chosen
int64 353
41.8M
| rejected
int64 287
41.8M
| chosen_rank
int64 1
2
| rejected_rank
int64 2
3
| top_level_parent
int64 189
41.8M
| split
large_stringclasses 1
value | chosen_prompt
large_stringlengths 236
19.5k
| rejected_prompt
large_stringlengths 209
18k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
40,323,486 | 40,320,064 | 1 | 2 | 40,313,733 | train | <story><title>Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'</title><url>https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/9/24153113/apple-ipad-ad-crushing-apology</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>maxrobeyns</author><text>My initial reaction to the ad, upon watching it in the launch event was &quot;huh, that&#x27;s a fun reference to the Hydraulic Press Channel&quot;. The slapstick elements (trumpet noise, squishy balls) made it come across as light-hearted, rather than an ominous display of force by a large company crushing artists&#x27; tools.<p>This idea of &#x27;squashing all these tools down to a thin slab of glass&#x27; made sense given their somewhat unusual focus on the thinness of the device. It was a bit of a throwback to the early 2010s smartphone innovation, where the size of the devices was the yardstick by which manufacturers would outdo each other. I would charitably interpret it as an uninspired marketing team trying to spin some version of Jobs&#x27; classic &quot;the iPhone is simultaneously an iPod, phone and internet device&quot; - however the party trick is old, and nobody&#x27;s impressed anymore.<p>Perhaps the blowback is a sign of a wider weariness that people have accumulated towards big tech companies over the past few years, mixed with a nebulous malaise about &#x27;AI&#x27; and what it means for the status quo and people&#x27;s livelihoods.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kenjackson</author><text>This outrage feels so manufactured. I&#x27;m a huge basketball fan, coach, ex-player. If they included a basketball in the ad my thought would&#x27;ve been &quot;yeah, you can play NBA2k on it&quot;. I&#x27;m not mad about the destruction of a single basketball. I don&#x27;t feel like its disrespect to the game. It&#x27;s showing that this single device has captured elements of basketball into a small form factor.<p>As you note this may hint at a larger weariness with big tech -- and I tend to agree. I feel like if it was a public library crushing a bunch of things, and then ends with it lifting up and showing a library card there wouldn&#x27;t be the same concerns.</text></comment> | <story><title>Apple apologizes for iPad 'Crush' ad that 'missed the mark'</title><url>https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/9/24153113/apple-ipad-ad-crushing-apology</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>maxrobeyns</author><text>My initial reaction to the ad, upon watching it in the launch event was &quot;huh, that&#x27;s a fun reference to the Hydraulic Press Channel&quot;. The slapstick elements (trumpet noise, squishy balls) made it come across as light-hearted, rather than an ominous display of force by a large company crushing artists&#x27; tools.<p>This idea of &#x27;squashing all these tools down to a thin slab of glass&#x27; made sense given their somewhat unusual focus on the thinness of the device. It was a bit of a throwback to the early 2010s smartphone innovation, where the size of the devices was the yardstick by which manufacturers would outdo each other. I would charitably interpret it as an uninspired marketing team trying to spin some version of Jobs&#x27; classic &quot;the iPhone is simultaneously an iPod, phone and internet device&quot; - however the party trick is old, and nobody&#x27;s impressed anymore.<p>Perhaps the blowback is a sign of a wider weariness that people have accumulated towards big tech companies over the past few years, mixed with a nebulous malaise about &#x27;AI&#x27; and what it means for the status quo and people&#x27;s livelihoods.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>some_random</author><text>I think the big thing here is that if you don&#x27;t have an attachment to any of the items being crushed you probably don&#x27;t feel as strongly. If you&#x27;re a trumpet player, seeing a trumpet being crushed is going to be a bit distressing. If you&#x27;re a photographer, you&#x27;re putting a monetary value on those lenses being destroyed. If you&#x27;re into old arcade machines, you&#x27;re thinking about how many of those cabinets are left in that good of a condition.</text></comment> |
18,590,540 | 18,590,956 | 1 | 2 | 18,589,484 | train | <story><title>Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-03/a-wall-street-rule-for-the-metoo-era-avoid-women-at-all-cost</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>falcolas</author><text>Personal opinion - the lack of a &quot;innocent until proven guilty&quot; judicial system when it comes to sexual harassment claims is what has caused much of the fear of women. Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion. The records of the accusations remain online forever, with little or no followup.<p>Innocent until proven guilty with a trial by peers. We enshrine these in our public justice system; it needs to be spread to private companies as well.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ams6110</author><text>Really, employers, universities, etc. should not even be involved in these kinds of claims. They are not competent to investigate them.<p>If a crime has been committed, there is a judicial system that can and will deal with that, with established standards regarding presumption of innocence and burden of proof.</text></comment> | <story><title>Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-03/a-wall-street-rule-for-the-metoo-era-avoid-women-at-all-cost</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>falcolas</author><text>Personal opinion - the lack of a &quot;innocent until proven guilty&quot; judicial system when it comes to sexual harassment claims is what has caused much of the fear of women. Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion. The records of the accusations remain online forever, with little or no followup.<p>Innocent until proven guilty with a trial by peers. We enshrine these in our public justice system; it needs to be spread to private companies as well.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pmastela</author><text>&gt; Colleges, businesses, and online communities almost always simply believe the victim, and even if a trial should occur and the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion.<p>Colleges don&#x27;t almost always simply believe the victim. It&#x27;s quite the opposite: “Alarmingly, many universities are compounding this trauma by failing to support survivors and, in some cases, actively seeking to silence them.” [1]<p>Businesses don&#x27;t almost always simply believe the victim. In fact, &quot;often employees fear that human resources will help the company lash out at the accuser rather than punish the accused.&quot; [2]<p>Online communities don&#x27;t almost always simply believe the victim. Take Twitter for example and how a chunk of that online community turned against Christine Blasey Ford. [3]<p>In the last case involving the accuser and the accused, the accuser had to move several times, hired her own private security detail, and continued to receive death threats [4], all the while the accused got the promotion of a lifetime. Hardly the case of — as you put it — &quot;the accused is vindicated, the accused has already been fired, expelled, or crucified by public opinion.&quot;<p>I know that what you said is personal opinion, but as far as the data supporting that opinion, I just didn&#x27;t find it.<p>1: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;australia-news&#x2F;2017&#x2F;feb&#x2F;27&#x2F;universities-actively-covering-up-sexual-assault-and-harassment-report-says" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;australia-news&#x2F;2017&#x2F;feb&#x2F;27&#x2F;unive...</a>
2: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;12&#x2F;12&#x2F;business&#x2F;sexual-harassment-human-resources.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;12&#x2F;12&#x2F;business&#x2F;sexual-harassmen...</a>
3: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;slate.com&#x2F;news-and-politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;09&#x2F;conservative-reaction-christine-blasey-fords-testimony-kavanaugh.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;slate.com&#x2F;news-and-politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;09&#x2F;conservative-rea...</a>
4: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;08&#x2F;665407589&#x2F;kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford-continues-receiving-threats-lawyers-say" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;08&#x2F;665407589&#x2F;kavanaugh-accuser-c...</a></text></comment> |
18,141,597 | 18,140,880 | 1 | 2 | 18,128,456 | train | <story><title>Kubernetes for personal projects? No thanks</title><url>https://carlosrdrz.es/kubernetes-for-small-projects/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>solatic</author><text>Oh man, the original article went way over the author&#x27;s head. The point of the original article was that even though Kubernetes is <i>primarily</i> useful for tackling the challenges involved with running many workloads at enterprise scale, it <i>can</i> also be used to run small hobbyist workloads at a price point acceptable for hobbyist projects.<p>Does that mean that Kubernetes should now be used for <i>all</i> hobbyist projects? No. If I&#x27;m thinking of playing around with a Raspberry Pi or other SBC, do I need to install Kubernetes on the SBC first? If I&#x27;m thinking of playing around with IoT or serverless, should I dump AWS- or GCE-proprietary tools because nobody will ever run anything that that can&#x27;t run on Kubernetes ever again? If I&#x27;m going to play around with React or React Native, should I write up a backend just so I can have something that I can run in a Kubernetes cluster, because all hobbyist projects must run Kubernetes now, because it&#x27;s cheap enough for hobbyist projects? If I&#x27;m going to play around with machine learning at home, buy a machine with a heavy GPU, figure out how to get Kubernetes to schedule my machine learning workload correctly instead of just running it directly on that machine, because uhhh maybe someday I&#x27;ll have three such machines with powerful GPUs plus other home servers for all my other hobbyist projects?<p>No, no, no, no, no. Clearly.<p>But maybe I envision my side project turning into full-time startup some day. Maybe I see all the news about Kubernetes and think it would be cool to be more familiar with it. Nah, probably too expensive. Oh wait, I can get something running for $5? Hey, that&#x27;s pretty neat!<p>Different people will use different solutions for different project requirements.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>admax88q</author><text>&gt; But maybe I envision my side project turning into full-time startup some day.<p>The state of the art for cluster management will probably something completely different by then. Better to build a good product now and if you really want to turn it into a startup, productionize it then.<p>&gt; Maybe I see all the news about Kubernetes and think it would be cool to be more familiar with it.<p>If learning Kubernetes _is_ your side project, then perfect go do that. Otherwise its just a distraction, taking more time away from actually building your side project and putting it into building infrastructure around your side project.<p>If what you really wanted to build is infrastructure, then great, you&#x27;re doing swell, but if you were really trying to build some other fun side app, Kubernetes is just a time&#x2F;money sink in almost all cases IMO.</text></comment> | <story><title>Kubernetes for personal projects? No thanks</title><url>https://carlosrdrz.es/kubernetes-for-small-projects/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>solatic</author><text>Oh man, the original article went way over the author&#x27;s head. The point of the original article was that even though Kubernetes is <i>primarily</i> useful for tackling the challenges involved with running many workloads at enterprise scale, it <i>can</i> also be used to run small hobbyist workloads at a price point acceptable for hobbyist projects.<p>Does that mean that Kubernetes should now be used for <i>all</i> hobbyist projects? No. If I&#x27;m thinking of playing around with a Raspberry Pi or other SBC, do I need to install Kubernetes on the SBC first? If I&#x27;m thinking of playing around with IoT or serverless, should I dump AWS- or GCE-proprietary tools because nobody will ever run anything that that can&#x27;t run on Kubernetes ever again? If I&#x27;m going to play around with React or React Native, should I write up a backend just so I can have something that I can run in a Kubernetes cluster, because all hobbyist projects must run Kubernetes now, because it&#x27;s cheap enough for hobbyist projects? If I&#x27;m going to play around with machine learning at home, buy a machine with a heavy GPU, figure out how to get Kubernetes to schedule my machine learning workload correctly instead of just running it directly on that machine, because uhhh maybe someday I&#x27;ll have three such machines with powerful GPUs plus other home servers for all my other hobbyist projects?<p>No, no, no, no, no. Clearly.<p>But maybe I envision my side project turning into full-time startup some day. Maybe I see all the news about Kubernetes and think it would be cool to be more familiar with it. Nah, probably too expensive. Oh wait, I can get something running for $5? Hey, that&#x27;s pretty neat!<p>Different people will use different solutions for different project requirements.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wpietri</author><text>Personally, as somebody who is building a small Kubernetes cluster right now at home just for the fun of it: I think using Kubernetes for small projects is mostly a bad idea. So I appreciate the author warning people so they don&#x27;t get misled by all the (justified) buzz around it.<p>For your average developer who just wants to get something running on a port, Kubernetes introduces two barriers: containerization and Kubernetes itself. These are non-trivial things to learn, especially if you don&#x27;t have an ops background, and both of them add substantial debugging overhead. And again for that developer, they provide very, very small gains.<p>I think the calculus changes if that developer starts to run multiple services on multiple servers, wants to keep doing that for years, and needs high uptime. I have a bunch of personal services I run in VMs with Chef, and I&#x27;m excited to convert that over to Kubernetes, as it will make future OS upgrades and other maintenance easier. But my old setup ran for something like 6 years and it was just fine. For hobbyists whose hobbies don&#x27;t include playing with cluster-scale ops tooling, I think it&#x27;s perfectly fine to ignore Kubernetes. It&#x27;s the new hotness, but it doesn&#x27;t provide much value for them yet. They can wait a few years; by then the tooling will surely have improved for low-end installs.</text></comment> |
12,685,784 | 12,684,236 | 1 | 2 | 12,683,992 | train | <story><title>The Killer Cats Are Winning</title><url>http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/09/29/killer-cats-are-winning/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>lnanek2</author><text>&gt; This is a ridiculous point to waffle on: pet cats should no more be allowed to roam around at will than should pet dogs, horses, pythons, or pot-bellied pigs.<p>Actually, my Dad grew up on a mountain where, every day after school, he would come home and gather up the pig and cows that had been let free to eat for the day. So there&#x27;s certainly use cases for letting a pig roam free and gather some forage. By the time I was growing up we had chickens, which had to be brought in at night to prevent predators from eating them, but otherwise could roam the yard to eat worms and the like.<p>Also a horse that kept the grass in the yard short without us having to mow it. There were goats, but they weren&#x27;t allowed free mostly because they went and ate mountain laurel and poisoned themselves.<p>It&#x27;s kind of strange to take a working animal like a cat, bred for pest control, and stick in a little indoor room and never let them out. Did farmers originally lock up their barn cats in the barns? I don&#x27;t think so. It&#x27;s actually a problem when they accidentally get locked up in a shed or a car or something, because they aren&#x27;t out doing their jobs.<p>Seems nuts to me that the author belittles letting them outside.</text></comment> | <story><title>The Killer Cats Are Winning</title><url>http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/09/29/killer-cats-are-winning/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>shagie</author><text>And a counterpoint <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;04&#x2F;473002208&#x2F;facing-a-growing-rat-problem-a-neighborhood-sets-off-the-cat-patrol" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;04&#x2F;473002208&#x2F;facing-a-growing-rat...</a><p>That example is why cats were domesticated in the first place.<p>Not having a healthy predator prey relationship in areas leads to public health issues.</text></comment> |
24,516,383 | 24,516,255 | 1 | 2 | 24,515,786 | train | <story><title>Apple Ending "Fortnite Save the World" Updates for Mac</title><url>https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/news/apple-ends-epics-ability-to-offer-fortnite-save-the-world-on-mac</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fxtentacle</author><text>This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it&#x27;s not like Epic is fully innocent here.<p>But what they are doing is brilliant, because they have just demonstrated that their perceived infringement of the iOS rules has caused them to also lose Mac developer access, presumably due to it being the same account. But legally, the iOS and the Mac developer agreements are separate contracts. So from a legal standpoint, Apple has reacted to a perceived infringement in one contract by retaliating in a legally unrelated contract. That might be illegal.<p>And in addition, Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway.<p>I&#x27;m curious to see how this will mix with Apple silicon, which will effectively make running a stock Windows impossible. So in the future, you&#x27;ll need to choose when buying your hardware if you want phone-quality games on Mac or triple A on PC.<p>I predict that the market segment of casual players using Apple hardware but Windows Bootcamp will now be driven away from Apple. In my opinion, the only way to avoid that would have been for Apple to demonstrate excellent UE5 performance on Apple silicon, but that now surely won&#x27;t happen.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hrktb</author><text>&gt; This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it&#x27;s not like Epic is fully innocent here.<p>It looks more and more like Apple made a mistake in blocking the developper account.<p>Arguably the reaction should have stopped at pulling Fortnite out of the store. If extra steps were really needed, forcing suppression of Fortnite from existing iOS devices could have been accepted as a related measure.<p>But blocking the whole developper account is so overreaching it still generates news weeks after the initial issue.<p>It feels like Epic waived a red cloth and Apple just ran full speed into it. I see the current mess completely of Apple&#x27;s own doing.</text></comment> | <story><title>Apple Ending "Fortnite Save the World" Updates for Mac</title><url>https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/en-US/news/apple-ends-epics-ability-to-offer-fortnite-save-the-world-on-mac</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fxtentacle</author><text>This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it&#x27;s not like Epic is fully innocent here.<p>But what they are doing is brilliant, because they have just demonstrated that their perceived infringement of the iOS rules has caused them to also lose Mac developer access, presumably due to it being the same account. But legally, the iOS and the Mac developer agreements are separate contracts. So from a legal standpoint, Apple has reacted to a perceived infringement in one contract by retaliating in a legally unrelated contract. That might be illegal.<p>And in addition, Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway.<p>I&#x27;m curious to see how this will mix with Apple silicon, which will effectively make running a stock Windows impossible. So in the future, you&#x27;ll need to choose when buying your hardware if you want phone-quality games on Mac or triple A on PC.<p>I predict that the market segment of casual players using Apple hardware but Windows Bootcamp will now be driven away from Apple. In my opinion, the only way to avoid that would have been for Apple to demonstrate excellent UE5 performance on Apple silicon, but that now surely won&#x27;t happen.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>abduhl</author><text>Regardless of how you feel about Apple versus Epic, we should all be clear about one thing here: there is no &quot;perceived&quot; infringement of the iOS rules. Epic broke the rules. They do not even try to deny that they breached their contract with Apple in their lawsuit, but rather attack the contract directly as being illegal. Their approach is analogous to you being caught going 120 miles per hour in a 45 mile per hour zone and you challenging whether the speed limit is legal.</text></comment> |
17,543,690 | 17,543,152 | 1 | 2 | 17,542,556 | train | <story><title>Instapaper is going independent</title><url>http://blog.instapaper.com/post/175953870856</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dfabulich</author><text><i>Why</i> is this better for Pinterest and&#x2F;or Instapaper?<p>In the 2016 blog post announcing the acquisition:
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.instapaper.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;149374303661" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.instapaper.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;149374303661</a><p>&gt; All of these features and developments revolved around the core mission of Instapaper, which is allowing our users to discover, save, and experience interesting web content. In that respect, there is a lot of overlap between Pinterest and Instapaper. Joining Pinterest provides us with the additional resources and experience necessary to achieve that shared mission on a much larger scale.<p>Is that no longer true? Was it ever true?</text></item><item><author>bthdonohue</author><text>Hi Brad, Brian from Instapaper here. Just want to reassure you that&#x27;s not the case here, we intend to operate Instapaper for the foreseeable future. We made this decision because we believe it’s best for both Pinterest and Instapaper.</text></item><item><author>brad0</author><text>From what I’ve seen this is usually what happens when the parent company wants to close the service down. First they spin off the service into its own company then the company shuts down because of a lack of income.<p>Is that what’s happening here? What’s the name of this process?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ggg9990</author><text>It rarely makes any sense for a large multibillion dollar company to operate a tiny business that has no material impact on its financials. It&#x27;s like Bill Gates owning a taco truck -- even though it might be a perfectly financially viable taco truck, it&#x27;s always going to be just a little random thing he has, and pretty much any involvement he has with the truck&#x27;s operator&#x2F;management will be disruptive.</text></comment> | <story><title>Instapaper is going independent</title><url>http://blog.instapaper.com/post/175953870856</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dfabulich</author><text><i>Why</i> is this better for Pinterest and&#x2F;or Instapaper?<p>In the 2016 blog post announcing the acquisition:
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.instapaper.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;149374303661" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.instapaper.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;149374303661</a><p>&gt; All of these features and developments revolved around the core mission of Instapaper, which is allowing our users to discover, save, and experience interesting web content. In that respect, there is a lot of overlap between Pinterest and Instapaper. Joining Pinterest provides us with the additional resources and experience necessary to achieve that shared mission on a much larger scale.<p>Is that no longer true? Was it ever true?</text></item><item><author>bthdonohue</author><text>Hi Brad, Brian from Instapaper here. Just want to reassure you that&#x27;s not the case here, we intend to operate Instapaper for the foreseeable future. We made this decision because we believe it’s best for both Pinterest and Instapaper.</text></item><item><author>brad0</author><text>From what I’ve seen this is usually what happens when the parent company wants to close the service down. First they spin off the service into its own company then the company shuts down because of a lack of income.<p>Is that what’s happening here? What’s the name of this process?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mbesto</author><text>M&amp;A guy here - despite what finance people will say, a majority of acquisitions do not end up realizing their planned strategy.</text></comment> |
28,923,032 | 28,923,022 | 1 | 2 | 28,894,913 | train | <story><title>Fable is a compiler that brings F# into the JavaScript ecosystem</title><url>https://fable.io/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>phillipcarter</author><text>Fable is a brilliant project.<p>It doesn&#x27;t try to hide the fact that when you write a Fable program, you&#x27;re fundamentally in the JS ecosystem. This can be a bit of a shift if you&#x27;re used to doing stuff in .NET, but it means that everything will more or less work with your code.<p>It also comes with a few tools&#x2F;utilities to ease the F#-JS bridge you&#x27;re on.</text></comment> | <story><title>Fable is a compiler that brings F# into the JavaScript ecosystem</title><url>https://fable.io/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>kirse</author><text>Along with Fable highly recommend a look at Feliz. A joy to work with and its ViewEngine can also separately be used w&#x2F; Giraffe just for the syntax:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zaid-ajaj.github.io&#x2F;Feliz&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zaid-ajaj.github.io&#x2F;Feliz&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Zaid-Ajaj&#x2F;Feliz" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Zaid-Ajaj&#x2F;Feliz</a></text></comment> |
36,064,198 | 36,059,087 | 1 | 2 | 36,057,183 | train | <story><title>Why the original transformer figure is wrong, and some other tidbits about LLMs</title><url>https://magazine.sebastianraschka.com/p/why-the-original-transformer-figure</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>YetAnotherNick</author><text>This is the commit that changed it:
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;tensorflow&#x2F;tensor2tensor&#x2F;commit&#x2F;d5bdfcc85fa3e10a73902974f2c0944dc51f6a33">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;tensorflow&#x2F;tensor2tensor&#x2F;commit&#x2F;d5bdfcc85...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Why the original transformer figure is wrong, and some other tidbits about LLMs</title><url>https://magazine.sebastianraschka.com/p/why-the-original-transformer-figure</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>fn-mote</author><text>This note contains four papers for &quot;historical perspective&quot;... which would usually mean &quot;no longer directly relevant&quot;, although I&#x27;m not sure that&#x27;s really what the author means.<p>You might be looking for the author&#x27;s &quot;Understanding Large Language Models&quot; post [1] instead.<p>Misspelling &quot;Attention is All Your Need&quot; twice in one paragraph makes for a rough start to the linked post.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;magazine.sebastianraschka.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;understanding-large-language-models" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;magazine.sebastianraschka.com&#x2F;p&#x2F;understanding-large-...</a></text></comment> |
2,955,319 | 2,955,308 | 1 | 2 | 2,955,214 | train | <story><title>Bootstrapping a $30k profit/month company from our undergrad internship earnings</title><url>http://blog.fiplab.com/bootstrapping-a-company-straight-out-of-unive</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dpcan</author><text>The most interesting part to me was that they are designers who considered the programming to be the most important part. As a programmer, I find the design to be the most important part.<p>The perspectives are very interesting.<p>From a programming standpoint, I can pound out the code to just about anything, but when it comes time to create the awesome graphics for the game, well, that's where I either have to cut corners or pay a lot of money.<p>I liked the cliff-hanger he left us with too. Day 4: Disaster! And that it was Apple's fault ...<p>But what happened? Did the glitch get fixed? Did sales pick back up? Where's his Twitter feed so I can see when the next post comes out?</text></comment> | <story><title>Bootstrapping a $30k profit/month company from our undergrad internship earnings</title><url>http://blog.fiplab.com/bootstrapping-a-company-straight-out-of-unive</url><text></text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>scottkrager</author><text>Interesting post, but I'm not a fan of these multi-part blog posts, I rarely end up seeing the 'Part II' post that I really wanted to read about in the first place.<p>Why not just write the whole story in one post?</text></comment> |
28,915,948 | 28,916,012 | 1 | 2 | 28,912,521 | train | <story><title>Why soda bottles have gaps in their threads (2000)</title><url>http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-02/950761555.Eg.r.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EdwardDiego</author><text>My country&#x27;s national library used to provide a service in the 70s&#x2F;80s where you could send a letter or telegram with a question, any question, and they&#x27;d do their best to answer it.<p>My Mum was a big fan of it, I&#x27;ve still got a copy of their telegram response to her question of &quot;Why don&#x27;t we see birds flying overhead with a penis flopping around?&quot;<p>The answer was simple.<p>&quot;Most birds don&#x27;t have penises. They press cloaca to cloaca. Birds that do have penises store them in their bodies when not mating. Please stop sending questions about penises&quot;<p>...it wasn&#x27;t her first animal penis question submitted, and I&#x27;m assuming she&#x27;d developed a reputation.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>stormdennis</author><text>That&#x27;s fascinating. I can remember pre-internet days being resigned to not knowing stuff.
For example albums in my country generally didn&#x27;t include the lyrics. Every time it came on the radio, I asked people what was the singer saying over and over in REM&#x27;s &quot;The sidewinder sleeps tonight&quot;. Nobody knew. Another was a foreign language pop song I remembered from when I was on holiday abroad as a teenager. I searched fruitlessly for it in record shops at home.
Decades later, on a whim I found it by googling and then the original video on youtube (I&#x27;d only heard it on juke boxes)</text></comment> | <story><title>Why soda bottles have gaps in their threads (2000)</title><url>http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-02/950761555.Eg.r.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>EdwardDiego</author><text>My country&#x27;s national library used to provide a service in the 70s&#x2F;80s where you could send a letter or telegram with a question, any question, and they&#x27;d do their best to answer it.<p>My Mum was a big fan of it, I&#x27;ve still got a copy of their telegram response to her question of &quot;Why don&#x27;t we see birds flying overhead with a penis flopping around?&quot;<p>The answer was simple.<p>&quot;Most birds don&#x27;t have penises. They press cloaca to cloaca. Birds that do have penises store them in their bodies when not mating. Please stop sending questions about penises&quot;<p>...it wasn&#x27;t her first animal penis question submitted, and I&#x27;m assuming she&#x27;d developed a reputation.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lqet</author><text>I&#x27;ve seen ducks mating. For their body size, they have <i>magnificent</i> penises. Flying with these things flopping around would not only be very difficult without getting caught in something, it would also be extremely irritating to people.</text></comment> |
13,334,183 | 13,332,678 | 1 | 2 | 13,332,265 | train | <story><title>Google Brain Residency Program – 7 months in and looking ahead</title><url>https://research.googleblog.com/2017/01/google-brain-residency-program-7-months_5.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>hardmaru</author><text>One of the things I like about the residency program, and google brain in general, is the openness of the research environment.<p>For example, it is easy for us to release open source code related our research, and in fact we are even encouraged to do so.<p>Some of us even continue to write personal blogs about machine learning research work done in the program.<p>In addition to open source projects such as tensorflow, people on the team also contribute and develop other open source libraries such as pybullet, rather than using proprietary, closed-source physics libraries.</text></comment> | <story><title>Google Brain Residency Program – 7 months in and looking ahead</title><url>https://research.googleblog.com/2017/01/google-brain-residency-program-7-months_5.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>ben_mann</author><text>Summary: Google Brain team hired a bunch of 1-year residents to do research with them. They&#x27;ve published 21 papers already and are loving it. Apply for next year here: g.co&#x2F;brainresidency</text></comment> |
13,617,285 | 13,617,352 | 1 | 2 | 13,616,123 | train | <story><title>Change at Buffer: The Next Phase, and Why Our Co-Founder and CTO Are Moving On</title><url>https://open.buffer.com/change-at-buffer/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jpeg_hero</author><text>My guess at what happened: the natural hyper growth engine ran out, they tried a bunch of things to jump start it, none of them worked, so now they are on the slow growth path.<p>If they were not remote-only maybe they could have pulled off the CTO&#x27;s plan of hiring a bunch of traditional managers and &quot;pushing&quot; the company forward (probably enterprise sales), but they&#x27;d have restructure the bones of the company at great expense. The great expense part probably doesn&#x27;t work, because since the sizzle is off the growth, the next VC round would be tough if not impossible to do. It would be very &quot;term-y&quot; and founders are already underwater enough on investor preference.<p>They probably made the right call of not shooting for the moon, and slowing down into a remote-only company that takes its time. Skype and boxer shorts.<p>But now the COO and CTO are faced with the decision of A) sitting around and riding it out at $185,000 and $182,089 per year respectively (healthy money no doubt but not DHH buy-a-racing-team like earn outs) or B) move on to the next thing while the market for vc funding is still hot and they can still get some juice from their association with buffer.<p>Rational decisions all around.<p>Oh, and Twitter launched scheduled tweets.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Yabood</author><text>&gt; &quot;Oh, and Twitter launched scheduled tweets.&quot;<p>Tools like buffer would still exist even if every single social media network offered scheduling capabilities. The fact is, if you&#x27;re a digital marketer, you&#x27;re not going to waste your time jumping between networks and multiple accounts scheduling content manually.</text></comment> | <story><title>Change at Buffer: The Next Phase, and Why Our Co-Founder and CTO Are Moving On</title><url>https://open.buffer.com/change-at-buffer/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jpeg_hero</author><text>My guess at what happened: the natural hyper growth engine ran out, they tried a bunch of things to jump start it, none of them worked, so now they are on the slow growth path.<p>If they were not remote-only maybe they could have pulled off the CTO&#x27;s plan of hiring a bunch of traditional managers and &quot;pushing&quot; the company forward (probably enterprise sales), but they&#x27;d have restructure the bones of the company at great expense. The great expense part probably doesn&#x27;t work, because since the sizzle is off the growth, the next VC round would be tough if not impossible to do. It would be very &quot;term-y&quot; and founders are already underwater enough on investor preference.<p>They probably made the right call of not shooting for the moon, and slowing down into a remote-only company that takes its time. Skype and boxer shorts.<p>But now the COO and CTO are faced with the decision of A) sitting around and riding it out at $185,000 and $182,089 per year respectively (healthy money no doubt but not DHH buy-a-racing-team like earn outs) or B) move on to the next thing while the market for vc funding is still hot and they can still get some juice from their association with buffer.<p>Rational decisions all around.<p>Oh, and Twitter launched scheduled tweets.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hkarthik</author><text>The logical exit for these smaller tools companies as growth slows is to get acqui-hired by the Twitters, Facebooks, and LinkedIns of the world.<p>However when your entire team is remote, that makes these companies steer clear of acquiring you since you won&#x27;t fit into their culture. So they will go for your competitors with a crappier product, but a local team that they can quickly bring in onsite within a few months.</text></comment> |
19,707,641 | 19,706,499 | 1 | 2 | 19,706,330 | train | <story><title>High-Deductible Health Policies Linked to Delayed Diagnosis and Treatment</title><url>https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/04/18/713887452/high-deductible-health-policies-linked-to-delayed-diagnosis-and-treatment</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>CptFribble</author><text>I think most people around here know that our healthcare payment structure is totally whack. However, we&#x27;re not the people who need to know this.<p>Try showing an NPR article about universal healthcare to Joe USA. I guarantee you&#x27;ll get one or all of the following responses:<p>1: I don&#x27;t want my taxes to go up<p>2: I don&#x27;t want to pay for illegals to go to the doctor for free<p>3: My insurance will get worse<p>4: I like my doctor, I don&#x27;t want to be forced to go to a worse one<p>5: I don&#x27;t want the government deciding when I go to the doctor<p>6: I don&#x27;t want to wait six months for a doctor appointment<p>7: NPR has a liberal agenda<p>Many of my family and extended social circles are quite conservative (in the USA sense) because of how I was brought up. I have heard all of these and more every time the concept of universal healthcare is brought up.<p>Most of the reasoning I hear is not based on facts, but on emotionally misleading arguments from the network of memes and punditry where they get their info. And when they vote, they vote for people who oppose universal healthcare on these fallacious bases.<p>How do you convince someone like this that universal healthcare is better for all of us?</text></comment> | <story><title>High-Deductible Health Policies Linked to Delayed Diagnosis and Treatment</title><url>https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/04/18/713887452/high-deductible-health-policies-linked-to-delayed-diagnosis-and-treatment</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>PaulHoule</author><text>These are going to be recognized as a policy disaster.<p>There are many cases where a somewhat expensive treatment saves a very expensive hospitalization.<p>For instance, a steroid inhaler for asthma costs about $200 a month, maybe you have two $200 specialist visits a year. So for $2800 a year (not covered by high-deductible insurance) you can probably be symptom free or you can take your chances and have an exacerbation and a $28,000 hospitalization (which insurance will pay some of after the deductible)<p>Docs hate them too.<p>With real insurance, you have maybe a $20 copay you pay at time of service and they know they are going to get paid by the insurance.<p>With fake insurance, they don&#x27;t know what you are going to pay until months later when the insurance gets around to telling them. Then you get a bill that says you owe $291.44 for some unspecified service you got 6 to 18 months ago.<p>(They can&#x27;t tell you what it was because that would violate your privacy)<p>Needless to say they have a big accounts receivable this way, many people don&#x27;t pay or they pay late (e.g. a few months after getting a bill they don&#x27;t understand as well as something that says &quot;THIS IS NOT A BILL&quot; they don&#x27;t understand). This is not good for their finances or their state of mind.<p>In theory high-deductible plans might lead you to shop around between providers to get a better price but in practice nobody can or will tell you what things costs and it doesn&#x27;t work.<p>It&#x27;s a perfect example of the neoliberal mind at work.</text></comment> |
11,599,108 | 11,598,315 | 1 | 3 | 11,598,033 | train | <story><title>GNU LibreJS</title><url>https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>connorshea</author><text>At GitLab we&#x27;ve been working with some volunteers at the FSF&#x2F;GNU Project to improve our score on the Ethical Repo Criteria Evaluation [1]. We&#x27;ve got an issue open about LibreJS [2] specifically, as well as another to fix the other issue preventing us from receiving a B grade. We&#x27;re also working on resolving some of the A grade criteria, albeit not all of them [3].<p>It&#x27;s disheartening to see the FSF demonized here, as I&#x27;ve been pleasantly surprised with the discussions I&#x27;ve had with most of their members. In the last HN thread about the Ethical Repo Evaluation, people called their requirements ridiculous. I agree with that for some of the A grade criteria, e.g. the GNU&#x2F;Linux requirement, but I think people are misunderstanding the purpose of the A grade, which is to signal that a site is &quot;sufficiently free&quot; and can be used to host the GNU Project&#x27;s source code. This is partly the fault of the FSF having poor communication, of course.<p>I&#x27;d like to highlight a comment by an FSF Volunteer regarding our work on some criteria for the A grade, &quot;Thanks for taking the time on this; I&#x27;m very encouraged, and I&#x27;m happy with any progress made. Again: since these criteria are for hosting of GNU projects, they&#x27;re a bit more strict and won&#x27;t be met by most services.&quot;<p>GitLab CE is licensed under the MIT Expat License, not the GPL, and yet they&#x27;re perfectly happy to work with us regardless. Outwardly they advocate for extreme ideas, but they&#x27;re also willing to compromise.<p>Apologies if this is rambly at all, or comes off as &quot;shilling&quot; in any way, I just wanted to share my story of interacting with the FSF. Hopefully I can convince some people that they&#x27;re not all living in caves yelling about how they&#x27;ll never use non-GPL software.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;repo-criteria-evaluation.html</a><p>[2]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;15621" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;15621</a><p>[3]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;15678" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;15678</a></text></comment> | <story><title>GNU LibreJS</title><url>https://www.gnu.org/software/librejs/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>aaronbrethorst</author><text>Apparently it adds a &quot;Complain&quot; tab to your browser when it detects offensive JavaScript: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;librejs&#x2F;manual&#x2F;librejs.html#Complaint-Feature" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;software&#x2F;librejs&#x2F;manual&#x2F;librejs.html#Com...</a></text></comment> |
19,241,879 | 19,241,399 | 1 | 2 | 19,238,365 | train | <story><title>Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes</title><url>https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1099648817601921024</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jameslk</author><text>Since we&#x27;re making predictions here, I predict that shortly after we adopt meat substitutes, we&#x27;ll start to question what&#x27;s inside them. Then the conversation will change from meat substitutes being good and healthy to something akin to the GMO debate about meat substitutes not being natural. And just like GMOs, whether it&#x27;s actually bad for you or not won&#x27;t matter. This debate will be a proxy war between Big Meat and some faceless VC-backed corporations trying to make meat proprietary. Some meat substitutes will actually be pretty terrible but #notallmeatsubstitutes. Unfortunately, it will only take a few bad substitutes to ruin the name of all.<p>I also predict that meat substitutes, if made cheaper than meat, will be deemed inferior in quality (cheap = inferior, because psychology) and reserved for those who cannot afford real meat (the &quot;meatless masses&quot;).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nabla9</author><text>Most of the meat in the market is already something else than what people think meat is.<p>Meatballs may have more than half chicken skin. Burgers contain 25% filler. Pink slime (= lean finely textured beef) is a highly processed meat by-product. In the US its processed with ammonia but that&#x27;s not allowed in EU.</text></comment> | <story><title>Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes</title><url>https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1099648817601921024</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jameslk</author><text>Since we&#x27;re making predictions here, I predict that shortly after we adopt meat substitutes, we&#x27;ll start to question what&#x27;s inside them. Then the conversation will change from meat substitutes being good and healthy to something akin to the GMO debate about meat substitutes not being natural. And just like GMOs, whether it&#x27;s actually bad for you or not won&#x27;t matter. This debate will be a proxy war between Big Meat and some faceless VC-backed corporations trying to make meat proprietary. Some meat substitutes will actually be pretty terrible but #notallmeatsubstitutes. Unfortunately, it will only take a few bad substitutes to ruin the name of all.<p>I also predict that meat substitutes, if made cheaper than meat, will be deemed inferior in quality (cheap = inferior, because psychology) and reserved for those who cannot afford real meat (the &quot;meatless masses&quot;).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jniedrauer</author><text>On a tangential note, I wish it were possible to buy foods specifically because they contain GMOs. I intentionally avoid buying foods labeled &quot;non-GMO&quot; in a feeble attempt to vote with my wallet.</text></comment> |
13,062,000 | 13,061,979 | 1 | 2 | 13,061,243 | train | <story><title>The Untouchables – Apple’s new OS “activation” for Touch Bar MacBook Pros</title><url>https://onemoreadmin.wordpress.com/2016/11/27/the-untouchables-apples-new-os-activation-for-touch-bar-macbook-pros/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>drvdevd</author><text>So:<p>&gt; It’s quite clear – Welcome to the future of Apple’s hybrid ARM&#x2F;x86 platform<p>Meaning, in a nutshell, that we have two different system &quot;loading&quot; policies (the ARM policy and the x86 policy) having fun together on the same disk? Three if you count macOS and EFI as two different systems really.<p>So naturally this would make disk imaging complex. Seriously, why wasn&#x27;t this documented (or better documented)?<p>I&#x27;m quite impressed with the author&#x27;s polite tone. His list of unanswered questions is mind boggling.<p>[edit: perhaps not &quot;mind boggling&quot; ... maybe just alarming is a better term]</text></comment> | <story><title>The Untouchables – Apple’s new OS “activation” for Touch Bar MacBook Pros</title><url>https://onemoreadmin.wordpress.com/2016/11/27/the-untouchables-apples-new-os-activation-for-touch-bar-macbook-pros/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>iSnow</author><text>Another indication that Apple is no longer committed to professional customers of their computer line and their needs - iDevices get the required admin tools, but the target demographics for their computers are consumers and web dev shops where everyone tends to their systems.</text></comment> |
18,210,619 | 18,210,669 | 1 | 2 | 18,209,241 | train | <story><title>Theranos Criminal Case Is Broader Than Publicly Disclosed, Prosecutors Say</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-12/theranos-criminal-case-is-broader-than-disclosed-u-s-says?srnd=premium</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>Pretty obviously because a pot charge is typically simple to adjudicate (you were arrested, you had pot, that&#x27;s illegal) and white-collar investor and product fraud cases are not. The criminal case against Balwani and Holmes is complicated, and it will take time to resolve.<p>(Relatively few people are at this point in jail for smoking pot, for whatever that&#x27;s worth to you).</text></item><item><author>samfisher83</author><text>Why aren&#x27;t Holmes and the other guy in jail. I mean there are people in jail for smoking pot and these guys did massive fraud and they are free.<p>I hope they don&#x27;t just give them some fine. Makes the judicial system look bad.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>eganist</author><text>&gt; Pretty obviously because—<p>It&#x27;s not. It might seem to be the case to you, me, and others with some understanding of the legal system in the United States, but when we consider the background knowledge of the legal system required to understand how cases are adjudicated, this is objectively quite generally not obvious.<p>&gt; (Relatively few people are at this point in jail for smoking pot, for whatever that&#x27;s worth to you).<p>Compared to what? If Virginia is any indication of trends among non-decriminalized or non-legalized states, it&#x27;s <i>relatively high.</i> (I&#x27;m nitpicking, of course: there&#x27;s a substantial difference between jail and prison; I&#x27;m assuming your definition—innocently, mind you—does not distinguish between the two.) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ww.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;amphtml&#x2F;news&#x2F;wonk&#x2F;wp&#x2F;2017&#x2F;10&#x2F;31&#x2F;heres-how-much-virginia-taxpayers-are-spending-to-jail-marijuana-users&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ww.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;amphtml&#x2F;n...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Theranos Criminal Case Is Broader Than Publicly Disclosed, Prosecutors Say</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-12/theranos-criminal-case-is-broader-than-disclosed-u-s-says?srnd=premium</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>Pretty obviously because a pot charge is typically simple to adjudicate (you were arrested, you had pot, that&#x27;s illegal) and white-collar investor and product fraud cases are not. The criminal case against Balwani and Holmes is complicated, and it will take time to resolve.<p>(Relatively few people are at this point in jail for smoking pot, for whatever that&#x27;s worth to you).</text></item><item><author>samfisher83</author><text>Why aren&#x27;t Holmes and the other guy in jail. I mean there are people in jail for smoking pot and these guys did massive fraud and they are free.<p>I hope they don&#x27;t just give them some fine. Makes the judicial system look bad.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>DSingularity</author><text>I don’t know how I feel about this. At some point this just seems like BS, a rigged system where the crimes of the rich and white are “too complicated to prosecute” while the crimes of the poor and the minorities are so simple and easy.<p>Please. One day this system will collapse on itself.</text></comment> |
7,012,984 | 7,013,015 | 1 | 3 | 7,012,648 | train | <story><title>Apple Acquires Rapid-Fire Camera App Developer SnappyLabs</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/04/snappylabs/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sabalaba</author><text>For those interested in the technical details, the original blog post is archived here:<p><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20131010012005/http://www.snappylabs.com/blog/snappycam/2013/07/31/iphone-king-of-speed/" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20131010012005&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.snappy...</a><p>I wonder why they took it down.</text></comment> | <story><title>Apple Acquires Rapid-Fire Camera App Developer SnappyLabs</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/04/snappylabs/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>chenster</author><text>When I first heard about the SnappyCam that is capable of taking blazing fast photos using a regular photo cam, I immediately purchased a copy and experimented with it. Not only it doesn&#x27;t everything it claims (essentially a breakthrough in super optimized image compression) but also the UI is well thought. At the time, I was certain that it&#x27;s just a matter of time to get Apple&#x27;s attention and very likely Apple would want to acquire the technology. Kudo to Papandriopoulos (How do you exactly pronounce that??)<p>What I&#x27;d like to add that, it apparently SnappyCam would only make sense on iPhone 5 or lower. That is because iPhone 5S already can do what SnappyCam does in its native Cam app by holding down the shoot button. Perhaps Apple got other ideas for its use in the future.</text></comment> |
29,686,303 | 29,685,343 | 1 | 3 | 29,682,917 | train | <story><title>“Autism is a spectrum” doesn’t mean what you think (2019)</title><url>https://neuroclastic.com/its-a-spectrum-doesnt-mean-what-you-think/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WillPostForFood</author><text>My hot take: a bunch of shitty gluten free food products have displaced better, cheaper, quality food. The people who think they are gluten intolerant are worse off, the people who are gluten tolerant are worse off, and the .5% of actual celiac sufferers are better off.</text></item><item><author>ok_dad</author><text>My opinion as an autistic person is the more people who think they’re autistic the better, it’ll normalize it and we’ll all have better lives. Look at the old chestnut: gluten. Now, because everyone thinks they have a gluten allergy, people who actually have them can eat so much more good food. That’s my hot take for today.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>BadCookie</author><text>I mistakenly thought that I was better off not eating gluten because I felt much better after going gluten free. I am now fairly sure that the real benefit I experienced came from reducing my sugar intake. Cutting out gluten tends to cut out sugar in tandem: breakfast cereal, cookies, cake, and so on. I wonder if this explains why so many people who aren’t celiac think they see a big benefit from a gluten-free diet. Lots of Americans are flirting with diabetes if they aren’t already diabetic. (And lots of sugar isn’t great for a person even if they are completely healthy.)</text></comment> | <story><title>“Autism is a spectrum” doesn’t mean what you think (2019)</title><url>https://neuroclastic.com/its-a-spectrum-doesnt-mean-what-you-think/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WillPostForFood</author><text>My hot take: a bunch of shitty gluten free food products have displaced better, cheaper, quality food. The people who think they are gluten intolerant are worse off, the people who are gluten tolerant are worse off, and the .5% of actual celiac sufferers are better off.</text></item><item><author>ok_dad</author><text>My opinion as an autistic person is the more people who think they’re autistic the better, it’ll normalize it and we’ll all have better lives. Look at the old chestnut: gluten. Now, because everyone thinks they have a gluten allergy, people who actually have them can eat so much more good food. That’s my hot take for today.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>caslon</author><text>Aside from the pandemic years, which are outliers, food has been consistently getting drastically cheaper for decades:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ers.usda.gov&#x2F;data-products&#x2F;food-expenditure-series&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ers.usda.gov&#x2F;data-products&#x2F;food-expenditure-seri...</a></text></comment> |
18,196,440 | 18,196,391 | 1 | 2 | 18,196,013 | train | <story><title>Millions of workers believe they are bound by non-binding contracts</title><url>http://thespeakernewsjournal.com/business/millions-of-workers-are-bound-by-non-binding-contracts/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>notacoward</author><text>There are other ways in which the papers you sign might not be as binding as you think. Story time.<p>A while back, the startup I worked at was acquired by a large company known for its aggressive legal department. Everyone had to sign an agreement, including both intellectual property and non-compete clauses, or be fired. One guy actually did refuse, and was fired. A few years later, I left that big company to work for another startup. I was concerned about that non-compete, so I did a bit of checking and found that it was NOT A CONTRACT as far as the law was concerned. You see, a contract by definition requires consideration on both sides. The relevant courts had repeatedly found that an offer of <i>initial</i> employment counted as consideration, but an offer of <i>continued</i> employment did not. Thus, what I had signed was not a contract. Legally, it wasn&#x27;t a non-binding or unenforceable contract. It was a non-entity. A piece of paper with some irrelevant squiggles on it.<p>I&#x27;ve heard that other ex-employees (and their lawyers and the courts) reaching the same conclusion is the reason that the big company in question adopted a policy of technically firing everyone from any startup they acquired, and then re-hiring them immediately under the same terms. The sole effect was to turn that continued employment into initial employment, non-consideration into consideration, validating the rest of the contract. It&#x27;s now standard practice throughout the industry.</text></comment> | <story><title>Millions of workers believe they are bound by non-binding contracts</title><url>http://thespeakernewsjournal.com/business/millions-of-workers-are-bound-by-non-binding-contracts/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>maxander</author><text>It doesn’t need to be enforceable, as far as the minimum wage class is concerned- if the spurious suit alone would have the defendant summoned to court multiple times over months, and likely unemployed during that time, it’s just as destructive as a real, successful suit would be for an ex-Googler, if not moreso. Without wages they can’t pay rent or feed their family (because this class is rarely able to accumulate savings.). If they <i>can</i> get a job before the suit resolves, having to move shifts around to get to court appointments could make them lose it again. And that’s assuming they have complete faith, somehow, that the law would rule in their favor- when they’re fighting a corporation, have minimal legal resources if their own, they would have to be <i>very</i> sure they live in a no-enforcement state- because a successful suit would end their financial life.</text></comment> |
39,670,977 | 39,669,469 | 1 | 3 | 39,665,090 | train | <story><title>Exploring Bauhaus: Revolutionary design school that shaped modern world</title><url>https://www.playforthoughts.com/blog/bauhaus</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>kjkjadksj</author><text>I think the real sell with bauhaus design is that it was and is super cheap. Look at these examples in the article. Simple forms. Simple materials. Cheap and fast. Compare that with an earlier building like the empire state building and we see the exact opposite. More complex forms. More craftsmanship required to create the overall decor and trim designs, and no doubt more cost compared to a bauhaus style building one could make with some chicken wire, plaster, and cheap windows. Its kind of a shame then that the international standard today has basically been the fast and cheap bauhaus inspired 5&#x2F;1 style building, in a sort of race to the bottom away from the building forms that once defined a place.</text></comment> | <story><title>Exploring Bauhaus: Revolutionary design school that shaped modern world</title><url>https://www.playforthoughts.com/blog/bauhaus</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>trevithick</author><text>Earlier HN discussion on this topic (different article): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30270286">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30270286</a><p>I mentioned Tom Wolfe&#x27;s book &quot;From Bauhaus to Our House.&quot; I don&#x27;t think he likes Bauhaus much.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;41001.From_Bauhaus_to_Our_House" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;41001.From_Bauhaus_to_Ou...</a></text></comment> |
2,493,757 | 2,493,834 | 1 | 3 | 2,493,356 | train | <story><title>The only wrong answer is 50/50: Calculating the co-founder equity split</title><url>http://www.geekwire.com/2011/wrong-answer-5050-calculating-cofounder-equity-split</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>webwright</author><text>I'm in the "thought provoking post, but disagree!" camp on this one.<p>As a guy who has been the CEO for most my startups, I'd NEVER say that I deserve more equity because of that.<p>Also, 5% for the IDEA? Jeebus. Is THAT idea the source of your eventual triumph? Or is it the 100 ideas that come later? If you pivot from your idea 6 months down the road in a direction your co-founder suggests, does he get a portion of that 5%? Or perhaps more, because it's your (now shown to be a bad) idea that wasted 6 months?<p>I DO agree that you need rules for who wins when a disagreement can't be resolved-- you can have those rules without handing over equity. You should also have rules for dissolution.<p>Co-founders are a market like any other. With these rules, and with Dan's outstanding reputation, I have no doubt that he could land a co-founder. But it'd always be a lesser co-founder than he COULD get. Minority shareholders are also more likely to bolt/get grumpy when things get rough.<p>In short, Dan's trying to maximize his personal wealth in the (exceedingly rare) event that the startup wins (sees liquidity) rather than maximizing for the company's chance of success.</text></comment> | <story><title>The only wrong answer is 50/50: Calculating the co-founder equity split</title><url>http://www.geekwire.com/2011/wrong-answer-5050-calculating-cofounder-equity-split</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>vessenes</author><text>This post is wrong. The central issue around equity splits is preserving equanimity and founder happiness as long as possible, in as wide a variety of situations as possible.<p>That is the fundamental purpose of a co-founder equity split in fact -- to allow founders to happily sacrifice and risk for corporate value building.<p>The niggly thises and thats this author suggest may be arguably fair day 1, but they miss both the psychology of nerd co-founders (or a nerd and a business guy), and they take absolutely nothing about the future into account.<p>Anyway, if this works for you and your team great, but I would bet 10:1 that with Joel's rules, the amount of time you spend fighting about equity in your first year is close to zero, definitely measured in hours.<p>With these rules, you will probably spend that long agreeing how much each of the multipliers is worth day two of your new startup, not to mention re-jiggering when some low-percentage (by this setup) co-founder has the actual big idea that gets you launched.</text></comment> |
7,433,950 | 7,433,018 | 1 | 3 | 7,431,369 | train | <story><title>Can the Bloomberg Terminal be "Toppled"?</title><url>http://mattturck.com/2014/03/19/can-the-bloomberg-terminal-be-toppled/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>squigs25</author><text>This IS the reason capital IQ started. They&#x27;ve done reasonably well.<p>There are a couple reasons why it&#x27;s really difficult to disrupt this industry:<p>1) An mvp won&#x27;t cut it. If I&#x27;m a trader with 300MM in my pocket, then I need access to information. All information.<p>2)Reliability. Traders need a highly reliable connection. No room for error. A great counter example is Reuters. I worked on a support desk where I had both Reuters and Bloomberg (at a cost of something insane, probably close to 100k&#x2F;yr). I imagine that when a major pricing error occurred on any exchange, I would find out within 30 seconds to a minute. Despite all its resources, Reuters proved time and again to have pricing issues. Connecting to hundreds of exchanges with thousands of securities is difficult. When you start to go outside of the US, there&#x27;s some really bizarre logic. Bloomberg was incredibly reliable on the other hand, and their support team responds to issues within minutes.<p>2) Network effects. Bloomberg messenger is the way to communicate in finance. Also, Bloomberg leverages its network to constantly monitor prices, so pricing problems are discovered REALLY quickly. It&#x27;s kind of like open-sourcing security pricing monitoring.<p>3) Reputation. Even if you create a perfect replica of Bloomberg, would I stake my clients money on your track record? Even with a good track record, why would I not trust Bloomberg when it&#x27;s the de facto standard?<p>4) IP? not sure about this one, but I imagine there are a lot of features baked into Bloomberg with legal protection.<p>5) The cost is insignificant for most of wall street.<p>Funny story: on a whim I interviewed with capital IQ while I was in college. They asked me to design an interface that would allow people to access financial information quickly. Having never used or seen Bloomberg, I immediately started describing a system of keyboard shortcuts, to which my interviewer responded that I was basically just describing Bloomberg terminal. Didn&#x27;t get the job.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mcfunley</author><text>&gt; Didn&#x27;t get the job.<p>You dodged a bullet. I worked for CIQ from 2003-2007, it was not such a great time. (I recently reminisced a bit here: <a href="http://mcfunley.com/manual-delivery" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;mcfunley.com&#x2F;manual-delivery</a>)<p>At one point I was offered a job with Bloomberg that I didn&#x27;t wind up taking. In my last interview with a director, he described an experience he had rewriting quite a bit of the Bloomberg terminal as a modern (for the time anyway) Windows app as some kind of skunkworks project. He said he was nearly fired for this. His superiors explained to him very slowly that although the terminal looks like obvious insanity to a tech person, it&#x27;s embedded in the culture in finance. People like it in part because it&#x27;s insane. It&#x27;s hard to attack this with modern methods.<p>One other giant stinking reason it&#x27;s really hard to innovate here is data. All of these companies are vertically integrated. CIQ, for example, is (or was back then, anyway) a tiny shim of a crappy tech company in New York and thousands and thousands of people doing data collection in India. The data is the product. Initially CIQ was just the website, and they bought their data from competitors. As they became successful their competitors shut them down and they had to scramble to replicate datasets by themselves.</text></comment> | <story><title>Can the Bloomberg Terminal be "Toppled"?</title><url>http://mattturck.com/2014/03/19/can-the-bloomberg-terminal-be-toppled/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>squigs25</author><text>This IS the reason capital IQ started. They&#x27;ve done reasonably well.<p>There are a couple reasons why it&#x27;s really difficult to disrupt this industry:<p>1) An mvp won&#x27;t cut it. If I&#x27;m a trader with 300MM in my pocket, then I need access to information. All information.<p>2)Reliability. Traders need a highly reliable connection. No room for error. A great counter example is Reuters. I worked on a support desk where I had both Reuters and Bloomberg (at a cost of something insane, probably close to 100k&#x2F;yr). I imagine that when a major pricing error occurred on any exchange, I would find out within 30 seconds to a minute. Despite all its resources, Reuters proved time and again to have pricing issues. Connecting to hundreds of exchanges with thousands of securities is difficult. When you start to go outside of the US, there&#x27;s some really bizarre logic. Bloomberg was incredibly reliable on the other hand, and their support team responds to issues within minutes.<p>2) Network effects. Bloomberg messenger is the way to communicate in finance. Also, Bloomberg leverages its network to constantly monitor prices, so pricing problems are discovered REALLY quickly. It&#x27;s kind of like open-sourcing security pricing monitoring.<p>3) Reputation. Even if you create a perfect replica of Bloomberg, would I stake my clients money on your track record? Even with a good track record, why would I not trust Bloomberg when it&#x27;s the de facto standard?<p>4) IP? not sure about this one, but I imagine there are a lot of features baked into Bloomberg with legal protection.<p>5) The cost is insignificant for most of wall street.<p>Funny story: on a whim I interviewed with capital IQ while I was in college. They asked me to design an interface that would allow people to access financial information quickly. Having never used or seen Bloomberg, I immediately started describing a system of keyboard shortcuts, to which my interviewer responded that I was basically just describing Bloomberg terminal. Didn&#x27;t get the job.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cmbaus</author><text>Not all Bloomberg users are traders though, and that&#x27;s where I would try to challenge them. I worked on software for many years that was used side by side with Bloomberg. Many of our customers were Bloomberg customers as well -- although our software was a bit more niche and we didn&#x27;t hit the heights that Bloomberg did. But when I doubted if we were in the right business, I would look over to Bloomberg and convince myself that the money was there for the right products.<p>While Bloomberg has almost any conceivable piece of data in real time, what they were missing was presentation. For instance, if you wanted to make a presentation to your board which demonstrated your value as a money manager, you&#x27;d have to leave Bloomberg to do it. That&#x27;s how we were able to share space with them. But I&#x27;ve heard rumors they are moving in this direction now.<p>I also agree with the author that the data is really the lynch pin. Some commonly used data can be very expensive to acquire if you are able to get it at all. For instance try finding out what stocks and weights make up the Russell 2000 index (and then legally redistribute that data). We were fortunate in that we got in the business when data vendors were willing to negotiate with small software vendors. And much of the value we offered was in those accumulated contracts.<p>Once those contracts are in place it is very difficult for either side to cancel them without pissing off their customers. For instance a couple years ago FactSet and Morningstar got into a spat and FactSet&#x27;s contract to provide Morningstar data wasn&#x27;t renewed. All hell broke loose on both sides. They made a deal. Data is pretty big chasm for a startup to cross. And users are particular about what data vendors they use, even for nearly equivalent products.<p>There have been some reasonable exits in the financial software business that don&#x27;t get much play in the Valley. For instance BlackDiamond sold their reporting package (again presentation) to Advent in San Francisco for about $70million and eVestment has been taking on investment and growing like crazy. But neither of those companies competed head to head with Bloomberg&#x27;s core business. But they are big enough markets that I could see Bloomberg wanting to grow into them.<p>In general, if you want a slice of the market that Bloomberg is in, I don&#x27;t think it would easy to do it head on over data. You have to outflank them where they are weak, and hope to chip away at their mindshare that way.</text></comment> |
16,810,601 | 16,810,567 | 1 | 3 | 16,810,268 | train | <story><title>Based on his testimony today, Mark Zuckerberg puts users last during a crisis</title><url>https://theoutline.com/post/4128/mark-zuckerberg-kamala-harris-facebook-priorities-cambridge-analytica</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>vergessenmir</author><text>As much as I loathe too I have to defend Facebook. Not to say the data collection practices are not
egregious ,let&#x27;s not forget that these are industry-wide practices and that the hearings have less to do with protecting users than it is political grand standing. Experian, anyone?<p>It&#x27;s almost as if we&#x27;ve collectively forgotten the data breaches of the last 12 months and how exposed American and EU citizens are now to fraud because of lax security practices by credit scoring companies.<p>I guess the difference is that Facebook is actively sharing this data and Experian was hacked, because their breach was the action of an external agent, they are less culpable.<p>From the UK it looks like this. Trump used data, Facebook helped, politicians are upset that Trump was helped by the Facebook platform (conveniently forgetting that every campaign before that has used large amounts of Facebook user data), let&#x27;s punish Facebook.<p>Facebook doesn&#x27;t care about users, but politicians who have the power to change this care even less.</text></comment> | <story><title>Based on his testimony today, Mark Zuckerberg puts users last during a crisis</title><url>https://theoutline.com/post/4128/mark-zuckerberg-kamala-harris-facebook-priorities-cambridge-analytica</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>victorbojica</author><text>Don&#x27;t want to take Zuck&#x27;s side, but reaching such conclusion from only two or three sentences seems a bit unfair and misleading.
The title sounds great though...</text></comment> |
41,389,406 | 41,389,458 | 1 | 2 | 41,388,326 | train | <story><title>Computer scientists prove that heat destroys quantum entanglement</title><url>https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-scientists-prove-that-heat-destroys-entanglement-20240828/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>danbruc</author><text>A similar result for superposition would be huge, I guess, after a century we could finally understand what qualifies as a measurement device, why we do not observe quantum effects at macroscopic scales, what actually saves or kills Schrödinger&#x27;s cat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sebzim4500</author><text>There&#x27;s a result in quantum information that demonstrating a superposition of two states is at least as hard as switching between those states.<p>So designing an experiment to show that a cat is in a superposition of alive and dead is at least as hard as bringing a dead cat back to life (obviously in real life it would be much harder, this is just a lower bound).</text></comment> | <story><title>Computer scientists prove that heat destroys quantum entanglement</title><url>https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-scientists-prove-that-heat-destroys-entanglement-20240828/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>danbruc</author><text>A similar result for superposition would be huge, I guess, after a century we could finally understand what qualifies as a measurement device, why we do not observe quantum effects at macroscopic scales, what actually saves or kills Schrödinger&#x27;s cat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>marginalia_nu</author><text>We have this result already. Interaction with thermal noise ruins wave coherence, and causes classical physics to emerge. This comes when you in a sense replace waves with their average values.<p>It&#x27;s not so much a question of scale, but of statistical noisiness. Quantum effects are primarily observable in the low-temperature domain (this is not necessarily &quot;thermometer temperature&quot;, but a statistical measure)</text></comment> |
35,283,932 | 35,283,409 | 1 | 2 | 35,282,325 | train | <story><title>Transformer architecture optimized for Apple Silicon</title><url>https://github.com/apple/ml-ane-transformers</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lotsofpulp</author><text>“Hey siri, what is today’s date?”<p>“Sorry, I’m having trouble connecting to the network”</text></item><item><author>threeseed</author><text>They do have a search engine though with Siri Suggestions. Which has a user base of ~1.5b+ people.<p>We only see the tip of the iceberg so who knows what else it is capable of.</text></item><item><author>highwaylights</author><text>Maybe, but Apple doesn’t have a search to rival Google (or even an assistant, given the state of Siri).<p>Focusing on privacy and on-device learning is great, but when the strength of these models is in consuming all the data they can hoover up your motive is at odds with your philosophy.</text></item><item><author>davnicwil</author><text>I really think you have hit the nail on the head here. Apple has a ridiculous, almost unfathomably deep moat for training and running personalised, customised LLMs and other AI models on the &#x27;edge&#x27; with these Apple Silicon chips in all their devices.<p>We must be talking orders of magnitude differences in operational cost, not to mention completely unique features like privacy. The very definition of disruption, waiting in the wings.<p>Not only that, but this model of &#x27;wait in the wings and pounce when the tech is really there and absolutely nail it&#x27; is Apple&#x27;s forté, aligned completely with the cultural and strategic DNA of the company.</text></item><item><author>endisneigh</author><text>i&#x27;d say within 5 years apple will have optimized apple silicon and their tech, along with language model improvements, such that you will be able to get gpt-4 level performance in the iPhone 19 with inference happening entirely locally.<p>openai is doing great work and is serious competition, but I think many underestimate big tech. once they&#x27;re properly motivated they&#x27;ll catch up quick. I think we can agree that openai is a sufficient motivator.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>epistasis</author><text>Me: Hey Siri, call &lt;my city&gt; Toyota.<p>Siri: I&#x27;m sorry, that contact is not in your list<p>Me: Siri, what is the number for &lt;my city&gt; Toyota.<p>Siri: &lt;my city&gt; Toyota&#x27;s phone number is 123-456-7890 [said too fast to remember or write down in one go]<p>Me: Siri, call &lt;my city&gt; Toyota<p>Siri: I&#x27;m sorry, you do not have that contact number.<p>Me: &amp;$@@&amp;&#x2F;&amp;&amp;&#x2F;&amp;!!!</text></comment> | <story><title>Transformer architecture optimized for Apple Silicon</title><url>https://github.com/apple/ml-ane-transformers</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lotsofpulp</author><text>“Hey siri, what is today’s date?”<p>“Sorry, I’m having trouble connecting to the network”</text></item><item><author>threeseed</author><text>They do have a search engine though with Siri Suggestions. Which has a user base of ~1.5b+ people.<p>We only see the tip of the iceberg so who knows what else it is capable of.</text></item><item><author>highwaylights</author><text>Maybe, but Apple doesn’t have a search to rival Google (or even an assistant, given the state of Siri).<p>Focusing on privacy and on-device learning is great, but when the strength of these models is in consuming all the data they can hoover up your motive is at odds with your philosophy.</text></item><item><author>davnicwil</author><text>I really think you have hit the nail on the head here. Apple has a ridiculous, almost unfathomably deep moat for training and running personalised, customised LLMs and other AI models on the &#x27;edge&#x27; with these Apple Silicon chips in all their devices.<p>We must be talking orders of magnitude differences in operational cost, not to mention completely unique features like privacy. The very definition of disruption, waiting in the wings.<p>Not only that, but this model of &#x27;wait in the wings and pounce when the tech is really there and absolutely nail it&#x27; is Apple&#x27;s forté, aligned completely with the cultural and strategic DNA of the company.</text></item><item><author>endisneigh</author><text>i&#x27;d say within 5 years apple will have optimized apple silicon and their tech, along with language model improvements, such that you will be able to get gpt-4 level performance in the iPhone 19 with inference happening entirely locally.<p>openai is doing great work and is serious competition, but I think many underestimate big tech. once they&#x27;re properly motivated they&#x27;ll catch up quick. I think we can agree that openai is a sufficient motivator.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dmd</author><text>“hey siri, what’s the weather today?”<p>“Now playing Eminem Love the way you lie featuring Rihanna”</text></comment> |
30,041,787 | 30,041,471 | 1 | 2 | 30,020,288 | train | <story><title>Atlas – Terraform but for Database Migrations</title><url>https://atlasgo.io/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>atombender</author><text>In my experience, this sort of thing breaks down when you have a large production database that requires carefully crafted migrations to avoid affecting the existing system and taking too many locks.<p>For example, with Postgres some indexes have to be performed with &quot;CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY&quot; or &quot;DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY&quot;, which cannot be done inside a transaction. (Also, a &quot;CREATE INDEX&quot; like this can fail halfway and leave behind an invalid index that must be manually deleted.) Whether this must be done with &quot;CONCURRENTLY&quot; or not isn&#x27;t something the tool can know.<p>In some cases, a change must done in multiple steps. For example, if you change a column from &quot;NULL&quot; to &quot;NOT NULL&quot;, you have to provide a default value. Updating the database with a default value can in fact be a huge operation that might even have to be done in multiple stages to avoid locking rows for too long. There&#x27;s no way to easily express this in a DSL. M<p>Then there&#x27;s the database support. A tooo like this needs to support a huge range of features. Postgres has extensions (CREATE INDEX ... USING), special index operator classes, functional indexes, partitioning, and so on. I&#x27;ve seen many ORMs or SQL adapters (ActiveRecord&#x2F;ARel, Squirrel, Goqu, Sequelize) try to be smart with how they let you build SQL from high-level code, but they all fail to cover all cases. (Recently I needed to do &quot;ORDER BY CASE ... END&quot; and was using Goqu, which has support for case expressions, but did not support sorting on them.)<p>So while a tool like this might be good when you&#x27;re just starting out, for a &quot;real&quot; app you want to avoid this sort of automation, because the tool is almost certainly not going to be smart enough.<p>I&#x27;m a fan of non-magical tools that let me just write SQL migrations, like dbmate and Goose, because that gives me full control. Having a tool to magically figure out the diff isn&#x27;t super helpful, because I really need to know the diff myself when writing the migration, in order to make it predictable. It&#x27;s simply more convenient to specify the order yourself.</text></comment> | <story><title>Atlas – Terraform but for Database Migrations</title><url>https://atlasgo.io/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>redact207</author><text>I&#x27;ll never be comfortable with any tool for that automatically generates schema changes, as I&#x27;m just never sure at what point it decides to delete parts of my prod db.<p>All of my migrations are dumb DDL statements rolled up into a version. I know exactly what the final state is as it gets run and used when integration testing, staging etc.<p>It&#x27;s boring but pretty bulletproof. I can rename a table and be confident it&#x27;ll work, rather than some tool that might decide to drop and create a new table.<p>I can also continue to use SQL and not have to learn HCl for databases. This is useful when I want to control how updates are done, if I want index updates to be done concurrently Vs locking the table.</text></comment> |
29,399,836 | 29,397,917 | 1 | 2 | 29,396,643 | train | <story><title>FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]</title><url>https://propertyofthepeople.org/document-detail/?doc-id=21114562</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gnopgnip</author><text>The Stored Communications Act makes disclosing the contents of messages without a search warrant unlawful</text></item><item><author>heavyset_go</author><text>There&#x27;s also:<p>* Law enforcement simply asks nicely: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years</text></item><item><author>xanaxagoras</author><text>They left off one very popular messenger, SMS:<p>* Message content: All<p>* Subpoena: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* 18 U.S.C 2703(d): can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* Search warrant: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* Vague suspicion plus a small fee to the carrier: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>freeflight</author><text>Just like the NSA spying on Americans is unlawful [0] the FBI terrorizing political movements is unlawful [1] or the CIA operating in the US is unlawful [2]<p>Yet, I&#x27;m pretty sure all these are still happening, to a certain degree, to this day.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;us-usa-nsa-spying-idUSKBN25T3CK" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;us-usa-nsa-spying-idUSKBN25T...</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;COINTELPRO" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;COINTELPRO</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Operation_CHAOS" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Operation_CHAOS</a></text></comment> | <story><title>FBI's ability to legally access secure messaging app content and metadata [pdf]</title><url>https://propertyofthepeople.org/document-detail/?doc-id=21114562</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>gnopgnip</author><text>The Stored Communications Act makes disclosing the contents of messages without a search warrant unlawful</text></item><item><author>heavyset_go</author><text>There&#x27;s also:<p>* Law enforcement simply asks nicely: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years</text></item><item><author>xanaxagoras</author><text>They left off one very popular messenger, SMS:<p>* Message content: All<p>* Subpoena: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* 18 U.S.C 2703(d): can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* Search warrant: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years<p>* Vague suspicion plus a small fee to the carrier: can render all message content for the last 1-7 years</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>AnthonyMouse</author><text>The people responsible for investigating and prosecuting such crimes have some not so great incentives to avoid doing so and keep the whole thing secret though, don&#x27;t they?<p>And then when they get caught, they do this:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdt.org&#x2F;insights&#x2F;the-truth-about-telecom-immunity&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdt.org&#x2F;insights&#x2F;the-truth-about-telecom-immunity&#x2F;</a></text></comment> |
40,616,661 | 40,616,254 | 1 | 2 | 40,615,786 | train | <story><title>Boeing Passenger Jet Nearly Crashes Because of Known Software Bug</title><url>https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/tui-boeing-flight-bristol-disaster-avoided-b2558536.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>HL33tibCe7</author><text><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;avherald.com&#x2F;h?article=5194536c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;avherald.com&#x2F;h?article=5194536c</a><p>and <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gov.uk&#x2F;aaib-reports&#x2F;aaib-special-bulletin-s1-slash-2024-boeing-737-8k5-g-fdzs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gov.uk&#x2F;aaib-reports&#x2F;aaib-special-bulletin-s1-sla...</a> is the AAIB report<p>Summary:<p>&gt; The aircraft took off from Runway 09 with a thrust setting significantly below that required to
achieve the correct takeoff performance. Rotation for the takeoff occurred only 260 m before
the end of the runway and the aircraft passed over the end at a height of approximately
10 ft. The N1
required to achieve the required takeoff performance was 92.8% but, following
an A&#x2F;T disconnect when the crew selected TOGA, 84.5% was manually set instead. Despite
an SOP requirement to check the thrust setting on takeoff, the crew did not realise that the
thrust was not set correctly until after the takeoff although they had noted how close to the
end of the runway they were.
The A&#x2F;T had disconnected when the TOGA switch was pressed due to a fault with the ASM
associated with the thrust lever for engine 1. This disconnect was a known issue with the
older type ASMs fitted to the aircraft type. The manufacturer has issued a Fleet Team Digest
for operators detailing the issue and the SB for replacing the ASMs with a newer model.</text></comment> | <story><title>Boeing Passenger Jet Nearly Crashes Because of Known Software Bug</title><url>https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/tui-boeing-flight-bristol-disaster-avoided-b2558536.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>kashunstva</author><text>The title here and the text of TFA reduce the incident to a single point of failure. There are conditions in which the TO&#x2F;GA mode when engaged will fail to set the calculated and the crew is required to manually set the takeoff thrust. Confirmation of takeoff thrust set should be called out. Was that done? Boeing is under justifiably intense scrutiny for many of its manufacturing and engineering practices but the press needs to apply intellectual honesty in reporting incidents like this. It seems that the crew may have known that the thrust was not properly set when TO&#x2F;GA was engaged and then manually set an incorrect thrust. Like many incidents, this is likely to have layered causes. Why not report that upfront?</text></comment> |
13,688,492 | 13,686,398 | 1 | 3 | 13,683,110 | train | <story><title>Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?</title><url>http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7758/has-there-been-a-nuclear-incident-in-the-arctic</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chris_overseas</author><text>I travelled on a (non-nuclear) icebreaker out from Murmansk back in 2012. On the way out to the open ocean we passed several moored nuclear powered icebreakers and other vessels in various states of decay[0]. It was both fascinating and disturbing to see - many of these had not yet been decommissioned and it seemed to me that they were huge disasters waiting to happen.<p>In Murmansk itself there is a nuclear icebreaker (The Lenin) that has been decommissioned and converted into a museum where you can tour the vessel and see everything including the engine rooms and nuclear reactors. Despite it being decommissioned, I discovered some systems were clearly still functioning when I accidentally leaned on a random control panel and a bunch of lights lit up!<p>Photos from the trip are here[1], with the first seven photos being taken of or onboard the Lenin.<p>Note that one of the most powerful nuclear icebreakers in the world, The 50 Years of Victory, is available for tourists to travel to the North Pole[2]<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;content&#x2F;bin&#x2F;images&#x2F;large&#x2F;AH5A5916.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;content&#x2F;bin&#x2F;images&#x2F;lar...</a><p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;index.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;index.html</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;50_Let_Pobedy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;50_Let_Pobedy</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tlow</author><text>As many have noted, these are excellent photographs. I have limited knowledge and experience with photography. Do you worry about your work being stolen and sold?<p>I&#x27;m thinking particularly of this story: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;petapixel.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;07&#x2F;27&#x2F;photographer-suing-getty-images-1-billion&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;petapixel.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;07&#x2F;27&#x2F;photographer-suing-getty-im...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?</title><url>http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7758/has-there-been-a-nuclear-incident-in-the-arctic</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>chris_overseas</author><text>I travelled on a (non-nuclear) icebreaker out from Murmansk back in 2012. On the way out to the open ocean we passed several moored nuclear powered icebreakers and other vessels in various states of decay[0]. It was both fascinating and disturbing to see - many of these had not yet been decommissioned and it seemed to me that they were huge disasters waiting to happen.<p>In Murmansk itself there is a nuclear icebreaker (The Lenin) that has been decommissioned and converted into a museum where you can tour the vessel and see everything including the engine rooms and nuclear reactors. Despite it being decommissioned, I discovered some systems were clearly still functioning when I accidentally leaned on a random control panel and a bunch of lights lit up!<p>Photos from the trip are here[1], with the first seven photos being taken of or onboard the Lenin.<p>Note that one of the most powerful nuclear icebreakers in the world, The 50 Years of Victory, is available for tourists to travel to the North Pole[2]<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;content&#x2F;bin&#x2F;images&#x2F;large&#x2F;AH5A5916.jpg" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;content&#x2F;bin&#x2F;images&#x2F;lar...</a><p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;index.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.redyeti.net&#x2F;FranzJosefLand&#x2F;index.html</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;50_Let_Pobedy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;50_Let_Pobedy</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pratyushag2</author><text>These are incredible pictures. What kind of camera did you use to click these?</text></comment> |
29,416,978 | 29,416,476 | 1 | 3 | 29,413,318 | train | <story><title>Google removes Pirate Bay domains from search results citing Dutch court order</title><url>https://torrentfreak.com/google-removes-pirate-bay-domains-from-search-results-citing-dutch-court-order-211130/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Valakas_</author><text>DDG should change their name though. Seriously. Who wants to use such a ridiculous sounding search engine? AltaVista sounded good and had a meaning (seeing from above). Yahoo fine. Bing also ok. But duckduckgo seems like the most ridiculous name someone came up on a brainstorm meeting for search engine names. But then they did went with it.</text></item><item><author>concinds</author><text>Google Search itself is now a threat to the open web. Forget Chrome.<p>Google willingly interferes, in a heavy-handed way, with both search suggestions and search results, with both Google Search and YouTube. Just try to look up any topic on YouTube, and you&#x27;ll have to get past the hundreds of mainstream media channels covering the event, before you actually find the original video. They artificially promote &quot;authoritative sources&quot; which are anything but, since they may be second-hand coverage of original videos that get buried in search results.<p>Google&#x27;s results are not only manipulated by clever SEO people[0], but by employees[1], in direct contradiction to Sundar Pichai&#x27;s sworn testimony. Some of that is very defendable. But there&#x27;s zero transparency. Given their search monopoly, and that most people aren&#x27;t aware that search results are manipulated, Google Search <i>is</i> the web. Websites that get delisted are presumed to have ceased to exist. Focusing on browsers (Firefox) is good, but no longer enough.<p>That&#x27;s why Google Search itself is now a threat to the open web. Switch to other engines. DuckDuckGo, Brave Search are the ones I trust, and there&#x27;s tons more.<p>[0]: how many times have you tried looking for a machine&#x27;s user manual, mistyped the model number, and somehow &quot;found&quot; a webpage with the manual for a product that didn&#x27;t exist? and then modified the model number further and found more results from the same website, with relevant keywords and yet another incorrect model number? My understanding of SEO isn&#x27;t good enough to know how they do that. I don&#x27;t believe websites can dynamically alter their index to show up for so many typoed search queries.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@mikewacker&#x2F;googles-manual-interventions-in-search-results-a3b0cfd3e26c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@mikewacker&#x2F;googles-manual-interventions-...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>athenot</author><text>They own duck.com and it redirects to their site. They should just adopt &quot;duck.com&quot; as their main brand, which will inevitably get shortened to &quot;Duck&quot; in everyday conversation.<p>Then we can turn it into a verb. &quot;Go Duck &lt;term&gt;&quot;<p>They could even capitalize on the famous autocorrect substitutions: &quot;Need an answer? Duck it!&quot;</text></comment> | <story><title>Google removes Pirate Bay domains from search results citing Dutch court order</title><url>https://torrentfreak.com/google-removes-pirate-bay-domains-from-search-results-citing-dutch-court-order-211130/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Valakas_</author><text>DDG should change their name though. Seriously. Who wants to use such a ridiculous sounding search engine? AltaVista sounded good and had a meaning (seeing from above). Yahoo fine. Bing also ok. But duckduckgo seems like the most ridiculous name someone came up on a brainstorm meeting for search engine names. But then they did went with it.</text></item><item><author>concinds</author><text>Google Search itself is now a threat to the open web. Forget Chrome.<p>Google willingly interferes, in a heavy-handed way, with both search suggestions and search results, with both Google Search and YouTube. Just try to look up any topic on YouTube, and you&#x27;ll have to get past the hundreds of mainstream media channels covering the event, before you actually find the original video. They artificially promote &quot;authoritative sources&quot; which are anything but, since they may be second-hand coverage of original videos that get buried in search results.<p>Google&#x27;s results are not only manipulated by clever SEO people[0], but by employees[1], in direct contradiction to Sundar Pichai&#x27;s sworn testimony. Some of that is very defendable. But there&#x27;s zero transparency. Given their search monopoly, and that most people aren&#x27;t aware that search results are manipulated, Google Search <i>is</i> the web. Websites that get delisted are presumed to have ceased to exist. Focusing on browsers (Firefox) is good, but no longer enough.<p>That&#x27;s why Google Search itself is now a threat to the open web. Switch to other engines. DuckDuckGo, Brave Search are the ones I trust, and there&#x27;s tons more.<p>[0]: how many times have you tried looking for a machine&#x27;s user manual, mistyped the model number, and somehow &quot;found&quot; a webpage with the manual for a product that didn&#x27;t exist? and then modified the model number further and found more results from the same website, with relevant keywords and yet another incorrect model number? My understanding of SEO isn&#x27;t good enough to know how they do that. I don&#x27;t believe websites can dynamically alter their index to show up for so many typoed search queries.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@mikewacker&#x2F;googles-manual-interventions-in-search-results-a3b0cfd3e26c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@mikewacker&#x2F;googles-manual-interventions-...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>CountDrewku</author><text>Nah HotBot and AskJeeves didn&#x27;t have a problem back in the day. Google sounded just as ridiculous when it came out.</text></comment> |
29,168,025 | 29,167,167 | 1 | 2 | 29,167,000 | train | <story><title>Macron says France will build new nuclear energy reactors</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/macron-says-france-will-build-more-nuclear-energy-reactors-2021-11-09/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>1cvmask</author><text>The Chinese have committed to building over 150 new nuclear reactors. The British government will subsidize Rolls Royce. Japan will reactivate over 30 nuclear reactors.<p>It seems this is the biggest energy story of the year. The comeback of nuclear energy.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smallcaps.com.au&#x2F;china-supercharge-uranium-race-150-new-nuclear-reactors&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smallcaps.com.au&#x2F;china-supercharge-uranium-race-150-...</a><p>The HN discussion on the China story:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=29151741" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=29151741</a><p>Japan reactivating nuclear reactors:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mainichi.jp&#x2F;english&#x2F;articles&#x2F;20210501&#x2F;p2a&#x2F;00m&#x2F;0op&#x2F;007000c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mainichi.jp&#x2F;english&#x2F;articles&#x2F;20210501&#x2F;p2a&#x2F;00m&#x2F;0op&#x2F;00...</a><p>UK. Rolls-Royce gets funding to develop mini nuclear reactors:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;business-59212983" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;business-59212983</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>toomuchtodo</author><text>It&#x27;s not a comeback until you push the first kwh to the grid for the price you said you&#x27;d build the new generator for. Japan turning back on mothballed reactors is a Big Deal (and a quick win for avoiding CO2 emissions), but getting new reactors built in less than a decade or for less than billons of dollars is where the proof lies. Talk and promises are cheap, action has a cost and can&#x27;t be faked.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lazard.com&#x2F;perspective&#x2F;levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lazard.com&#x2F;perspective&#x2F;levelized-cost-of-energy-...</a> (Lazard’s latest annual Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis (LCOE 15.0) shows the continued cost-competitiveness of certain renewable energy technologies on a subsidized basis and the marginal cost of coal, nuclear and combined cycle gas generation.)</text></comment> | <story><title>Macron says France will build new nuclear energy reactors</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/macron-says-france-will-build-more-nuclear-energy-reactors-2021-11-09/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>1cvmask</author><text>The Chinese have committed to building over 150 new nuclear reactors. The British government will subsidize Rolls Royce. Japan will reactivate over 30 nuclear reactors.<p>It seems this is the biggest energy story of the year. The comeback of nuclear energy.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smallcaps.com.au&#x2F;china-supercharge-uranium-race-150-new-nuclear-reactors&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smallcaps.com.au&#x2F;china-supercharge-uranium-race-150-...</a><p>The HN discussion on the China story:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=29151741" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=29151741</a><p>Japan reactivating nuclear reactors:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mainichi.jp&#x2F;english&#x2F;articles&#x2F;20210501&#x2F;p2a&#x2F;00m&#x2F;0op&#x2F;007000c" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mainichi.jp&#x2F;english&#x2F;articles&#x2F;20210501&#x2F;p2a&#x2F;00m&#x2F;0op&#x2F;00...</a><p>UK. Rolls-Royce gets funding to develop mini nuclear reactors:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;business-59212983" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;business-59212983</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Gwypaas</author><text>That announcement of 150 reactors in China is no real change to the long term plans either. Still simply keeping the option barely open which is very sensible to do when you&#x27;re such a huge economy, even if it comes from subsidies.<p><i>In 2019, China had a new target of 200 GWe of nuclear generating capacity by 2035, which is 7.7% out of predicted total electricity generating capacity of 2600 GWe.</i><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nuclear_power_in_China" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nuclear_power_in_China</a><p>So with about 50 GWe from 50 reactors today adding another 150 gives you the same goal of about 200 GWe. Unless we&#x27;re talking SMRs because then the goal just got reduced to a fraction of the original.</text></comment> |
35,141,353 | 35,141,332 | 1 | 2 | 35,140,309 | train | <story><title>Swedish pension giant loses $1.1B from US banks’ collapse</title><url>https://www.thelocal.se/20230313/swedish-pension-giant-loses-12-billion-kronor-from-us-banks-collapse</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tensor</author><text>Risk applies equally to depositors. Apparently we all forgot that banks have risk, just less than our mattresses.</text></item><item><author>Arrath</author><text>Worse as far as the outcome for the Pension, yes.<p>But its a concept otherwise known as Risk.</text></item><item><author>Analemma_</author><text>I mean, that&#x27;s worse. The depositors at SVB are being made whole, the shareholders are getting wiped out.<p>EDIT: I think a lot of people misunderstood me. Wiping out the shareholders was absolutely the correct thing to do; I just meant worse from the perspective of people whose value is in the equity.</text></item><item><author>tom-thistime</author><text>According to the article, the pension fund&#x27;s exposure is because it owns shares of stock in SVB. That&#x27;s bad, but bank stocks can be tricky. They&#x27;re not saying they lost money as a depositor.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ctvo</author><text>&gt; Risk applies equally to depositors.<p>Share holders are owners in the company. They are rewarded financially when the company does well, and risk losing money when the company does poorly. In what world are customers <i>equally</i> subject to the same risks? They obviously do not get the same rewards.<p>Or do you mean in general? In that case, it&#x27;s not particularly interesting. There&#x27;s risk in walking outside.</text></comment> | <story><title>Swedish pension giant loses $1.1B from US banks’ collapse</title><url>https://www.thelocal.se/20230313/swedish-pension-giant-loses-12-billion-kronor-from-us-banks-collapse</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tensor</author><text>Risk applies equally to depositors. Apparently we all forgot that banks have risk, just less than our mattresses.</text></item><item><author>Arrath</author><text>Worse as far as the outcome for the Pension, yes.<p>But its a concept otherwise known as Risk.</text></item><item><author>Analemma_</author><text>I mean, that&#x27;s worse. The depositors at SVB are being made whole, the shareholders are getting wiped out.<p>EDIT: I think a lot of people misunderstood me. Wiping out the shareholders was absolutely the correct thing to do; I just meant worse from the perspective of people whose value is in the equity.</text></item><item><author>tom-thistime</author><text>According to the article, the pension fund&#x27;s exposure is because it owns shares of stock in SVB. That&#x27;s bad, but bank stocks can be tricky. They&#x27;re not saying they lost money as a depositor.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>NoboruWataya</author><text>Of course there is risk in bank deposits, but it is a rather more thorny (and therefore more interesting) topic because the risk is not the <i>purpose</i> of the bank deposit; people generally don&#x27;t deposit cash with a bank as a means of speculating on the creditworthiness of the bank. A pension fund losing money on stocks is BAU, but a pension fund (or any company) losing bank deposits is exceptional and arguably represents a failure of the market, regulators or both.</text></comment> |
6,477,495 | 6,477,498 | 1 | 3 | 6,477,276 | train | <story><title>A 3D printed toothbrush for all your teeth</title><url>http://www.3ders.org//articles/20131001-blizzident-releases-3d-printed-6-seconds-toothbrush-tailored-to-your-teeth.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zdw</author><text>While it obviously appears to shorten the brushing time, it also looks like it would be much harder to keep the device itself clean - everyone who has had a retainer or other removable dental device could likely attest to this. I&#x27;d imagine it would also require more toothpaste.<p>Seeing as toothbrushes in bulk are about less than $1 each, a $300 ($150 refurbished, but ewwwwww...), hard to clean device seems somewhat difficult to argue for.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>brd</author><text>Lets put aside the cleaning argument and discuss cost for a minute here.<p>Its recommended you brush your teeth for ~2 minutes. Lets say with this thing you shorten it to 30 seconds. That means you save 3 minutes per day every day on brushing, assuming you brush twice daily. This works out to about 18 hours a year. If your time is more valuable than 17&#x2F;hr it&#x27;s arguably worth it.<p>Time and time again I see people complain about the cost of daily use items but when you factor in how much you actually use them and the potential benefit you can get out of a them it quickly becomes worthwhile.<p>edit: there is a huge difference between being maximizing productivity and measuring opportunity cost, I&#x27;m arguing the latter. I don&#x27;t expect you to get paid another 18 hours a year. I&#x27;m simply pointing out that depending on how YOU value YOUR time spending $300 on a fancy toothbrush is entirely worth it.</text></comment> | <story><title>A 3D printed toothbrush for all your teeth</title><url>http://www.3ders.org//articles/20131001-blizzident-releases-3d-printed-6-seconds-toothbrush-tailored-to-your-teeth.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zdw</author><text>While it obviously appears to shorten the brushing time, it also looks like it would be much harder to keep the device itself clean - everyone who has had a retainer or other removable dental device could likely attest to this. I&#x27;d imagine it would also require more toothpaste.<p>Seeing as toothbrushes in bulk are about less than $1 each, a $300 ($150 refurbished, but ewwwwww...), hard to clean device seems somewhat difficult to argue for.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>r0h1n</author><text>How can a product that is &quot;tailor-made to fit into a person&#x27;s mouth using 3D scanning and 3D printing&quot; be sold refurbished?</text></comment> |
26,906,942 | 26,906,406 | 1 | 2 | 26,905,203 | train | <story><title>Wildtype: Sushi-grade salmon grown from Pacific Salmon cells</title><url>https://www.wildtypefoods.com/oursalmon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>iamwil</author><text>As a curiosity and side note, Salmon wasn&#x27;t always eaten by the Japanese as sushi. It was considered a garbage fish that you&#x27;d grill due to its likelihood of being infected by parasites. It was the Norwegians that had a surplus, and was looking for a new market to open up that salmon sushi became a thing.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;torodex&#x2F;salmon-sushi-is-not-a-japanese-invention-9189d9cd78b7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;torodex&#x2F;salmon-sushi-is-not-a-japanese-in...</a><p>The Norwegians probably won&#x27;t pay attention to this initially, but will probably come out against it, given that Salmon is at least a chunk of chain for their industries.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>weaksauce</author><text>Andong did a deep dive on it and the norway genesis isn&#x27;t the full story: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=1k4x9FrD5k4" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=1k4x9FrD5k4</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Wildtype: Sushi-grade salmon grown from Pacific Salmon cells</title><url>https://www.wildtypefoods.com/oursalmon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>iamwil</author><text>As a curiosity and side note, Salmon wasn&#x27;t always eaten by the Japanese as sushi. It was considered a garbage fish that you&#x27;d grill due to its likelihood of being infected by parasites. It was the Norwegians that had a surplus, and was looking for a new market to open up that salmon sushi became a thing.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;torodex&#x2F;salmon-sushi-is-not-a-japanese-invention-9189d9cd78b7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;torodex&#x2F;salmon-sushi-is-not-a-japanese-in...</a><p>The Norwegians probably won&#x27;t pay attention to this initially, but will probably come out against it, given that Salmon is at least a chunk of chain for their industries.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ddlatham</author><text>As with many interesting topics, there&#x27;s a great Planet Money episode about this too:
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;sections&#x2F;money&#x2F;2015&#x2F;09&#x2F;16&#x2F;440951873&#x2F;episode-651-the-salmon-taboo" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;sections&#x2F;money&#x2F;2015&#x2F;09&#x2F;16&#x2F;440951873&#x2F;epis...</a></text></comment> |
12,489,061 | 12,489,066 | 1 | 2 | 12,488,345 | train | <story><title>Brain-sensing technology allows typing at 12 words per minute</title><url>http://sciencebulletin.org/archives/5149.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>I am not sure what is more surprising, that you can get 12WPM by simply using your brain, or that you can train monkeys to transcribe the New York Times or hamlet.</text></comment> | <story><title>Brain-sensing technology allows typing at 12 words per minute</title><url>http://sciencebulletin.org/archives/5149.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>etrautmann</author><text>This paper is from a colleague in my lab at Stanford - happy to answer questions.<p>For intuition, this is like clicking on an on-screen keyboard, so the typing speed is very high given the constraint of focusing on each key as a separate, discrete movement.</text></comment> |
21,912,325 | 21,912,311 | 1 | 2 | 21,911,454 | train | <story><title>What: A terminal tool to check what is taking up your bandwidth</title><url>https://github.com/imsnif/what</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lazyjones</author><text>Bad naming..<p><pre><code> WHAT(1) BSD General Commands Manual WHAT(1)
NAME
what -- show what versions of object modules were used to construct a file
</code></pre>
(MacOS ...)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>anilgulecha</author><text>This is in the top class of utilities (htopm etc).<p>A good name could probably be bwtop, or tcptop or iftop.<p>Actually I searched for these, and turns out iftop exists! (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;linux.die.net&#x2F;man&#x2F;8&#x2F;iftop" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;linux.die.net&#x2F;man&#x2F;8&#x2F;iftop</a>)</text></comment> | <story><title>What: A terminal tool to check what is taking up your bandwidth</title><url>https://github.com/imsnif/what</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lazyjones</author><text>Bad naming..<p><pre><code> WHAT(1) BSD General Commands Manual WHAT(1)
NAME
what -- show what versions of object modules were used to construct a file
</code></pre>
(MacOS ...)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Symbiote</author><text>&#x27;whence&#x27; would be more specific – it&#x27;s archaic in English, it means &#x27;from where&#x27; – although it&#x27;s used within the ksh shell.</text></comment> |
18,807,202 | 18,806,319 | 1 | 3 | 18,803,874 | train | <story><title>Google wins U.S. approval for radar-based hand motion sensor</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-sensor/google-wins-u-s-approval-for-radar-based-hand-motion-sensor-idUSKCN1OV1SH</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>roywiggins</author><text>&gt; A loud clatter of gunk music flooded through the Heart of Gold cabin as Zaphod searched the sub-etha radio wave bands for news of himself. The machine was rather difficult to operate. For years radios had been operated by means of pressing buttons and turning dials; then as the technology became more sophisticated the controls were made touch-sensitive--you merely had to brush the panels with your fingers; now all you had to do was wave your hand in the general direction of the components and hope. It saved a lot of muscular expenditure, of course, but meant that you had to sit infuriatingly still if you wanted to keep listening to the same program.<p>&gt; Zaphod waved a hand and the channel switched again.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.technovelgy.com&#x2F;ct&#x2F;content.asp?Bnum=1329" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.technovelgy.com&#x2F;ct&#x2F;content.asp?Bnum=1329</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Google wins U.S. approval for radar-based hand motion sensor</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-sensor/google-wins-u-s-approval-for-radar-based-hand-motion-sensor-idUSKCN1OV1SH</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>tootie</author><text>Having spent a fair bit of time looking into applications for gesture inputs (kinect and leap motion mostly) I can tell you the hardest part by far will the user experience design. Gestures are extremely unintuitive on their own. Users need really clear prompts and&#x2F;or training to understand how to use them. And if you want to innovate and create new and subtle gestures as your product evolves, it only gets worse.<p>The leap motion is already pretty good and has some useful applications, but it&#x27;s still very, very niche. The Soli looks like a real evolution of the technology in terms of both precision and how embeddable it is, but it&#x27;s going to have the same challenges in user adoption. I&#x27;d expect this kind of thing to get more traction in industry than in people&#x27;s homes.</text></comment> |
26,482,146 | 26,481,923 | 1 | 2 | 26,477,855 | train | <story><title>Pangolin – Mobile AMD laptop with Ryzen CPU and Radeon graphics</title><url>https://system76.com/laptops/pangolin?its-the-same-url-but-the-content-has-changed-thank-you</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Macha</author><text>Honestly find it hard to notice much difference in the display quality between my 1080p 2018 XPS laptop and my 1800p 2019 Mac laptop. Actually the XPS is slightly preferable to me because the matte vs glossy finish outweighs the extra resolution at that size for me.<p>I guess that could just be my sight, but the reviews for the XPS laptop vs the 4k model of the same were pretty much unanimous on the 4k variant being a waste of battery for a neglible return on image quality, so it&#x27;s at least not a fringe view</text></item><item><author>indymike</author><text>Would buy in a heartbeat if it had a 4k display. Hard to go back to 1080p after six years of Retina and 4K displays.</text></item><item><author>Fergusonb</author><text>I can&#x27;t speak to the 4700u or the pangolin specifically, but I can offer this perspective on PopOS&#x2F;AMD:<p>I&#x27;ve been using System76&#x27;s PopOS with my Asus Zephyrus G14 (4800hs) as a daily driver and I really like it. (freelance&#x2F;web)<p>The battery life is comparable to Windows (on integrated graphics mode, it has graphics switching available)at 7-10 hours with 70% brightness and balanced power settings using VScode and firefox.<p>The g14 has a 75wh battery vs the pangolin&#x27;s 49wh, so I would expect less battery life from the pangolin despite the 4700u having a lower default tdp, since the 4800hs likes to sit at around 6-10 watts when doing non-intensive tasks anyway.<p>In 2021 I&#x27;m not missing any major programs. It&#x27;s pretty incredible how much is cross-platform now.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>deckard1</author><text>&gt; the XPS is slightly preferable to me because the matte vs glossy finish outweighs the extra resolution at that size for me.<p>I have a ThinkPad, and this has been my experience. Sitting next to my Macbook Pro 13&quot; retina, there is not much difference. 14&quot; 16:9 1080p vs. 13&quot; 16:10 1600p. The matte finish + slight diagonal increase closes the gap between the two. Unless you&#x27;re in your 20s with perfect vision, I doubt the average person could tell a visual difference between the two.<p>I will also say that at 13&quot;, the difference between 16:9 and 16:10 is practically nonexistent. Especially 14&quot; vs 13&quot;. I thought this would be a major issue for me. But it&#x27;s not. On a 27&quot; desktop monitor? Sure, that can make a difference.</text></comment> | <story><title>Pangolin – Mobile AMD laptop with Ryzen CPU and Radeon graphics</title><url>https://system76.com/laptops/pangolin?its-the-same-url-but-the-content-has-changed-thank-you</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Macha</author><text>Honestly find it hard to notice much difference in the display quality between my 1080p 2018 XPS laptop and my 1800p 2019 Mac laptop. Actually the XPS is slightly preferable to me because the matte vs glossy finish outweighs the extra resolution at that size for me.<p>I guess that could just be my sight, but the reviews for the XPS laptop vs the 4k model of the same were pretty much unanimous on the 4k variant being a waste of battery for a neglible return on image quality, so it&#x27;s at least not a fringe view</text></item><item><author>indymike</author><text>Would buy in a heartbeat if it had a 4k display. Hard to go back to 1080p after six years of Retina and 4K displays.</text></item><item><author>Fergusonb</author><text>I can&#x27;t speak to the 4700u or the pangolin specifically, but I can offer this perspective on PopOS&#x2F;AMD:<p>I&#x27;ve been using System76&#x27;s PopOS with my Asus Zephyrus G14 (4800hs) as a daily driver and I really like it. (freelance&#x2F;web)<p>The battery life is comparable to Windows (on integrated graphics mode, it has graphics switching available)at 7-10 hours with 70% brightness and balanced power settings using VScode and firefox.<p>The g14 has a 75wh battery vs the pangolin&#x27;s 49wh, so I would expect less battery life from the pangolin despite the 4700u having a lower default tdp, since the 4800hs likes to sit at around 6-10 watts when doing non-intensive tasks anyway.<p>In 2021 I&#x27;m not missing any major programs. It&#x27;s pretty incredible how much is cross-platform now.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>joshuaengler</author><text>It could be your sight, or the size of your display. You never mentioned how big it was. If it&#x27;s a monster 18&quot; laptop then the difference between 1080 and 4k is a lot more significant than if it&#x27;s a 14&quot; display where you almost can&#x27;t even tell the difference. It&#x27;s all about pixels per inch. I always prefer higher quality pixels as opposed to more of them, I don&#x27;t mind 1080p if it&#x27;s extremely accurate colour and amazing viewing angles, but that&#x27;s just me.</text></comment> |
15,202,273 | 15,202,031 | 1 | 2 | 15,201,027 | train | <story><title>Coding Boot Camps Get the Boot: Why the Industry Is Shutting Down</title><url>https://thetechladder.com/story/coding-boot-camps-get-boot-industry-shutting/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>aecorredor</author><text>&quot;While coding boot camps had many course listings on JavaScript, Ruby, and web development, they had none that covered product management, wireframing, cloud computing, DevOps, or Agile methodologies&quot;<p>I have a 4 year computer science degree and I didn&#x27;t learn any of the listed topics either, so I&#x27;m not sure if the article is implying that other institutions do prepare new grads for these topics. The main advantage I see from bootcamps is that you basically code intensely for 4 months, learn the most important stuff to be productive (at least in small scale) right away, and then you&#x27;re able to tackle more in depth topics by yourself.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Stranger43</author><text>IT Operations have always been a apprenticeship system where you progress from servicedesk towards manager as your career progresses, and project management, cloud computing, devops etc is operations not development skillsets.<p>An in a lot of ways the current problem is that outsourcing have killed the pipeline from college drop-out to sys-admin by way of the call center. as the call centre have now been outsourced to people far away in companies with no upward career path.<p>The boot camp industry were never about fixing the operations pipeline problem, but to fix the problem of how to turn domain specialist into programmers something it largely failed at by being way to valley and app centric.</text></comment> | <story><title>Coding Boot Camps Get the Boot: Why the Industry Is Shutting Down</title><url>https://thetechladder.com/story/coding-boot-camps-get-boot-industry-shutting/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>aecorredor</author><text>&quot;While coding boot camps had many course listings on JavaScript, Ruby, and web development, they had none that covered product management, wireframing, cloud computing, DevOps, or Agile methodologies&quot;<p>I have a 4 year computer science degree and I didn&#x27;t learn any of the listed topics either, so I&#x27;m not sure if the article is implying that other institutions do prepare new grads for these topics. The main advantage I see from bootcamps is that you basically code intensely for 4 months, learn the most important stuff to be productive (at least in small scale) right away, and then you&#x27;re able to tackle more in depth topics by yourself.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jzymbaluk</author><text>Really? I graduated this year from a state school with a degree in CS and we covered a lot of this stuff. Software Engineering was a required junior&#x2F;senior level course where we had a semester-long group project where we had to self-organize using Agile methods, and we were grade on our user stories and . I took a senior-level elective course on product management, and we covered cloud and warehouse computing in computer architecture class. We also started using git in our very first programming course, where we had to turn in our code using a central repository.<p>What year did you graduate, out of curiosity?</text></comment> |
3,714,760 | 3,714,809 | 1 | 2 | 3,714,269 | train | <story><title>This American Life Retracting "Mr. Daisey & The Apple Factory"</title><url>http://www.thisamericanlife.org/blog/2012/03/retracting-mr-daisey-and-the-apple-factory</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>Daisey responds: "It uses a combination of fact, memoir, and dramatic license to tell its story, and I believe it does so with integrity".<p>Calling to mind Jack Shafer (now at Reuters, formally Slate's media critic) on the problematic nature of narrative journalism:<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2012/03/14/dismantling-the-capote-myth/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2012/03/14/dismantling-t...</a></text></item><item><author>tptacek</author><text>I'm a Chicago Public Radio member and just got this in my email. Wow:<p><i>I’m writing to tell you that tonight, This American Life and Marketplace will reveal that a story that we broadcast on This American Life this past January contained significant fabrications.</i><p><i>We’re retracting that story because we can’t vouch for its truth, and this weekend's episode of our show will detail the errors in the story, which was an excerpt of Mike Daisey's acclaimed one-man show, "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs." In it, Daisey tells how he visited a factory owned by Foxconn that manufactures iPhones and iPads in Shenzhen, China. He's performed the monologue in theaters around the country; it's currently at the Public Theater in New York.</i><p><i>When the original 39-minute excerpt was broadcast on This American Life, Marketplace China Correspondent Rob Schmitz wondered about its truth. He located and interviewed Daisey's Chinese interpreter Li Guifen (who goes by the name Cathy Lee professionally with westerners). She disputed much of what Daisey has been telling theater audiences since 2010 and much of what he said on the radio.</i><p><i>During fact checking before the broadcast of Daisey's story, I and This American Life producer Brian Reed asked Daisey for this interpreter's contact information, so we could confirm with her that Daisey actually witnessed what he claims. Daisey told us her real name was Anna, not Cathy as he says in his monologue, and he said that the cell phone number he had for her didn't work any more. He said he had no way to reach her.</i><p><i>At that point, we should've killed the story. But other things Daisey told us about Apple's operations in China checked out, and we saw no reason to doubt him. We didn't think that he was lying to us. That was a mistake.</i><p><i>Schmitz does a 20-minute story on our show this weekend about his findings, and we'll also broadcast an interview I did with Daisey. Marketplace will feature a shorter version of Schmitz's report earlier in the evening. You can read more details on our website, and listen to our show on WBEZ at 7 p.m. tonight, and noon tomorrow.</i><p><i>We've been planning a live presentation of Daisey's monologue on stage at the Chicago Theatre on April 7th, with me leading a Q&#38;A afterwards. Maybe you've heard me advertising it on the air. That show will be cancelled and all tickets will be refunded.</i><p><i>I've never had to write an email like this. Like all our friends and colleagues in public radio, I and my co-workers at This American Life work hard every day to make sure that what you hear on WBEZ is factually correct. We will continue to do that, and hope you can forgive this.</i></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ilamont</author><text>An M.O. of many fabricators in the world of journalism is to first claim the source(s) can't be tracked down, and then to claim artistic license (this happened with Mike Barnicle of the Boston Globe in the late 1990s, and I recall seeing similar incidents at the New York Times and one of the Chicago papers over the years as well). Plagiarism is another problem area for publishers, but their excuse is often along the lines of "my notes got mixed up".<p>Whatever the case, the frequency of reported cases in the mass media is significant. Poynter has been tracking it for years; here are some of the <i>reported</i> cases from last year:<p><a href="http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/regret-the-error/156485/october-was-worst-month-this-year-for-plagiarism-fabrication/" rel="nofollow">http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/regret-the-error/156485/o...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>This American Life Retracting "Mr. Daisey & The Apple Factory"</title><url>http://www.thisamericanlife.org/blog/2012/03/retracting-mr-daisey-and-the-apple-factory</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>Daisey responds: "It uses a combination of fact, memoir, and dramatic license to tell its story, and I believe it does so with integrity".<p>Calling to mind Jack Shafer (now at Reuters, formally Slate's media critic) on the problematic nature of narrative journalism:<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2012/03/14/dismantling-the-capote-myth/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2012/03/14/dismantling-t...</a></text></item><item><author>tptacek</author><text>I'm a Chicago Public Radio member and just got this in my email. Wow:<p><i>I’m writing to tell you that tonight, This American Life and Marketplace will reveal that a story that we broadcast on This American Life this past January contained significant fabrications.</i><p><i>We’re retracting that story because we can’t vouch for its truth, and this weekend's episode of our show will detail the errors in the story, which was an excerpt of Mike Daisey's acclaimed one-man show, "The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs." In it, Daisey tells how he visited a factory owned by Foxconn that manufactures iPhones and iPads in Shenzhen, China. He's performed the monologue in theaters around the country; it's currently at the Public Theater in New York.</i><p><i>When the original 39-minute excerpt was broadcast on This American Life, Marketplace China Correspondent Rob Schmitz wondered about its truth. He located and interviewed Daisey's Chinese interpreter Li Guifen (who goes by the name Cathy Lee professionally with westerners). She disputed much of what Daisey has been telling theater audiences since 2010 and much of what he said on the radio.</i><p><i>During fact checking before the broadcast of Daisey's story, I and This American Life producer Brian Reed asked Daisey for this interpreter's contact information, so we could confirm with her that Daisey actually witnessed what he claims. Daisey told us her real name was Anna, not Cathy as he says in his monologue, and he said that the cell phone number he had for her didn't work any more. He said he had no way to reach her.</i><p><i>At that point, we should've killed the story. But other things Daisey told us about Apple's operations in China checked out, and we saw no reason to doubt him. We didn't think that he was lying to us. That was a mistake.</i><p><i>Schmitz does a 20-minute story on our show this weekend about his findings, and we'll also broadcast an interview I did with Daisey. Marketplace will feature a shorter version of Schmitz's report earlier in the evening. You can read more details on our website, and listen to our show on WBEZ at 7 p.m. tonight, and noon tomorrow.</i><p><i>We've been planning a live presentation of Daisey's monologue on stage at the Chicago Theatre on April 7th, with me leading a Q&#38;A afterwards. Maybe you've heard me advertising it on the air. That show will be cancelled and all tickets will be refunded.</i><p><i>I've never had to write an email like this. Like all our friends and colleagues in public radio, I and my co-workers at This American Life work hard every day to make sure that what you hear on WBEZ is factually correct. We will continue to do that, and hope you can forgive this.</i></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bitwize</author><text>For me it calls to mind Upton Sinclair. While working on <i>Boston</i>, Sinclair met with the lawyer of Sacco and Vanzetti, who told him they were guilty as sin and he the lawyer) fabricated an alibi for them.<p>By the time the novel was finished, Sinclair was convinced the pair were guilty; but he released it anyway because of its "higher truth".</text></comment> |
15,683,828 | 15,683,203 | 1 | 2 | 15,681,358 | train | <story><title>A/B test of banner ads vs. traffic</title><url>http://www.gwern.net/Ads</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dangrossman</author><text>It wouldn&#x27;t work anyway. To make up for the advertising revenue, that subscription would have to be in excess of $100&#x2F;month per household, and you&#x27;d need to get virtually every household in wealthy nations to buy into it. The amount of marketing money spent each year is on the order of 10-11% of all revenue made by companies selling consumer goods... you can&#x27;t replace that with some $10&#x2F;month subscription even if everyone paid it.</text></item><item><author>badestrand</author><text>Thanks for sharing. I really wish there was a general web subscription with revenue-sharing between all visited websites. I hate seeing the ads on my own sites but have no viable way to replace them. And as a user I would like to support several sites, apart from disabling the adblocker.</text></item><item><author>buro9</author><text>What I learned from running hundreds of forums is that:<p>1. Banners hurt unless they are relevant<p>2. Filtering for banners that are relevant tends to reduce revenue rather than increase as there is a smaller pool of highly relevant advertisers<p>3. Removing all banner adverts significantly increased engagement by every metric<p>4. Some revenue is possible using affiliate links within the content (re-writing existing links rather than inserting awful links on a word match basis)<p>That last one is what I now do. Is it as profitable as running banners everywhere? No. But it is the highest possible engagement with some revenue, and if one focuses energy on reducing costs instead it can work well.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Houshalter</author><text>I think your estimate is off by more than an order of magnitude. I follow a number of large youtube channels. Many of them seem to be making more money from patreon than from ads. And patreon isn&#x27;t even a true subscription model, since you can usually see the content even if you don&#x27;t subscribe. And it still beats ads.<p>One of my favorite channels is this super niche thing that only gets about 1000-2000 views per video and makes 2 vids a month. That adds up to maybe $4-8 in ad revenue using some rough estimates of youtube&#x27;s payout rate. On patreon he&#x27;s making over $500 a month. Which is really respectable for such a small audience.<p>Online ads have never generated that much money per user and were only profitable in large quantities. Given how scummy they are and this evidence that they repel users, they should be eliminated.</text></comment> | <story><title>A/B test of banner ads vs. traffic</title><url>http://www.gwern.net/Ads</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dangrossman</author><text>It wouldn&#x27;t work anyway. To make up for the advertising revenue, that subscription would have to be in excess of $100&#x2F;month per household, and you&#x27;d need to get virtually every household in wealthy nations to buy into it. The amount of marketing money spent each year is on the order of 10-11% of all revenue made by companies selling consumer goods... you can&#x27;t replace that with some $10&#x2F;month subscription even if everyone paid it.</text></item><item><author>badestrand</author><text>Thanks for sharing. I really wish there was a general web subscription with revenue-sharing between all visited websites. I hate seeing the ads on my own sites but have no viable way to replace them. And as a user I would like to support several sites, apart from disabling the adblocker.</text></item><item><author>buro9</author><text>What I learned from running hundreds of forums is that:<p>1. Banners hurt unless they are relevant<p>2. Filtering for banners that are relevant tends to reduce revenue rather than increase as there is a smaller pool of highly relevant advertisers<p>3. Removing all banner adverts significantly increased engagement by every metric<p>4. Some revenue is possible using affiliate links within the content (re-writing existing links rather than inserting awful links on a word match basis)<p>That last one is what I now do. Is it as profitable as running banners everywhere? No. But it is the highest possible engagement with some revenue, and if one focuses energy on reducing costs instead it can work well.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>viraptor</author><text>Something&#x27;s not right with that equation. You&#x27;re implying that on average, each household is spending over $1000 per month on things they get via the online advertising that they would otherwise not get at all.<p>And that&#x27;s just not realistic. One-off purchases, maybe. Sustained 1k&#x2F;hh&#x2F;mth avg - I&#x27;d love to see a proof of that.</text></comment> |
41,760,836 | 41,759,154 | 1 | 2 | 41,758,915 | train | <story><title>Gleam Is Pragmatic</title><url>https://blog.drewolson.org/gleam-is-pragmatic/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jazzypants</author><text>&gt; I won’t fall into the trap of trying to define Monads in this post. Instead, let’s talk about monadic-style APIs – that is, APIs that allow you to do a bunch of things one after another, with the ability to use the result of a previous computation in the next computation, and also allows some logic to happen between steps.<p>Am I crazy, or did he just give a really good definition of monads in programming? I think that it benefits by not letting itself get bogged down in Category Theory nomenclature which doesn&#x27;t actually matter when programming.</text></comment> | <story><title>Gleam Is Pragmatic</title><url>https://blog.drewolson.org/gleam-is-pragmatic/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>atemerev</author><text>The greatest power of BEAM-based languages is the fully preemptive actor model. Nobody else supports it. This is a superpower, the solution of most problems with concurrent programming.<p>In Erland and Elixir, actors and actor-based concurrency hold the central place in the corresponding ecosystems, well supported by extensive documentation.<p>In Gleam, actors and OTP are an afterthought. They are there somewhere, but underdocumented and abandoned.</text></comment> |
26,814,871 | 26,814,927 | 1 | 3 | 26,811,111 | train | <story><title>$7.5B In Stolen Bitcoin from 2016 Bitfinex Hack has just been moved</title><url>https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1382392286819057668</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kjrose</author><text>You see. This is what bitcoin so fascinating... it is absolutely impossible to hide a transaction.<p>So imagine the field day the irs would have with this if everyone used it. They basically would be able to send bills to owners of wallets. And anyone ever caught working with an undesirable would be able to have their funds more or less locked up.<p>So now, we all watch as billions of stolen money moves and we know the moment it gets converted to anything real, the owners will be caught. However in the future I could easily see a government watch money that some undesired element has move and no one will want it because the moment they get it they are connected to an undesirable and their wallet becomes tainted.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sgpl</author><text>This fails to account for the fact that IRS currently (and maybe this changes in the future) has a hard time doing serious audits on any significant amount of wealthy people; and that the agency has pretty much been gutted over the years.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;how-the-irs-was-gutted" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;how-the-irs-was-gutted</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;series&#x2F;gutting-the-irs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;series&#x2F;gutting-the-irs</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gq.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;no-irs-audits-for-the-rich" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gq.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;no-irs-audits-for-the-rich</a></text></comment> | <story><title>$7.5B In Stolen Bitcoin from 2016 Bitfinex Hack has just been moved</title><url>https://twitter.com/CryptoWhale/status/1382392286819057668</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kjrose</author><text>You see. This is what bitcoin so fascinating... it is absolutely impossible to hide a transaction.<p>So imagine the field day the irs would have with this if everyone used it. They basically would be able to send bills to owners of wallets. And anyone ever caught working with an undesirable would be able to have their funds more or less locked up.<p>So now, we all watch as billions of stolen money moves and we know the moment it gets converted to anything real, the owners will be caught. However in the future I could easily see a government watch money that some undesired element has move and no one will want it because the moment they get it they are connected to an undesirable and their wallet becomes tainted.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>TrackerFF</author><text>Not sure how the scammers and thieves operate, but wouldn&#x27;t they (likely) be laundering the money the same way they&#x27;ve always been doing it?<p>I.e, exploiting things like identity theft, countries and exchanges with little oversight, mules, gambling, etc.</text></comment> |
34,165,066 | 34,164,902 | 1 | 3 | 34,163,748 | train | <story><title>You might as well timestamp it (2021)</title><url>https://changelog.com/posts/you-might-as-well-timestamp-it</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jpollock</author><text>The problem with the timestamp is that it keeps people from thinking that they&#x27;ve got an enum.<p>For example, let&#x27;s start with an object, which has a boolean flag &quot;active&quot;.<p>boolean is_active;<p>We will always want to get a bit more advanced, and get into sub-states as it is brought up. We can&#x27;t do that with a boolean. So we go to an enum.<p>Enum current_state {
not_configured;
being_provisioned;
active;
disabled;
deleted;
}<p>current_state state;<p>We have an enum in hiding. Converting the boolean to a timestamp stops the conversion to an enum - we can&#x27;t overload the presence of a timestamp into the multiple values in the enum.<p>The timestamp is &quot;what happened, when&quot;, an audit log&#x2F;change history function. That should be kept separate from the rest of the database.<p>Sometimes, there is a business reason to track a timestamp - charge the customer 30days after the item became &quot;active&quot;. How to model that depends on your database and what is required - history table, convert the enum to struct, time_became_active, time_of_last_state_change, etc.</text></comment> | <story><title>You might as well timestamp it (2021)</title><url>https://changelog.com/posts/you-might-as-well-timestamp-it</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>simonw</author><text>This was one of Luke Plant&#x27;s YAGNI exceptions: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lukeplant.me.uk&#x2F;blog&#x2F;posts&#x2F;yagni-exceptions&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lukeplant.me.uk&#x2F;blog&#x2F;posts&#x2F;yagni-exceptions&#x2F;</a></text></comment> |
36,776,678 | 36,775,874 | 1 | 3 | 36,770,883 | train | <story><title>Firefox has surpassed Chrome on Speedometer</title><url>https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perfherder/graphs?timerange=31536000&series=mozilla-central,3735773,1,13&series=mozilla-central,3412459,1,13</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dahfizz</author><text>&gt; I couldn&#x27;t imagine opening more than a dozen of tabs without it.<p>I can&#x27;t imagine having more than a dozen tabs open, period. You tab hoarders will never make sense to me...</text></item><item><author>beltsazar</author><text>I switched to Firefox from Chrome years ago because Chrome was slower. Specially, when there were many tabs opened, switching tabs in Chrome were usually prefaced with a blank white screen for about 2 seconds.<p>I&#x27;ve been staying with Firefox not for the performance (today Chrome loads Google sites like YouTube faster), but mainly for Tree Style Tab extension. I couldn&#x27;t imagine opening more than a dozen of tabs without it.</text></item><item><author>seba_dos1</author><text>There was a time when Firefox felt a lot slower than Chromium, but for a few years now it&#x27;s been close enough (even if still somewhat slower) to not bother me, while Firefox clearly offers superior functionality and <i>much</i> better performance under high load. The last time Chromium has felt attractive compared to Firefox was a really long time ago. Glad to see it moving in the right direction still.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mcpackieh</author><text>&gt;hoarding<p>I&#x27;ve got 30 tabs open today, and the oldest of them is only a few hours old.<p>I look down a page, see interesting links, and middle click them all. They open tabs but don&#x27;t actually load until I click that tab. I close each tab after I&#x27;m done reading it, or after a few hours if I never got around to reading it and lost interest.<p>Is that hoarding? I don&#x27;t think so. But it&#x27;s the sort of workflow that TST makes pleasant but is extremely frustrating with a horizontal tab bar.</text></comment> | <story><title>Firefox has surpassed Chrome on Speedometer</title><url>https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perfherder/graphs?timerange=31536000&series=mozilla-central,3735773,1,13&series=mozilla-central,3412459,1,13</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dahfizz</author><text>&gt; I couldn&#x27;t imagine opening more than a dozen of tabs without it.<p>I can&#x27;t imagine having more than a dozen tabs open, period. You tab hoarders will never make sense to me...</text></item><item><author>beltsazar</author><text>I switched to Firefox from Chrome years ago because Chrome was slower. Specially, when there were many tabs opened, switching tabs in Chrome were usually prefaced with a blank white screen for about 2 seconds.<p>I&#x27;ve been staying with Firefox not for the performance (today Chrome loads Google sites like YouTube faster), but mainly for Tree Style Tab extension. I couldn&#x27;t imagine opening more than a dozen of tabs without it.</text></item><item><author>seba_dos1</author><text>There was a time when Firefox felt a lot slower than Chromium, but for a few years now it&#x27;s been close enough (even if still somewhat slower) to not bother me, while Firefox clearly offers superior functionality and <i>much</i> better performance under high load. The last time Chromium has felt attractive compared to Firefox was a really long time ago. Glad to see it moving in the right direction still.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ddoolin</author><text>Agreed, but once I switched to vertical tabs (via Sidebery with Firefox), it is WAY more manageable. Multiple tab spaces, named groupings, and a scrollable view that doesn&#x27;t crowd and shorten names make it great for having many items in there with little downside.</text></comment> |
23,026,209 | 23,025,893 | 1 | 3 | 23,009,467 | train | <story><title>Conventional Comments</title><url>https://conventionalcomments.org/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>hcarvalhoalves</author><text>It seems I disagree w&#x2F; many points.<p><pre><code> &gt; - Leave actionable comments
&gt; suggestion: This is not worded correctly.
&gt; Can we change this to match the wording of the marketing page?
</code></pre>
If I already know how it should be, I prefer to quote it right away and save work, instead of asking and leaving room for misinterpretation. Asking also seems dishonest if I&#x27;m not truly inviting a discussion. I would still add a rationale so others can correct me though (&quot;Changing this to match the wording on the marketing page&quot;).<p><pre><code> &gt; - Combine similar comments
</code></pre>
Sometimes it&#x27;s better to be repetitive in the name of exactness, because most review tools are line-oriented. Otherwise I have to write a comment &quot;See lines A, B, C, D, E&quot;, and the person asking for the review now has more work to do searching all the instances.<p><pre><code> &gt; - Replace “you” with “we”
</code></pre>
Better yet, I replace all pronouns w&#x2F; &quot;this&quot;. Criticise the work, don&#x27;t make it personal if it&#x27;s not necessary. &quot;We&quot; feels forced team-building, and dishonest if I&#x27;m not actually going to put in work.<p>It seems these practices are created because people are using reviews as some form of conversation, and then everybody is stepping on egg shells. I believe if the entire team agrees to see it as just annotations (it&#x27;s not a performance evaluation, leave your ego at the door, etc) these problems are avoided.<p>(I can see &quot;why&quot; you need these guidelines though, I guess it depends on what kind of work culture you have, company size, and so on.)</text></comment> | <story><title>Conventional Comments</title><url>https://conventionalcomments.org/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jchw</author><text>I agree with the vast majority of this, but I have a bad reaction to “praise” and the idea that you should try to have one per review. I hate praise that feels forced, and it seems like this kind of practice would make it seem quite forced.<p>I feel you could just say something like “good idea” and it would be fine without the prefix. Especially if your review tool of choice has a concept of actionable vs non-actionable comments, like Gerrit and resolved&#x2F;unresolved comments.</text></comment> |
25,009,017 | 25,009,034 | 1 | 2 | 25,008,159 | train | <story><title>Intel’s palpable desperation on display with Rocket Lake</title><url>https://semiaccurate.com/2020/10/29/intels-palpable-desperation-on-display-with-rocket-lake/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>nxc18</author><text>Is there good coverage of how Intel became so uncompetitive? My instinct is to say this is just the natural result of the presence of MBAs who are trained to focus _exclusively_ on this quarter&#x27;s results so ignore R&amp;D investment and also shit on employees by doing gimmicks like hotdesking to pinch pennies.<p>I&#x27;m willing to bet my intuition is wrong, especially given my extremely deep bias against MBAs and &#x27;this quarter&#x27; thinking. Any great sources on the full story?</text></comment> | <story><title>Intel’s palpable desperation on display with Rocket Lake</title><url>https://semiaccurate.com/2020/10/29/intels-palpable-desperation-on-display-with-rocket-lake/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>henriquez</author><text>My main question would be why Intel would even bother releasing Rocket Lake if, balancing between higher IPC and lower clocks, the performance would be _lower_ than the 10 series chips. So I disagree with the article that this will be an unqualified disaster. It&#x27;s quite likely that they will be a little faster, at least core for core. But it also seems like these are notebook chips hacked into a desktop socket and limited to just 8 cores.<p>That means the best case scenario for Intel would be (barely) scraping back their &quot;single threaded gaming performance&quot; crown while completely giving up against the multi-threaded performance of AMD&#x27;s higher core count Zen 3 chips. The only way Rocket Lake would make any sense in the market would be if these are priced less than $400 (probably a lot less), and so Intel&#x27;s margins will be much lower on what is likely to be a much larger die with more transistors.<p>I don&#x27;t think it&#x27;s possible to call this anything other than a pure desperation move.</text></comment> |
8,914,619 | 8,913,986 | 1 | 3 | 8,911,719 | train | <story><title>Genetic Algorithm Walkers</title><url>http://rednuht.org/genetic_walkers/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Animats</author><text>I&#x27;m currently stuck at 1233 after 250 generations. The last improvement was at gen 183. Walking gets part way down the first downslope, then falls. The current champions are far better than any of their mutations, so a local maximum has been reached. This is the fate of most evolutionary AI.<p>Once on the downslope, the controller for flat ground won&#x27;t work, so now it has to jump to something substantially more complex to progress. Making such jumps was an unsolved problem with genetic algorithms 20 years ago, and I commented back then that whoever solved it would win a Nobel Prize. Still waiting.<p>I suspect that a solution lies in work on neural nets where one net is trained, then a second, smaller, net is trained to match the first. This is a form of &quot;abstraction&quot;. Somewhere in that space is something very important to AI.</text></comment> | <story><title>Genetic Algorithm Walkers</title><url>http://rednuht.org/genetic_walkers/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sinwave</author><text>I suspect that the best way to tackle this problem is to treat &quot;learning to walk&quot; as a reinforcement learning problem. This way you can evaluate actions within each episode rather than waiting until the end of each trial to adjust parameters encoding the walking strategy.<p>As karpathy suggests below (and he&#x27;s certainly much more qualified than me), an evolutionary method such as GA&#x27;s, while apparently fairly effective, could well be wasting valuable information learned in real time through interaction.</text></comment> |
39,965,296 | 39,965,373 | 1 | 3 | 39,962,023 | train | <story><title>PumpkinOS, a Re-Implementation of PalmOS</title><url>https://github.com/migueletto/PumpkinOS</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jsheard</author><text>&gt; anything moderately large would need to be put into a special memory block that the OS could rearrange at will, and one would need to lock the block&#x27;s handle to keep it stable while accessing it<p>Didn&#x27;t 16-bit Windows and classic Mac OS do something similar? If you&#x27;re doing multitasking on a system without an MMU then I think that kind of live heap defragmentation would have been practically required.</text></item><item><author>verdagon</author><text>This PumpkinOS project is pretty incredible. I can&#x27;t imagine how much effort it would take to be compatible with all the system calls that the average Palm app would expect. I remember Palm did some truly weird things with memory: anything moderately large would need to be put into a special memory block that the OS could rearrange at will, and one would need to lock the block&#x27;s handle to keep it stable while accessing it. Stuff like that must have been challenging (and fun) to implement in PumpkinOS.<p>This brings me back. I used to make little games for Palm OS, and I was so excited for the next version of the OS which would let one use the (then new) Palm OS Development Suite to make programs. It was also the last OS I&#x27;ve used where an app had a central event loop. Everything else today has UI frameworks that handle it for you. Things are easier now, but I still miss it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kmeisthax</author><text>Yes. The idea wasn&#x27;t to get away with not having an MMU, though - it was to get away with shipping the Mac with an ungodly low amount of RAM for a machine with a GUI. I believe the original idea was to ship with like 64k or something?<p>Obviously, with the state of mobile hardware back then relocatable blocks were also similarly necessary in order to save RAM.<p>For anyone wondering, no, this isn&#x27;t the thing that made classic Mac OS unfit for multitasking. The MMU is necessary to keep applications from writing other apps&#x27; heaps, not to do memory defragmentation. You <i>can</i> do some cool software-transparent defragmentation tricks with MMUs, but if you&#x27;re deciding what the ABI looks like ahead of time, then you can just make everyone carry double-pointers to everything.</text></comment> | <story><title>PumpkinOS, a Re-Implementation of PalmOS</title><url>https://github.com/migueletto/PumpkinOS</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jsheard</author><text>&gt; anything moderately large would need to be put into a special memory block that the OS could rearrange at will, and one would need to lock the block&#x27;s handle to keep it stable while accessing it<p>Didn&#x27;t 16-bit Windows and classic Mac OS do something similar? If you&#x27;re doing multitasking on a system without an MMU then I think that kind of live heap defragmentation would have been practically required.</text></item><item><author>verdagon</author><text>This PumpkinOS project is pretty incredible. I can&#x27;t imagine how much effort it would take to be compatible with all the system calls that the average Palm app would expect. I remember Palm did some truly weird things with memory: anything moderately large would need to be put into a special memory block that the OS could rearrange at will, and one would need to lock the block&#x27;s handle to keep it stable while accessing it. Stuff like that must have been challenging (and fun) to implement in PumpkinOS.<p>This brings me back. I used to make little games for Palm OS, and I was so excited for the next version of the OS which would let one use the (then new) Palm OS Development Suite to make programs. It was also the last OS I&#x27;ve used where an app had a central event loop. Everything else today has UI frameworks that handle it for you. Things are easier now, but I still miss it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>MaulingMonkey</author><text>&gt; Didn&#x27;t 16-bit Windows and classic Mac OS do something similar?<p>I assume this is what `{Local,Global}{Lock,Unlock}` were for when combined with `{Local,Global}Alloc({L,G}MEM_MOVEABLE)`<p>Similar idioms occasionally persist in modern code - e.g. when dealing with FFI in GCed languages (C#&#x27;s `fixed` statement pins memory in place.)</text></comment> |
40,162,453 | 40,162,251 | 1 | 2 | 40,161,811 | train | <story><title>Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking</title><url>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/asian-american-women-lung-cancer-rcna138895</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>helsinkiandrew</author><text>12% of Asian American men smoke compared with 2.6% of women. So non smoking Asian women are more likely to live with a smoking man. Could second hand smoking exposure be a factor in this?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lung.org&#x2F;quit-smoking&#x2F;smoking-facts&#x2F;impact-of-tobacco-use&#x2F;tobacco-use-racial-and-ethnic" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lung.org&#x2F;quit-smoking&#x2F;smoking-facts&#x2F;impact-of-to...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>woodruffw</author><text>This is what I first thought of as well, but other sources indicate that Asian Americans are actually the demographic with the <i>least</i> overall cigarette use[1]. Given that White and Black Americans use cigarettes at almost twice the rate Asian Americans do, we&#x27;d expect strong second-hand correlations for those groups as well.<p>(This source doesn&#x27;t quantify &quot;use,&quot; so there are confounding factors: prevalence of smoking at home, chain smoking vs. social smoking, etc.)<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smokingcessationleadership.ucsf.edu&#x2F;racialethnic-minorities" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;smokingcessationleadership.ucsf.edu&#x2F;racialethnic-min...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking</title><url>https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/asian-american-women-lung-cancer-rcna138895</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>helsinkiandrew</author><text>12% of Asian American men smoke compared with 2.6% of women. So non smoking Asian women are more likely to live with a smoking man. Could second hand smoking exposure be a factor in this?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lung.org&#x2F;quit-smoking&#x2F;smoking-facts&#x2F;impact-of-tobacco-use&#x2F;tobacco-use-racial-and-ethnic" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lung.org&#x2F;quit-smoking&#x2F;smoking-facts&#x2F;impact-of-to...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>somethoughts</author><text>Not sure about the validity of the source but it does suggest that second hand smoke could be related.<p>&quot;What’s behind this rise in lung cancer in women who have never smoked compared with men, and particularly in Asian American women? One possibility: While Chinese American women may never smoke themselves, they frequently live with partners or family members who do. (About 28% of Chinese American men smoke heavily, Dr. Li said.) “We think secondhand smoke might be one of the key risk factors, because they’re living with people who smoke,” Dr. Li said.&quot; [1]<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.chestnet.org&#x2F;newsroom&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2024&#x2F;03&#x2F;secondhand-smoke-may-be-fueling-an-increase-in-lung-cancer-diagnoses-in-chinese-american-women" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.chestnet.org&#x2F;newsroom&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2024&#x2F;03&#x2F;secondhand-sm...</a><p>I could see a possible scenario where a first generation (i.e. immigrant, English as a second language) Asian father&#x2F;husband smoking at home in the 1990-2010 timeframe and not getting the second hand smoking messages&#x2F;ads (that were primarily in English as quickly) as the rest of Americans and it&#x27;s is just now that the statistics are showing up.</text></comment> |
612,082 | 611,838 | 1 | 2 | 610,896 | train | <story><title>My Personal Credit Crisis</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/magazine/17foreclosure-t.html?_r=1&em=&pagewanted=all</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Chocobean</author><text>I don't know about you, but as a young female of the 20-25 group, if my husband made me sign a pre-nup before the wedding, it will pretty well signal the end of the relationship. It will be interpreted as a sign of "if you don't trust me with everything, i can't trust you with anything."<p>20-somethings believe in "life long marriage".</text></item><item><author>unexpected</author><text>this brings up an interesting point. Would you make your wife sign a pre-nuptial agreement before getting married?<p>I often see people who have gotten divorced sign a pre-nup, but people I've spoken with around my age group (20-25) seem to be adamantly opposed to a pre-nup.</text></item><item><author>gaius</author><text>He also displayed a lack of financial acumen in his first marriage...</text></item><item><author>sethg</author><text>I think the author's first mistake was not in taking out the subprime loan, but in entering a marriage without some kind of mutual understanding of how to manage the household finances.<p>One of the <i>first</i> things my wife and I did, after getting married (possibly even before), was to set up a budget, including line items for how much money each of us could spend without being questioned by the other.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>__david__</author><text>Yeah, I thought that too when I got married at your age.<p>When I got divorced 5 years later I found out some legal details that made me rethink that position. Specifically, I found that even though my wife was a reasonable person and our split fairly amicable (as much as these things can be) that I wasn't necessarily off the hook for alimony. According to my understanding of California law, the judge can look at my divorce case and if he thinks my ex's income is too low compared to the mine then he can award her alimony <i>even though it was not requested by her</i>.<p>That opened my eyes and I saw pre-nups in a new light: They are just writing your own personal divorce laws so that you can be sure they are "fair" in your own eyes--They are not a sign of distrust.<p>It's like signing a confidentiality agreement in business. One party isn't assuming you're going to break the agreement, they're just spelling out the terms so everything is on the table.</text></comment> | <story><title>My Personal Credit Crisis</title><url>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/magazine/17foreclosure-t.html?_r=1&em=&pagewanted=all</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Chocobean</author><text>I don't know about you, but as a young female of the 20-25 group, if my husband made me sign a pre-nup before the wedding, it will pretty well signal the end of the relationship. It will be interpreted as a sign of "if you don't trust me with everything, i can't trust you with anything."<p>20-somethings believe in "life long marriage".</text></item><item><author>unexpected</author><text>this brings up an interesting point. Would you make your wife sign a pre-nuptial agreement before getting married?<p>I often see people who have gotten divorced sign a pre-nup, but people I've spoken with around my age group (20-25) seem to be adamantly opposed to a pre-nup.</text></item><item><author>gaius</author><text>He also displayed a lack of financial acumen in his first marriage...</text></item><item><author>sethg</author><text>I think the author's first mistake was not in taking out the subprime loan, but in entering a marriage without some kind of mutual understanding of how to manage the household finances.<p>One of the <i>first</i> things my wife and I did, after getting married (possibly even before), was to set up a budget, including line items for how much money each of us could spend without being questioned by the other.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>granular</author><text>&#62; if my husband made me sign a pre-nup before the
&#62; wedding, it will pretty well signal the end of
&#62; the relationship.<p>You don't seem to understand. The legal system in the USA is currently configured to crush fathers. A pre-nup is not a way to say, "hey, I want to be able to leave you and the kids and not pay a dime!", it's a way to limit the soul-crushing damage the legal system will do to Dad when Mom decides he's not making enough money and wants a divorce, and the kids, and the house, and child support, and alimony.</text></comment> |
8,033,715 | 8,033,652 | 1 | 2 | 8,033,322 | train | <story><title>Y Combinator has filed an official comment with the FCC</title><url>http://blog.ycombinator.com/y-combinator-has-filed-an-official-comment-with-the-fcc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>alexqgb</author><text>That&#x27;s the essence of contemporary lobbying. Most legislators can be persuaded with campaign contributions (the carrot) but those that can&#x27;t get threatened with the stick, which comes in the form of a previously unheard of but suddenly flush primary opponent.<p>Add gerrymandering to the mix, and this tactic becomes even harder to resist, since the effective sidelining of an opposing party means that no matter what else happens, the seat in question stays with the side that already holds it. This is what people mean by &quot;safe&quot; seats, by the way. They&#x27;re safe for the <i>party</i>. Particular incumbents, not so much.<p>So yes. If you have a realistic hope of getting what you want it&#x27;s because you&#x27;re known to have the power to end careers. If legislators refuse to cooperate, their prospects dim. If an agency gets uncooperative, the legislators who oversee it turn the budget screws, causing pain and wrecking livelihoods until the backer with the biggest stick wins. These are the mechanics of regulatory capture, and they&#x27;re in operation every day.<p>Obviously, all of this deeply depressing, and provides an excellent argument for getting private finance out of elections altogether, since that really is the mechanism upon which American-style corruption depends. And while we&#x27;re at it, de-rigging the vote with non-partisan redistricting and establishing a nation-wide version of the (pre-gutted) Voting Rights Act would go a long way in fostering a government of, by, and for the people.<p>But in the meantime, when our systems is less like a democracy and more like an oligarchy, getting what you want means playing by the rules that exist. And that means lobbying with both carrot and stick. They hit you, you hit back. And not only do you hit back harder, you hit back so hard that they will never get up again. That&#x27;s what the SOPA&#x2F;PIPA backlash did: threatened a sweeping act of maximum violence to an unprecedented number of careers.<p>It was brutal and it was ugly, but it worked. And it did so when there&#x27;s not much else that does.</text></item><item><author>harrystone</author><text>I appreciate what Alexis is trying to do here but I hope he isn&#x27;t assuming that the FCC just doesn&#x27;t understand the problem. That&#x27;s how this reads to me. Maybe the idea is to be diplomatic. I don&#x27;t think the FCC cares. The FCC understands what is going on and it wants to do whatever is best for the FCC.<p>The best thing for tech companies to do is to start destroying some political careers. That&#x27;s the only thing the machine understands and the only thing it&#x27;s really going to respond to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>juliangamble</author><text>Lawrence Lessig is working on a people-power initiative to fix the problem of getting private finance out of elections:
<a href="https://mayday.us/" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mayday.us&#x2F;</a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayday_PAC" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Mayday_PAC</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Y Combinator has filed an official comment with the FCC</title><url>http://blog.ycombinator.com/y-combinator-has-filed-an-official-comment-with-the-fcc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>alexqgb</author><text>That&#x27;s the essence of contemporary lobbying. Most legislators can be persuaded with campaign contributions (the carrot) but those that can&#x27;t get threatened with the stick, which comes in the form of a previously unheard of but suddenly flush primary opponent.<p>Add gerrymandering to the mix, and this tactic becomes even harder to resist, since the effective sidelining of an opposing party means that no matter what else happens, the seat in question stays with the side that already holds it. This is what people mean by &quot;safe&quot; seats, by the way. They&#x27;re safe for the <i>party</i>. Particular incumbents, not so much.<p>So yes. If you have a realistic hope of getting what you want it&#x27;s because you&#x27;re known to have the power to end careers. If legislators refuse to cooperate, their prospects dim. If an agency gets uncooperative, the legislators who oversee it turn the budget screws, causing pain and wrecking livelihoods until the backer with the biggest stick wins. These are the mechanics of regulatory capture, and they&#x27;re in operation every day.<p>Obviously, all of this deeply depressing, and provides an excellent argument for getting private finance out of elections altogether, since that really is the mechanism upon which American-style corruption depends. And while we&#x27;re at it, de-rigging the vote with non-partisan redistricting and establishing a nation-wide version of the (pre-gutted) Voting Rights Act would go a long way in fostering a government of, by, and for the people.<p>But in the meantime, when our systems is less like a democracy and more like an oligarchy, getting what you want means playing by the rules that exist. And that means lobbying with both carrot and stick. They hit you, you hit back. And not only do you hit back harder, you hit back so hard that they will never get up again. That&#x27;s what the SOPA&#x2F;PIPA backlash did: threatened a sweeping act of maximum violence to an unprecedented number of careers.<p>It was brutal and it was ugly, but it worked. And it did so when there&#x27;s not much else that does.</text></item><item><author>harrystone</author><text>I appreciate what Alexis is trying to do here but I hope he isn&#x27;t assuming that the FCC just doesn&#x27;t understand the problem. That&#x27;s how this reads to me. Maybe the idea is to be diplomatic. I don&#x27;t think the FCC cares. The FCC understands what is going on and it wants to do whatever is best for the FCC.<p>The best thing for tech companies to do is to start destroying some political careers. That&#x27;s the only thing the machine understands and the only thing it&#x27;s really going to respond to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nickff</author><text>&gt;<i>&quot;our systems is less like a democracy and more like an oligarchy&quot;</i><p>What if the problem is simply that very few voters care about the issue, and that even less would be willing to change their vote over this issue?</text></comment> |
33,784,070 | 33,783,550 | 1 | 2 | 33,773,135 | train | <story><title>Beyond Meat is struggling, and the plant-based meat industry worries</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/business/beyond-meat-industry.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>colordrops</author><text>I see you are being downvoted, but I know exactly what you mean. When I eat Impossible and especially Beyond burgers, my stomach feels slightly off. A bit of indigestion. I don&#x27;t get this with typical veggie patties.</text></item><item><author>TaylorAlexander</author><text>I’m vegan, converted about four years ago so I ate meat for decades. I ate impossible burgers for a while after Burger King got them, because there is some nostalgia&#x2F;novelty in going to a fast food joint.<p>But I’ve realized that this weird food product leaves some kind of odd taste in my stomach, and not just from Burger King. I’m pretty over these fake beef burgers now, and would way rather have a black bean burger or a garden burger. Those taste light and yummy and don’t leave a weird feeling in my stomach.</text></item><item><author>gwbas1c</author><text>I married a vegan, and I eat a lot of vegetarian food. (I also still eat plenty of meat, just not every day.)<p>One <i>extremely</i> frustrating aspect of plant meat is that they tried to aggressively push out traditional veggie burgers on restaurant menus. A familiar refrain I&#x27;ve heard in restaurants in the last few years is &quot;we used to have a nice veggie patty, but they replaced it with the beyond&#x2F;incredible&#x2F;whatever patty.&quot;<p>The thing is, vegetarian food is incredible without needing to taste like meat. When I&#x27;ve had these products, I&#x27;ve always walked away feeling like they taste inferior to traditional vegetarian burgers &#x2F; sausages that don&#x27;t try to taste like meat.<p>&gt; Some say the slowdown in sales is a product of food inflation, as consumers trade pricier plant-based meat for less-expensive animal meat.<p>Normally vegetarian food costs less than meat. It&#x27;s because the animals need to eat (surprise surprise) vegetables! When you eat the vegetables directly instead of having the animal eat the vegetable for your, it&#x27;s cheaper.<p>IMO, I think the &quot;meat in a vat&quot; system where animal tissue is grown in some kind of factory setting is a much better approach. When I want to eat meat, I want to eat meat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>SoftTalker</author><text>Beyond&#x2F;Incredible meat is awful. There&#x27;s no other description for it. This highly processed fake meat is not healthy. Just eat meat, or don&#x27;t if you don&#x27;t want to. There&#x27;s no need for this fake garbage.</text></comment> | <story><title>Beyond Meat is struggling, and the plant-based meat industry worries</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/business/beyond-meat-industry.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>colordrops</author><text>I see you are being downvoted, but I know exactly what you mean. When I eat Impossible and especially Beyond burgers, my stomach feels slightly off. A bit of indigestion. I don&#x27;t get this with typical veggie patties.</text></item><item><author>TaylorAlexander</author><text>I’m vegan, converted about four years ago so I ate meat for decades. I ate impossible burgers for a while after Burger King got them, because there is some nostalgia&#x2F;novelty in going to a fast food joint.<p>But I’ve realized that this weird food product leaves some kind of odd taste in my stomach, and not just from Burger King. I’m pretty over these fake beef burgers now, and would way rather have a black bean burger or a garden burger. Those taste light and yummy and don’t leave a weird feeling in my stomach.</text></item><item><author>gwbas1c</author><text>I married a vegan, and I eat a lot of vegetarian food. (I also still eat plenty of meat, just not every day.)<p>One <i>extremely</i> frustrating aspect of plant meat is that they tried to aggressively push out traditional veggie burgers on restaurant menus. A familiar refrain I&#x27;ve heard in restaurants in the last few years is &quot;we used to have a nice veggie patty, but they replaced it with the beyond&#x2F;incredible&#x2F;whatever patty.&quot;<p>The thing is, vegetarian food is incredible without needing to taste like meat. When I&#x27;ve had these products, I&#x27;ve always walked away feeling like they taste inferior to traditional vegetarian burgers &#x2F; sausages that don&#x27;t try to taste like meat.<p>&gt; Some say the slowdown in sales is a product of food inflation, as consumers trade pricier plant-based meat for less-expensive animal meat.<p>Normally vegetarian food costs less than meat. It&#x27;s because the animals need to eat (surprise surprise) vegetables! When you eat the vegetables directly instead of having the animal eat the vegetable for your, it&#x27;s cheaper.<p>IMO, I think the &quot;meat in a vat&quot; system where animal tissue is grown in some kind of factory setting is a much better approach. When I want to eat meat, I want to eat meat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>steve_adams_86</author><text>I’m not positive but I have a feeling it’s the methylcellulose. In my own home experimentation, none of the ingredients seem to cause issues except for that.<p>It seems fairly benign, but it can’t be digested and it isn’t clear to me if we have gut flora which can break it down efficiently.<p>I enjoy throwing together little experiments in a similar vein to beyond meat or impossible burger products, but it feels too much like a lab experiment to eat regularly. My kids like “meat balls” with spaghetti, so I tend to make that and otherwise I’m gravitating back towards whole food-based garden burgers.<p>A weird thing about beyond&#x2F;impossible is that while they appear moderately healthier than real meat from some perspectives… They are still pretty trashy. I can’t not feel like I’m making a bad choice, even if it’s home made, and at the end of the day I just want to feel good (mentally and physically) about my food.</text></comment> |
35,949,996 | 35,949,678 | 1 | 2 | 35,949,043 | train | <story><title>The UK’s Secretive Web Surveillance Program Is Ramping Up</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/internet-connection-records-uk-surveillance/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>DethNinja</author><text>In my opinion, most of the governments must have obtained access to numerous Certificate Authority private keys by now. As a result, they would not only be logging DNS records but also the entire unencrypted data transfer.<p>I think lesson to be learned here is that centralized systems such as the internet, due to CAs (including Cloudflare) and ISPs, are unsuitable for private communications.<p>It is so sad that so many people won&#x27;t experience late 1980s and early 1990s era of the internet, which was devoid of extensive surveillance and censorship.<p>Hopefully, humanity will somehow figure out a superior, decentralized communications platform to ensure privacy. However, the current internet offers no such guarantees.<p>My recommendation at this stage is to assume that government and supranational organizations control the entirety of the internet and act accordingly as if internet had no privacy.</text></comment> | <story><title>The UK’s Secretive Web Surveillance Program Is Ramping Up</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/internet-connection-records-uk-surveillance/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sysadm1n</author><text>&gt; ICRs can include that you visited Wired.com but not that you read this individual article<p>So obviously it&#x27;s just DNS records they look at, unless they look at other metadata? I know that DoH encrypts your DNS queries, but still leaks the site you&#x27;re visiting via the TLS handshake.<p>There are further developments in this space which mitigate this weakspot, namely ECH[0] and Oblivious DoH[1]. Combine a VPN that you trust with these and you&#x27;ve essentially gone dark to this sort of surveillance apparatus.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;encrypted-client-hello&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;encrypted-client-hello&#x2F;</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;oblivious-dns&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;oblivious-dns&#x2F;</a></text></comment> |
19,240,522 | 19,240,493 | 1 | 3 | 19,238,995 | train | <story><title>A meta approach to implementing programming languages (2018)</title><url>http://rickardlindberg.me/writing/rlmeta/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jimmy_ruska</author><text>Some links worth mentioning<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.colm.net&#x2F;open-source&#x2F;ragel&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.colm.net&#x2F;open-source&#x2F;ragel&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;beautifulracket.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;beautifulracket.com&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.jetbrains.com&#x2F;mps&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.jetbrains.com&#x2F;mps&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kotlinlang.org&#x2F;docs&#x2F;reference&#x2F;type-safe-builders.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;kotlinlang.org&#x2F;docs&#x2F;reference&#x2F;type-safe-builders.htm...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ANTLR" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ANTLR</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;llaisdy&#x2F;beam_languages" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;llaisdy&#x2F;beam_languages</a></text></comment> | <story><title>A meta approach to implementing programming languages (2018)</title><url>http://rickardlindberg.me/writing/rlmeta/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Davidbrcz</author><text>If you are interested by uncommon approach to implementing programming language, toy should have a look at the K framework (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.kframework.org&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;Main_Page" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.kframework.org&#x2F;index.php&#x2F;Main_Page</a>)<p>The idea is to write the spec (is grammar and semantics) only once and have for free a compiler as well as some formal tools (model checker,...)<p>C had been formalized with it for instance.</text></comment> |
6,639,868 | 6,639,390 | 1 | 2 | 6,635,315 | train | <story><title>Profit affects doctors' treatment decisions</title><url>http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/10/unnecessary-surgeries-you-bet-doctors.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bhauer</author><text>&gt; <i>That is why we have the FDA etc, and that is why doctors are rigorously vetted and trained through the med school&#x2F;residency process, and I think most people would agree that that is a good thing.</i><p>With the amount of error we have (see malpractice suits) as it is, I&#x27;m not convinced that what we have right now is actually yielding better overall results than a free market would with actual price signals.<p>Reason being that medical care quality is usually not a binary matter—with outcomes of either total success or total failure. Usually it&#x27;s a broad continuum, and yet mediocre doctors are presently extremely difficult to differentiate from superb doctors because of the lack of price signals.<p>Malpractice suits would still exist in a free market, of course. And if care lead to death, there would be lawsuits. But in a majority of cases, bad care would lead to non-death but non-ideal resolution. That&#x27;s where price signals will flourish.<p>Ironically, I see the current situation as an all-or-nothing where I want more nuance. We currently treat all doctors as essentially similar because they have all completed the same rigorous training and certification process, and we few other measures to use. (Some above-market review systems notwithstanding.)<p>Finally, don&#x27;t be certain that doing away with regulation would lead to certifications evaporating. It more likely would mean variation in certification. A less politically-entrenched alternative to the AMA perhaps. (Of course, I&#x27;m also not necessarily bowled over by certification. I put no stock in computer programming certifications.)<p>&gt; <i>And of course the typical libertarian response is &quot;tough luck&quot; or &quot;work harder&quot;.</i><p>While true, this shouldn&#x27;t be dismissed cavalierly. We tend to speak without as much political thought as the right and left—saying apparently heartless things like &quot;work harder.&quot; But what we mean in practice is that there would be more emphatic pressure on individuals to work to solve their own life situations first and only in extreme cases leverage safety nets.<p>We have a situation today where half of the country uses some form of government assistance. That&#x27;s not what safety nets should be for. But outside of &quot;character&quot; or other intangibles, there&#x27;s no incentive to avoid the safety nets—in fact there&#x27;s every incentive to use them, lest you be a sucker. Only suckers pay for things.<p>When I had an electric car, I momentarily reeled at the $5,000 federal government incentive because it goes against my every belief. But, come on. Who is going to pass on such a sweet kick-back? I took the money. We all do.<p>Yes, it&#x27;s <i>utterly impossible</i> for a libertarian paradise to provide a 50% safety net. But we feel we have such a large safety net because it&#x27;s a venus fly trap, not because it is necessary to have a 50% safety net as a first principle.<p>Furthermore, many libertarians are amenable to a basic income, and with a basic income and a free market for health care and health insurance, it&#x27;s almost a foregone conclusion that a great deal of competition would angle for that demand.<p>&gt; <i>Compromise shouldn&#x27;t be such a dirty word in today&#x27;s political discussions, it&#x27;s a sad state of affairs</i><p>The trouble with compromise is what I said earlier. We&#x27;re willing to allow central planners to build within a free market, to create a voluntary consortium of participants supporting one another through centrally-planned distribution of resources. But reverse the tables and we&#x27;re absolutely never permitted the same freedom. Central-planning is not voluntary; it a piece of totalitarianism.<p>So compromising with central planners means totally conceding. Either they plan for you or you plan for you. I prefer planning for me, difficulties and all.</text></item><item><author>pyoung</author><text>One major oversight that you fail to address in you hypothetical free market scenario is that supply is still constrained. In a truly free market, anyone can set up shop and try to market and sell their services. If I buy a TV that craps out in two days, I either get it fixed by warranty or I go online and write a bad review which hopefully contributes to the demise of the company. If I get a bad surgery from a poorly trained doctor I die. That is why we have the FDA etc, and that is why doctors are rigorously vetted and trained through the med school&#x2F;residency process, and I think most people would agree that that is a good thing.<p>Another issue I have is your mention of &#x27;charity&#x27;. Almost anytime this gets used in a political&#x2F;economic discussion, it is used to dismiss a whole class of problems that the author does not want to deal with in their argument. In this particular case you mention that if you cannot afford a &#x27;free market&#x27; doctor&#x2F;treatment, then you can turn to charity to provide the funds. Of course we all know that charity will never come close to providing for the entirety of society, so you are left with a situation where almost everyone except those who can afford treatment are forced to go without it. And of course the typical libertarian response is &quot;tough luck&quot; or &quot;work harder&quot;. But here is the thing, health, similar to environmental issues has strong public effects. There are a number of diseases and illnesses that, if left untreated in a large portion of the population, can have devastating impacts on society. A healthy population is a necessity of a first world economy and relying on charity to ensure positive, society level outcomes is absurd and ignores reality.<p>Look, I lean libertarian on many issues, but there are certain aspects of society that are just not suited to a free market. I want to be able to go to a restaurant without being terrified of catching TB from the waiter or getting salmonella poisoning from the food. I don&#x27;t want industrial companies polluting the ocean and rivers that I surf and fish in. The free market can be very powerful, but it is also fairly dumb, it cannot recognize when it is doing more collective harm than good. I don&#x27;t see why so many libertarians think in terms of all or nothing. Compromise shouldn&#x27;t be such a dirty word in today&#x27;s political discussions, it&#x27;s a sad state of affairs.</text></item><item><author>bhauer</author><text>&gt; <i>That&#x27;s a fine bit of conservative nonsense you just regurgitated</i><p>Conservative, libertarian, I guess they are more or less the same for this subject. Fine.<p>&gt; <i>coming to the conclusion that the problem the U.S. is suffering from is &quot;too much health care&quot;</i><p>I suppose you&#x27;re saying that because higher prices suggest a glut of supply? Wait, no.<p>I&#x27;m not sure why you say that is the conclusion of my argument. I certainly never said the US has too much healthcare, nor imply it.<p>In fact, if anything the US is supply-constrained in healthcare thanks to the AMA, FDA, etc. There is plenty of demand for healthcare, but the supply is pretty well controlled through regulation.<p>I certainly can&#x27;t start selling healthcare. Even with a lot of studying, I still couldn&#x27;t just <i>sell</i> healthcare. Making additional healthcare supply isn&#x27;t like making more supply of furniture, food, or even cars (which is closer on the regulation spectrum to healthcare, meaning it requires a herculean effort to enter this industry—witness Tesla).<p>&gt; <i>therefore the solution is to reduce access to healthcare and insurance</i><p>What?<p>No, I&#x27;d rather make these services <i>more</i> readily available to everyone by making them available in the same way nearly every other product is available to anyone. Is the iPad unavailable to me because my employer doesn&#x27;t provide tablet insurance? Just sell me healthcare and health insurance on regular markets, please. Nothing could be <i>more</i> available in my opinion.<p>As it is, the &quot;availability&quot; of healthcare in my life is extremely narrow (again thanks to what evolved from 1940s price controls). I have a small set of options from one vendor selected by my employer. With the ACA, I will now have that option (maybe, though it&#x27;s an HSA and I&#x27;ve been told to kiss HSAs goodbye) and a few other ratified options that have been selected by a central planning committee.<p>If I can&#x27;t afford routine health care on a regular market, I&#x27;d rather work harder to get a better job. In a worst-case scenario, I&#x27;ll plead with friends and family or charities. I genuinely would prefer this to the current model. I&#x27;d pick up insurance to handle catastrophic events. I&#x27;d donate more to charity to boot.<p>&gt; <i>your health is worth an infinite amount of money to you</i><p>Actually, not really. If I have a quality of life issue and I can improve my quality of life for $500, I will weigh the pros and cons and probably go for it. If it costs $500,000, I&#x27;ll suck it up until someone innovates the cost down to something I can afford.<p>Even if I have a catastrophic issue and I have no insurance, and the only resolution is something that costs $1M, this is something my family (friends, charities) should decide. Sell&#x2F;refinance property or pull the plug? Bottom line, it&#x27;s a local decision to pull the plug, not something for a central planning board.<p>&gt; <i>Further, healthcare prices are unpredictable</i><p>This is not a counter-argument to using regular price signals. Services that are unpredictable are usually billed at hourly rates or time and materials with an estimate. If I have the termite guy out to check my house, he&#x27;s not going to be able to give me a quote until he assesses the situation. Even then, it may be worse than he thought. But he has a price sheet of hours and services and I can look at that and select a different termite guy if the price sheet seems out of line. Better yet, other people will have paid termite guys and give me a basic feel for what a termite guy charges. When he says his hourly rate is $5,000, I&#x27;ll know he&#x27;s a nutcase.<p>Today, if I heard it cost $5,000&#x2F;hr for some medical procedure, I wouldn&#x27;t even know how to react. Is that a lot? Is it low? I don&#x27;t even know who I could ask for a guess.<p>&gt; <i>which has been discovered by every advanced nation on Earth except the U.S.</i><p>I don&#x27;t enjoy the argument that everyone else does something a given way, so why don&#x27;t you get in line already. The way I see it, this country has been doing healthcare <i>more similar</i> to other countries (no true market, no price signals) than similar to what I want for decades.<p>A free market can support a central-planning model inside of itself, but vice-versa is never possible. This is why those of us who support free markets are so sensitive to those who would shut them off. Central planners don&#x27;t have to <i>kill</i> the free market to do their central planning exercise, but they <i>always</i> choose to.<p>We don&#x27;t ask them to kill central planning so we can have a free market. In fact, we don&#x27;t even care how central planners want to arrange their centrally-planned plan inside the free market, as long as it&#x27;s voluntary. Have fun!<p>If I had my way, the ACA would make centrally-planned healthcare an entirely in or entirely out proposition. Voluntary. Don&#x27;t want in? Fine, you&#x27;re on your own. Entirely.<p>I&#x27;d opt out. And soon enough, I&#x27;d find people ready to sell me health care. Then I&#x27;d give more to charity. I&#x27;d be so much happier.</text></item><item><author>jellicle</author><text>That&#x27;s a fine bit of conservative nonsense you just regurgitated, coming to the conclusion that the problem the U.S. is suffering from is &quot;too much health care&quot;, and therefore the solution is to reduce access to healthcare and insurance. It rests on the assumption that patients get frivolous medical procedures (open heart surgery for you! and open heart surgery for you! and open heart surgery for you!) because they may not pay full price for them, a claim which, like the teapot orbiting the sun directly opposite the Earth, has never been observed in real life.<p>In actuality, healthcare is a well known example of a market failure - there cannot be a normal market in healthcare ever, because definitionally, your health is worth an infinite amount of money to you (how much would you pay not to be a slave? how much would you pay not to have your hands and feet chopped off?).<p>Further, healthcare prices are unpredictable. How much does a gall bladder surgery cost? Did I mention that the patient got a flesh-eating bacterial infection as a result of the surgery? That&#x27;s true and will always be true even if prices were posted at the door, which they are not.<p>The solution - which has been discovered by every advanced nation on Earth except the U.S. - is having the government strongly involved in paying for healthcare, insuring across the entire population to even out costs and making sure that, e.g., medical device manufacturers can&#x27;t gouge the unknowing public. Monopsony powers nicely counteract the inherent power imbalance that healthcare providers normally have over the sick, and everything works just fine, costing each of those nations less to cover their entire nation than the U.S. currently spends to cover a small segment of its population.</text></item><item><author>bhauer</author><text>This particular invisible hand has been hamstrung by malignant forces. Notably, the <i>payer</i> in a typical healthcare transaction is not the same as the <i>recipient</i>, splitting the typical <i>buyer</i> role into two.<p>Because health insurance is now commonly provided by employers because of World War II price controls, and because we have become accustomed to using health insurance to pay for all matter of health care, including routine visits, consumers are often ignorant of health care costs.<p>Customer A: My insurance will pay? Fine, let&#x27;s do this. Cha-ching, price rises.<p>Customer B: My insurance will pay? Fine, let&#x27;s do this. Cha-ching, price rises.<p>Customer C: Oh, insurance won&#x27;t pay? How much? Whoa! How did the price get so high?<p>It&#x27;s no surprise then that the invisible hand works in a way that appears flawed when one of its inputs (the buyer&#x27;s sensitivity to price) is frustrated.<p>People of my persuasion often make the case that if automobile insurance worked the same as health insurance, and we used insurance to pay for oil changes, the price of oil changes would shoot up wildly. Reason being that you would no longer care what it costs.<p>Obviously the seller (the doctor in the case at hand) wants the price to be as high as possible. The invisible hand can&#x27;t keep this in check—it cannot discipline the seller with lost sales—when so many buyers do not act with actual price sensitivity.</text></item><item><author>cs702</author><text>Many aspects of US society today are organized under the assumption that if every individual pursues what is in his&#x2F;her best <i>financial</i> interest, the &quot;invisible hand of the free market&quot; will produce the best possible outcome for everyone.<p>Yet here we have reputable doctors acting in their self interest, and the result is that they are ordering unnecessary surgeries for financial gain. Meanwhile, patients are essentially unable to protect themselves against this travesty.<p>Maybe in this case the invisible hand cannot be seen because it is not there?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hharrison</author><text>I&#x27;m surprised that this point hasn&#x27;t come up yet in this conversation: the whole point of insurance is to <i>pool risk</i>. The basic principle is that of everyone who pays in, the lucky ones subsidize the unlucky ones.<p>Obviously, this works best the more people who pay in. When people don&#x27;t get insurance until they need it, it raises the cost for everyone. When people don&#x27;t get insurance and <i>still</i> end up burdening those who did (by going bankrupt when faced with monstrous E.R. bills, for a common example), costs go up for everyone. In these situations, there&#x27;s only way to make the system work: <i>enforce</i> that <i>everyone</i> buys in. That&#x27;s why I support single-payer.<p>Here&#x27;s another car analogy: car insurance is mandatory for drivers in the U.S., and most countries. Because the system only works when everyone buys in.<p>Of course it offends the libertarian sensibility to <i>force</i> people to buy something. How barbaric! Personally, I&#x27;m a libertarian-to-leftist convert. I think society needs a monopoly on force, and that monopoly goes to the government. The use of that force should be minimized, but one of reasons we need it is to <i>force</i> people to chip in for the common good. When it comes to pooled risk for catastrophic events, it&#x27;s worth it. I have no moral qualms. It&#x27;s not a matter of who&#x27;s doing the planning, it&#x27;s a matter of societal choices that just plain don&#x27;t work if not everyone&#x27;s on board. You&#x27;re right that central planning is not voluntary. <i>That&#x27;s the whole point</i>.<p><i>&gt; But outside of &quot;character&quot; or other intangibles, there&#x27;s no incentive to avoid the safety nets—in fact there&#x27;s every incentive to use them, lest you be a sucker. Only suckers pay for things.</i><p>&quot;Yeah, look at all those suckers, <i>paying</i> for things, how stupid. Why bother trying to make more money? It&#x27;s not like I value character-building.&quot;
- single mom making $12,000&#x2F;year, and (gasp) receiving government assistance<p>Do you <i>really</i> think government assistance makes poverty appealing?</text></comment> | <story><title>Profit affects doctors' treatment decisions</title><url>http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/10/unnecessary-surgeries-you-bet-doctors.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bhauer</author><text>&gt; <i>That is why we have the FDA etc, and that is why doctors are rigorously vetted and trained through the med school&#x2F;residency process, and I think most people would agree that that is a good thing.</i><p>With the amount of error we have (see malpractice suits) as it is, I&#x27;m not convinced that what we have right now is actually yielding better overall results than a free market would with actual price signals.<p>Reason being that medical care quality is usually not a binary matter—with outcomes of either total success or total failure. Usually it&#x27;s a broad continuum, and yet mediocre doctors are presently extremely difficult to differentiate from superb doctors because of the lack of price signals.<p>Malpractice suits would still exist in a free market, of course. And if care lead to death, there would be lawsuits. But in a majority of cases, bad care would lead to non-death but non-ideal resolution. That&#x27;s where price signals will flourish.<p>Ironically, I see the current situation as an all-or-nothing where I want more nuance. We currently treat all doctors as essentially similar because they have all completed the same rigorous training and certification process, and we few other measures to use. (Some above-market review systems notwithstanding.)<p>Finally, don&#x27;t be certain that doing away with regulation would lead to certifications evaporating. It more likely would mean variation in certification. A less politically-entrenched alternative to the AMA perhaps. (Of course, I&#x27;m also not necessarily bowled over by certification. I put no stock in computer programming certifications.)<p>&gt; <i>And of course the typical libertarian response is &quot;tough luck&quot; or &quot;work harder&quot;.</i><p>While true, this shouldn&#x27;t be dismissed cavalierly. We tend to speak without as much political thought as the right and left—saying apparently heartless things like &quot;work harder.&quot; But what we mean in practice is that there would be more emphatic pressure on individuals to work to solve their own life situations first and only in extreme cases leverage safety nets.<p>We have a situation today where half of the country uses some form of government assistance. That&#x27;s not what safety nets should be for. But outside of &quot;character&quot; or other intangibles, there&#x27;s no incentive to avoid the safety nets—in fact there&#x27;s every incentive to use them, lest you be a sucker. Only suckers pay for things.<p>When I had an electric car, I momentarily reeled at the $5,000 federal government incentive because it goes against my every belief. But, come on. Who is going to pass on such a sweet kick-back? I took the money. We all do.<p>Yes, it&#x27;s <i>utterly impossible</i> for a libertarian paradise to provide a 50% safety net. But we feel we have such a large safety net because it&#x27;s a venus fly trap, not because it is necessary to have a 50% safety net as a first principle.<p>Furthermore, many libertarians are amenable to a basic income, and with a basic income and a free market for health care and health insurance, it&#x27;s almost a foregone conclusion that a great deal of competition would angle for that demand.<p>&gt; <i>Compromise shouldn&#x27;t be such a dirty word in today&#x27;s political discussions, it&#x27;s a sad state of affairs</i><p>The trouble with compromise is what I said earlier. We&#x27;re willing to allow central planners to build within a free market, to create a voluntary consortium of participants supporting one another through centrally-planned distribution of resources. But reverse the tables and we&#x27;re absolutely never permitted the same freedom. Central-planning is not voluntary; it a piece of totalitarianism.<p>So compromising with central planners means totally conceding. Either they plan for you or you plan for you. I prefer planning for me, difficulties and all.</text></item><item><author>pyoung</author><text>One major oversight that you fail to address in you hypothetical free market scenario is that supply is still constrained. In a truly free market, anyone can set up shop and try to market and sell their services. If I buy a TV that craps out in two days, I either get it fixed by warranty or I go online and write a bad review which hopefully contributes to the demise of the company. If I get a bad surgery from a poorly trained doctor I die. That is why we have the FDA etc, and that is why doctors are rigorously vetted and trained through the med school&#x2F;residency process, and I think most people would agree that that is a good thing.<p>Another issue I have is your mention of &#x27;charity&#x27;. Almost anytime this gets used in a political&#x2F;economic discussion, it is used to dismiss a whole class of problems that the author does not want to deal with in their argument. In this particular case you mention that if you cannot afford a &#x27;free market&#x27; doctor&#x2F;treatment, then you can turn to charity to provide the funds. Of course we all know that charity will never come close to providing for the entirety of society, so you are left with a situation where almost everyone except those who can afford treatment are forced to go without it. And of course the typical libertarian response is &quot;tough luck&quot; or &quot;work harder&quot;. But here is the thing, health, similar to environmental issues has strong public effects. There are a number of diseases and illnesses that, if left untreated in a large portion of the population, can have devastating impacts on society. A healthy population is a necessity of a first world economy and relying on charity to ensure positive, society level outcomes is absurd and ignores reality.<p>Look, I lean libertarian on many issues, but there are certain aspects of society that are just not suited to a free market. I want to be able to go to a restaurant without being terrified of catching TB from the waiter or getting salmonella poisoning from the food. I don&#x27;t want industrial companies polluting the ocean and rivers that I surf and fish in. The free market can be very powerful, but it is also fairly dumb, it cannot recognize when it is doing more collective harm than good. I don&#x27;t see why so many libertarians think in terms of all or nothing. Compromise shouldn&#x27;t be such a dirty word in today&#x27;s political discussions, it&#x27;s a sad state of affairs.</text></item><item><author>bhauer</author><text>&gt; <i>That&#x27;s a fine bit of conservative nonsense you just regurgitated</i><p>Conservative, libertarian, I guess they are more or less the same for this subject. Fine.<p>&gt; <i>coming to the conclusion that the problem the U.S. is suffering from is &quot;too much health care&quot;</i><p>I suppose you&#x27;re saying that because higher prices suggest a glut of supply? Wait, no.<p>I&#x27;m not sure why you say that is the conclusion of my argument. I certainly never said the US has too much healthcare, nor imply it.<p>In fact, if anything the US is supply-constrained in healthcare thanks to the AMA, FDA, etc. There is plenty of demand for healthcare, but the supply is pretty well controlled through regulation.<p>I certainly can&#x27;t start selling healthcare. Even with a lot of studying, I still couldn&#x27;t just <i>sell</i> healthcare. Making additional healthcare supply isn&#x27;t like making more supply of furniture, food, or even cars (which is closer on the regulation spectrum to healthcare, meaning it requires a herculean effort to enter this industry—witness Tesla).<p>&gt; <i>therefore the solution is to reduce access to healthcare and insurance</i><p>What?<p>No, I&#x27;d rather make these services <i>more</i> readily available to everyone by making them available in the same way nearly every other product is available to anyone. Is the iPad unavailable to me because my employer doesn&#x27;t provide tablet insurance? Just sell me healthcare and health insurance on regular markets, please. Nothing could be <i>more</i> available in my opinion.<p>As it is, the &quot;availability&quot; of healthcare in my life is extremely narrow (again thanks to what evolved from 1940s price controls). I have a small set of options from one vendor selected by my employer. With the ACA, I will now have that option (maybe, though it&#x27;s an HSA and I&#x27;ve been told to kiss HSAs goodbye) and a few other ratified options that have been selected by a central planning committee.<p>If I can&#x27;t afford routine health care on a regular market, I&#x27;d rather work harder to get a better job. In a worst-case scenario, I&#x27;ll plead with friends and family or charities. I genuinely would prefer this to the current model. I&#x27;d pick up insurance to handle catastrophic events. I&#x27;d donate more to charity to boot.<p>&gt; <i>your health is worth an infinite amount of money to you</i><p>Actually, not really. If I have a quality of life issue and I can improve my quality of life for $500, I will weigh the pros and cons and probably go for it. If it costs $500,000, I&#x27;ll suck it up until someone innovates the cost down to something I can afford.<p>Even if I have a catastrophic issue and I have no insurance, and the only resolution is something that costs $1M, this is something my family (friends, charities) should decide. Sell&#x2F;refinance property or pull the plug? Bottom line, it&#x27;s a local decision to pull the plug, not something for a central planning board.<p>&gt; <i>Further, healthcare prices are unpredictable</i><p>This is not a counter-argument to using regular price signals. Services that are unpredictable are usually billed at hourly rates or time and materials with an estimate. If I have the termite guy out to check my house, he&#x27;s not going to be able to give me a quote until he assesses the situation. Even then, it may be worse than he thought. But he has a price sheet of hours and services and I can look at that and select a different termite guy if the price sheet seems out of line. Better yet, other people will have paid termite guys and give me a basic feel for what a termite guy charges. When he says his hourly rate is $5,000, I&#x27;ll know he&#x27;s a nutcase.<p>Today, if I heard it cost $5,000&#x2F;hr for some medical procedure, I wouldn&#x27;t even know how to react. Is that a lot? Is it low? I don&#x27;t even know who I could ask for a guess.<p>&gt; <i>which has been discovered by every advanced nation on Earth except the U.S.</i><p>I don&#x27;t enjoy the argument that everyone else does something a given way, so why don&#x27;t you get in line already. The way I see it, this country has been doing healthcare <i>more similar</i> to other countries (no true market, no price signals) than similar to what I want for decades.<p>A free market can support a central-planning model inside of itself, but vice-versa is never possible. This is why those of us who support free markets are so sensitive to those who would shut them off. Central planners don&#x27;t have to <i>kill</i> the free market to do their central planning exercise, but they <i>always</i> choose to.<p>We don&#x27;t ask them to kill central planning so we can have a free market. In fact, we don&#x27;t even care how central planners want to arrange their centrally-planned plan inside the free market, as long as it&#x27;s voluntary. Have fun!<p>If I had my way, the ACA would make centrally-planned healthcare an entirely in or entirely out proposition. Voluntary. Don&#x27;t want in? Fine, you&#x27;re on your own. Entirely.<p>I&#x27;d opt out. And soon enough, I&#x27;d find people ready to sell me health care. Then I&#x27;d give more to charity. I&#x27;d be so much happier.</text></item><item><author>jellicle</author><text>That&#x27;s a fine bit of conservative nonsense you just regurgitated, coming to the conclusion that the problem the U.S. is suffering from is &quot;too much health care&quot;, and therefore the solution is to reduce access to healthcare and insurance. It rests on the assumption that patients get frivolous medical procedures (open heart surgery for you! and open heart surgery for you! and open heart surgery for you!) because they may not pay full price for them, a claim which, like the teapot orbiting the sun directly opposite the Earth, has never been observed in real life.<p>In actuality, healthcare is a well known example of a market failure - there cannot be a normal market in healthcare ever, because definitionally, your health is worth an infinite amount of money to you (how much would you pay not to be a slave? how much would you pay not to have your hands and feet chopped off?).<p>Further, healthcare prices are unpredictable. How much does a gall bladder surgery cost? Did I mention that the patient got a flesh-eating bacterial infection as a result of the surgery? That&#x27;s true and will always be true even if prices were posted at the door, which they are not.<p>The solution - which has been discovered by every advanced nation on Earth except the U.S. - is having the government strongly involved in paying for healthcare, insuring across the entire population to even out costs and making sure that, e.g., medical device manufacturers can&#x27;t gouge the unknowing public. Monopsony powers nicely counteract the inherent power imbalance that healthcare providers normally have over the sick, and everything works just fine, costing each of those nations less to cover their entire nation than the U.S. currently spends to cover a small segment of its population.</text></item><item><author>bhauer</author><text>This particular invisible hand has been hamstrung by malignant forces. Notably, the <i>payer</i> in a typical healthcare transaction is not the same as the <i>recipient</i>, splitting the typical <i>buyer</i> role into two.<p>Because health insurance is now commonly provided by employers because of World War II price controls, and because we have become accustomed to using health insurance to pay for all matter of health care, including routine visits, consumers are often ignorant of health care costs.<p>Customer A: My insurance will pay? Fine, let&#x27;s do this. Cha-ching, price rises.<p>Customer B: My insurance will pay? Fine, let&#x27;s do this. Cha-ching, price rises.<p>Customer C: Oh, insurance won&#x27;t pay? How much? Whoa! How did the price get so high?<p>It&#x27;s no surprise then that the invisible hand works in a way that appears flawed when one of its inputs (the buyer&#x27;s sensitivity to price) is frustrated.<p>People of my persuasion often make the case that if automobile insurance worked the same as health insurance, and we used insurance to pay for oil changes, the price of oil changes would shoot up wildly. Reason being that you would no longer care what it costs.<p>Obviously the seller (the doctor in the case at hand) wants the price to be as high as possible. The invisible hand can&#x27;t keep this in check—it cannot discipline the seller with lost sales—when so many buyers do not act with actual price sensitivity.</text></item><item><author>cs702</author><text>Many aspects of US society today are organized under the assumption that if every individual pursues what is in his&#x2F;her best <i>financial</i> interest, the &quot;invisible hand of the free market&quot; will produce the best possible outcome for everyone.<p>Yet here we have reputable doctors acting in their self interest, and the result is that they are ordering unnecessary surgeries for financial gain. Meanwhile, patients are essentially unable to protect themselves against this travesty.<p>Maybe in this case the invisible hand cannot be seen because it is not there?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>warfangle</author><text>&gt;But in a majority of cases, bad care would lead to non-death but non-ideal resolution. That&#x27;s where price signals will flourish.<p>Conjecture. Got proof? (let&#x27;s say, a statistical analysis between the recent spate of doctors who no longer accept insurance -- only cold hard cash or credit -- and their Swedish counterparts in both patient care and malpractice suite rate)<p>That&#x27;s the thing about this entire argument. We&#x27;re point at those other folks that seem to be a doing a lot better job at this whole keeping people healthy thing than we are. And you&#x27;re pointing at this conjecture that maybe people make rational decisions in a market.<p>And we know that&#x27;s not true.<p>Just look at homeopathic medicine to see how well the free market does, without FDA intervention, at keeping people healthy - and getting them healthy if they aren&#x27;t.</text></comment> |
16,560,220 | 16,560,321 | 1 | 2 | 16,558,698 | train | <story><title>Palantir Wins $876M U.S. Army Contract</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-09/peter-thiel-s-palantir-wins-876-million-u-s-army-contract</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>spondyl</author><text>Palantir had a booth at a Summer internship expo I went to once. I asked them what the deal was with helping the NSA in their surveillance capabilities and what not. The guy said he was impressed that &quot;I had the courage to ask tough questions&quot; and asked for my details. They sent me a test but not being super experienced as a dev, I didn&#x27;t get much further than that. I still got a free shirt so I can rep them when we&#x27;re full 1984 :)</text></comment> | <story><title>Palantir Wins $876M U.S. Army Contract</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-09/peter-thiel-s-palantir-wins-876-million-u-s-army-contract</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>osrec</author><text>They look more and more like a consulting firm each day. My previous employer spent £40m with them, only to get nowhere close to the expected project deliverables. We did get a nice looking dashboard though...</text></comment> |
19,765,392 | 19,765,551 | 1 | 3 | 19,764,896 | train | <story><title>Apple has removed or restricted several screen-time and parental-control apps</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/27/technology/apple-screen-time-trackers.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>miki123211</author><text>So, let&#x27;s get the facts straight here:<p>1. The apps used MDM profiles, intedned for control of employee&#x27;s smartphones and&#x2F;or vpns to filter access to apps.<p>2. Those approaches gave the app makers enormous control over the devices. If they used vpns, <i>all</i> internet traffic from the device could be intercepted. If they used MDM profiles, they had deep access to all the device&#x27;s settings. It was a <i>huge</i> privacy risk.<p>3. This was clearly against Apple&#x27;s policies. APIs were used for the purpose they were not intended for. That was what Facebooks&#x27;s certificates were revoked for. They should&#x27;ve feared removal since the day they wrote their first line of code.<p>4. I guess that Apple understood the need for parental control apps and allowed them, with the privacy risks, as there was no other way to get parental control at the time.<p>5. Apple knew how important iPhone addiction has become and developed their own, privacy respecting solution, screen Time.<p>6. The need for parental control has now been filled and the privacy risks of those apps now outweigh the benefits. Apple made the decision to remove.<p>7. Apple, in general, doesn&#x27;t allow other apps to access such information on your device, for privacy and security reasons. It&#x27;s a bit anti competitive, yes, it limits what app makers can do, but it makes iOs secure. There&#x27;s no other way to do it, and that&#x27;s what many people don&#x27;t understand. Apple&#x27;s philosophy sacrifices some features you might have for your own security. If you&#x27;re not fine with it, use Android and sideload, but don&#x27;t run screaming to the police when it suddenly turns out that the online banking app you&#x27;ve just installed was a very good fake. [1].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tahawultech.com&#x2F;industry&#x2F;technology&#x2F;android-warning-fake-banking-apps-on-the-rise&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tahawultech.com&#x2F;industry&#x2F;technology&#x2F;android-warn...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sigmar</author><text>&gt;It&#x27;s a bit anti competitive, yes, it limits what app makers can do, but it makes iOs secure. There&#x27;s no other way to do it, and that&#x27;s what many people don&#x27;t understand.<p>Doesn&#x27;t it seem weird to you how they only cared about &quot;making iOS secure&quot; once they had their own product?<p>If Google or Microsoft did this the reaction here on HN would be so different. Any anti-competitive practice could be rationalized by saying it makes the platform more secure.</text></comment> | <story><title>Apple has removed or restricted several screen-time and parental-control apps</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/27/technology/apple-screen-time-trackers.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>miki123211</author><text>So, let&#x27;s get the facts straight here:<p>1. The apps used MDM profiles, intedned for control of employee&#x27;s smartphones and&#x2F;or vpns to filter access to apps.<p>2. Those approaches gave the app makers enormous control over the devices. If they used vpns, <i>all</i> internet traffic from the device could be intercepted. If they used MDM profiles, they had deep access to all the device&#x27;s settings. It was a <i>huge</i> privacy risk.<p>3. This was clearly against Apple&#x27;s policies. APIs were used for the purpose they were not intended for. That was what Facebooks&#x27;s certificates were revoked for. They should&#x27;ve feared removal since the day they wrote their first line of code.<p>4. I guess that Apple understood the need for parental control apps and allowed them, with the privacy risks, as there was no other way to get parental control at the time.<p>5. Apple knew how important iPhone addiction has become and developed their own, privacy respecting solution, screen Time.<p>6. The need for parental control has now been filled and the privacy risks of those apps now outweigh the benefits. Apple made the decision to remove.<p>7. Apple, in general, doesn&#x27;t allow other apps to access such information on your device, for privacy and security reasons. It&#x27;s a bit anti competitive, yes, it limits what app makers can do, but it makes iOs secure. There&#x27;s no other way to do it, and that&#x27;s what many people don&#x27;t understand. Apple&#x27;s philosophy sacrifices some features you might have for your own security. If you&#x27;re not fine with it, use Android and sideload, but don&#x27;t run screaming to the police when it suddenly turns out that the online banking app you&#x27;ve just installed was a very good fake. [1].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tahawultech.com&#x2F;industry&#x2F;technology&#x2F;android-warning-fake-banking-apps-on-the-rise&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tahawultech.com&#x2F;industry&#x2F;technology&#x2F;android-warn...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>asveikau</author><text>Don&#x27;t be an apologist. To introduce your own feature and stopping there, declaring the problem solved (when this article claims the solution doesn&#x27;t work as well as the third party ones did) is irresponsible. If this is the road they want to take, the right way is to introduce any and all public hooks needed to create a solution, and then, importantly, make the Apple one use only public APIs.<p>But it seems they chose to be significantly more lazy and bigger jerks than that. And here you come with the 7 point plan to say they are really commendable instead.</text></comment> |
34,295,695 | 34,293,738 | 1 | 3 | 34,287,562 | train | <story><title>Modern C for C++ peeps (2019)</title><url>https://floooh.github.io/2019/09/27/modern-c-for-cpp-peeps.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WalterBright</author><text>&gt; Enable all warnings!<p>The trouble I&#x27;ve run into with that is different compilers have different warnings, sometimes they are mutually contradictory, so it is not possible to have portable code that doesn&#x27;t trigger warnings in one compiler or another.<p>I.e. the general problem with warnings is the language gets balkanized into multiple competing and incompatible dialects.<p>What <i>should</i> happen is to carefully examine the warnings, and adopt the best into the language Standard as errors.<p>For example:<p><pre><code> if (a &lt; b &lt; c)
</code></pre>
That is pretty much 100% a bug in the code. Just make it illegal already. D does.<p>For another:<p><pre><code> for (i = 0; i &lt; 10; ++i);
{
...
}
</code></pre>
Long ago, an expert C programmer came to me once and said he&#x27;d spent all day trying to figure out why his loop only executed once. I pointed to the semicolon. He sighed. I put a warning for that in the compiler. I noticed that other compilers eventually did, too.<p>In D, it&#x27;s an error.<p>A third example:<p>In the Joint Fighter coding standard, it says don&#x27;t use `l` as an integer suffixe, as in `124l`, because in many fonts it looks like `1241`. Solution: D does not allow `l` as a suffix. There&#x27;s is no reason to support that suffix. No reason to put it in coding standard. Do the world a favor, just make it illegal. Done!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pornel</author><text>The warnings problem is nicely solved in Rust:<p>• There&#x27;s a built-in way to silence specific warnings for specific portions of the code. When the compiler is wrong, instead of obfuscating the code to hide it from the compiler, you can directly mark &quot;I know what I&#x27;m doing&quot;. <i>Standard</i> C can&#x27;t do it, and compiler-specific #pragmas are much more clunky.<p>• Builds of dependencies automatically suppress lints, so builds with a -Werror equivalent won&#x27;t break on someone else&#x27;s code (that you may not be able to fix), just because your compiler has added new lints.</text></comment> | <story><title>Modern C for C++ peeps (2019)</title><url>https://floooh.github.io/2019/09/27/modern-c-for-cpp-peeps.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>WalterBright</author><text>&gt; Enable all warnings!<p>The trouble I&#x27;ve run into with that is different compilers have different warnings, sometimes they are mutually contradictory, so it is not possible to have portable code that doesn&#x27;t trigger warnings in one compiler or another.<p>I.e. the general problem with warnings is the language gets balkanized into multiple competing and incompatible dialects.<p>What <i>should</i> happen is to carefully examine the warnings, and adopt the best into the language Standard as errors.<p>For example:<p><pre><code> if (a &lt; b &lt; c)
</code></pre>
That is pretty much 100% a bug in the code. Just make it illegal already. D does.<p>For another:<p><pre><code> for (i = 0; i &lt; 10; ++i);
{
...
}
</code></pre>
Long ago, an expert C programmer came to me once and said he&#x27;d spent all day trying to figure out why his loop only executed once. I pointed to the semicolon. He sighed. I put a warning for that in the compiler. I noticed that other compilers eventually did, too.<p>In D, it&#x27;s an error.<p>A third example:<p>In the Joint Fighter coding standard, it says don&#x27;t use `l` as an integer suffixe, as in `124l`, because in many fonts it looks like `1241`. Solution: D does not allow `l` as a suffix. There&#x27;s is no reason to support that suffix. No reason to put it in coding standard. Do the world a favor, just make it illegal. Done!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tialaramex</author><text>&gt; (a &lt; b &lt; c)<p>On the other hand the intention (assuming numerical types) is clear, if people keep doing this, what machine code is emitted by common compilers for the &quot;best&quot; way to express this? And how about for the idiomatic way to express it? Perhaps the insight, if it&#x27;s common, is that we should provide a nice way to do this which emits efficient machine code.<p>Rust says &quot;chained comparison&quot; is forbidden, so it knows what we&#x27;re going for here, and indeed it suggests you might want (a &lt; b) &amp;&amp; (b &lt; c) which is how I&#x27;d write this, but of course the opposite could be faster, as perhaps could ((a+1)..c).contains(&amp;b) and either may make more sense in context of the usage.</text></comment> |
28,193,499 | 28,193,159 | 1 | 3 | 28,188,822 | train | <story><title>Why is learning functional programming so damned hard? (2019)</title><url>https://cscalfani.medium.com/why-is-learning-functional-programming-so-damned-hard-bfd00202a7d1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>IIAOPSW</author><text>What makes you say &quot;port&quot; and &quot;starboard&quot; are more clear than &quot;front&quot; and &quot;back&quot;?</text></item><item><author>swiley</author><text>Programming is about clearly communicating theory.<p>Mariners use &quot;port&quot; and &quot;starboard&quot; for vehicle relative directions not because it&#x27;s &quot;cool&quot; but because it&#x27;s clear and unambiguous. Problem decomposition works the same way: some problems decompose better with FP (I would argue databases do) some with OOP, some with EF etc. The more you know the clearer code you can write and the faster you can extract the theory from other people&#x27;s code.</text></item><item><author>yodsanklai</author><text>It&#x27;s not hard at all. It&#x27;s routinely taught to beginners.<p>However, it&#x27;s not a silver bullet. I found that basic software engineering principles are way more important than the language. I&#x27;ve seen extremely messy OCaml code and super clean C code. What is important is how the code is organized at high level. Whether you use a for loop or a fold, an error monad or an exception mechanism matters less.<p>I&#x27;m also wary of functional programming gurus that tend to over-abstract things and use all the language latest features, making code very hard to read.<p>Also, when developing in a niche language, you tend to miss important tools and need to rely on unstable third-party libraries.<p>I used to be quite enthusiastic about FP, but I think I&#x27;d stick with more mainstream languages unless there&#x27;s a good reason not to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jyounker</author><text>&quot;Port&quot;, &quot;starboard&quot; are unambiguously defined relative to the vessel. &quot;Left&quot; and &quot;right&quot; require specifying or guessing a point of reference.<p>For instance if you&#x27;re facing port and I ask you to take two steps forward, you could either take two steps to port or two steps towards the bow. If I tell you to take two steps to port then the direction is unambiguous.</text></comment> | <story><title>Why is learning functional programming so damned hard? (2019)</title><url>https://cscalfani.medium.com/why-is-learning-functional-programming-so-damned-hard-bfd00202a7d1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>IIAOPSW</author><text>What makes you say &quot;port&quot; and &quot;starboard&quot; are more clear than &quot;front&quot; and &quot;back&quot;?</text></item><item><author>swiley</author><text>Programming is about clearly communicating theory.<p>Mariners use &quot;port&quot; and &quot;starboard&quot; for vehicle relative directions not because it&#x27;s &quot;cool&quot; but because it&#x27;s clear and unambiguous. Problem decomposition works the same way: some problems decompose better with FP (I would argue databases do) some with OOP, some with EF etc. The more you know the clearer code you can write and the faster you can extract the theory from other people&#x27;s code.</text></item><item><author>yodsanklai</author><text>It&#x27;s not hard at all. It&#x27;s routinely taught to beginners.<p>However, it&#x27;s not a silver bullet. I found that basic software engineering principles are way more important than the language. I&#x27;ve seen extremely messy OCaml code and super clean C code. What is important is how the code is organized at high level. Whether you use a for loop or a fold, an error monad or an exception mechanism matters less.<p>I&#x27;m also wary of functional programming gurus that tend to over-abstract things and use all the language latest features, making code very hard to read.<p>Also, when developing in a niche language, you tend to miss important tools and need to rely on unstable third-party libraries.<p>I used to be quite enthusiastic about FP, but I think I&#x27;d stick with more mainstream languages unless there&#x27;s a good reason not to.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>swiley</author><text>The alternatives are left and right respectively. They&#x27;re more clear because left and right are usually relative to the speaker or listener who may be facing each other and are often moving around.</text></comment> |
22,494,810 | 22,494,792 | 1 | 2 | 22,493,537 | train | <story><title>People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report</title><url>https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/basic-income-mcmaster-report-1.5485729</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ctdonath</author><text>Problem is the lack of colloquial objective definition of &quot;poor&quot;.<p>The US &quot;poverty line&quot; is at 80th percentile of world incomes. The US&#x27;s vast welfare&#x2F;entitlement system ensures few indeed net less than that line, shoring up their shortfall with trillions of $.<p>What constitutes &quot;poor&quot; keeps shifting. There will always be a bottom 10%. There is ongoing increase to the standard of living, instilling a sense of &quot;nobody should go without X&quot; (when X didn&#x27;t exist not long before, broadband internet being the latest). Affordable housing gets overrun by population growth &amp; attracting mobile opportunity-seekers, living space naturally going to the highest bidder; property taxes being a thing, there is no recognized natural right to real estate. Health care relentlessly advances, new lifesaving care objectively costing a great deal ... vs a public sentiment of a right thereto.<p>We need an objective redefinition of &quot;poor&quot;, predicated on a baseline of nutrition, housing floorspace, basic tools (stove, disposal, etc), care (minimum optimistic odds of longevity), information access, etc and an understanding that the baseline cannot be shifted - that those doing better are <i>not poor</i>, that accessibility thereto is largely attainable (whatever the sociopolitical system), and acknowledgement that when&#x2F;if all are above that line, poverty services are officially out of a job.<p>As it stands, &quot;poor&quot; is a moving target for which a great number of people have a vested interest in covering a consistent, if not growing, population.</text></item><item><author>AnthonyMouse</author><text>&gt; With basic income, we may just raise the cost of those things.<p>The problem with this argument is that it proves too much. It&#x27;s true of <i>anything that causes the poor to have more money</i>. Lower unemployment, higher wages, anything. Heck, it&#x27;s true of lower healthcare costs, because people would have more money for housing, or vice versa.<p>Housing costs and healthcare costs are problems, but they&#x27;re <i>independent</i> problems.<p>On top of that, you&#x27;re assuming the UBI actually results in the poor getting more assistance rather than merely different assistance. Right now there are explicit subsidies for housing and healthcare. If they get replaced with a UBI in the same amount, maybe people just use it to buy housing and healthcare anyway -- but maybe some of them don&#x27;t, and that causes those prices to go <i>down</i>.</text></item><item><author>throwaway13337</author><text>The issue I see with basic income is that most money is spent on housing and health care. These two things are supply constrained so it&#x27;s more of an auction for who can afford them.<p>With basic income, we may just raise the cost of those things.<p>This problem wouldn&#x27;t appear in a study that distributed to only some individuals.<p>We need to solve the regulatory or otherwise organizational problems of these things to provide real relief. Throwing money at the problem will just move money to a few hands.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Balgair</author><text>&gt; As it stands, &quot;poor&quot; is a moving target for which a great number of people have a vested interest in covering a consistent, if not growing, population.<p>Nearly all Kings and Emperors were &#x27;poorer&#x27; than most Westerners under the poverty line of today. They had no refrigeration, antibiotics, electricity, etc. But we still agree that there are &#x27;poor&#x27; people today, and I think we&#x27;re correct to say so. Yes, it is a moving target, and thank God that it is such. If &#x27;progress&#x27; means that we have to drag the least lucky of us up to levels of decadence that Cesar could never have though of, I&#x27;m more than on board for that. Quibbling about the exact definition of poor for all of time is useless. Charge ahead, have the &#x27;poor&#x27; of our grandchildren&#x27;s time be the wealthy of today.</text></comment> | <story><title>People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report</title><url>https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/basic-income-mcmaster-report-1.5485729</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ctdonath</author><text>Problem is the lack of colloquial objective definition of &quot;poor&quot;.<p>The US &quot;poverty line&quot; is at 80th percentile of world incomes. The US&#x27;s vast welfare&#x2F;entitlement system ensures few indeed net less than that line, shoring up their shortfall with trillions of $.<p>What constitutes &quot;poor&quot; keeps shifting. There will always be a bottom 10%. There is ongoing increase to the standard of living, instilling a sense of &quot;nobody should go without X&quot; (when X didn&#x27;t exist not long before, broadband internet being the latest). Affordable housing gets overrun by population growth &amp; attracting mobile opportunity-seekers, living space naturally going to the highest bidder; property taxes being a thing, there is no recognized natural right to real estate. Health care relentlessly advances, new lifesaving care objectively costing a great deal ... vs a public sentiment of a right thereto.<p>We need an objective redefinition of &quot;poor&quot;, predicated on a baseline of nutrition, housing floorspace, basic tools (stove, disposal, etc), care (minimum optimistic odds of longevity), information access, etc and an understanding that the baseline cannot be shifted - that those doing better are <i>not poor</i>, that accessibility thereto is largely attainable (whatever the sociopolitical system), and acknowledgement that when&#x2F;if all are above that line, poverty services are officially out of a job.<p>As it stands, &quot;poor&quot; is a moving target for which a great number of people have a vested interest in covering a consistent, if not growing, population.</text></item><item><author>AnthonyMouse</author><text>&gt; With basic income, we may just raise the cost of those things.<p>The problem with this argument is that it proves too much. It&#x27;s true of <i>anything that causes the poor to have more money</i>. Lower unemployment, higher wages, anything. Heck, it&#x27;s true of lower healthcare costs, because people would have more money for housing, or vice versa.<p>Housing costs and healthcare costs are problems, but they&#x27;re <i>independent</i> problems.<p>On top of that, you&#x27;re assuming the UBI actually results in the poor getting more assistance rather than merely different assistance. Right now there are explicit subsidies for housing and healthcare. If they get replaced with a UBI in the same amount, maybe people just use it to buy housing and healthcare anyway -- but maybe some of them don&#x27;t, and that causes those prices to go <i>down</i>.</text></item><item><author>throwaway13337</author><text>The issue I see with basic income is that most money is spent on housing and health care. These two things are supply constrained so it&#x27;s more of an auction for who can afford them.<p>With basic income, we may just raise the cost of those things.<p>This problem wouldn&#x27;t appear in a study that distributed to only some individuals.<p>We need to solve the regulatory or otherwise organizational problems of these things to provide real relief. Throwing money at the problem will just move money to a few hands.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>baddox</author><text>Why would we not want the baseline to improve over time? I genuinely do not understand the attitude that we should establish some extremely low bar like “is not currently at risk of starvation” and then never move the bar, but merely congratulating ourselves when more people pass that bar.</text></comment> |
21,496,691 | 21,496,548 | 1 | 3 | 21,492,782 | train | <story><title>The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fcc-has-fined-robocallers-208-million-its-collected-6-790-11553770803?mod=rsswn</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lukebuehler</author><text>A lot of people point out that telecom companies should do something but aren&#x27;t because it&#x27;s lucrative for them or too expensive to fix.<p>Are telecom companies not realizing how much they are hurting themselves with this in the long term? People will stop using phone numbers altogether. Using the phone has become such a pain, at least in the US, that whenever I can, I used different ways of communicating. WhatsApp, iMesage, Skype, etc. The incessant robocalls have definitely motivated me to move away from traditional phone calls faster than I would otherwise.<p>Lastly, maybe this is what these companies want, i.e., that I just use their data plan, but then that makes me way less likely to stay loyal.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>onetimeusename</author><text>They are slow to act because it is unclear whether it is justified in the law for them to block what they believe is spam or if a customer wants to receive a call.<p>Section 202 of Telecommunications Act details that telecoms cannot discriminate connections so they have been unwilling to block spam if it can lead to breaking the law[1]. The FCC has been trying to change that by rolling out new guidance on what can definitely be blocked[2]. One of the new rules defines a new legal safe harbor for carriers that block calls that are unauthenticated using a new protocol that is expected to be rolled out by year end, 2019.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.law.cornell.edu&#x2F;uscode&#x2F;text&#x2F;47&#x2F;202" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.law.cornell.edu&#x2F;uscode&#x2F;text&#x2F;47&#x2F;202</a>
[2]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fcc.gov&#x2F;document&#x2F;fcc-affirms-robocall-blocking-default-protect-consumers-0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fcc.gov&#x2F;document&#x2F;fcc-affirms-robocall-blocking-d...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fcc-has-fined-robocallers-208-million-its-collected-6-790-11553770803?mod=rsswn</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lukebuehler</author><text>A lot of people point out that telecom companies should do something but aren&#x27;t because it&#x27;s lucrative for them or too expensive to fix.<p>Are telecom companies not realizing how much they are hurting themselves with this in the long term? People will stop using phone numbers altogether. Using the phone has become such a pain, at least in the US, that whenever I can, I used different ways of communicating. WhatsApp, iMesage, Skype, etc. The incessant robocalls have definitely motivated me to move away from traditional phone calls faster than I would otherwise.<p>Lastly, maybe this is what these companies want, i.e., that I just use their data plan, but then that makes me way less likely to stay loyal.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sj4nz</author><text>I&#x27;m already there wanting to stop using phone numbers. So. Much. There.<p>I haven&#x27;t had a &quot;land line&quot; in multiple-decades. My short list of &quot;the next thing&quot; requires:<p>- Ability to install on a mobile device without any connection to a &quot;phone number.&quot; Phone numbers in my mind are dead.
- Skip the synchronous social convention of calling. Everything should be async by default. You don&#x27;t ever cause someone&#x27;s device to interrupt them. This is already culturally &quot;accepted&quot; with SMS. Unopened messages are deleted after some number of days.
- With permission, these asynchronous messages should be forwardable. You give permission in advance of course, and then you can avoid having to repeat yourself again and again.
- TMDA style whitelisting for unknown public keys wishing for contact. Addresses need some kind of seniority (older than 30-days) and some reasonable integration into the network at large (vouching connections between other people with &quot;skin in the game&quot;, akin to a shared reputation--If I could remember the name of that early social network that tried to do this, avogato.org? Something like that.)
- Mesh networking forever. Decentralize it all.<p>This is not something that I think can be a &quot;startup,&quot; because this needs to be a protocol, not tied to any firm. If anyone&#x27;s software works with the protocol, then let the &quot;best installable&quot; win. The closest thing to this right now is Scuttlebutt protocol and if someone could re-introduce contact sharing via &quot;bumping&quot; (using the accelerometer and GPS location and time together) devices together to exchange public keys, that particular bit of UX could go a long way to making it easier to adopt. However, the worst part of Scuttlebutt&#x27;s capabilities has been the storage consumption for very popular identities that often consumes all the available memory on smaller devices. It needs data-storage hygenics--some way for the end-user to state what kind of data they want to keep and what they wish to ignore.</text></comment> |
17,363,615 | 17,363,191 | 1 | 3 | 17,361,168 | train | <story><title>Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try</title><url>https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/technology/personaltech/firefox-chrome-browser-privacy.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bad_user</author><text>Just dropping a note in support of Firefox ...<p>It&#x27;s a great browser and I&#x27;ve came back to it even before the changes in Quantum, because the UI is better and it&#x27;s also a browser I can trust to protect my interests.<p>Just one thing to consider ... recently in Chrome 66 they introduced the means for cosmetic ads blocking via stylesheets that can no longer be overridden, as Google finally succumbed to demands for it. Firefox has been supporting the feature for years and is on the cutting edge in regards to protecting privacy.<p>For example I&#x27;m using Multi-Account Containers + Facebook Container, an add-on which sandboxes Facebook. Along with the blocking of trackers that&#x27;s now built-in, Firefox is leading the offense against privacy invading web services (although granted Apple&#x27;s Safari doesn&#x27;t do a bad job either).<p>The only downside of Firefox is that Chrome&#x27;s dev tools are still better, however Firefox has been improving <i>a lot</i> lately and I&#x27;m pretty sure they&#x27;ll be on par pretty soon. After all, lets not forget that Firebug, which then inspired every other browser, was an add-on that happened for Firefox.<p>Oh, and I love that they are refactoring its internals via Rust. That&#x27;s an awesome development.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>StavrosK</author><text>This is a great point. It&#x27;s evident in Chrome&#x27;s course so far that the browser has put Google&#x27;s interests first, whereas Firefox puts the users&#x27; interests first. That&#x27;s why I stuck with FF when it was slow, and I&#x27;m very glad that&#x27;s all fixed now.<p>Plus, FF for Android is amazing. I can run Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin on my mobile browser!</text></comment> | <story><title>Firefox is back. It's time to give it a try</title><url>https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/technology/personaltech/firefox-chrome-browser-privacy.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bad_user</author><text>Just dropping a note in support of Firefox ...<p>It&#x27;s a great browser and I&#x27;ve came back to it even before the changes in Quantum, because the UI is better and it&#x27;s also a browser I can trust to protect my interests.<p>Just one thing to consider ... recently in Chrome 66 they introduced the means for cosmetic ads blocking via stylesheets that can no longer be overridden, as Google finally succumbed to demands for it. Firefox has been supporting the feature for years and is on the cutting edge in regards to protecting privacy.<p>For example I&#x27;m using Multi-Account Containers + Facebook Container, an add-on which sandboxes Facebook. Along with the blocking of trackers that&#x27;s now built-in, Firefox is leading the offense against privacy invading web services (although granted Apple&#x27;s Safari doesn&#x27;t do a bad job either).<p>The only downside of Firefox is that Chrome&#x27;s dev tools are still better, however Firefox has been improving <i>a lot</i> lately and I&#x27;m pretty sure they&#x27;ll be on par pretty soon. After all, lets not forget that Firebug, which then inspired every other browser, was an add-on that happened for Firefox.<p>Oh, and I love that they are refactoring its internals via Rust. That&#x27;s an awesome development.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>davedx</author><text>Yep, same here. I use it as my regular browser. Occasionally I switch to Chrome for miscellaneous &quot;other reasons&quot;, sometimes just to maintain separation between work and personal browsing sessions (I use FF for work).<p>I&#x27;m about to start a new contract doing React development again though. I wonder if I&#x27;ll stick to FF or if I&#x27;ll get dragged back to Chrome for DevTools support...</text></comment> |
32,266,109 | 32,266,161 | 1 | 3 | 32,263,444 | train | <story><title>US Gross Domestic Product, Second Quarter 2022 (Advance Estimate)</title><url>https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/gross-domestic-product-second-quarter-2022-advance-estimate</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>partiallypro</author><text>I personally think we&#x27;re in recession and the reason is datapoints outside of this GDP print, what companies are saying, and the fact I know people that have been laid off already. What I find pathetic is that saying we are in a recession is now a political stance.<p>I think we all know that if a Republican were President the entire narrative would shift, with most of the press saying we&#x27;re in recession while Fox, etc would say unemployment is still low which is what matters.<p>How did we get to a point where actual data can be outright denied or absorbed based on your political viewpoint? It&#x27;s really pathetic. People will go to the ends of the earth just to protect politicians. Worse, even if we&#x27;re in recession it&#x27;s pretty mild, so I don&#x27;t even know why there is so much handwringing about it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mywittyname</author><text>I agree that we are in a recession.<p>&gt;How did we get to a point where actual data can be outright denied or absorbed based on your political viewpoint?<p>Because the actual data is sending mixed signals. People equate recessions with job losses, but job growth is still high and unemployment remains incredibly low. Businesses equate recessions with reduced demand for goods and and services, yet demand remains strong enough to push prices and profits to record levels.<p>GDP has long been criticized for being a poor metric for the economy. But it&#x27;s always been correlated enough with overall economic sentiment that it was Good Enough. It looks like we&#x27;ve finally gotten ourselves into a situation where the edge case issues with GDP surface.<p>Lastly, not everyone feels recessions the same. I was one of those people who benefited from the financial crisis, because I kept my job and lived in an apartment, so my income was going up while my costs went down. That doesn&#x27;t take away from the devastation it caused to other people.</text></comment> | <story><title>US Gross Domestic Product, Second Quarter 2022 (Advance Estimate)</title><url>https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/gross-domestic-product-second-quarter-2022-advance-estimate</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>partiallypro</author><text>I personally think we&#x27;re in recession and the reason is datapoints outside of this GDP print, what companies are saying, and the fact I know people that have been laid off already. What I find pathetic is that saying we are in a recession is now a political stance.<p>I think we all know that if a Republican were President the entire narrative would shift, with most of the press saying we&#x27;re in recession while Fox, etc would say unemployment is still low which is what matters.<p>How did we get to a point where actual data can be outright denied or absorbed based on your political viewpoint? It&#x27;s really pathetic. People will go to the ends of the earth just to protect politicians. Worse, even if we&#x27;re in recession it&#x27;s pretty mild, so I don&#x27;t even know why there is so much handwringing about it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rockemsockem</author><text>I&#x27;ve seen the word recession thrown around plenty in the press; who&#x27;s avoiding saying it?<p>As pointed out by another commenter the NBER has never failed to declare a recession after two consecutive quarters of GDP reduction. This is a preliminary report, I would expect them to wait for the full report to actually declare it.<p>These things work a certain way. Whether that way is good or bad isn&#x27;t relevant to this particular point, by expecting that way to change on a whim you&#x27;re just being impatient.</text></comment> |
38,215,441 | 38,213,474 | 1 | 2 | 38,204,378 | train | <story><title>An implementation of Common Lisp targeting Lua</title><url>https://codeberg.org/gsou/LCL</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>whitten</author><text>Is there a set of code written in a subset of Common Lisp which implements the parts of Common Lisp not currently part of this Lua+CL ?<p>Since there were many Lisp variants when Common Lisp first came out, there ought to be a lot code created when trying to first get compatibility working. How much of that historic code is available now ?</text></comment> | <story><title>An implementation of Common Lisp targeting Lua</title><url>https://codeberg.org/gsou/LCL</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>xeonmc</author><text>How do this compare to Fennel?</text></comment> |
19,511,666 | 19,511,685 | 1 | 3 | 19,511,026 | train | <story><title>BBC podcasts on third-party apps</title><url>http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/d68712d7-bd24-440f-94a0-1c6a4cdee71a</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lbacaj</author><text>Technically speaking the way Podcasts work is a fascinating thing.<p>Most on HN May be familiar with this already but Podcasts are completely open and a creator simply publishes an RSS that they then provide to a podcast App such as iTunes so it can appear on the Apple podcast app. In exchange most of these podcast apps share any listen counts and analytics with the owner of the Podcast. However, almost always the files are hosted by the owner so the plays could also likely be counted that way. Even the artwork and everything is provided with this RSS that is completely open.<p>More and more platforms are popping up creating “exclusive” podcasts and trying to close the ecosystem down. Not sure if that’s what is happening here, it’s unclear from the article, but just think Podcasts are one of those last few technically open things on the internet and that’s great.<p>They are so open in fact I was planning on adding them to my audio App I’ve been building which lets people listen to any article right now. The more this closes up the less of an opportunity for people to create useful things and for people to find new ways to stay informed.<p>As a shameless self promotion if your interested in having articles read to you on the go try my app <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;articulu.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;articulu.com</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>simias</author><text>Admittedly I don&#x27;t consume a massive amount of podcasts but I don&#x27;t have a problem with this move towards a more closed platform. If people want to make money from their work as podcasters they basically have three possibilities: beg for donations, ad tons of ads before, after and often in the middle of the podcasts or move to a subscription model (which means the podcast is no longer available for free).<p>Since I vehemently despise ads I have no issues with the subscription model as long as it remains convenient to play the audio any way I feel like (i.e. no intrusive DRM).<p>So I actually think that&#x27;s a good evolution overall, I wish more of the internet moved away from ads and towards other monetization models.<p>For your audio app I suppose that it&#x27;ll mean that you&#x27;ll have to strike a deal with the podcast platforms to share some of the revenue or figure out an API to let people use their license keys on third party players. I understand that it&#x27;s annoying but that sounds perfectly fair to me.</text></comment> | <story><title>BBC podcasts on third-party apps</title><url>http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/d68712d7-bd24-440f-94a0-1c6a4cdee71a</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>lbacaj</author><text>Technically speaking the way Podcasts work is a fascinating thing.<p>Most on HN May be familiar with this already but Podcasts are completely open and a creator simply publishes an RSS that they then provide to a podcast App such as iTunes so it can appear on the Apple podcast app. In exchange most of these podcast apps share any listen counts and analytics with the owner of the Podcast. However, almost always the files are hosted by the owner so the plays could also likely be counted that way. Even the artwork and everything is provided with this RSS that is completely open.<p>More and more platforms are popping up creating “exclusive” podcasts and trying to close the ecosystem down. Not sure if that’s what is happening here, it’s unclear from the article, but just think Podcasts are one of those last few technically open things on the internet and that’s great.<p>They are so open in fact I was planning on adding them to my audio App I’ve been building which lets people listen to any article right now. The more this closes up the less of an opportunity for people to create useful things and for people to find new ways to stay informed.<p>As a shameless self promotion if your interested in having articles read to you on the go try my app <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;articulu.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;articulu.com</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rbinv</author><text>You seem to be rather shameless yourself as you&#x27;re still annoyingly dropping links to your app any chance you get (almost no matter the topic).<p>This was even mentioned to you roughly a month ago by someone else:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=19287119" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=19287119</a><p>Didn&#x27;t seem to have much of a lasting impact on you.</text></comment> |
26,835,769 | 26,834,795 | 1 | 3 | 26,828,967 | train | <story><title>Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network</title><url>https://paramdeo.com/blog/opting-your-website-out-of-googles-floc-network</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jefftk</author><text><i>&gt; I run a website with no trackers, no ads, nothing at all to do with Google or any other company in any way.</i><p>Then your site will not be included in FLoC: &quot;A page visit will be included in the browser&#x27;s FLoC calculation if document.interestCohort() is used on the page. During the current FLoC origin trial, a page will also be included in the calculation if Chrome detects that the page load ads or ads-related resources.&quot; -- <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.dev&#x2F;floc&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.dev&#x2F;floc&#x2F;</a><p>(Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)</text></item><item><author>_Understated_</author><text>Ok, so let me see if I understand this correctly:<p>I run a website with no trackers, no ads, nothing at all to do with Google or any other company in any way.
You come along, with Google Chrome, and visit my site.
Google adds the fact that you visited my site to their massive dataset (as well as who-knows-what-else)
And to opt out of something I have never been asked to be involved with in any way, I need to contact Google and ask them to please leave my site alone?<p>Am I understanding this shit correctly?<p>Whether I like it or not, my site, by proxy, is participating in Google&#x27;s data mining?<p>If my guess is correct, how the actual fuck is this not illegal?<p>Edit: Ok, I guess I&#x27;m off the mark here with my assumptions so I&#x27;ll put my pitchfork down.<p>Google are just using your Chrome browsing data, matching it with site id&#x27;s (or hashes?) and then analysing the shit out of it for their gain.<p>As a website owner, nothing has changed other than I can tell them not to use my site as part of their analysis... that sound about right?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>whoopdedo</author><text>That &quot;During the current FLoC origin trial&quot; bit scares me though. Why should I assume the scope of implicit inclusion in FLoC won&#x27;t be expanded in the future?<p>I don&#x27;t exactly trust this opt-out header. The spec makes it sound like it&#x27;s not so much a request to the user agent not to use cohorts in general. Rather it&#x27;s a security-in-depth measure to prevent third-party scripts or injected spyware from exploiting certain functions. So those functions are disabled for resources loaded from that domain. Chrome, meanwhile, can still do whatever it likes.</text></comment> | <story><title>Opting Your Website Out of Google's FLoC Network</title><url>https://paramdeo.com/blog/opting-your-website-out-of-googles-floc-network</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jefftk</author><text><i>&gt; I run a website with no trackers, no ads, nothing at all to do with Google or any other company in any way.</i><p>Then your site will not be included in FLoC: &quot;A page visit will be included in the browser&#x27;s FLoC calculation if document.interestCohort() is used on the page. During the current FLoC origin trial, a page will also be included in the calculation if Chrome detects that the page load ads or ads-related resources.&quot; -- <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.dev&#x2F;floc&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.dev&#x2F;floc&#x2F;</a><p>(Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)</text></item><item><author>_Understated_</author><text>Ok, so let me see if I understand this correctly:<p>I run a website with no trackers, no ads, nothing at all to do with Google or any other company in any way.
You come along, with Google Chrome, and visit my site.
Google adds the fact that you visited my site to their massive dataset (as well as who-knows-what-else)
And to opt out of something I have never been asked to be involved with in any way, I need to contact Google and ask them to please leave my site alone?<p>Am I understanding this shit correctly?<p>Whether I like it or not, my site, by proxy, is participating in Google&#x27;s data mining?<p>If my guess is correct, how the actual fuck is this not illegal?<p>Edit: Ok, I guess I&#x27;m off the mark here with my assumptions so I&#x27;ll put my pitchfork down.<p>Google are just using your Chrome browsing data, matching it with site id&#x27;s (or hashes?) and then analysing the shit out of it for their gain.<p>As a website owner, nothing has changed other than I can tell them not to use my site as part of their analysis... that sound about right?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dannyw</author><text>Thanks. I hate FLoC, but accurate facts need to get to the top.</text></comment> |
31,652,092 | 31,648,656 | 1 | 2 | 31,644,008 | train | <story><title>Apple Unveils M2</title><url>https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/06/apple-unveils-m2-with-breakthrough-performance-and-capabilities/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>darkteflon</author><text>To clarify, you’re talking about the 13” Pro only. But yeah, total mystery to me why they’re still selling it. It made sense in 2020 on the cusp of the Intel&#x2F;Silicon transition, but now that we already have the redesigned 14”, don’t really understand what they’re doing here.<p>Who would buy one of these? The Touch Bar is an evolutionary dead-end, and the design of the new 14” and 16” Pros seemed specifically targeted at addressing the well-known shortfalls of this previous generation.</text></item><item><author>godelski</author><text>Why does the 13&quot; Pro have a 720p camera and the Air have a 1080p? Seriously, why is Apple still putting in 720p cameras? This has to be a mistake, right?<p>Edit: Also the pro is missing the magsafe charger. Are they phasing out the 13&quot; pro?<p>Pro: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-pro-13&#x2F;specs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-pro-13&#x2F;specs&#x2F;</a><p>Air: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-air-m2&#x2F;specs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-air-m2&#x2F;specs&#x2F;</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jmkni</author><text>I have the M1 13” Pro, honestly I love it.<p>13” is the perfect size of laptop IMO, the battery life is insane, the performance is great, the screen is good enough for me (I don’t care about higher refresh rates etc)<p>If the M2 is just more of the same but faster, yes please. Why fix something that isn’t broken?</text></comment> | <story><title>Apple Unveils M2</title><url>https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/06/apple-unveils-m2-with-breakthrough-performance-and-capabilities/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>darkteflon</author><text>To clarify, you’re talking about the 13” Pro only. But yeah, total mystery to me why they’re still selling it. It made sense in 2020 on the cusp of the Intel&#x2F;Silicon transition, but now that we already have the redesigned 14”, don’t really understand what they’re doing here.<p>Who would buy one of these? The Touch Bar is an evolutionary dead-end, and the design of the new 14” and 16” Pros seemed specifically targeted at addressing the well-known shortfalls of this previous generation.</text></item><item><author>godelski</author><text>Why does the 13&quot; Pro have a 720p camera and the Air have a 1080p? Seriously, why is Apple still putting in 720p cameras? This has to be a mistake, right?<p>Edit: Also the pro is missing the magsafe charger. Are they phasing out the 13&quot; pro?<p>Pro: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-pro-13&#x2F;specs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-pro-13&#x2F;specs&#x2F;</a><p>Air: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-air-m2&#x2F;specs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.apple.com&#x2F;macbook-air-m2&#x2F;specs&#x2F;</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tinco</author><text>I might go for it. If it weren&#x27;t for the keyboard and the odd battery&#x2F;performance issues with my late 2016MBP I&#x27;d be happy with it. When I got it I thought it was too thin, but I got used to it and now the new 14&quot; feels bulky. I loved mag safe, but it&#x27;s not a must have. I love the 4 USB-C ports, I don&#x27;t need any other connectors, and I actually enjoy the touch bar.<p>I&#x27;d have to test the keyboard though, the new pro keyboard is awesome so maybe I don&#x27;t want to miss out on that.</text></comment> |
17,205,848 | 17,205,326 | 1 | 3 | 17,204,255 | train | <story><title>Can “effective altruism” maximise the bang for each charitable buck?</title><url>https://www.economist.com/international/2018/06/02/can-effective-altruism-maximise-the-bang-for-each-charitable-buck</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>monadgonad</author><text>I think the Effective Altruism movement really belies its own values and cause with the fact that one of its own funds is for supporting:<p>&gt; organizations that work on improving long-term outcomes for humanity. Grants will likely go to organizations that seek to reduce global catastrophic risks, especially those relating to advanced artificial intelligence. [1]<p>Yes, an argument can be made that it&#x27;s important to fund prevention of global catastrophes, as while they&#x27;re unlikely compared to the immediate threat of malaria, they&#x27;ll cause much greater damage, thus increasing risk. However, to consider artificial intelligence to be a potential global catastrophe at all, let alone the single one requiring extra funding, is mostly unfounded. We currently can barely even define what the actual risk is, let alone how to mitigate it.<p>It&#x27;s one thing to walk past homeless people in my city and not give them money, because I know that money could much more easily and effectively safe a life in malaria-ridden parts of the world. I think it&#x27;s absolutely morally repugnant to walk past them and not give them money, because instead you&#x27;re paying people to sit around thinking about AI.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;app.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;funds&#x2F;far-future" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;app.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;funds&#x2F;far-future</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Can “effective altruism” maximise the bang for each charitable buck?</title><url>https://www.economist.com/international/2018/06/02/can-effective-altruism-maximise-the-bang-for-each-charitable-buck</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>stevenking86</author><text>It&#x27;s mentioned in the article several times, but if you&#x27;re interested in making some analytically driven donations, quickly, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.givewell.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.givewell.org&#x2F;</a> is the place to start.</text></comment> |
25,074,682 | 25,074,699 | 1 | 2 | 25,073,640 | train | <story><title>I Still Use Vim</title><url>https://buttondown.email/hillelwayne/archive/why-i-still-use-vim/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ogre_codes</author><text>&gt; My vim config is 600 lines. I have fixes for small annoyances. I have a bookmarking system set up in 45 lines. I have extra syntax highlighting for code snippets that are important to me because I’m doing things the original syntax maintainers never even considered. I create impromptu keyboard mappings and abbreviations and autocommands as needed for given tasks. I can move around in the design space at will.<p>I use VIM on and off, but I wanted to post the above because I think it exemplifies who might like using VIM.<p>VIM is ideal for people who find it worthwhile to spend the time building their configuration out. VIM is the productivity tool that gets better as you put the time and effort into building it out. If you aren&#x27;t the kind of person who wants to put that time and effort in, it is still decent as a basic editor, but it doesn&#x27;t really shine.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tombert</author><text>I don&#x27;t disagree with your thesis, but I should point out that I have been using Vim almost exclusively for almost six years now (well, NeoVim for 4 of those years), and my config is only about 40 lines, and most of it is just installing plugins for whatever languages I&#x27;m using.<p>Despite me not hacking it like crazy, I still think it really shines as an editor; Vim macros were sort of life-changing to me once they clicked for me. I also just think that modal editing is superior once you get past the initial learning curve.</text></comment> | <story><title>I Still Use Vim</title><url>https://buttondown.email/hillelwayne/archive/why-i-still-use-vim/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ogre_codes</author><text>&gt; My vim config is 600 lines. I have fixes for small annoyances. I have a bookmarking system set up in 45 lines. I have extra syntax highlighting for code snippets that are important to me because I’m doing things the original syntax maintainers never even considered. I create impromptu keyboard mappings and abbreviations and autocommands as needed for given tasks. I can move around in the design space at will.<p>I use VIM on and off, but I wanted to post the above because I think it exemplifies who might like using VIM.<p>VIM is ideal for people who find it worthwhile to spend the time building their configuration out. VIM is the productivity tool that gets better as you put the time and effort into building it out. If you aren&#x27;t the kind of person who wants to put that time and effort in, it is still decent as a basic editor, but it doesn&#x27;t really shine.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>threatofrain</author><text>My problem is that some of that building should&#x27;ve been sensible defaults, and the community tends to outsource those responsibilities to extensions.<p>Which means your Vim experience now has some risk of rot. Once and awhile my configurations&#x2F;extensions rot and I have to go and update myself as to what happened in the ecosystem, or what is interacting with what. One day I decided I&#x27;m too tired and switched to VSC.<p>Also the author failed to talk about the #1 killer feature of VSC, the reason for its meteoric rise in popularity — intellisense.</text></comment> |
8,356,788 | 8,356,509 | 1 | 2 | 8,355,860 | train | <story><title>Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014</title><url>https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zaroth</author><text>Since annual failure rate is a function mostly of age, it would be interesting to see a line chart of cumulative failure rate vs age. But since new drives are continually being added to the population, there would be fewer drives in the data set as you moved up each curve.<p>I guess you could calculate confidence intervals at quarterly intervals, and so the error bars would get larger as age increases and &#x27;n&#x27; decreases.<p>How would you calculate the CI for failure rate? It&#x27;s not binomial or poisson, since failure rate goes to 1 over time...<p>A little searching turns up <a href="http://rmod.ee.duke.edu/statistics.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;rmod.ee.duke.edu&#x2F;statistics.htm</a> which I&#x27;m sure completely explains how to do this... (rolls eyes). I hate that this is how statistics is commonly taught. Knowing which distribution to use and applying it correctly can actually be intuitive if taught properly. It doesn&#x27;t always need to be an exercise in alphabet soup &#x2F; deriving from base principles.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hyperbovine</author><text>Undergrad version: the lifespan of a single drive should be exponentially distributed with some rate lambda. The time to first failure from among k drives would then have an exponential distribution with rate k * lambda. The confidence interval for lambda is: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_distribution#Confidence_intervals" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Exponential_distribution#Confid...</a><p>Grad-level version: drive lifetime is exponential with an inhomogeneous (increasing, presumably) rate function lambda(t). Inferring lambda(t) is difficult without additional assumptions on the functional form. But potentially do-able.<p>Real-life version: None of the classical distribution fit that well. (<a href="https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/fast07/tech/schroeder/schroeder_html/" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usenix.org&#x2F;legacy&#x2F;event&#x2F;fast07&#x2F;tech&#x2F;schroeder&#x2F;sc...</a>)<p>(This is survival analysis: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Survival_analysis</a>)</text></comment> | <story><title>Hard Drive Reliability Update – Sep 2014</title><url>https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>zaroth</author><text>Since annual failure rate is a function mostly of age, it would be interesting to see a line chart of cumulative failure rate vs age. But since new drives are continually being added to the population, there would be fewer drives in the data set as you moved up each curve.<p>I guess you could calculate confidence intervals at quarterly intervals, and so the error bars would get larger as age increases and &#x27;n&#x27; decreases.<p>How would you calculate the CI for failure rate? It&#x27;s not binomial or poisson, since failure rate goes to 1 over time...<p>A little searching turns up <a href="http://rmod.ee.duke.edu/statistics.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;rmod.ee.duke.edu&#x2F;statistics.htm</a> which I&#x27;m sure completely explains how to do this... (rolls eyes). I hate that this is how statistics is commonly taught. Knowing which distribution to use and applying it correctly can actually be intuitive if taught properly. It doesn&#x27;t always need to be an exercise in alphabet soup &#x2F; deriving from base principles.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jrapdx3</author><text>I&#x27;m not a statistician, but what you are describing is a situation in which the survival of the &quot;subjects&quot; (SSDs) is the crucial variable. How quickly the population declines is the question.<p>This is similar to studies in medical research, e.g., how long do subjects live after an experimental cancer treatment. What I&#x27;ve seen used is the Kaplan-Meier non-parametric method (Kaplan-Meier plot) for the purpose.<p>Maybe I&#x27;m just used to seeing these plots, but I find the method conveys information very effectively. More info can be found here:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaplan%E2%80%93Meier_estimator" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Kaplan%E2%80%93Meier_estimator</a><p>I agree that presenting the SSD life data in that way would be a good idea.</text></comment> |
32,288,275 | 32,286,792 | 1 | 3 | 32,285,113 | train | <story><title>My customized Wim Hof breathing method</title><url>https://ugjka.net/blog/breathwork/2022/07/30/wim-hof-breathing-customized/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>philipwhiuk</author><text>Well that would require some critical thinking about the pseudoscience.</text></item><item><author>vmurthy</author><text>The author&#x27;s blog post should come with a disclaimer :) .<p>A while ago I tried a few breathing techniques which were given in a nice book [0]. I really enjoyed the after-effects of the said techniques so I decided to mix and match some of them etc. The effects were awesome .. at first.<p>After a couple of weeks, I started feeling very low for no particular reason (no dietary changes or anything) and just downright weird. I eliminated one factor after another and checked if my energy levels were OK. I finally gave up the experiment on breathing techniques and restarted what was in the book. I am good, now.<p>So.. despite a sample size of one and a trial which wasn&#x27;t random or controlled (:)) , my advice on this whole thing : Get a qualified teacher and do what is taught. YMMV otherwise.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.in&#x2F;gp&#x2F;product&#x2F;B07WSBS5S4&#x2F;ref=kinw_myk_ro_title" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.in&#x2F;gp&#x2F;product&#x2F;B07WSBS5S4&#x2F;ref=kinw_myk_ro_...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dang</author><text>Please don&#x27;t post shallow dismissals, flamebait, or name-calling comments to HN.<p>If you&#x27;d like to make your substantive points without those things, that would be great.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html</a></text></comment> | <story><title>My customized Wim Hof breathing method</title><url>https://ugjka.net/blog/breathwork/2022/07/30/wim-hof-breathing-customized/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>philipwhiuk</author><text>Well that would require some critical thinking about the pseudoscience.</text></item><item><author>vmurthy</author><text>The author&#x27;s blog post should come with a disclaimer :) .<p>A while ago I tried a few breathing techniques which were given in a nice book [0]. I really enjoyed the after-effects of the said techniques so I decided to mix and match some of them etc. The effects were awesome .. at first.<p>After a couple of weeks, I started feeling very low for no particular reason (no dietary changes or anything) and just downright weird. I eliminated one factor after another and checked if my energy levels were OK. I finally gave up the experiment on breathing techniques and restarted what was in the book. I am good, now.<p>So.. despite a sample size of one and a trial which wasn&#x27;t random or controlled (:)) , my advice on this whole thing : Get a qualified teacher and do what is taught. YMMV otherwise.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.in&#x2F;gp&#x2F;product&#x2F;B07WSBS5S4&#x2F;ref=kinw_myk_ro_title" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.in&#x2F;gp&#x2F;product&#x2F;B07WSBS5S4&#x2F;ref=kinw_myk_ro_...</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mekoka</author><text>About 20 years ago people used to say the same thing about mindfulness and meditation. When looking for books at the library or bookstore, you were guided to the spiritual or esoteric section. It&#x27;s been funny to see them slowly migrate to the medical one.<p>Today we&#x27;re living something of a renaissance for psychedelics, with promises of therapeutic benefits for myriad of mental issues. At the time they were forbidden, someone came up with a breathing technique to induce the same therapeutic effects (see Stanislav Grof, holotropic breathwork), which is pretty much an offshoot of the same original techniques Wim Hof expands from.<p>Connect those dots with critical thinking.</text></comment> |
27,881,249 | 27,880,829 | 1 | 3 | 27,880,733 | train | <story><title>Show HN: Magic Mushroom Map</title><url>https://www.magicmushroommap.com/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>anm89</author><text>As someone who forages mushrooms pretty extensively my advice is not to forage psychedelic mushrooms as a beginner. Most psilocybin mushrooms fall into the colloquial category of &quot;LBMs&quot; (little brown mushrooms) and the advice is almost always not to forage LBMs because there a million of them, they all look alike, and you might not know from region to region what the risk of look a likes are. &#x27;<p>So unless you have a region specific guidebook, and can make an absolutely positive identification (which probably involves identifying spores from a print under a microscope for LBMs), you really should not forage LBMs or any mushrooms for that fact. In some cases you might also need to know how to safely taste or smell the mushrooms and then know what you are tasting or smelling for. No beginner is going to be able to do any of that.<p>Let someone else grow them from a verified strain from a syringe. It&#x27;s much safer.<p>As an aside, mushroom foraging is very beginner friendly as long as you stick to the right categories. Things like Chicken of The Woods, oysters, and maitakke are very easy to positively identify and don&#x27;t have many look alikes in most parts of the US. The often propogated idea that mushroom foraging is only for safe for trained experts is totally untrue. The average person can safely forage for mushrooms. Just buy a region specific guidebook, and stick to the categories that your book tells you are safe for your region.</text></comment> | <story><title>Show HN: Magic Mushroom Map</title><url>https://www.magicmushroommap.com/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>toastal</author><text>I can appreciate that this site is using Mapbox and Plausible instead of giving out user data to Google</text></comment> |
21,297,929 | 21,297,400 | 1 | 3 | 21,295,079 | train | <story><title>Builders Ditch Nest After Google Ties Devices to Digital Assistant</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-17/builders-ditch-nest-as-google-ties-digital-assistant-to-devices</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>epistasis</author><text>Nest has been so terribly mismanaged seemingly from the beginning of the acquisition; has there been any management level change to compensate for the poor execution?<p>I really like the look of the Nest thermometer, but I definitely don&#x27;t want Google in control of anything in my house, or listening to anything in my house, with how the manage this stuff.<p>If I do automate anything, I will be going with Home Assistant, even though I kind of despise home rolling these sorts of things. I don&#x27;t trust any of the major players, and their recent behavior and lack of care for the user makes me nervous for the future of tech.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pacala</author><text>The economic incentives for home automation are aligned to send them the way of the SpyTV fiasco [0]. Whatever brand you choose, it will spy on you sooner or later. Our speech is no longer private within the confines or our own homes. Soon, our heart beats too will become game for the creeps of the world [1].<p>This needs to stop. We need laws to keep internet-connected devices from spying on us in our own homes. We need an option to purchase internet-free devices. We need legislation now, as the wireless internet of things [5G] is coming online and the last drop of control we had, to not give the wifi password to the spy devices, will be taken away from us.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnet.com&#x2F;how-to&#x2F;your-tv-is-probably-tracking-you-heres-how-to-stop-it&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnet.com&#x2F;how-to&#x2F;your-tv-is-probably-tracking-you...</a><p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;atap.google.com&#x2F;soli&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;atap.google.com&#x2F;soli&#x2F;</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Builders Ditch Nest After Google Ties Devices to Digital Assistant</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-17/builders-ditch-nest-as-google-ties-digital-assistant-to-devices</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>epistasis</author><text>Nest has been so terribly mismanaged seemingly from the beginning of the acquisition; has there been any management level change to compensate for the poor execution?<p>I really like the look of the Nest thermometer, but I definitely don&#x27;t want Google in control of anything in my house, or listening to anything in my house, with how the manage this stuff.<p>If I do automate anything, I will be going with Home Assistant, even though I kind of despise home rolling these sorts of things. I don&#x27;t trust any of the major players, and their recent behavior and lack of care for the user makes me nervous for the future of tech.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>KaiserPro</author><text>I suspect that google bought nest as a beachhead for creating a &quot;house platform&quot;<p>Having google in your house means that it makes sense for an en user to have an android phone, a google account. If you make the walled garden nice enough, you&#x27;ll never want to leave.<p>Or if you make people invest enough in it, its to expensive or painful to leave.<p>As HA requires a bit of work to setup, its always going to be for tinkerers (unless its packaged and supported by a third party)</text></comment> |
9,265,909 | 9,265,342 | 1 | 2 | 9,264,195 | train | <story><title>X86 is a high-level language</title><url>http://blog.erratasec.com/2015/03/x86-is-high-level-language.html#.VRLn95PF_XE</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Animats</author><text>That&#x27;s true of all superscalar machines. That&#x27;s what killed RISC. The original idea of RISC was one instruction per clock and a very simple CPU control section. Early MIPS CPUs realized that.<p>Then superscalar came to microprocessors with the Pentium Pro. It took 3000 engineers at Intel to design that CPU, but it did much better than one instruction per clock while still handling all the weird cases in x86 instructions. As the fabs improved, the Pentium Pro technology moved to the mainstream. The Pentium II and III were Pentium Pro architecture.<p>This killed the basic advantage of RISC. The &quot;all instructions the same length&quot; concept really killed it - it meant 2x code bloat. That meant bigger caches or worse cache performance. It meant more RAM and more RAM bandwidth or worse memory performance. The x86 instruction set, for all its faults, is compact.<p>For the crypto problem, the trouble is that modern crypto algorithms are not branch free. DES was. Vernam was. Rotor machines were. RSA and elliptic curve stuff, no. This is independent of the CPU architecture.</text></item><item><author>na85</author><text>I think that&#x27;s the author&#x27;s point: x86 is now a significant abstraction from the actual details of execution.</text></item><item><author>kazinator</author><text>&quot;high level&quot; doesn&#x27;t refer to how it is implemented.<p>Even a RISC instruction set can be implemented by, say, either some very slick silicon gates, or by an emulator written in Javascript.<p>The existence of the Javascript emulator doesn&#x27;t make the RISC instruction a high level language, on the grounds that an instruction like &quot;ADD R1, R2, R3&quot; triggers a complicated traversal within the Javascript code.<p>The &quot;level&quot; of a language should refer to the &quot;abstraction level&quot;. Years ago, I came to favor the definition of &quot;abstraction level&quot; given in the glossary of the Tunes project:<p><a href="http://tunes.org/wiki/abstraction_20level.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tunes.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;abstraction_20level.html</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pcwalton</author><text>&gt; This killed the basic advantage of RISC. The &quot;all instructions the same length&quot; concept really killed it - it meant 2x code bloat. That meant bigger caches or worse cache performance. It meant more RAM and more RAM bandwidth or worse memory performance. The x86 instruction set, for all its faults, is compact.<p>I&#x27;m not really sure that is a big deal today, however. Maybe it was when caches were much smaller, but AArch64 went back from a variable width encoding scheme (Thumb) to uniform width instructions in 64-bit mode, without any problems that I&#x27;m aware of, and the performance is quite good. At the same time, the x86-64 ISA has gotten quite a bit less space-efficient: because of the extension to 16 registers, REX prefixes are everywhere and eat up lots of bytes of the instruction stream.</text></comment> | <story><title>X86 is a high-level language</title><url>http://blog.erratasec.com/2015/03/x86-is-high-level-language.html#.VRLn95PF_XE</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Animats</author><text>That&#x27;s true of all superscalar machines. That&#x27;s what killed RISC. The original idea of RISC was one instruction per clock and a very simple CPU control section. Early MIPS CPUs realized that.<p>Then superscalar came to microprocessors with the Pentium Pro. It took 3000 engineers at Intel to design that CPU, but it did much better than one instruction per clock while still handling all the weird cases in x86 instructions. As the fabs improved, the Pentium Pro technology moved to the mainstream. The Pentium II and III were Pentium Pro architecture.<p>This killed the basic advantage of RISC. The &quot;all instructions the same length&quot; concept really killed it - it meant 2x code bloat. That meant bigger caches or worse cache performance. It meant more RAM and more RAM bandwidth or worse memory performance. The x86 instruction set, for all its faults, is compact.<p>For the crypto problem, the trouble is that modern crypto algorithms are not branch free. DES was. Vernam was. Rotor machines were. RSA and elliptic curve stuff, no. This is independent of the CPU architecture.</text></item><item><author>na85</author><text>I think that&#x27;s the author&#x27;s point: x86 is now a significant abstraction from the actual details of execution.</text></item><item><author>kazinator</author><text>&quot;high level&quot; doesn&#x27;t refer to how it is implemented.<p>Even a RISC instruction set can be implemented by, say, either some very slick silicon gates, or by an emulator written in Javascript.<p>The existence of the Javascript emulator doesn&#x27;t make the RISC instruction a high level language, on the grounds that an instruction like &quot;ADD R1, R2, R3&quot; triggers a complicated traversal within the Javascript code.<p>The &quot;level&quot; of a language should refer to the &quot;abstraction level&quot;. Years ago, I came to favor the definition of &quot;abstraction level&quot; given in the glossary of the Tunes project:<p><a href="http://tunes.org/wiki/abstraction_20level.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tunes.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;abstraction_20level.html</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sdevlin</author><text>RSA is not &quot;modern&quot;.<p>Modern elliptic curves are chosen with side channels in mind. You won&#x27;t find data-dependent branches or look-ups in straightforward implementations of Curve25519 scalar multiplication, for example.</text></comment> |
34,938,145 | 34,923,600 | 1 | 2 | 34,921,188 | train | <story><title>How to date a recording using background electrical noise</title><url>https://robertheaton.com/enf/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Groxx</author><text>A video on the same subject: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;e0elNU0iOMY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;e0elNU0iOMY</a><p>I really enjoy Tom Scott. Everything he puts out is <i>wonderfully</i> concise.</text></comment> | <story><title>How to date a recording using background electrical noise</title><url>https://robertheaton.com/enf/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>justinclift</author><text>Sounds like anyone wanting to do a &quot;proper&quot; fake job will now need to separate out any existing hum, then add a new continuous &quot;hum track&quot; based upon those publicly available ENV values.<p>Probably wouldn&#x27;t even be all that hard.</text></comment> |
25,911,268 | 25,911,059 | 1 | 2 | 25,910,496 | train | <story><title>Future Plans for Autotools</title><url>https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2021-01/msg00049.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kstrauser</author><text>I wonder how much cruft could be thrown away if the project tossed out support for, say:<p>- Everything but Linux and a few of the more popular BSDs<p>- 32 bit CPUs<p>- CPUs with less than 1,000 installations<p>- Ancient toolsets that don&#x27;t support features everyone else takes for granted in the last 20 years<p>For instance, it has to be a pain in the neck to sit on a code base with Solaris 2.6 support, or NetBSD on Alpha, or... Also, it seems like there&#x27;d <i>have</i> to be some legacy pain around things like &quot;we can&#x27;t use this flag on sed because Amix didn&#x27;t have it&quot;.<p>But I don&#x27;t know enough about the infrastructure to know if pruning those out would make a bit of engineering difference. How much is support for ancient or little-used stuff slowing down development?<p>Edit:<p>Alternatively, I wonder what it would look like to have a build farm that precomputed all the values. &quot;Oh, you&#x27;re on macOS 11.1 on Intel? Here&#x27;s the list of 32 envvars you need to set.&quot; If a million people are compiling the same file on a million identical computers, is it a great idea for all of them to have run the same probes?<p>Edit 2:<p>I&#x27;d never advocate for support for such systems to be scrubbed from the Internet. I&#x27;m just saying it&#x27;s unreasonable to <i>expect</i> a maintainer today to support ancient systems. The people still using those systems have the right to fork the tools and maintain their own version, but that&#x27;s not the same as making upstream do it for them.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jerf</author><text>Per the discussion in the link, specifically &quot;All the supported languages except C and C++ are second-class citizens.&quot;, I&#x27;d seriously consider writing off everything except C, C++, and any language where someone steps up to actively support their language going forward.<p>Slice autotools down to 32-bit &amp; 64-bit UNIX systems in the last couple of years (bearing in mind that if you start that today, by the time it is finished it will constitute support for the last 3-5 years)... or even all the way to current systems for the parenthesized reason... for C and C++.<p>Would probably also call it &quot;Autotools 3&quot; and slice away anything else that doesn&#x27;t seem useful, on the grounds that 2.7 isn&#x27;t going anywhere. If in doubt, slice it away and see what people say when you release 2.99.01.<p>This probably takes it down to something not so enormous to carry around.<p>It seems like other languages are all going their own way. Maybe that&#x27;s bad, maybe that&#x27;s good, most likely it&#x27;s a complicated combination of both, but most importantly, there&#x27;s nothing Autotools can do to stop it at this point, so you might as well roll with it.</text></comment> | <story><title>Future Plans for Autotools</title><url>https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2021-01/msg00049.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kstrauser</author><text>I wonder how much cruft could be thrown away if the project tossed out support for, say:<p>- Everything but Linux and a few of the more popular BSDs<p>- 32 bit CPUs<p>- CPUs with less than 1,000 installations<p>- Ancient toolsets that don&#x27;t support features everyone else takes for granted in the last 20 years<p>For instance, it has to be a pain in the neck to sit on a code base with Solaris 2.6 support, or NetBSD on Alpha, or... Also, it seems like there&#x27;d <i>have</i> to be some legacy pain around things like &quot;we can&#x27;t use this flag on sed because Amix didn&#x27;t have it&quot;.<p>But I don&#x27;t know enough about the infrastructure to know if pruning those out would make a bit of engineering difference. How much is support for ancient or little-used stuff slowing down development?<p>Edit:<p>Alternatively, I wonder what it would look like to have a build farm that precomputed all the values. &quot;Oh, you&#x27;re on macOS 11.1 on Intel? Here&#x27;s the list of 32 envvars you need to set.&quot; If a million people are compiling the same file on a million identical computers, is it a great idea for all of them to have run the same probes?<p>Edit 2:<p>I&#x27;d never advocate for support for such systems to be scrubbed from the Internet. I&#x27;m just saying it&#x27;s unreasonable to <i>expect</i> a maintainer today to support ancient systems. The people still using those systems have the right to fork the tools and maintain their own version, but that&#x27;s not the same as making upstream do it for them.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>yjftsjthsd-h</author><text>If you&#x27;re going to cut off the long tail of compatibility, what&#x27;s the point of using autotools? I thought the whole point of autotools was to deal with the (painful) diversity of operating systems.</text></comment> |
27,523,893 | 27,523,952 | 1 | 2 | 27,523,377 | train | <story><title>Fsspec: Filesystem Interfaces for Python</title><url>https://filesystem-spec.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>remram</author><text>See also smart_open: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;RaRe-Technologies&#x2F;smart_open" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;RaRe-Technologies&#x2F;smart_open</a> which might be more user-friendly? Never used it myself but it was on HN before. Discussion on their bugtracker: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;RaRe-Technologies&#x2F;smart_open&#x2F;issues&#x2F;579" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;RaRe-Technologies&#x2F;smart_open&#x2F;issues&#x2F;579</a><p>Personally I wasn&#x27;t too impressed with fsspec, though I am using it. I had to wrap files with Python&#x27;s io wrappers to get acceptable performance, and found that different fsspec implementations still have significant differences that you can&#x27;t ignore. They don&#x27;t seem interested in supporting or documenting use cases outside of Pandas and Dask.</text></comment> | <story><title>Fsspec: Filesystem Interfaces for Python</title><url>https://filesystem-spec.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>MrPowers</author><text>fsspec is used in dask (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;dask&#x2F;dask" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;dask&#x2F;dask</a>) if you want to see it in action.<p>The author of fsspec also created fastparquet (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;dask&#x2F;fastparquet" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;dask&#x2F;fastparquet</a>), a native Python implementation of the Parquet file format.<p>I&#x27;m really appreciative for Martin&#x27;s extensive contributions to the PyData ecosystem.</text></comment> |
24,687,755 | 24,687,722 | 1 | 3 | 24,683,403 | train | <story><title>Benchmarking static website hosting providers</title><url>https://www.savjee.be/2020/05/benchmarking-static-website-hosting-providers/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>klodolph</author><text>I must be a bit old-fashioned but I would love to see comparisons against running a simple VM with Nginx.<p>&gt; Google Cloud’s regional and multi-regional buckets perform fairly alike. Interestingly, both are much faster than S3, which is a comparable service. Is Google doing some caching behind the scenes?<p>These are both <i>incredibly complicated services</i> and describing what they do as “caching” would be too much of a simplification.</text></comment> | <story><title>Benchmarking static website hosting providers</title><url>https://www.savjee.be/2020/05/benchmarking-static-website-hosting-providers/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>vbtechguy</author><text>Cloudflare doesn’t cache HTML pages by default only static files <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.cloudflare.com&#x2F;hc&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;articles&#x2F;200172516" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.cloudflare.com&#x2F;hc&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;articles&#x2F;200172516</a>. You need to specifically tell Cloudflare to cache HTML pages via page rules etc <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.cloudflare.com&#x2F;hc&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;articles&#x2F;202775670" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;support.cloudflare.com&#x2F;hc&#x2F;en-us&#x2F;articles&#x2F;202775670</a><p>Cloudflare Workers don’t cache by default either for HTML pages only static files unless you write the Worker to cache HTML pages.<p>So if they tested on default index.html page then it would of been a Cloudflare Cache miss&#x2F;bypass which may explain their results.</text></comment> |
8,903,200 | 8,902,819 | 1 | 2 | 8,902,071 | train | <story><title>What Doesn't Seem Like Work?</title><url>http://paulgraham.com/work.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stegosaurus</author><text>What if the idea of work itself is what you dislike?<p>There are plenty of activities I can enjoy, and some, quite a few of them in fact, are profitable.<p>Once you shoe-horn them into the power dynamic situation of a traditional job (with the bureaucracy that entails unless you&#x27;re dealing with Actual People as opposed to corporations), suddenly a lot of the luster disappears.<p>As a ridiculous example - I enjoy reading. It&#x27;s not really work at all, right?<p>Ask me to read 9am-5pm and I&#x27;d start to find it frustrating. Or add in a commute, or very low pay.<p>The actual job itself is very rarely the issue for me. It&#x27;s what you miss out on, and also the fact that it invariably involves submission, acceptance of being subordinate, etc.<p>edit: To be clear here; I&#x27;m not talking about work ethic in the sense of &#x27;pushing through something you find difficult&#x27;.<p>More the general idea of not wanting to be a part of a machine, a construct that you don&#x27;t agree with. Large corporations and their &#x27;policy documents&#x27;, for example. I don&#x27;t want to work for a company in which my boss doesn&#x27;t have the autonomy to speak to me as a human being - this stands regardless of whether my job is backbreaking labour or eating chocolate bars.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>stegosaurus</author><text>As an addition to this, I&#x27;ve struggled a lot with the concept of working for pay and only recently could I really begin to explain why.<p>Some people would probably call it &#x27;entitlement&#x27;, but I&#x27;m not really sure that&#x27;s an accurate description.<p>As an employee, your role is essentially a permanent state of brown nosing. First of all you must convince a rich person&#x2F;company that you are worthy. Then you must convince them that you want to work for them, that they&#x27;re special, and so on. And then later, you must defer, every single day. Ill? According to policy document AED, page 5, section b, one of your eight sick days will be deducted, worker drone!<p>It&#x27;s not enough to simply perform a valuable function for society. You need to be subservient and defer to authority - you are worth less than your betters (those with wealth) and must please them in order to eat, in order to shelter.<p>There are a few ways left in which you can directly serve other humans and profit via such - private entrepreneurial services such as window cleaning, antique dealing, etcetera - but these make up a small portion of the employment market today and are often subject to ridiculously overbearing regulation. The vast majority of &#x27;jobs&#x27; in the Western world involve being directly, by rank, inferior to another human being.<p>Other people seem much more capable of dealing with this than I do. Often I find myself resenting others for putting up with the more ridiculous aspects - it feels like a betrayal, that if only people were better human beings and less likely to defer to authority we could all have a better experience.<p>This is the struggle I face, really. Physical trauma I find very simple - the emotional aspect of actively taking part in a system that I despise is much more difficult.</text></comment> | <story><title>What Doesn't Seem Like Work?</title><url>http://paulgraham.com/work.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stegosaurus</author><text>What if the idea of work itself is what you dislike?<p>There are plenty of activities I can enjoy, and some, quite a few of them in fact, are profitable.<p>Once you shoe-horn them into the power dynamic situation of a traditional job (with the bureaucracy that entails unless you&#x27;re dealing with Actual People as opposed to corporations), suddenly a lot of the luster disappears.<p>As a ridiculous example - I enjoy reading. It&#x27;s not really work at all, right?<p>Ask me to read 9am-5pm and I&#x27;d start to find it frustrating. Or add in a commute, or very low pay.<p>The actual job itself is very rarely the issue for me. It&#x27;s what you miss out on, and also the fact that it invariably involves submission, acceptance of being subordinate, etc.<p>edit: To be clear here; I&#x27;m not talking about work ethic in the sense of &#x27;pushing through something you find difficult&#x27;.<p>More the general idea of not wanting to be a part of a machine, a construct that you don&#x27;t agree with. Large corporations and their &#x27;policy documents&#x27;, for example. I don&#x27;t want to work for a company in which my boss doesn&#x27;t have the autonomy to speak to me as a human being - this stands regardless of whether my job is backbreaking labour or eating chocolate bars.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ashark</author><text>Anytime I read one of those &quot;just do what you&#x27;re passionate about!&quot; posts, or job postings that read like &quot;we&#x27;re looking for people who are <i>passionate</i> about [thing that literally no-one has ever been <i>passionate</i> about]&quot; I try to think whether there&#x27;s <i>anything whatsoever</i> that I&#x27;d enjoy (let alone stay <i>passionate</i> about) doing (at least) 40 hours a week, 49ish weeks a year.<p>I haven&#x27;t thought of anything yet.<p>Left to my own devices, I&#x27;d probably spend 100 hours one week programming, then not touch a computer for two or three weeks, reading or building something or doing stuff outdoors instead. Lock me down to 40 hours every week, even weeks when I&#x27;m not in to it and would rather curl up on the couch for hours on end with some math books and a notebook or marathon-watch some Criterion movies or go camping with my family or whatever, and any fun I was having in those 40 hours will disappear fast.<p>It doesn&#x27;t matter if the thing I&#x27;m clocking in to do is <i>play video games of my choice and in the way that I choose</i>, even—I&#x27;ll be ready to not look at a video game for the next <i>year</i> within a matter of weeks.<p>That&#x27;s not to say that I consider all work equally bad, but I&#x27;m probably not going to love anything at 40+ mandatory hours every week. The only way I can imagine enjoying that many hours on the clock is by splitting it between at least two very different things, like programming 4 hours&#x2F;day then carrying heavy stuff at a construction site the next 4 hours, and even that might not do it over the long haul.</text></comment> |
9,623,514 | 9,623,556 | 1 | 2 | 9,621,872 | train | <story><title>ES6 in Depth: Destructuring</title><url>https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/05/es6-in-depth-destructuring/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bakhy</author><text>No offense meant to anyone, but I really do not like this constant stream of new features in JavaScript. There are some core issues with the language which, of course, cannot be just fixed, and no new features will make them go away. But there is also a beautiful simplicity and power in the way this (used to be) funny little language does classes, objects, scoping... I feel like these new features are bloating it, and for what? So that you can write an assignment in 1 instead of 3 lines? Wow. It&#x27;s as if, whatever programming language is trendy, JavaScript must absorb as much of its features as it can...<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, destructuring is a nifty feature, but it&#x27;s not really necessary. Plus, things like that usually get thought through along with everything else, when the language is designed. Not only is this increasing the conceptual weight of the language (OK, maybe I exaggerate in this example ;) but there are many more features added all the time), but now you also have a new set of potential pitfalls when doing potentially type-inappropriate destructuring. (I see from the text that you sometimes get undefined, and sometimes a TypeError?) Does JS need more of that?<p>Why not keep it simple? It may have its flaws, but the JavaScript mental model, once you figure out some corner cases, is really simple and powerful. I find it sometimes very elegant. This feature bloat reduces that, IMO, and could hurt understandability of JS code.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jeswin</author><text>I down voted you, I owe you an explanation.<p>&gt; I really do not like this constant stream of new features in JavaScript<p>ES6&#x2F;Ecmascript Harmony was announced seven years back, and has been actively discussed for the last four years. So the constant stream of new features you see are JS engines implementing parts of the standard, which is now in its final shape. ES-Discuss mailing lists* are open for community participation (like someone mentioned below) and is led by people with a lot of experience in their respective focus areas. Every new feature has had to pass through many levels of debates, and have (mostly) been borrowed after being found successful either in other languages or libraries.<p>&gt; I feel like these new features are bloating it, and for what?<p>De-structuring is fairly easy to grasp, and is not even one of the main draws in ES6. Since the last changes to JS, the environment and therefore expectations have changed a lot: (a) JavaScript is now a server-side technology in a big way, (b) async has become increasingly important, (c) people are writing very complex apps in JS. Without the changes in ES6 (and ES7&#x2F;8 going forward), developers would have hated working with JS and JavaScript could have slowly died.<p>If you have been following, you&#x27;d notice that JS has a very vibrant community around it. One big reason for that is that they see the language evolving with the technology that surrounds it. Finally, note that all the new enhancements have come without breaking backward compatibility.<p>* I lurk there, not a contributor. Have learnt a ton from just subscribing to it.</text></comment> | <story><title>ES6 in Depth: Destructuring</title><url>https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/05/es6-in-depth-destructuring/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bakhy</author><text>No offense meant to anyone, but I really do not like this constant stream of new features in JavaScript. There are some core issues with the language which, of course, cannot be just fixed, and no new features will make them go away. But there is also a beautiful simplicity and power in the way this (used to be) funny little language does classes, objects, scoping... I feel like these new features are bloating it, and for what? So that you can write an assignment in 1 instead of 3 lines? Wow. It&#x27;s as if, whatever programming language is trendy, JavaScript must absorb as much of its features as it can...<p>Don&#x27;t get me wrong, destructuring is a nifty feature, but it&#x27;s not really necessary. Plus, things like that usually get thought through along with everything else, when the language is designed. Not only is this increasing the conceptual weight of the language (OK, maybe I exaggerate in this example ;) but there are many more features added all the time), but now you also have a new set of potential pitfalls when doing potentially type-inappropriate destructuring. (I see from the text that you sometimes get undefined, and sometimes a TypeError?) Does JS need more of that?<p>Why not keep it simple? It may have its flaws, but the JavaScript mental model, once you figure out some corner cases, is really simple and powerful. I find it sometimes very elegant. This feature bloat reduces that, IMO, and could hurt understandability of JS code.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>solarexplorer</author><text>ES6 may make the language itself more complex, but I would argue that it does make your code simpler and more concise. Destructuring and arrow functions may seem gimmicks, but they do reduce the visual complexity of the source code and allow you to concentrate on more important things.<p>And stuff like the module system, class system, promises etc. really needed to be standardized because there were too many different solutions floating around and the fragmentation was hurting the ecosystem.<p>Personally, I think that ES6 is much more usable than any previous version of JavaScript.</text></comment> |
30,131,389 | 30,131,551 | 1 | 2 | 30,130,251 | train | <story><title>Despite the hype, iPhone security no match for NSO spyware (2021)</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/19/apple-iphone-nso/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>neonate</author><text><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;22UCa" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;22UCa</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Despite the hype, iPhone security no match for NSO spyware (2021)</title><url>https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/07/19/apple-iphone-nso/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>spideymans</author><text>Regarding the headline, it is absurdly unrealistic to expect that any consumer-grade software can defend itself from state-funded hackers. Not even the entirety American intelligence apparatus can defend itself against state hackers. Why would we expect lowly iOS (or any other consumer software) to do better?<p>If you have reason to believe you&#x27;re targeted by state-backed intelligence agencies, you really oughta be working under the assumption that they can see <i>everything</i> you&#x27;re doing.</text></comment> |
19,910,368 | 19,910,408 | 1 | 2 | 19,909,526 | train | <story><title>Tesla researcher is 'excited' about new battery tech developed by the Army</title><url>https://electrek.co/2019/05/13/tesla-battery-researcher-new-battery-tech-army/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>boh</author><text>For those who believe governments only serve to stifle innovation, please take heed to this counter example(before the Silicon Valley PR machine recasts the research as a work of its own genius).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dexen</author><text>It&#x27;s a fine sentiment. Tor is another good example of innovation ran by the (US) Navy. Which is to be expected, as navies traditionally were big into crypto.<p>The military has long history of both doing their own research (logistics &amp; management, and cryptography being good examples), running research institutes with civilian employees (as it seems to be in this case), and contracting out R&amp;D to run-of-the-mill civilian institutions (half of the SV on a good day).<p>It&#x27;s worth remembering that the military in typical country is set up with certain similarities to free market economy: it negotiates budget with the &quot;customer&quot; (government), it has several major branches that fiercely compete with each other (typically air force, army, navy; US also rolls with marines as a separate branch), and there are vertical &amp; lateral transfers of employees at times. Lastly, there&#x27;s always the competing militaris abroad ;-)<p>Heck, one of common view of the Cold War is that of NATO bankrupting the Soviet block via military arms race.</text></comment> | <story><title>Tesla researcher is 'excited' about new battery tech developed by the Army</title><url>https://electrek.co/2019/05/13/tesla-battery-researcher-new-battery-tech-army/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>boh</author><text>For those who believe governments only serve to stifle innovation, please take heed to this counter example(before the Silicon Valley PR machine recasts the research as a work of its own genius).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nathan_long</author><text>See also: ARPANET, forerunner of the internet.<p>&gt; The Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET) was an early packet-switching network and the first network to implement the TCP&#x2F;IP protocol suite. Both technologies became the technical foundation of the Internet. The ARPANET was initially founded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the United States Department of Defense.
&gt; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ARPANET" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ARPANET</a><p>&quot;Where Wizards Stay Up Late&quot; by Katie Hafner is an entertaining chronicle of its creation.</text></comment> |
36,952,699 | 36,952,429 | 1 | 2 | 36,951,815 | train | <story><title>Origin of correlated isolated flat bands in LK99</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16892</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bibabaloo</author><text>If this could be simulated, can you help me understand why we couldn&#x27;t have used simulation to find promising SC materials to investigate further earlier? Are there just too many permutations to investigate?<p>It seems to my own naive self that if LK99 is the real deal, we mostly just got lucky finding it.</text></item><item><author>raziel2701</author><text>Man, I&#x27;m feeling stronger about LK-99 being it. This paper is theoretical and she finds that particular Cu substitutions onto specific Pb atomic sites are key to enabling a band structure that is usually linked to high Tc superconductors.<p>What this means for the more practical minded is that the synthesis of superconducting LK-99 is not trivial and you need to make the appropriate substitutional alloy for this to work.<p>This is a DFT paper, and a band structure that is usually seen in high Tc superconductors just naturally came out. She also talks about the strong electron-phonon coupling that naturally arose from the structure, which is always necessary for superconductivity.<p>I am, by far, the most excited I&#x27;ve ever been about this being a RT, ambient pressure superconductor.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>akasakahakada</author><text>Not an expert but it just happen that my lab is full of DFT folks so I heard a lot about those everyweek. As people above already answered the questions, I gonna talk some extras.<p>1. Computation cost is large. 1 compute task for a small scale ~100 atoms last about 3 days to 1 week on supercomputer.<p>2. Search space is hugh. For each composition you can have different atomic (or crystal) structure. And here we are talking doping which means introduce impurities into the molecule. Chemical characteristics differs depending on which atom you swap for the impurity. Sometimes you may want to try all places.<p>3. Depends on initial values. Sometimes the initial value is just bad that the result is totally unusable, then you have tweak a little bit and throw back to supercomputer. This cycle might happen few times for 1 specific formula and structure.<p>4. Not 100% accurate. Often the resulting numbers are off by a few % or more which is hugh, compare to experimental results. Reason is that the simulation is not full scale, approximation is here and there to reduce computational cost.</text></comment> | <story><title>Origin of correlated isolated flat bands in LK99</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16892</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bibabaloo</author><text>If this could be simulated, can you help me understand why we couldn&#x27;t have used simulation to find promising SC materials to investigate further earlier? Are there just too many permutations to investigate?<p>It seems to my own naive self that if LK99 is the real deal, we mostly just got lucky finding it.</text></item><item><author>raziel2701</author><text>Man, I&#x27;m feeling stronger about LK-99 being it. This paper is theoretical and she finds that particular Cu substitutions onto specific Pb atomic sites are key to enabling a band structure that is usually linked to high Tc superconductors.<p>What this means for the more practical minded is that the synthesis of superconducting LK-99 is not trivial and you need to make the appropriate substitutional alloy for this to work.<p>This is a DFT paper, and a band structure that is usually seen in high Tc superconductors just naturally came out. She also talks about the strong electron-phonon coupling that naturally arose from the structure, which is always necessary for superconductivity.<p>I am, by far, the most excited I&#x27;ve ever been about this being a RT, ambient pressure superconductor.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tired_and_awake</author><text>DFT scales horribly so it&#x27;s phenomenally expensive to run. You have to have some other mechanism for knowing the general atomic layout before entering the DFT realm.<p>Once you know the atomic positions you can then do little perturbation simulations to model phonon dispersions or ask electron density questions.</text></comment> |
9,964,086 | 9,963,536 | 1 | 3 | 9,962,185 | train | <story><title>Show HN: Spot the Drowning Child</title><url>http://spotthedrowningchild.com</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>irishcoffee</author><text>I would like to point out that any flotation device in a pool besides a life jacket is just asking for problems.<p>I life-guarded for almost 10 years, the only way I would ever let anything that supported a human floating __besides__ an approved life jacket was if the pool was almost empty (such that the one person got my undivided attention) and if I knew the child to already be a strong swimmer.<p>I highly encourage everyone reading this to not swim at pools that allow floats of any kind besides a life jacket, even something as simple as water wings. [0] It encourages kids to go deeper than they should, and if they fall off they&#x27;re in big trouble. It creates the possibility for a child to get trapped under someone else, and a life guard has almost no chance in that scenario.<p>95% of guarding is preventive.<p>Neat site though.<p>[0] Water wings can create the situation where a child has their head underwater and their arms up above water, but they can&#x27;t pull themselves up.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>carbeewo</author><text>When I was a young child, my local pool allowed kids to play on large floating foam rafts (like this, but half the length: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;goo.gl&#x2F;7Y4HbU" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;goo.gl&#x2F;7Y4HbU</a>). One day I decided to show off my underwater swimming skills to a girl I fancied. After a long swim underwater, I exhausted my breath and came to resurface for air, only to get caught under a stacked pile of 5 of these rafts, with kids standing on top like in that photo! I panicked and didn&#x27;t know what was going on. I don&#x27;t remember what happened next, but I am told my father was watching me closely and jumped into the pool, pushed the mats off of me (thus throwing like 4 kids off the rafts into the water) and saved me.<p>Parents were angry at him for throwing their kids into the water. None of them even realized I had almost died. Not that I blame them though, it would probably look pretty funny to see a grown man knock 4 kids off some mats into the pool haha.</text></comment> | <story><title>Show HN: Spot the Drowning Child</title><url>http://spotthedrowningchild.com</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>irishcoffee</author><text>I would like to point out that any flotation device in a pool besides a life jacket is just asking for problems.<p>I life-guarded for almost 10 years, the only way I would ever let anything that supported a human floating __besides__ an approved life jacket was if the pool was almost empty (such that the one person got my undivided attention) and if I knew the child to already be a strong swimmer.<p>I highly encourage everyone reading this to not swim at pools that allow floats of any kind besides a life jacket, even something as simple as water wings. [0] It encourages kids to go deeper than they should, and if they fall off they&#x27;re in big trouble. It creates the possibility for a child to get trapped under someone else, and a life guard has almost no chance in that scenario.<p>95% of guarding is preventive.<p>Neat site though.<p>[0] Water wings can create the situation where a child has their head underwater and their arms up above water, but they can&#x27;t pull themselves up.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>z3t4</author><text>I was around four-five years old when I was first allowed into the deep pool with some float equipment. I was like a fish and liked diving. Couldn&#x27;t swim though.<p>When I jumped into the deep pool my floating equipment was pushed off. I panicked and struggled for my life until I somehow got to the side and then managed to get up by myself. And no-one noticed.<p>I stayed away from deep water until I could swim properly.</text></comment> |
41,773,184 | 41,766,279 | 1 | 2 | 41,765,334 | train | <story><title>An e-waste dumping ground</title><url>https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2024/10/05/g-s1-6411/electronics-public-health-waste-ghana-phones-computers</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>agentultra</author><text>This is one reason I believe &quot;right to repair&quot; laws are so important. The environmental damage of producing the device is already done. Make it last as long as possible. Reduce, <i>reuse</i>... then recycle.<p>Re-using devices helps us also <i>reduce</i> the number of new devices needed... which is what probably scares the corporate oligarchy. If we&#x27;re not buying new phones every couple of years how will the stock prices keep going up?<p>Never the less, the devices we make these days can last a long, long time. I&#x27;ve been repairing and maintaining iPhone 5&#x27;s, 7&#x27;s, and 8&#x27;s that are no where near their end of life. The iPhone has a couple of small electrolytic capacitors which should have a useful life of at least 20 years. And can be replaced! The batteries and screens can replaced. These devices can last much longer than we give them credit for.<p>But tech companies have been struggling to make it illegal or difficult to repair for a long time. I&#x27;ve been seeing photojournalist projects such as this since the late 90s at least (longer perhaps). In North America we had a culture that valued repairing and building things that lasted. It&#x27;s as good a time as any to push for this to return! Support policy makers that are pushing for right-to-repair and environmental protection!<p>And pick up a new hobby if you are able. Support your local tech geeks if you can!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>burningChrome</author><text>&gt;&gt; Re-using devices helps us also reduce the number of new devices needed.<p>This isn&#x27;t just the hardware makers, its also software makers.<p>A ton of the software gets sunset on older versions of Android. Older OnePlus phones, Sony and Google phones are being repurposed for Ubuntu Touch or Sailfish OS because many apps will only work on a specific Android version and up. Same thing with the Google Play store. If you have an older phone that works fine - that&#x27;s great, too bad none of the software can run on it because modern apps are bloated, you need 12GB of RAM on your phone now. Oh sure you can <i>technically</i> run it, but it won&#x27;t rune <i>well</i>.<p>I have three or four Windows phones that still run, but are completely worthless because the software can&#x27;t be updated because the only browser that you could use was Explorer. Now that MS upgraded to Edge, these phones are worthless. Same thing with the Windows apps. I was able to use One Note on my Lumia 950 just as a stand alone note taker, but now it won&#x27;t update because MS says it doesn&#x27;t support that older version and I can&#x27;t update it.<p>I agree 100% hardware makers are one of the reasons, but there&#x27;s a massive issue with the software makers who do the same thing and essentially stop supporting older versions of their software that run fine on these older devices.</text></comment> | <story><title>An e-waste dumping ground</title><url>https://www.npr.org/sections/goats-and-soda/2024/10/05/g-s1-6411/electronics-public-health-waste-ghana-phones-computers</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>agentultra</author><text>This is one reason I believe &quot;right to repair&quot; laws are so important. The environmental damage of producing the device is already done. Make it last as long as possible. Reduce, <i>reuse</i>... then recycle.<p>Re-using devices helps us also <i>reduce</i> the number of new devices needed... which is what probably scares the corporate oligarchy. If we&#x27;re not buying new phones every couple of years how will the stock prices keep going up?<p>Never the less, the devices we make these days can last a long, long time. I&#x27;ve been repairing and maintaining iPhone 5&#x27;s, 7&#x27;s, and 8&#x27;s that are no where near their end of life. The iPhone has a couple of small electrolytic capacitors which should have a useful life of at least 20 years. And can be replaced! The batteries and screens can replaced. These devices can last much longer than we give them credit for.<p>But tech companies have been struggling to make it illegal or difficult to repair for a long time. I&#x27;ve been seeing photojournalist projects such as this since the late 90s at least (longer perhaps). In North America we had a culture that valued repairing and building things that lasted. It&#x27;s as good a time as any to push for this to return! Support policy makers that are pushing for right-to-repair and environmental protection!<p>And pick up a new hobby if you are able. Support your local tech geeks if you can!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>yndoendo</author><text>Refurbish and repairing viable electronics does not help keep Apple&#x27;s, Google&#x27;s or any manufacturer&#x27;s stock high. Stock spikes high when the news organizations can talk about all the latest hardware and how sales doing well. Why would those companies CEOs want to hurt their golden package before exiting the industry?<p>One way to start penetrating right-to-repair would be to force device unlocking after ownership, device payed off, and end-of-life classification by the manufacture.<p>Next step would be for the manufacturers to require publishing open documents for 3rd party support without having to sign a NDA.<p>Both of those require reverse engineering. With camera technology being so complex, this is the feature that limits alternative OS usage with continual security updates after the manufactures give up.<p>Maybe rephrasing right-to-repair as &quot;consumer protection&quot; could help push it through better with less tech savvy consumers.</text></comment> |
24,316,990 | 24,315,837 | 1 | 3 | 24,315,239 | train | <story><title>Don't trust default timeouts</title><url>https://robertovitillo.com/default-timeouts/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>joosters</author><text>No! The danger in forcing programmers to pick a timeout is that they will pick the wrong value, most often a too short timeout, because they have been testing their software on a super-fast internal network and haven&#x27;t considered the poor users in the real world.<p>Case in point: Google&#x27;s Waze. If I have a slow mobile connection (e.g. edge or even 3g), Waze will repeatedly fail to load a driving route. It will think for a few seconds at most, then timeout and tell me there was a problem. If it only would wait a few more seconds to load, then the app would be useful. Instead, due to their crappy choice of timeouts, the app becomes useless.</text></comment> | <story><title>Don't trust default timeouts</title><url>https://robertovitillo.com/default-timeouts/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>emptysea</author><text>Related to HTTP timeouts, I’ve run into database clients without default timeouts. This meant even though the HTTP request was cut off after the timeout, the database request kept on working causing tons of slow database requests to be running on the server.<p>With Postgres you can use roles to set timeouts, maybe you want a longer timeout for crons, shorter for HTTP endpoints.<p>Sadly we were using mongo which doesn’t have equivalent functionality. Ended up monkey patching the client library to define a reasonable default timeout.</text></comment> |
13,950,678 | 13,950,532 | 1 | 2 | 13,949,986 | train | <story><title>Guide to the CoreCLR Source Code</title><url>http://mattwarren.org/2017/03/23/Hitchhikers-Guide-to-the-CoreCLR-Source-Code/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>giancarlostoro</author><text>&gt;&gt; Just over 2 years ago Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET framework,<p>Except they open-sourced a new .NET stack, not really the entire .NET Framework, .NET Core and .NET Framework are similar but not fully backwards compatible. I&#x27;ve been porting .NET Framework code to .NET Core and depending on how specialized your project is you may not always find the same libraries supporting your project. A project that perfectly compiles with .NET 2.0 will not just compile for .NET Core, at least not as easily as using a .NET Framework 2.0 project in .NET Framework 4.6. I love Microsoft and .NET but I think Core is executed poorly. You also have EntityFramework vs. EntityFramework Core which lacks features from EF which were deemed &quot;unused&quot; which bites some people in the face.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>manigandham</author><text>.NET Standard&#x2F;Core 2.0 will add back many APIs. It&#x27;ll be the real release of the newer framework, similar to how the original .NET Framework took until v2 to get things into shape.<p>.NET Standard is all about compatibility - so you can use that to determine which framework you can&#x2F;need to use. However .NET Core is a distinctly designed for cross-platform reach so it will be a break from .NET Framework in some ways - this is just a given, otherwise they would&#x27;ve just released another .NET Framework version instead of doing all this.</text></comment> | <story><title>Guide to the CoreCLR Source Code</title><url>http://mattwarren.org/2017/03/23/Hitchhikers-Guide-to-the-CoreCLR-Source-Code/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>giancarlostoro</author><text>&gt;&gt; Just over 2 years ago Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET framework,<p>Except they open-sourced a new .NET stack, not really the entire .NET Framework, .NET Core and .NET Framework are similar but not fully backwards compatible. I&#x27;ve been porting .NET Framework code to .NET Core and depending on how specialized your project is you may not always find the same libraries supporting your project. A project that perfectly compiles with .NET 2.0 will not just compile for .NET Core, at least not as easily as using a .NET Framework 2.0 project in .NET Framework 4.6. I love Microsoft and .NET but I think Core is executed poorly. You also have EntityFramework vs. EntityFramework Core which lacks features from EF which were deemed &quot;unused&quot; which bites some people in the face.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>matthewwarren</author><text>Well, it depends how you look at it, but you have a point.<p>I guess I could&#x27;ve written &#x27;Microsoft open-sourced the entire .NET stack&#x27;. I wanted to make it clear that they open-sourced everything, i.e. runtime, JIT, GC, base-class libraries, etc</text></comment> |
3,521,355 | 3,521,388 | 1 | 2 | 3,521,309 | train | <story><title>Jekyll Bootstrap: The Quickest Way to Blog with Jekyll</title><url>http://jekyllbootstrap.com/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>apsurd</author><text>I'm the maintainer of jekyll-bootstrap, nice to see this on HN!<p>My main focus is super-fast publishing (GitHub Pages) and technical blogging. I really could use some honest user feedback from technically-minded bloggers. What is most important to you? What features do you need to see?<p>I'm prioritizing API development. Simple and standardized api's put Open Source projects on the map imo. On that note I'm working on a theme and javascript api for JB.<p>Theme api allows designers to (easily) contribute great themes. This includes syntax highlighting (which is not themed yet =[)<p>Javascript plugin API will allow your blog to stretch its wings - arbitrary 3rd-party integration, optimizing content form (tabs, accordion, slides, etc) and..<p>I want to rollout a jekyll-blog network where users can log in, "follow", "like" etc just how tumblr, posterous, wordpress all have community integration.<p>Please let me know what is important to you. Thanks for your support!</text></comment> | <story><title>Jekyll Bootstrap: The Quickest Way to Blog with Jekyll</title><url>http://jekyllbootstrap.com/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>LogicX</author><text>Can you give us a breakdown/comparison to Octopress (<a href="http://www.octopress.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.octopress.org</a>)?<p>Which I use for <a href="http://www.MikeSchroll.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.MikeSchroll.com</a> and seems to have many similar goals (and also can be easily deployed to github pages, which is where I host mine)</text></comment> |
35,126,124 | 35,126,350 | 1 | 3 | 35,125,479 | train | <story><title>OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sent startup six-figure loan after SVB collapse</title><url>https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-sent-money-support-startup-payroll-svb-collapse-report-2023-3</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>gfsdgsfgfds</author><text>Just one anecdote of many. I&#x27;m a founder of a bootstrapped startup. We are&#x2F;were with SVB. On Thursday I tried to get a Brex cash account setup to move some operational cash there but it didn&#x27;t happen in time. I thought of wiring money out of SVB to my personal account but decided it felt too dodgy. Payroll for 2 weeks ending March 15th had to be funded through Gusto by tomorrow (March 13th). So I did all I could do without delaying payroll, dropped my salary to near zero and wired the payroll money to Gusto from my personal checking account. Being bootstrapped and low headcount this was possible. I&#x27;ll have to retrospectively do some loan paperwork I guess. It would have been a tougher comms to staff if I didn&#x27;t happen to have enough liquidity personally.</text></comment> | <story><title>OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sent startup six-figure loan after SVB collapse</title><url>https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-sent-money-support-startup-payroll-svb-collapse-report-2023-3</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>roboy</author><text>Q from outside the US: why is capital needed for payroll mid month? Are there some automatic insolvency processes if it is missed by a day? Why do the companies fall apart if there is just a few days of payment delay? (I mean it is obviously a shit situation, and having to tell the team payment might take a few days more than usual is bad, I am just surprised how 2 days of no-cash seem to wreak havoc…)</text></comment> |
2,367,058 | 2,367,073 | 1 | 2 | 2,366,552 | train | <story><title>Burned by Twitter, Developers Launch Distributed Microblogging Service</title><url>http://www.readwriteweb.com/cloud/2011/03/burned-by-twitters-api.php</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jmathai</author><text>Unfortunately, the only people who care about Twitter's recent actions are the nerds. At this point Twitter has too much momentum for the nerds to have much (if any) influence. Building "open" technology isn't an effective method of social engineering here. I wish I knew a better alternative but I don't.<p>That being said, I never understood why everyone (including pg) referred to Twitter as this great new protocol. It's 100% proprietary and this type of decision should have been easily predicted. SMTP and POP are protocols, Twitter and Facebook are websites with APIs.<p>But good for the developers. The seem passionate about the idea and are building it. Kudos.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kirubakaran</author><text>What about Twitter's actions that are yet to come?<p>And why not just try? What if the open platform succeeds? Even if the chance of success is 0.01%, it is worth trying. Also, a million such attempts by million such teams can fail. Only one team needs to succeed. Once.</text></comment> | <story><title>Burned by Twitter, Developers Launch Distributed Microblogging Service</title><url>http://www.readwriteweb.com/cloud/2011/03/burned-by-twitters-api.php</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jmathai</author><text>Unfortunately, the only people who care about Twitter's recent actions are the nerds. At this point Twitter has too much momentum for the nerds to have much (if any) influence. Building "open" technology isn't an effective method of social engineering here. I wish I knew a better alternative but I don't.<p>That being said, I never understood why everyone (including pg) referred to Twitter as this great new protocol. It's 100% proprietary and this type of decision should have been easily predicted. SMTP and POP are protocols, Twitter and Facebook are websites with APIs.<p>But good for the developers. The seem passionate about the idea and are building it. Kudos.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ddagradi</author><text>Twitter also started out as a niche product "for the nerds": early adopters drive mass adoption. The fact that Twitter is a firmly entrenched player doesn't stop us from competing with a better, simpler product.<p>I completely agree that "open" is not the great differentiator that will attract endless droves of users. While it makes the platform more attractive to developers and those who share this mindset, the average user's priority is neither owning their data nor using "open" technologies. What we do have, however, is the opportunity and enthusiasm to build something new and exciting with a community of greatly talented individuals.</text></comment> |
18,490,337 | 18,490,353 | 1 | 3 | 18,489,582 | train | <story><title>A Guide to Statistics on Historical Trends in Income Inequality</title><url>https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>digitalmaster</author><text>So looks like the 80s is when things start going south (increased income inequality) so I looked up who was president during that time, then looked at their wiki page to see their economic policy and found this gem of a quote:<p>&quot;Soon after taking office, Reagan began implementing sweeping new political and economic initiatives. His supply-side economic policies, dubbed &quot;Reaganomics&quot;, advocated tax rate reduction to spur economic growth, economic deregulation, and reduction in government spending.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rwcarlsen</author><text>As an engineer and computational scientist, drawing conclusions from correlations like this is absurd. Maybe Reagan was good for income inequality or maybe he was bad for it. Did you control for the other variables before drawing your conclusions? What about:<p>* The governments&#x27; legislation and economic policies in countries like the USSR, China, etc. in the 80s<p>* Changing technology especially communication technology<p>* Changing levels of education in the world.<p>* Lingering&#x2F;diminishing trends&#x2F;effects from wars like: Cold War, Korean War, Vietnam War, etc.<p>* Changing age distribution of humans in western countries,<p>And on and on. The world economy is extremely complex with heavy nonlinear feedback effects. How can you possibly state things like Reagan caused X w.r.t. the world wealth distribution with such confidence?</text></comment> | <story><title>A Guide to Statistics on Historical Trends in Income Inequality</title><url>https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>digitalmaster</author><text>So looks like the 80s is when things start going south (increased income inequality) so I looked up who was president during that time, then looked at their wiki page to see their economic policy and found this gem of a quote:<p>&quot;Soon after taking office, Reagan began implementing sweeping new political and economic initiatives. His supply-side economic policies, dubbed &quot;Reaganomics&quot;, advocated tax rate reduction to spur economic growth, economic deregulation, and reduction in government spending.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>roenxi</author><text>:P Ouch, going right for the partisans. Presidents are important people, but they are a lot more reactive than is generally accepted - what about the theory that Reagan was reforming economics <i>in response to</i> some deeper underlying problem [0]?<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assets.weforum.org&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;150710-US-petroleum-consumption-voxeu-chart.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assets.weforum.org&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2015&#x2F;07&#x2F;150710...</a></text></comment> |
32,335,254 | 32,334,175 | 1 | 2 | 32,332,577 | train | <story><title>US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force</title><url>https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/nationwide-anti-robocall-litigation-task-force-created-to-fight-estimated-29-8b-in-scam-call/article_e3dfd458-129f-11ed-b714-7b059dbcf5e7.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sonofhans</author><text>Some weeks ago I broke my iPhone and had it replaced. During the process I had to get re-authorized with Verizon. They tried to call my partner to get her permission, since she&#x27;s the account owner. Of course she never picked up the phone, because it was from an unknown caller.<p>The irony is incredible: the literal phone company cannot use their own product to contact their own customers, because they have let that product become a cesspool of spam.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>godelski</author><text>What&#x27;s also funny about this is that I&#x27;ve tried using Google&#x27;s screening service and I&#x27;ve literally never had an important caller answer the screening, they just go to voice mail instead. It&#x27;s a weird situation because everyone knows that no one picks up calls from unknown numbers but everyone also expects you to pick up for them. It&#x27;s kinda like when someone texts you &quot;Hi&quot; after exchanging numbers. No, text me &quot;Hi it&#x27;s so and so from xyz&quot; because I can&#x27;t differentiate you from spam without that. It&#x27;s amazing to me that with such a universal problem that people don&#x27;t adapt to the situation.</text></comment> | <story><title>US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force</title><url>https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/nationwide-anti-robocall-litigation-task-force-created-to-fight-estimated-29-8b-in-scam-call/article_e3dfd458-129f-11ed-b714-7b059dbcf5e7.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sonofhans</author><text>Some weeks ago I broke my iPhone and had it replaced. During the process I had to get re-authorized with Verizon. They tried to call my partner to get her permission, since she&#x27;s the account owner. Of course she never picked up the phone, because it was from an unknown caller.<p>The irony is incredible: the literal phone company cannot use their own product to contact their own customers, because they have let that product become a cesspool of spam.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>koheripbal</author><text>All the negative comments are focusing on the old-school providers, but it is worth noting that I get multiple daily spam calls on Google Fi service also.</text></comment> |
26,091,102 | 26,091,384 | 1 | 2 | 26,090,330 | train | <story><title>Elon Musk wants clean power. But Tesla's carrying Bitcoin's dirty baggage</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-crypto-currency-tesla-climate-insight/elon-musk-wants-clean-power-but-teslas-carrying-bitcoins-dirty-baggage-idUSKBN2AA193</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>keiferski</author><text>Is everyone that uses USD complicit in the actions the US uses to ensure it’s the global default currency?<p>I don’t really think so, so I’m not sure how Bitcoin is functionally any different.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tboyd47</author><text>Exactly.<p>How many wars started, how many countries destroyed, and how many livelihoods and families ruined for the USD?<p>No one wants to talk about that, yet we are supposed to wring our hands in grief over some extra computers left running. Give me a break.</text></comment> | <story><title>Elon Musk wants clean power. But Tesla's carrying Bitcoin's dirty baggage</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-crypto-currency-tesla-climate-insight/elon-musk-wants-clean-power-but-teslas-carrying-bitcoins-dirty-baggage-idUSKBN2AA193</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>keiferski</author><text>Is everyone that uses USD complicit in the actions the US uses to ensure it’s the global default currency?<p>I don’t really think so, so I’m not sure how Bitcoin is functionally any different.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>titzer</author><text>The link between Bitcoin and carbon emissions is absolutely crystal clear. The USD and American hegemony has a massive tangle of indirect dependencies through governments and bureaucracies, spy agencies, militaries, etc, none of which you can disavow yourself from.<p>Yet you can divest from Bitcoin by simply <i>not buying it</i>.<p>It&#x27;s the absolute perfect expression of our greed as a species. Ruining the planet for ephemeral bits. Bitcoin might as well be rebranded the &quot;anti carbon offset&quot;. You&#x27;re literally doing nothing but buying into a speculation market that is backed by only <i>bits</i>, and those bits are obtained at the cost of a supremely inefficient cryptographic process which has attracted massive electricity investment simply to make money. It has zero indirect benefit to society.</text></comment> |
36,558,583 | 36,558,705 | 1 | 2 | 36,558,428 | train | <story><title>Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?</title><url>https://movingthelimit.com/why-do-ivy-league-students-self-sabotage/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>josh_fyi</author><text>I studied at Harvard and the answer is that they want to pretend to be so smart and talented that they don&#x27;t <i>need</i> to work. The image is of the effete aristocrat who enjoys life without lifting a finger.<p>Think of George W. Bush: Got into Yale (Harvard too!) because his blue-blood line always did. Mediocre grades. Lots of alcohol and drugs. (Quit that later.) Avoided Vietnam with the cushiest fun job as a fighter pilot who never flies out of Texas skies (and mostly skipped that too). Led some companies funded by his rich family. President twice.<p>Who wouldn&#x27;t want that?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>akprasad</author><text>I believe you and the author are describing two different types of students. The author describes students who <i>want</i> to work and succeed but are unable to cope with &quot;real-world problems rather than contrived academic examples,&quot; whereas you seem to point to students who want instead to luxuriate in their self-perceived social class.</text></comment> | <story><title>Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?</title><url>https://movingthelimit.com/why-do-ivy-league-students-self-sabotage/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>josh_fyi</author><text>I studied at Harvard and the answer is that they want to pretend to be so smart and talented that they don&#x27;t <i>need</i> to work. The image is of the effete aristocrat who enjoys life without lifting a finger.<p>Think of George W. Bush: Got into Yale (Harvard too!) because his blue-blood line always did. Mediocre grades. Lots of alcohol and drugs. (Quit that later.) Avoided Vietnam with the cushiest fun job as a fighter pilot who never flies out of Texas skies (and mostly skipped that too). Led some companies funded by his rich family. President twice.<p>Who wouldn&#x27;t want that?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>avindroth</author><text>Feels like an oversimplification. My peers at Stanford felt like they were genuinely grappling with issues like imposter syndrome.</text></comment> |
6,815,573 | 6,813,902 | 1 | 2 | 6,813,546 | train | <story><title>IBM Research produces staph-killing polymers that leave healthy cells alone </title><url>http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/nanomedicine.shtml</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jrockway</author><text><i>In addition to the potential use for systemic delivery of drugs, scientists suggest that additional applications for these polymers could include adding them to every day personal and cleaning solutions.</i><p>Oh, good idea! Let&#x27;s also put it in the drinking water and feed it to livestock! Nothing like that has ever caused resistance problems in the past!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cwp</author><text>True, caution is warranted.<p>But I think you missed a key point in the article. Unlike antibiotics, these polymers disintegrate. The article isn&#x27;t clear on the mechanism–is it part of destroying a bacterium, decay over time or what?-but the implication is that they can be targeted to kill specific bacteria, without then escaping in to the wild to apply selection pressure on bacteria that aren&#x27;t threatening somebody&#x27;s life.<p>It&#x27;s not like these researchers are unaware of drug-resistant bacteria. The whole point of the statement you quote is that adding them to cleaning agents <i>won&#x27;t</i> breed resistant bacteria. They may be wrong, but they&#x27;re not stupid.</text></comment> | <story><title>IBM Research produces staph-killing polymers that leave healthy cells alone </title><url>http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/nanomedicine.shtml</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jrockway</author><text><i>In addition to the potential use for systemic delivery of drugs, scientists suggest that additional applications for these polymers could include adding them to every day personal and cleaning solutions.</i><p>Oh, good idea! Let&#x27;s also put it in the drinking water and feed it to livestock! Nothing like that has ever caused resistance problems in the past!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>troels</author><text><i>&quot;They try to mimic what the immune system does: the polymer attaches to the bacteria&#x27;s membrane and then facilitates destabilization of the membrane. It falls apart, everything falls out and there&#x27;s little opportunity for it to develop resistance to these polymers.&quot;</i><p>But yeah, caution might be a good idea.</text></comment> |
15,062,475 | 15,062,486 | 1 | 2 | 15,061,710 | train | <story><title>Aging Parents with Lots of Stuff, and Children Who Don’t Want It</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/your-money/aging-parents-with-lots-of-stuff-and-children-who-dont-want-it.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fspacef</author><text>Came to a similar epiphany when I had to move out on short notice. Since then I follow what I call the &quot;1 suit case philosophy&quot; - If I can&#x27;t fit all my stuff into one standard size suit case and fly, then I have too much stuff.</text></item><item><author>Powerofmene</author><text>It is true that culling the volume of things owned by parents can be a nightmare. I had to do this for my grandmother years ago and am starting to help parents with the same. It is amazing to me the volume of things they have held onto all these years for no discernible reason.<p>Years ago I committed to reducing the clutter in my life. It was such a pivotal moment. It was no longer necessary to move things from here to there in order to put up Christmas decorations, etc. I do think that overall we see value in things that truly have no monetary value all while keeping this item of &quot;value&quot; in the attic or in a box without seeing the light of day for decades. Things take a great deal of time and energy and for me personally, there seemed to be a connection between a disorganized living space with a disorganized mind&#x2F;life. I cleaned all of that up and found I had better health, had time for the things I enjoy most in life, and was far happier than I would have imagined by having &quot;less.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>barrkel</author><text>That&#x27;s fine if you don&#x27;t have any interests that involve the physical world.<p>My tool cabinet has about $4000 in tools at this point, many motorcycle-specific ordered from abroad and not easily borrowed or bought at short notice.</text></comment> | <story><title>Aging Parents with Lots of Stuff, and Children Who Don’t Want It</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/your-money/aging-parents-with-lots-of-stuff-and-children-who-dont-want-it.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fspacef</author><text>Came to a similar epiphany when I had to move out on short notice. Since then I follow what I call the &quot;1 suit case philosophy&quot; - If I can&#x27;t fit all my stuff into one standard size suit case and fly, then I have too much stuff.</text></item><item><author>Powerofmene</author><text>It is true that culling the volume of things owned by parents can be a nightmare. I had to do this for my grandmother years ago and am starting to help parents with the same. It is amazing to me the volume of things they have held onto all these years for no discernible reason.<p>Years ago I committed to reducing the clutter in my life. It was such a pivotal moment. It was no longer necessary to move things from here to there in order to put up Christmas decorations, etc. I do think that overall we see value in things that truly have no monetary value all while keeping this item of &quot;value&quot; in the attic or in a box without seeing the light of day for decades. Things take a great deal of time and energy and for me personally, there seemed to be a connection between a disorganized living space with a disorganized mind&#x2F;life. I cleaned all of that up and found I had better health, had time for the things I enjoy most in life, and was far happier than I would have imagined by having &quot;less.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>y4mi</author><text>so you&#x27;re sleeping on the floor, do sports in your work clothing and always eat out? they&#x27;d sure as hell wouldn&#x27;t allow you to back your kitchen knives after all. or any of your cooking utensils for that matter.<p>a tv for gaming&#x2F;television is also out of the question, they&#x27;d never let you take that along in your suitcase.<p>doesn&#x27;t sound like a life i&#x27;d like to be honest.<p>in all seriousness, its perfectly fine to have stuff. just ask yourself before you buy it, wherever you&#x27;ll still be using it in ~12 month or so. otherwise, its probably just a fad you shouldn&#x27;t spent money on.</text></comment> |
33,748,628 | 33,748,528 | 1 | 2 | 33,743,003 | train | <story><title>Google, please do something with your ads and SEO-spam</title><url>https://mdubakov.medium.com/google-please-do-something-with-your-ads-and-seo-spam-99a6b039354c</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bombolo</author><text>I wish google had a feature to permanently ban domains from search results.</text></item><item><author>kevin_thibedeau</author><text>They have a fix already and applied it to the Wikipedia clones. They intentionally ignore other content scrapers because they drive ad impressions.</text></item><item><author>pupppet</author><text>What really ticks me off are all these sites clearly scraping content from Stack Overflow that somehow end up near the top of the search results. How is there not an automated fix for this. Lemme help you out with this Googlers: If site content A == site content B, pagerank = -1.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kdot</author><text>They had a personal block list at one point... but removed it.</text></comment> | <story><title>Google, please do something with your ads and SEO-spam</title><url>https://mdubakov.medium.com/google-please-do-something-with-your-ads-and-seo-spam-99a6b039354c</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bombolo</author><text>I wish google had a feature to permanently ban domains from search results.</text></item><item><author>kevin_thibedeau</author><text>They have a fix already and applied it to the Wikipedia clones. They intentionally ignore other content scrapers because they drive ad impressions.</text></item><item><author>pupppet</author><text>What really ticks me off are all these sites clearly scraping content from Stack Overflow that somehow end up near the top of the search results. How is there not an automated fix for this. Lemme help you out with this Googlers: If site content A == site content B, pagerank = -1.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>prolyxis</author><text>There are browser add-ons that can do this (for example, uBlacklist).</text></comment> |
4,925,082 | 4,924,364 | 1 | 2 | 4,923,530 | train | <story><title>Brython - Python to Javascript translator</title><url>http://www.brython.info/index_en.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>fijal</author><text>I'm genuinely shocked that this made it to the top of hackernews. I would expect better. While the idea of having the Python interpreter in the browser is very likely better than having a compiler Python -&#62; JS (if we care about Python), the implementation here is both half assed and really bad. It takes quite a bit of effort to create a python interpreter that can be called python. This is nowhere near there. On top of it double-interpretation in dynamic languages is very slow and I doubt someone is willing to pay that price here. A good example of low quality is here:<p><a href="http://code.google.com/p/brython/source/browse/trunk/py_classes.js#140" rel="nofollow">http://code.google.com/p/brython/source/browse/trunk/py_clas...</a><p>this is both incorrect (exceptions are propagated, <a href="http://paste.pound-python.org/show/28457/" rel="nofollow">http://paste.pound-python.org/show/28457/</a>) and has wrong complexity. It's not even a dict at all!</text></comment> | <story><title>Brython - Python to Javascript translator</title><url>http://www.brython.info/index_en.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>madhadron</author><text>If you want to do this kind of thing on the server side, Python provides enough introspection to turn functions in a live Python image into JavaScript. Here's a minimal example I tossed together a while back:<p><a href="https://gist.github.com/50d706081074aed8fcf6" rel="nofollow">https://gist.github.com/50d706081074aed8fcf6</a><p>I have a bunch of notes somewhere on translating a big hunk of the basic language, including how to generate continuation passing style code in JavaScript from less ghastly Python.<p>The difficulty is providing all the class semantics and the standard library.</text></comment> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.