benefits society when a genius born in the slums can make something of themselves, that the opportunities are there to escape the slum.

Extreme inequality leads to crime, social instability and eventually major civil unrest. As with everything, it's about moderation. Unrestrained capitalism is just as bad as unrestrained communism, the ideal balance is somewhere in between.

As for sources, here are a few (just a web search away):

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-...

https://inequality.org/facts/wealth-inequality/

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/rising-inequality-a-major...

https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/income-inequality.ht...
The fundamental problem in visual programming is that it limits you to geometry (practically to 2D euclidian space). Most non-trivial programming problems are spaghetti by nature in such spaces.
yes, philosophically and by the vibes, we are in complete agreement. clearly inequality is growing, clearly that is bad.

but you're doing a disservice with completely bogus claims like "incomes for lower and middle-class families have fallen since the 80s". it only makes it harder to talk about the real issues and facts, because why would the other side stick to them now? the trust between sides gets further eroded and the gap widens

there's enough real data that we don't have to start making stuff up. the author could have easily pointed to housing instead like you. i think it's actually extremely important to get these facts right. enough to argue about on an internet forum on a sunday evening
It appears the template owner updated the pricing after we launched the page. I have now updated the pricing tag.Sorry for the confusion.
> just as easy

Citation needed. The social context matters.

Alcohol and caffeine are not a wise combination. Socially, consuming both in parallel isn't common (Red Bull excepted, I suppose, but that was exactly the target market and inspiration for these as well.)

The amounts are also deceptive from a cultural standpoint. Most people are not expecting a tall can to contain _nearly the same alcohol as a full bottle of wine_.

It's the same reason we don't sell neat whisky in 12oz cans. Yes, people can choose how they imbibe, but product design does practically matter.
This is not luck.

Your grandfather chose your grandmother and so too did your parents.

Your parents deciding to do something is not luck either.

I want my children to have an inheritance, the actions I take to ensure that are ongoing deliberate choices to build wealth over having fun.
OK, so make it retroactive on the day the law was passed. Laws are words written on paper, it's not like dark wizardry.

These kinds of objections always come up. "But, rich people are oh so clever, and they will exploit loopholes in any law that gets written!" Well, write stronger laws. Don't include exceptions. Lawmakers need to think more than 5 minutes about what kinds of options/resources are available to people, and how those people might game their way into getting around the spirit of the law.
Could potentially run on Wine?
Hi! it validates if the message was (or not) generated for schema registry, it checks if the message has the schema registry magic bytes (this bytes has the schema id). so, it deserializes messages with or without schema registry.

This is the drawback: you have to generate the descriptor first.

1) download the schema from schema registry:
http :8081/schemas/ids/<my-id>/schema

2) generate the descriptor with the schema:
protoc --include_imports --descriptor_set_out=my-descriptor.desc --proto_path=. my-schema.proto

3) use kaskade:
kaskade consumer -b my-kafka:9092 -x auto.offset.reset=earliest -k string -v protobuf -t my-protobuf-topic -p descriptor=my-descriptor.desc -p value=mypackage.MyMessage
Thanks! It's been the most fun project I've worked on in a while now.
I'm a young millennial and Four Loko's were still somewhat popular at my college. Maybe it was just a localized thing.. they went under the name "sidewalk slammer" where you would (quickly) drink half of it, then pour in a Red Bull (or other energy drink). So still finding a way to get that combo of caffeine, and still using the (at that point) slightly "retro" branding?

Never tried one myself lol
I think it's sad that lying in a title is now accepted marketing practice.
> If California taxes people and businesses at insane levels, maybe we shouldn't replicate insane level of taxation everywhere else in U.S., on the off chance that it is not, in fact, an optimal level for generating wealth for the people.

This is nonsense. California is the strongest state in the union economically, with one of the highest quality of life and income per capita. We have an affordability crisis that is related to the topic at hand - billionaires hoarding wealth and driving up the cost of living - but that's a national problem that California can't solve on it's own. Our taxes pay for the things that enable our success - roads, power, dams, parks, libraries, and all that other good stuff.

Meanwhile Floridians can't use their beaches due to red tide and dumping tires in the water. The people of Houston JUST got their power back yesterday a week after a mere Category 1 hurricane. Maybe they should raise some taxes and do something about that so their cities stop losing economic productivity multiple times a year...
Thank you for the advice. I get how this might be better suited for a regular blog post rather than Show HN. I will repost it in a month or so. Hopefully some people might find it interesting.
The fact they constantly have to rotate to avoid blocks is because they are used for abuse and are attempting to essentially attack network services.

Something like private aliases attached to a real account you actually have adds privacy, but retains accountability. (You can create aliases on Proton, Fastmail, Outlook, etc. but they are attached to your real account so abuse is manageable.) A service rotating temporary domains to avoid services blocking them is a malicious attacker, and should be treated as such.