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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
25,232,752 | 25,232,748 | 1 | 2 | 25,229,050 | train | <story><title>Glucose metabolism responds to perceived sugar intake more than actual intake</title><url>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72501-w?mc_cid=2b33d59ff8&mc_eid=e358e73db6</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>novok</author><text>No it&#x27;s far from common knowledge, if the way you find out is through some university professor.<p>My understanding is &#x2F; was that fake sugars do not have response and do not cause you to get fat, while you&#x27;ve demonstrated there is an insulin response which is pretty major.<p>Now I have to figure out another way to deal with the bitterness of coffee other than my current 2 packets of stevia method.</text></item><item><author>specialist</author><text>I thought this was common knowledge. Late 80s, my bro tech&#x27;d for his prof, who was researching artificial sweeteners, esp aspartame. He told me a burger w&#x2F; diet coke was worse than normal coke, because the excess insulin produced will then metabolize whatever useful protein is found into fat. He also said the fake sugars were more addictive, which I totally believe.</text></item><item><author>gazzini</author><text>I’m not diabetic, but I’m using a CGM for a few weeks, out of curiosity.<p>My only surprising finding was that diet sodas don’t spike my glucose, but they do crash it, probably because my insulin response is triggered by perceived sweetness.</text></item><item><author>1123581321</author><text>I&#x27;m type 1. I used to believe artificial sweeteners caused the body to raise its blood sugar because the drink is perceived to be sweet, but when I got a CGM I was able to verify that they do not. I&#x27;d be interested in a switched label test with CGMs and T1s because a potential insulin response would be absent.<p>I realize this study is qualified (type 2, preprandial &lt; 200mgdl, lab setting, fake labels, short term) and laud the potential connection between stress and elevated fasting glucose (seems similar to the connection between sleep and elevated glucose.) I&#x27;ve read the study and am just adding a personal anecdote to the thread.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cosmie</author><text>If you&#x27;re using a sweetener to cut the bitterness (rather than to <i>add</i> sweetness), then you may enjoy cold-brewed coffee. Cold water is far less effective than hot water at extracting tannins from coffee grounds, which are the primary source of the bitterness in coffee. So cold-brewed coffee tends to be naturally less bitter, as a result.<p>Bonus points in that it&#x27;s less acidic, as well. And in case anyone else is as oblivious as I originally was, &quot;cold-brewed&quot; doesn&#x27;t actually have to equate to cold coffee. You end up with a coffee concentrate, which you dilute with water to preference (taste, caffeine content, etc). You can dilute a cup with boiling water to get a hot cup of (non-bitter) coffee just as easily as you can dilute it with ice water for a cold, ice coffee.</text></comment> | <story><title>Glucose metabolism responds to perceived sugar intake more than actual intake</title><url>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72501-w?mc_cid=2b33d59ff8&mc_eid=e358e73db6</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>novok</author><text>No it&#x27;s far from common knowledge, if the way you find out is through some university professor.<p>My understanding is &#x2F; was that fake sugars do not have response and do not cause you to get fat, while you&#x27;ve demonstrated there is an insulin response which is pretty major.<p>Now I have to figure out another way to deal with the bitterness of coffee other than my current 2 packets of stevia method.</text></item><item><author>specialist</author><text>I thought this was common knowledge. Late 80s, my bro tech&#x27;d for his prof, who was researching artificial sweeteners, esp aspartame. He told me a burger w&#x2F; diet coke was worse than normal coke, because the excess insulin produced will then metabolize whatever useful protein is found into fat. He also said the fake sugars were more addictive, which I totally believe.</text></item><item><author>gazzini</author><text>I’m not diabetic, but I’m using a CGM for a few weeks, out of curiosity.<p>My only surprising finding was that diet sodas don’t spike my glucose, but they do crash it, probably because my insulin response is triggered by perceived sweetness.</text></item><item><author>1123581321</author><text>I&#x27;m type 1. I used to believe artificial sweeteners caused the body to raise its blood sugar because the drink is perceived to be sweet, but when I got a CGM I was able to verify that they do not. I&#x27;d be interested in a switched label test with CGMs and T1s because a potential insulin response would be absent.<p>I realize this study is qualified (type 2, preprandial &lt; 200mgdl, lab setting, fake labels, short term) and laud the potential connection between stress and elevated fasting glucose (seems similar to the connection between sleep and elevated glucose.) I&#x27;ve read the study and am just adding a personal anecdote to the thread.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Spooky23</author><text>Trade sugar for good cream. Skip the fake dairy crap like soy&#x2F;oat&#x2F;etc. Find a creamy half and half or even heavy cream cut with half and half. A little goes a long way. I put two tablespoons in a 30oz travel cup.<p>I live in the northeast and find the Aldi brand heavy cream is fabulous and cheap. It is processed at ultra dairy in Syracuse, NY, shop around for a brand you like, but use the plant codes on the box to figure out who makes it — each dairy is different.</text></comment> |
40,155,096 | 40,155,131 | 1 | 3 | 40,148,729 | train | <story><title>McKinsey Under Criminal Investigation over Opioid-Related Consulting</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/mckinsey-faces-criminal-probe-over-opioid-related-consulting-a3f816d4</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pembrook</author><text>On the contrary, this just affirms their value-add.<p>As a decision maker, the reason you would outsource decision-making to 23-year old PowerPoint kids is so you aren’t responsible for the consequences of your actions.<p>“Darn, that strategy ended up killing people?? Too bad evil McKinsey told me to do that! I’m just a lowly corporate officer. I wouldn’t have killed all those people if they didn’t show us those PowerPoint slides! I got duped like the rest of you!”<p><i>[goes home and counts money]</i></text></item><item><author>JCM9</author><text>Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for McKinsey. They’ve gone from scandal to scandal over the last 10 years or so and their once vaunted reputation is now in shambles. They deserve whatever is coming to them here. There are certainly some decent folks that have passed through McKinsey but the firm is, ironically, in desperate need of some good advice on how to run a company.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>marban</author><text>Reminds me of <i>&quot;What people really want from the automated adding machine is not more accurate sums, but a box into which they may place their responsibility.&quot;</i></text></comment> | <story><title>McKinsey Under Criminal Investigation over Opioid-Related Consulting</title><url>https://www.wsj.com/articles/mckinsey-faces-criminal-probe-over-opioid-related-consulting-a3f816d4</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pembrook</author><text>On the contrary, this just affirms their value-add.<p>As a decision maker, the reason you would outsource decision-making to 23-year old PowerPoint kids is so you aren’t responsible for the consequences of your actions.<p>“Darn, that strategy ended up killing people?? Too bad evil McKinsey told me to do that! I’m just a lowly corporate officer. I wouldn’t have killed all those people if they didn’t show us those PowerPoint slides! I got duped like the rest of you!”<p><i>[goes home and counts money]</i></text></item><item><author>JCM9</author><text>Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for McKinsey. They’ve gone from scandal to scandal over the last 10 years or so and their once vaunted reputation is now in shambles. They deserve whatever is coming to them here. There are certainly some decent folks that have passed through McKinsey but the firm is, ironically, in desperate need of some good advice on how to run a company.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>croes</author><text>Reminds me of<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Schie%C3%9Fbefehl" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Schie%C3%9Fbefehl</a></text></comment> |
24,440,750 | 24,437,798 | 1 | 3 | 24,437,459 | train | <story><title>LLVM merges machine function splitter for reduction in TLB misses</title><url>https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-August/144012.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>account42</author><text>In their comparisons they explain that the existing Hot Cold Split creates new functions for the cold parts which brings overheads due to calling conventions and exception handling. Their new method avoids that by using simple jumps.<p>I wish compilers were able to optimize functions boundaries for visible but not inlined better so they could optimize those function call overheads away automatically. There is no reason for a compiler to limit itself to the system ABI for completely internal functions.<p>Besides leaving values in the registers they are already in instead of moving them to where the ABI says they should be, this could enable passing C++ objects such as std::unique_ptr in registers where the current ABI forbids this. Or to eliminate nop destructors for objects that are always moved from in the called functions.<p>In general, I think compilers should see function boundaries in the source code as a mere hint when it comes to code generation just like they already do with the register keyword.<p>Is there any existing compiler work to optimize function calls where the implementation and all uses are visible in the translation unit?</text></comment> | <story><title>LLVM merges machine function splitter for reduction in TLB misses</title><url>https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-August/144012.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>MaxBarraclough</author><text>&gt; Google engineers found a 2.33% runtime improvement with a ~32% reduction in iTLB and sTLB misses<p>Not bad. Presumably this will benefit every compiler that uses LLVM, not just Clang.</text></comment> |
13,834,407 | 13,832,530 | 1 | 2 | 13,832,217 | train | <story><title>Putting the Times’s First Email Address to Bed</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/insider/putting-the-timess-first-email-address-to-bed.html?_r=0</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>comex</author><text>In the article&#x27;s comments section, a notable comment from the Peter Lewis mentioned in the article:<p><i>John, let the record show that The Times also initially turned down my free offer of the nytimes.com domain, which I had registered. A couple of years later they decided this internet thing was perhaps more than a fad, and demanded that I transfer ownership, which I willingly did. They still haven&#x27;t reimbursed me for the registration fee :-)</i></text></comment> | <story><title>Putting the Times’s First Email Address to Bed</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/insider/putting-the-timess-first-email-address-to-bed.html?_r=0</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>walshemj</author><text>Quite sweet in way that in 94&#x2F;95 the NYT had not a clue about mail when some businesses had been running it for well over a decade by that point.</text></comment> |
12,518,438 | 12,518,459 | 1 | 3 | 12,517,884 | train | <story><title>Is your SSH password revealed when you attempt to connect to the wrong server?</title><url>http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/309938/is-your-ssh-password-revealed-when-you-attempt-to-connect-to-the-wrong-server</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>userbinator</author><text>I find this common &quot;wisdom&quot; or &quot;best practice&quot; questionable. Something to think about:<p>If I use a password, a suitably designed client can have absolutely no trace of my credential after it has been used.<p>If I use a key&#x2F;certificate, that credential must be stored <i>somewhere</i> on the client, and even in encrypted form, it <i>exists</i> in persistent storage.</text></item><item><author>alexk</author><text>I highly recommend to move off password-based SSH at all in favor of SSH keys or (even better, certificates).<p>Here are some projects to help you roll out new infrastructure without SSH passwords:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gravitational&#x2F;teleport" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gravitational&#x2F;teleport</a> ( I work on this one with our team) and
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Netflix&#x2F;bless" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Netflix&#x2F;bless</a> (heard great things about it, especially if you are using AWS)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>eli</author><text>If someone is able to steal my private key file, then they have probably compromised my computer and could just as well install a keylogger.</text></comment> | <story><title>Is your SSH password revealed when you attempt to connect to the wrong server?</title><url>http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/309938/is-your-ssh-password-revealed-when-you-attempt-to-connect-to-the-wrong-server</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>userbinator</author><text>I find this common &quot;wisdom&quot; or &quot;best practice&quot; questionable. Something to think about:<p>If I use a password, a suitably designed client can have absolutely no trace of my credential after it has been used.<p>If I use a key&#x2F;certificate, that credential must be stored <i>somewhere</i> on the client, and even in encrypted form, it <i>exists</i> in persistent storage.</text></item><item><author>alexk</author><text>I highly recommend to move off password-based SSH at all in favor of SSH keys or (even better, certificates).<p>Here are some projects to help you roll out new infrastructure without SSH passwords:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gravitational&#x2F;teleport" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gravitational&#x2F;teleport</a> ( I work on this one with our team) and
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Netflix&#x2F;bless" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;Netflix&#x2F;bless</a> (heard great things about it, especially if you are using AWS)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sfifs</author><text>Well you can always keep your keys in a removable drive rather than on persistent storage in your client device.<p>If you can&#x27;t trust your client device, you probably have bigger issues with either method - for instance, can you trust that the client is not logging all keystrokes?</text></comment> |
5,645,471 | 5,644,034 | 1 | 3 | 5,643,532 | train | <story><title>Manchester City Council</title><url>http://www.manchester.gov.uk/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>DigitalSea</author><text>I applaud the change and thinking outside of the box, but the Manchester City Council website looks like a $45 Wordpress theme off of Themeforest. The slider appears to offer no value to the site other than taking up a massive amount of room without really justifying its existence. I'm not a designer, I'm a developer and I am struggling to understand the reasoning behind that slider.<p>While I agree that the trendy look of the site is better than most Government sites, it tries too hard to the point the change and potential this site could have had is gone. The reason Government websites are usually ugly is not because Government's are afraid of change or can't justify the cash it's because there are content accessibility guidelines to adhere too. And when you've got to make your content accessible to people with disabilities well your options can be somewhat limited (especially colour use).<p>This is the perfect example of everything wrong with modern web design. Instead of thinking, "What can we NOT add to this site design" designers seem to be thinking, "How many full screen images, rounded corners, parallax effects, CSS animations, Javascript effects and large amounts of custom fonts can we cram into this site?"<p>I can foresee a lot of issues for people with eyesight problems on this site, aren't Governments supposed to adhere to WCAG rules and a lot more stricter than non-Government websites do? The images don't even have alt tags on them, Web Developer common sense rule #1 — Always put alt tags on images, especially when they're being used as icons in content sections, wow.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hglaser</author><text>What a predictable top comment for a Hacker News thread. :(<p>A government website showcases a design that is <i>leaps and bounds</i> ahead of <i>any other government site we can think of</i>, and HN's top comment casually dismisses it.<p>To rewrite something you said: "This is the perfect example of everything wrong with [HN comments]."<p>I, for one, am floored that someone in city government was able to rise above the bureaucracy and ship something truly useful and delightful for citizens. I would love nothing more than to meet the people involved and buy them a pint. Well done, guys.</text></comment> | <story><title>Manchester City Council</title><url>http://www.manchester.gov.uk/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>DigitalSea</author><text>I applaud the change and thinking outside of the box, but the Manchester City Council website looks like a $45 Wordpress theme off of Themeforest. The slider appears to offer no value to the site other than taking up a massive amount of room without really justifying its existence. I'm not a designer, I'm a developer and I am struggling to understand the reasoning behind that slider.<p>While I agree that the trendy look of the site is better than most Government sites, it tries too hard to the point the change and potential this site could have had is gone. The reason Government websites are usually ugly is not because Government's are afraid of change or can't justify the cash it's because there are content accessibility guidelines to adhere too. And when you've got to make your content accessible to people with disabilities well your options can be somewhat limited (especially colour use).<p>This is the perfect example of everything wrong with modern web design. Instead of thinking, "What can we NOT add to this site design" designers seem to be thinking, "How many full screen images, rounded corners, parallax effects, CSS animations, Javascript effects and large amounts of custom fonts can we cram into this site?"<p>I can foresee a lot of issues for people with eyesight problems on this site, aren't Governments supposed to adhere to WCAG rules and a lot more stricter than non-Government websites do? The images don't even have alt tags on them, Web Developer common sense rule #1 — Always put alt tags on images, especially when they're being used as icons in content sections, wow.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>thegoodlab</author><text>&#62;This is the perfect example of everything wrong with modern web design.<p>This seems to be quite the hyperbole. Sure, it might over use some modern design trends, but there is nothing inherently wrong with that. Also, what is wrong with themes on themeforest? Many are built with great design in mind.<p>More than anything govt. sites are not friendly, don't organize their content well, and do a horrible job at engaging their users. I would say this site does all of three, making it <i>at least</i> a decently designed and well built site.</text></comment> |
28,947,007 | 28,946,946 | 1 | 3 | 28,946,392 | train | <story><title>Gov Parson pushes to prosecute reporter who found security flaw in state site</title><url>https://missouriindependent.com/2021/10/21/parson-doubles-down-on-push-to-prosecute-reporter-who-found-security-flaw-in-state-site/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Acutulus</author><text>I find the article title kind of curious, given that it states Parson has &quot;doubled down&quot; which suggests that the video the article references is an active effort on Parson&#x27;s part. It then goes on to state that the video was produced by a PAC Parson created but doesn&#x27;t give direct input to. Comes off as unnecessarily inflammatory to me I suppose.<p>Having said that, this situation in particular really tests my willingness to assume good faith on the part of the governor and his body of advisors. Is he legitimately without a single person close to him that could inform him of how misguided this line of aggression is, and how fortunate it was that the individual who identified the security problem acted in such a helpful manner? On top of that he assigned the Missouri State Highway Patrol to investigate, because given his perceived severity of the situation that&#x27;s the best agency at his disposal? It all just seems bananas.<p>I try not to assume that totally inane actions from elected officials are exclusively the result of political calculus, and I suppose I don&#x27;t have any evidence to assume that&#x27;s the case here either. But I&#x27;m at a loss as to how this situation could blossom into something so ridiculous.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nrmitchi</author><text>This situation is keeping his name in the spotlight, and people will, in general, be more likely to vote for names that they recognize.<p>I don&#x27;t believe that there is any other reason here.</text></comment> | <story><title>Gov Parson pushes to prosecute reporter who found security flaw in state site</title><url>https://missouriindependent.com/2021/10/21/parson-doubles-down-on-push-to-prosecute-reporter-who-found-security-flaw-in-state-site/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Acutulus</author><text>I find the article title kind of curious, given that it states Parson has &quot;doubled down&quot; which suggests that the video the article references is an active effort on Parson&#x27;s part. It then goes on to state that the video was produced by a PAC Parson created but doesn&#x27;t give direct input to. Comes off as unnecessarily inflammatory to me I suppose.<p>Having said that, this situation in particular really tests my willingness to assume good faith on the part of the governor and his body of advisors. Is he legitimately without a single person close to him that could inform him of how misguided this line of aggression is, and how fortunate it was that the individual who identified the security problem acted in such a helpful manner? On top of that he assigned the Missouri State Highway Patrol to investigate, because given his perceived severity of the situation that&#x27;s the best agency at his disposal? It all just seems bananas.<p>I try not to assume that totally inane actions from elected officials are exclusively the result of political calculus, and I suppose I don&#x27;t have any evidence to assume that&#x27;s the case here either. But I&#x27;m at a loss as to how this situation could blossom into something so ridiculous.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>UncleOxidant</author><text>&gt; is he legitimately without a single person close to him that could inform him of how misguided this line of aggression is<p>I would not be surprised if that is the case. Or if he does have such a person he is only hearing what he wants to hear.</text></comment> |
26,131,640 | 26,131,726 | 1 | 2 | 26,131,258 | train | <story><title>Do Adults Really Not Remember School Sucked?</title><url>https://www.ianwelsh.net/do-adults-really-not-remember-school-sucked/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Barrin92</author><text>This take is so common on HN but I dislike it so much. First off, comparing not having to go to school with the pandemic situation is wrong because kids can&#x27;t physically meet outside of school either, so that sucks in an entirely different way and is a bad comparison.<p>Secondly though, school is not terrible for everyone. I didn&#x27;t have a great household. My parents didn&#x27;t read me books. I made a lot of friends in school, and I had good teachers who helped me chosing an education and career path my parents wouldn&#x27;t have offered me. So getting out of my home environment into a different social one was vital.<p>I&#x27;d call the authors attitude the &#x27;nerdy privileged kid&#x27; experience, who most likely had bad social interactions as well as a household educated and affluent enough to get a rich education outside of the education system. It&#x27;s not how it works for many, probably most kids.<p>There&#x27;s also an important aspect implicitly ignored in the article. That a lot of parents <i>who cannot work from home</i>, like say cashiers or construction workers who still have to go out, do not even really know right now how to manage their kids. People like that rely on having a school system that works.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kinghtown</author><text>Totally agree with this. My parents were good in some ways but in terms of anything related to academics they were both in the negative. They never helped me with my homework even a single time growing up.. homeschooling with them would have been.. awkward.<p>Education definitely needs to reform, speaking here in terms of North America, but HN is not a a good sample pool for the general public.<p>I’m so jealous of people from good families. Like when I hear so and sos parents went to Yale so they did to.. here I am like: my dad sold drugs :&#x2F;<p>Don’t all of you go about underestimating your good luck.</text></comment> | <story><title>Do Adults Really Not Remember School Sucked?</title><url>https://www.ianwelsh.net/do-adults-really-not-remember-school-sucked/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Barrin92</author><text>This take is so common on HN but I dislike it so much. First off, comparing not having to go to school with the pandemic situation is wrong because kids can&#x27;t physically meet outside of school either, so that sucks in an entirely different way and is a bad comparison.<p>Secondly though, school is not terrible for everyone. I didn&#x27;t have a great household. My parents didn&#x27;t read me books. I made a lot of friends in school, and I had good teachers who helped me chosing an education and career path my parents wouldn&#x27;t have offered me. So getting out of my home environment into a different social one was vital.<p>I&#x27;d call the authors attitude the &#x27;nerdy privileged kid&#x27; experience, who most likely had bad social interactions as well as a household educated and affluent enough to get a rich education outside of the education system. It&#x27;s not how it works for many, probably most kids.<p>There&#x27;s also an important aspect implicitly ignored in the article. That a lot of parents <i>who cannot work from home</i>, like say cashiers or construction workers who still have to go out, do not even really know right now how to manage their kids. People like that rely on having a school system that works.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>armada651</author><text>His argument about knowledge retention also completely misses the mark. My high school chemistry teacher said it best when asked why we needed to learn stuff we&#x27;d just forget about after the exam:<p>&quot;I don&#x27;t expect you to remember anything you learned in my classes after you leave high school, but when a time comes later in life that you need this knowledge you&#x27;ll know how to learn it again.&quot;<p>It&#x27;s not about being able to recite all the answers to the exam questions at any given time. It&#x27;s about having gone through the learning process.</text></comment> |
16,678,141 | 16,675,177 | 1 | 2 | 16,675,052 | train | <story><title>I would like to share 500 Data Structure and Algorithms problems</title><text>You can find around 500+ data structure and algorithms problems here (http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techiedelight.com&#x2F;list-of-problems&#x2F;) that are helpful to improve your algorithmic skills and also to crack coding interview of top tech companies.<p>From: Discussion on reddit
https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;learnprogramming&#x2F;comments&#x2F;86seey&#x2F;i_would_like_to_share_500_data_structure_and&#x2F;</text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bigdido</author><text>The best such site IMO: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;rosettacode.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Category:Programming_Tasks" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;rosettacode.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Category:Programming_Tasks</a></text></comment> | <story><title>I would like to share 500 Data Structure and Algorithms problems</title><text>You can find around 500+ data structure and algorithms problems here (http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techiedelight.com&#x2F;list-of-problems&#x2F;) that are helpful to improve your algorithmic skills and also to crack coding interview of top tech companies.<p>From: Discussion on reddit
https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;learnprogramming&#x2F;comments&#x2F;86seey&#x2F;i_would_like_to_share_500_data_structure_and&#x2F;</text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>eesmith</author><text>In <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techiedelight.com&#x2F;count-set-bits-using-lookup-table&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techiedelight.com&#x2F;count-set-bits-using-lookup-tab...</a> , the solution does not appear to be portable, that is, it uses the right shift of a signed number, and the C specification says (from <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.open-std.org&#x2F;jtc1&#x2F;sc22&#x2F;wg14&#x2F;www&#x2F;docs&#x2F;n1336.pdf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.open-std.org&#x2F;jtc1&#x2F;sc22&#x2F;wg14&#x2F;www&#x2F;docs&#x2F;n1336.pdf</a> )<p>&gt; The result of E1 &gt;&gt; E2 is E1 right-shifted E2 bit positions. ... If E1 has a signed type and a negative value, the resulting value is implementation-defined.<p>In practice it isn&#x27;t a concern, as the most common compilers (gcc, clang, MSVC++) do what we expect.</text></comment> |
22,386,975 | 22,386,899 | 1 | 3 | 22,386,440 | train | <story><title>Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study</title><url>https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bduerst</author><text>I worked in the EMR software industry and have certifications that involve hospital &amp; lab billing, among others. I&#x27;ve been on site with healthcare providers, and there are entire buildings full of people whose job it is just to code and scrub claims, and cover disputes&#x2F;negotiations with private insurance providers.<p>Consumers do not see it because it&#x27;s typically off-site from the main hospital care facilities, but believe me, the administrative savings potential is real.</text></item><item><author>mgraczyk</author><text>In the study, nearly all the computed savings comes from two sources.<p>1. Decrease in pharmaceutical costs as a result of better bargaining power.<p>2. Decrease in administrative overhead, calculated by extrapolating the overhead in medicare to the entire US healthcare economy.<p>I don&#x27;t have an informed opinion on either of these estimates, but my intuition is that #1 seems reasonable while #2 seems unlikely. The justifications they give include lower executive salaries and decreased fraud. From what I have been told by healthcare professionals, medicare has less incentive to negotiate cost, less incentive to investigate fraud, and therefore lower administrative cost.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mochomocha</author><text>I once worked at a US biotech startup getting paid by insurers where we would build ML models just to reverse-engineer the inconsistencies of CPT coding &amp; claim reimbursement by insurers &amp; hospitals so we could get paid. Basically trying to automate &quot;learn that Karen at insurer X processing claims wiht code Y from hospital Z usually decides to reimburse $XX&quot;. This whole idea of &quot;free market is more efficient for healthcare&quot; has to die. All the incentives are backwards. For example: insurers don&#x27;t want efficient claim processing because that means less revenues for them.</text></comment> | <story><title>Single-payer healthcare would save $450B and 68k lives a year: study</title><url>https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bduerst</author><text>I worked in the EMR software industry and have certifications that involve hospital &amp; lab billing, among others. I&#x27;ve been on site with healthcare providers, and there are entire buildings full of people whose job it is just to code and scrub claims, and cover disputes&#x2F;negotiations with private insurance providers.<p>Consumers do not see it because it&#x27;s typically off-site from the main hospital care facilities, but believe me, the administrative savings potential is real.</text></item><item><author>mgraczyk</author><text>In the study, nearly all the computed savings comes from two sources.<p>1. Decrease in pharmaceutical costs as a result of better bargaining power.<p>2. Decrease in administrative overhead, calculated by extrapolating the overhead in medicare to the entire US healthcare economy.<p>I don&#x27;t have an informed opinion on either of these estimates, but my intuition is that #1 seems reasonable while #2 seems unlikely. The justifications they give include lower executive salaries and decreased fraud. From what I have been told by healthcare professionals, medicare has less incentive to negotiate cost, less incentive to investigate fraud, and therefore lower administrative cost.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>anonsivalley652</author><text>IIRC, coding is on the order of a million jobs across insurance, hospitals and doctor offices. Then there&#x27;s all the other non-value-add activities of negotiating of prices, authorizing&#x2F;denying treatment, billing and management. Oh and there&#x27;s going through bankruptcy while you have cancer... I forgot that one.</text></comment> |
1,738,751 | 1,738,763 | 1 | 2 | 1,738,681 | train | <story><title>IE9 team responds to Reddit questions: reddit tl;dr version</title><url>http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/dk3s0/the_ie9_team_responds_to_your_questions/c10szx5</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>niyazpk</author><text>Mark my words, the decision of not to making IE9 compatible with XP will lead to thousands of hours of developer time and millions of dollars wasted in fixing browser compatibility issues. This will just be another reincarnation of the IE6 effect.<p>BTW the tl;dr version is an excellent summary. It is a warning to all the marketing people out there that the internet will make a bare truth tl;dr version of any sugarcoated market-speak you publish.</text></comment> | <story><title>IE9 team responds to Reddit questions: reddit tl;dr version</title><url>http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/dk3s0/the_ie9_team_responds_to_your_questions/c10szx5</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>cubicle67</author><text>in response to a question about websockets and friends:<p><i>Our approach when deciding what technologies to support starts with data. There are three things we consider: What are developers actually doing on the web today? What do developers want to do in the future? &#60;snip&#62;
We started by building a tool to look at the top 7000 sites and what web APIs they used.</i><p>Isn't this arse about? Isn't it kind of hard to use new tech if it isn't supported. I'd love to be able to use some of the new HTML5 things, but IE is holding us back<p><i>XP is a platform that doesn't allow for the performance characteristics of a modern web experience.</i><p>WTF sort of a response is that? There's some good answers in there, but this sort of spin-driven markety rhubarb works so hard to hide it. Why not just say that IE9 makes use of features available in Vista and 7, but not in XP.</text></comment> |
27,562,463 | 27,562,111 | 1 | 3 | 27,559,804 | train | <story><title>North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering</title><url>https://ij.org/press-release/north-carolina-board-tells-retired-engineer-he-cant-talk-about-engineering/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tablespoon</author><text>&gt; Just the concept of “jaywalking” as a punishable offense is revolting to me.<p>It&#x27;s a required compromise to allow pedestrians and high-speed automobile traffic to coexist. This unfairly-dead comment has a good discussion: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27561530" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27561530</a><p>Get rid of it, and you&#x27;ll either have more pedestrians getting run over (e.g. some distracted guy on his cell phone accidentially rushing out in front of some car, getting killed in the process and traumatizing some driver) or you&#x27;ll have to lower speed limits, which would make longer-distance travel more inefficient and inconvenient.</text></item><item><author>Swenrekcah</author><text>Just the concept of “jaywalking” as a punishable offense is revolting to me.</text></item><item><author>dotancohen</author><text><p><pre><code> &gt; It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without
&gt; issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking.
</code></pre>
I&#x27;ll take the opportunity to branch OT. This selective enforcement has always been such a problem, has there ever been any attempt - anywhere - to address it? Such that if a citizen can demonstrate selective enforcement he can also be absolved of the same crimes that the rest of the population is absolved of?</text></item><item><author>the_lonely_road</author><text>What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion!<p>Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking. We all know that’s not why he was arrested but the law is clear, he was breaking the law, and they enforced it. So the individual incident dots it’s I’s and crosses it’s t’s as long as you don’t bring up the dreaded ‘uneven enforcement’ issue which is at the heart of everything wrong with the law in America. I have no evidence for the theory but it makes sense with the multiple issues involving this guy mentioned in such a short article.<p>Next interesting point. Is giving a speech about how to treat a broken bone considered ‘practicing medicine’? Who gets to decide the answer. Is a PHD candidate writing an exploration of the efficacy of the various methods for treating a migraine practicing medicine? What if he’s selling copies of his paper on the checkout counter at the drug store? I use medicine instead of engineering because I think it’s easier to discuss but the point should hold the same regardless of which licensed profession we are discussing.<p>Shit I have to run but hope to return to this conversation to discuss the other fun questions raised.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Swenrekcah</author><text>&gt; e.g. some distracted guy on his cell phone accidentially rushing out in front of some car, getting killed in the process and traumatizing some driver<p>I think this comment demonstrates the perverse value system I’m commenting against. I don’t mean this as an insult to you, merely to point out how people have been programmed to think people shouldn’t be able to live in a city without being terrified of their lives so we don’t mildly annoy drivers.<p>The scenario that would actually be likely to happen is the exact opposite. A distracted driver running over and killing a pedestrian that’s crossing on a green light or a zebra crossing. That happens very regularly.<p>Cars have no business driving faster than 15-20mph on a city steet.</text></comment> | <story><title>North Carolina tells retired engineer he can't talk about engineering</title><url>https://ij.org/press-release/north-carolina-board-tells-retired-engineer-he-cant-talk-about-engineering/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tablespoon</author><text>&gt; Just the concept of “jaywalking” as a punishable offense is revolting to me.<p>It&#x27;s a required compromise to allow pedestrians and high-speed automobile traffic to coexist. This unfairly-dead comment has a good discussion: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27561530" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27561530</a><p>Get rid of it, and you&#x27;ll either have more pedestrians getting run over (e.g. some distracted guy on his cell phone accidentially rushing out in front of some car, getting killed in the process and traumatizing some driver) or you&#x27;ll have to lower speed limits, which would make longer-distance travel more inefficient and inconvenient.</text></item><item><author>Swenrekcah</author><text>Just the concept of “jaywalking” as a punishable offense is revolting to me.</text></item><item><author>dotancohen</author><text><p><pre><code> &gt; It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without
&gt; issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking.
</code></pre>
I&#x27;ll take the opportunity to branch OT. This selective enforcement has always been such a problem, has there ever been any attempt - anywhere - to address it? Such that if a citizen can demonstrate selective enforcement he can also be absolved of the same crimes that the rest of the population is absolved of?</text></item><item><author>the_lonely_road</author><text>What a fascinating case. There are so many details in such a short articles that is each worth its own discussion!<p>Let’s start with my personally theory that hopefully won’t color all of the conversation about the individual points. This guy pissed off some people and those people are using their petty power to make his life hell. It’s like the 10’s of thousands of people jaywalking without issue and then the homeless guy that gets arrested for jaw walking. We all know that’s not why he was arrested but the law is clear, he was breaking the law, and they enforced it. So the individual incident dots it’s I’s and crosses it’s t’s as long as you don’t bring up the dreaded ‘uneven enforcement’ issue which is at the heart of everything wrong with the law in America. I have no evidence for the theory but it makes sense with the multiple issues involving this guy mentioned in such a short article.<p>Next interesting point. Is giving a speech about how to treat a broken bone considered ‘practicing medicine’? Who gets to decide the answer. Is a PHD candidate writing an exploration of the efficacy of the various methods for treating a migraine practicing medicine? What if he’s selling copies of his paper on the checkout counter at the drug store? I use medicine instead of engineering because I think it’s easier to discuss but the point should hold the same regardless of which licensed profession we are discussing.<p>Shit I have to run but hope to return to this conversation to discuss the other fun questions raised.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lozenge</author><text>I always thought it was my desire to live that keeps me from walking into traffic despite any &quot;distractions&quot;, but now I learn from you it was the threat of a $250 fine all along.</text></comment> |
21,351,808 | 21,350,643 | 1 | 2 | 21,348,476 | train | <story><title>Monty Hall Problem</title><url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hinkley</author><text>You want to have an ugly argument with other developers, bring up the Monty Hall problem. People who are wrong will <i>not</i> let it go.<p>We had it beaten into us not to use truth tables to solve problems in college, because it doesn&#x27;t scale. But the Monty Hall problem has a finite set of states you can easily write on a piece of paper. And then you&#x27;ll see that it jumps from 2&#x2F;6 successes to 3&#x2F;6.<p>I tried to replicate that table under duress once (see initial comment) and I couldn&#x27;t get it sorted. I should try it again and write it down this time.<p>Edit: Why do work when you can find someone else who already has:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;probability-and-statistics&#x2F;monty-hall-problem&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;probabili...</a><p>and particular to my statement, this table:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2014&#x2F;12&#x2F;monty-hall-problem2.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;wp-conten...</a><p>When switching the number of lose scenarios is lower than a naive expectation of outcomes.</text></item><item><author>drfuchs</author><text>I found the easiest way to convince non-mathematical types is by suggesting we do the million-door version: “Ok, pick a door between 1 and 1,000,000. We’ll call that door N. Now, I’ll open 999,998 bad doors. So, now only door N and door 223,205 are still closed, and one of them has the good prize. Want to keep door N, or swap?”</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>shadowgovt</author><text>Reasoning through Monty Hall was my freshmen year introduction to the power of computing simulation.<p>I couldn&#x27;t get my mind to accept the explanation. So I coded it and ran the simulation 100,000 times.<p>I got about 50,000 instances where switching won the prize. Biases confirmed.<p>... until I found the bug in my code where Monty was allowed to open the door containing the car as the one showed to the player.<p>Fixed the bug, and switching won the prize in about 66,666 instances.</text></comment> | <story><title>Monty Hall Problem</title><url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hinkley</author><text>You want to have an ugly argument with other developers, bring up the Monty Hall problem. People who are wrong will <i>not</i> let it go.<p>We had it beaten into us not to use truth tables to solve problems in college, because it doesn&#x27;t scale. But the Monty Hall problem has a finite set of states you can easily write on a piece of paper. And then you&#x27;ll see that it jumps from 2&#x2F;6 successes to 3&#x2F;6.<p>I tried to replicate that table under duress once (see initial comment) and I couldn&#x27;t get it sorted. I should try it again and write it down this time.<p>Edit: Why do work when you can find someone else who already has:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;probability-and-statistics&#x2F;monty-hall-problem&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;probabili...</a><p>and particular to my statement, this table:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2014&#x2F;12&#x2F;monty-hall-problem2.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com&#x2F;wp-conten...</a><p>When switching the number of lose scenarios is lower than a naive expectation of outcomes.</text></item><item><author>drfuchs</author><text>I found the easiest way to convince non-mathematical types is by suggesting we do the million-door version: “Ok, pick a door between 1 and 1,000,000. We’ll call that door N. Now, I’ll open 999,998 bad doors. So, now only door N and door 223,205 are still closed, and one of them has the good prize. Want to keep door N, or swap?”</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>anon1m0us</author><text>&gt; And then you&#x27;ll see that it jumps from 2&#x2F;6 successes to 3&#x2F;6.<p>It jumps to 4&#x2F;6! Even better.</text></comment> |
29,434,161 | 29,433,298 | 1 | 2 | 29,432,276 | train | <story><title>U.S. State Department phones hacked with Israeli company spyware</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-us-state-department-phones-hacked-with-israeli-company-spyware-sources-2021-12-03/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>walrus01</author><text>I&#x27;m waiting for the day that the US declares a foreign corporation as an &quot;enemy combatant&quot;, as they have done with foreign citizen wahabbist jihadis and US citizens such as Anwar Al-Awlaki.<p>Given the extent and depth of US-Israeli cooperation and ties, the precedeing theoretical is probably going to remain in the realm of theoretical.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>fmajid</author><text>That&#x27;s pretty much what they did with NSO, which is getting the Huawei treatment:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theregister.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;us_sanctions_spyware&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theregister.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;us_sanctions_spyware&#x2F;</a><p>reportedly, this has created havoc on NSO, since for instance none of the cloud providers can sell services to them to host their zero-days, among other logistics headaches. Their recently hired CEO resigned.</text></comment> | <story><title>U.S. State Department phones hacked with Israeli company spyware</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-us-state-department-phones-hacked-with-israeli-company-spyware-sources-2021-12-03/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>walrus01</author><text>I&#x27;m waiting for the day that the US declares a foreign corporation as an &quot;enemy combatant&quot;, as they have done with foreign citizen wahabbist jihadis and US citizens such as Anwar Al-Awlaki.<p>Given the extent and depth of US-Israeli cooperation and ties, the precedeing theoretical is probably going to remain in the realm of theoretical.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>drusepth</author><text>Didn&#x27;t they get pretty close with Huawei when the previous president issued an executive order in response to state spying fears that:<p>* banned the sale of any of their phones or networking products in the US<p>* banned US companies selling product to Huawei<p>* cut funding to wireless carriers using Huawei equipment<p>...and then pressured allied countries to do the same?</text></comment> |
40,584,061 | 40,582,955 | 1 | 2 | 40,580,549 | train | <story><title>You'll regret using natural keys</title><url>https://blog.ploeh.dk/2024/06/03/youll-regret-using-natural-keys/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>yashap</author><text>This is bad advice.<p>Say I have a user table, and the email is unique and required, and we don’t let users update their email, and we don’t have user deletion. If I’m going natural PK, I make email the primary key.<p>But … then we add the ability for users to update their email. But it should still be the same user! This is trivial if we have a surrogate primary key, a nightmare if we made email the natural primary key.<p>Or building on that example, maybe at first we always require an email from our users. But later we also allow phone auth, and you just need an email OR a phone number. And later we add user name auth, SSO, etc. Again, all good with surrogate primary keys, a nightmare with natural primary keys.<p>There are countless examples like this. You brought up cars, same thing with licence plates, for example. Or even Social Security Numbers&#x2F;Social Insurance Numbers - in Canada SINs are generally permanent, but temporary residents can have their SIN change if they later become permanent residents, but they’re still the same person.<p>You want your entities to have stable identity, even if things you at one time thought gave them identity change. Surrogate primary keys do that, natural primary keys do not. Don’t use natural primary keys, use surrogate primary keys with unique constraints&#x2F;indexes.<p>I challenge you to come up with a single plausible example where you’re screwing yourself by choosing surrogate PK + unique constraints&#x2F;indexes. Meanwhile there are endless examples where you’re screwing yourself by choosing natural PK.</text></item><item><author>jklowden</author><text>You think your surrogate key will save you? It will not. The world has an external reality that needs to be reflected in your database. If the unique identifier for your object — VIN, CUSIP, whatever — if it changes, the world will henceforth refer to it by both. You will need to track both. Adding a synthetic key only means you have to track all three. Plus you have to generate a meaningless number, which is actually a choke point in your data throughput.<p>The natural key forces you to think about what makes the row unique. What <i>identifies</i> it. Sometimes, it makes you go back to the SME and ask them what they mean. Sometimes it makes you reconsider time: it’s unique now, but does it change over time, and does the database need to capture that? In short, what are the boundaries of the Closed World Assumption? You need to know that too, to answer any &quot;not exists&quot; question.<p>To use our professor’s car’s example, we actually do not know the database design. It could well be that the original identifier remained the primary key, and the &quot;new id&quot; is entered as an alias. The ID is unique in the Car table, identifying the vehicle, and is not in the CarAlias table, where the aliases are unique.<p>Oh, you say, but what if the bad old ID gets reused? Good question. Better question: how will the surrogate key protect you? It will not. The reused ID will be used to query the system. Without some distinguishing feature, perhaps date, it will serve up duplicates. The problem has to be handled, and the surrogate key is no defense.<p>Model your data on the real world. Do not depend on spherical horses.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bioneuralnet</author><text>My first job in the late 2000&#x27;s was at a small university with a home-grown ERP system originally written in the 80s (Informix-4GL). Student records, employee records, financials, asset tracking - everything. It used natural compound keys.<p>Even worse than the verbose, repetitive, and error-prone conditions&#x2F;joins was the few times when something big in the schema changed, requiring a new column be added to the compound key. We&#x27;d have to trawl through the codebase and add the new column to every query condition&#x2F;join that used the compound key. It sucked.</text></comment> | <story><title>You'll regret using natural keys</title><url>https://blog.ploeh.dk/2024/06/03/youll-regret-using-natural-keys/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>yashap</author><text>This is bad advice.<p>Say I have a user table, and the email is unique and required, and we don’t let users update their email, and we don’t have user deletion. If I’m going natural PK, I make email the primary key.<p>But … then we add the ability for users to update their email. But it should still be the same user! This is trivial if we have a surrogate primary key, a nightmare if we made email the natural primary key.<p>Or building on that example, maybe at first we always require an email from our users. But later we also allow phone auth, and you just need an email OR a phone number. And later we add user name auth, SSO, etc. Again, all good with surrogate primary keys, a nightmare with natural primary keys.<p>There are countless examples like this. You brought up cars, same thing with licence plates, for example. Or even Social Security Numbers&#x2F;Social Insurance Numbers - in Canada SINs are generally permanent, but temporary residents can have their SIN change if they later become permanent residents, but they’re still the same person.<p>You want your entities to have stable identity, even if things you at one time thought gave them identity change. Surrogate primary keys do that, natural primary keys do not. Don’t use natural primary keys, use surrogate primary keys with unique constraints&#x2F;indexes.<p>I challenge you to come up with a single plausible example where you’re screwing yourself by choosing surrogate PK + unique constraints&#x2F;indexes. Meanwhile there are endless examples where you’re screwing yourself by choosing natural PK.</text></item><item><author>jklowden</author><text>You think your surrogate key will save you? It will not. The world has an external reality that needs to be reflected in your database. If the unique identifier for your object — VIN, CUSIP, whatever — if it changes, the world will henceforth refer to it by both. You will need to track both. Adding a synthetic key only means you have to track all three. Plus you have to generate a meaningless number, which is actually a choke point in your data throughput.<p>The natural key forces you to think about what makes the row unique. What <i>identifies</i> it. Sometimes, it makes you go back to the SME and ask them what they mean. Sometimes it makes you reconsider time: it’s unique now, but does it change over time, and does the database need to capture that? In short, what are the boundaries of the Closed World Assumption? You need to know that too, to answer any &quot;not exists&quot; question.<p>To use our professor’s car’s example, we actually do not know the database design. It could well be that the original identifier remained the primary key, and the &quot;new id&quot; is entered as an alias. The ID is unique in the Car table, identifying the vehicle, and is not in the CarAlias table, where the aliases are unique.<p>Oh, you say, but what if the bad old ID gets reused? Good question. Better question: how will the surrogate key protect you? It will not. The reused ID will be used to query the system. Without some distinguishing feature, perhaps date, it will serve up duplicates. The problem has to be handled, and the surrogate key is no defense.<p>Model your data on the real world. Do not depend on spherical horses.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>arnorhs</author><text>Another benefit of having stable identies &#x2F; surrogate primary keys is that any relations (FKs) will be much simpler.<p>Sure, like the post poster you replied to is pointing out, you _can_ use natural keys, and then also relying on dates or other parts of the data - but creating a relation for that can end up being extremely cumbersome.<p>- Indexes generally become larger
- relationships become harder to define and maintain
- Harder for other developers to get up to speed on a project</text></comment> |
30,580,894 | 30,580,832 | 1 | 2 | 30,580,444 | train | <story><title>Windows Defender is enough, if you harden it</title><url>https://0ut3r.space/2022/03/06/windows-defender/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sumthinprofound</author><text>My firm belief is the that hardware vendors do end users a disservice by preloading 3rd party anti-virus software that expires ans requires payment after a period of time for virus signature updates. Typically this 3rd party software disables Defender, so once the pre-installed AV trial runs out, the user is exposed.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tjoff</author><text>The end user was never even considered.<p>But surely windows will activate defender? Since any AV must register in windows and considering that MS isn&#x27;t exactly known for respecting user wishes I&#x27;d expect defender to start up the same nanosecond any other AV stops.<p>Though I&#x27;d never out myself in a position to test that.</text></comment> | <story><title>Windows Defender is enough, if you harden it</title><url>https://0ut3r.space/2022/03/06/windows-defender/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sumthinprofound</author><text>My firm belief is the that hardware vendors do end users a disservice by preloading 3rd party anti-virus software that expires ans requires payment after a period of time for virus signature updates. Typically this 3rd party software disables Defender, so once the pre-installed AV trial runs out, the user is exposed.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Nextgrid</author><text>&gt; do end users a disservice by preloading 3rd party anti-virus software<p>There&#x27;s a reason they&#x27;re paid for doing so. If it was beneficial they&#x27;d do it for free.</text></comment> |
37,761,296 | 37,761,288 | 1 | 2 | 37,761,045 | train | <story><title>Tell HN: Please stop sending AI-generated job applications (whoishiring threads)</title><text>Via yesterday&#x27;s whoishiring thread, I received more than 70 emails. A good percentage of them (nearly half of them) came with unedited AI-generated cover letters.<p>Please don&#x27;t do this. I spend time going through the resume, the various links in it, and then responding to everyone who applied. But this time, with so much AI-generated verbiage I simply don&#x27;t want to.<p>I understand non-native speakers of English wanting to use AI. But frankly, just saying &quot;here&#x27;s my resume (and github&#x2F;blog&#x2F;publications etc)&quot; is better than ChatGPT content. Writing longer emails creates an obligation for us (at the hiring end), and when it&#x27;s AI-generated you&#x27;re just wasting our time. If there&#x27;s a distinct AI-generated tone to the email, I&#x27;m inclined to not consider the application.</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>nullptr_deref</author><text>I am sorry to play the role of devil&#x27;s advocate.<p>The hiring industry put up with ridiculous requirements on the engineers. There is such a disconnect between the requirements on job post and actual job. As a result, all entry level people are forced to apply to 300-400 jobs at least. And you are all looking for programmers. If one thing I know is most of them are having a heck of fun creating their automated system.<p>I know it&#x27;s annoying to you but it is equally annoying to us. I hope the upper management learns something out of this. Compile a presentation and show it to upper management. If they don&#x27;t do something, expect more weird stuffs down the line.<p>I think your upper management will force your senior engineers to come with a filter and we will come with ways to bypass the filter. The race to the bottom is on.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lovehashbrowns</author><text>I agree with this. Just getting to talk to a human is a massive effort in the hiring process. Before that it’s create an account on workday, have it automatically fill in the form with a pdf resume but it doesn’t change anything because I still have to go through it and make sure everything is correct, decide if I want to put effort into writing a cover letter, fill in all the manual questionnaires like “why do you want to work for us?” that I’m comfortable with, wait 2+ weeks for the automated rejection email, repeat!<p>This is also precious coming from an industry that uses automated emails for rejection. Yeah you don’t want to write 80 personalized rejection emails (probably way more) aaaand we don’t want to write 80 (or more) cover letters. I feel that’s pretty fair.<p>Also isn’t this the industry that uses keywords to automatically detect “good” resumes and skips the resumes that don’t have those keywords?</text></comment> | <story><title>Tell HN: Please stop sending AI-generated job applications (whoishiring threads)</title><text>Via yesterday&#x27;s whoishiring thread, I received more than 70 emails. A good percentage of them (nearly half of them) came with unedited AI-generated cover letters.<p>Please don&#x27;t do this. I spend time going through the resume, the various links in it, and then responding to everyone who applied. But this time, with so much AI-generated verbiage I simply don&#x27;t want to.<p>I understand non-native speakers of English wanting to use AI. But frankly, just saying &quot;here&#x27;s my resume (and github&#x2F;blog&#x2F;publications etc)&quot; is better than ChatGPT content. Writing longer emails creates an obligation for us (at the hiring end), and when it&#x27;s AI-generated you&#x27;re just wasting our time. If there&#x27;s a distinct AI-generated tone to the email, I&#x27;m inclined to not consider the application.</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>nullptr_deref</author><text>I am sorry to play the role of devil&#x27;s advocate.<p>The hiring industry put up with ridiculous requirements on the engineers. There is such a disconnect between the requirements on job post and actual job. As a result, all entry level people are forced to apply to 300-400 jobs at least. And you are all looking for programmers. If one thing I know is most of them are having a heck of fun creating their automated system.<p>I know it&#x27;s annoying to you but it is equally annoying to us. I hope the upper management learns something out of this. Compile a presentation and show it to upper management. If they don&#x27;t do something, expect more weird stuffs down the line.<p>I think your upper management will force your senior engineers to come with a filter and we will come with ways to bypass the filter. The race to the bottom is on.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dleeftink</author><text>I was about to say: the automation of HR and candidate screening has given rise to &#x27;hidden workers&#x27; that may be ideal for certain positions but are missed due to candidate pre-screening [0].<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hbs.edu&#x2F;managing-the-future-of-work&#x2F;Documents&#x2F;research&#x2F;hiddenworkers09032021.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hbs.edu&#x2F;managing-the-future-of-work&#x2F;Documents&#x2F;re...</a></text></comment> |
11,559,193 | 11,558,432 | 1 | 3 | 11,558,091 | train | <story><title>NASA to begin historic new era of X-Planes</title><url>http://www.nasa.gov/aero/nasa-moves-to-begin-historic-new-era-of-x-plane-research</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jgeada</author><text>All really interesting &amp; immediately commercially useful. So why aren&#x27;t these research projects being funded by Boeing, Lockheed etc? Why are we using NASA as the R&amp;D division of commercial companies?<p>Shouldn&#x27;t NASA&#x27;s role be more blue-sky research for things we don&#x27;t know yet are feasible or possible?</text></comment> | <story><title>NASA to begin historic new era of X-Planes</title><url>http://www.nasa.gov/aero/nasa-moves-to-begin-historic-new-era-of-x-plane-research</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>watersb</author><text>NASA&#x27;s previous X-Plane initiative seemed to end without making any substantial change to civil (non-military) aviation.<p>We could really use small jets out here in sparsely-populated Western USA. Eclipse Aviation got very close, then ran out of money. How much money would be required to start them up again?<p>We need new engines. My 1966 Cessna 172 required leaded AV gas, which is as rare -- and as damaging -- as the tears from a weeping unicorn.<p>Why invest in supersonic transport? We need low-end disruption, not high-end incremental improvements.</text></comment> |
8,901,694 | 8,901,489 | 1 | 3 | 8,900,779 | train | <story><title>Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions with police</title><url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/holder-ends-seized-asset-sharing-process-that-split-billions-with-local-state-police/2015/01/16/0e7ca058-99d4-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>knodi123</author><text>&gt; I really don&#x27;t understand how this practice persisted for so long next when we have the right to due process.<p>Can someone clarify for me- I read the article, and it SEEMS to be saying &quot;the feds will no longer be participating in this process, which will of course still be carried out by state and city police&quot;. It&#x27;s more about where seized money gets allocated, than about limiting the actual seizures.<p>Is that right?</text></item><item><author>clavalle</author><text>Good.<p>I really don&#x27;t understand how this practice persisted for so long next when we have the right to due process.<p>For people who think it only happened to drug dealers who were difficult to prosecute; it happened to my elderly parents.<p>My grandfather died suddenly in Georgia and we were the closest family at the time. My parents packed up their car in a hurry and started from Texas down I-10. In Mississippi they ran into a drunk driving checkpoint. They, being elderly conservative Republican business owners driving a luxury sedan that never conceived that the police would not be on their side, consented to a search of their car. The police found an antique revolver (my dad is an avid collector) locked in its case in the trunk. That plus the $800 he had in his wallet as travel money was enough to get them thrown in jail for the weekend and their property seized as suspected drug dealers.<p>$8000 in local lawyer fees later they got their car back but the antique gun had &#x27;gone missing&#x27; along with the cash. Their lawyer said they were lucky to get the car back.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tw04</author><text>Under federal rules, the departments got to keep the forfeitures. IE: the cop who pulled you over could literally pocket the cash. 0 oversight.<p>Under State rules, in almost all states, the money goes into the general fund. And there is due process to actually seize the asset. We&#x27;re essentially removing the incentive from the police officers to pull people over. It does them no good to take your stuff if it just goes into one big pot that they&#x27;ll never see again.</text></comment> | <story><title>Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions with police</title><url>http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/holder-ends-seized-asset-sharing-process-that-split-billions-with-local-state-police/2015/01/16/0e7ca058-99d4-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>knodi123</author><text>&gt; I really don&#x27;t understand how this practice persisted for so long next when we have the right to due process.<p>Can someone clarify for me- I read the article, and it SEEMS to be saying &quot;the feds will no longer be participating in this process, which will of course still be carried out by state and city police&quot;. It&#x27;s more about where seized money gets allocated, than about limiting the actual seizures.<p>Is that right?</text></item><item><author>clavalle</author><text>Good.<p>I really don&#x27;t understand how this practice persisted for so long next when we have the right to due process.<p>For people who think it only happened to drug dealers who were difficult to prosecute; it happened to my elderly parents.<p>My grandfather died suddenly in Georgia and we were the closest family at the time. My parents packed up their car in a hurry and started from Texas down I-10. In Mississippi they ran into a drunk driving checkpoint. They, being elderly conservative Republican business owners driving a luxury sedan that never conceived that the police would not be on their side, consented to a search of their car. The police found an antique revolver (my dad is an avid collector) locked in its case in the trunk. That plus the $800 he had in his wallet as travel money was enough to get them thrown in jail for the weekend and their property seized as suspected drug dealers.<p>$8000 in local lawyer fees later they got their car back but the antique gun had &#x27;gone missing&#x27; along with the cash. Their lawyer said they were lucky to get the car back.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>WillNotDownvote</author><text>This policy adjustment is in regard to a federal program that shared the seized proceeds with the state and local police that made the seizures using federal laws.<p>That is, the laws that were &#x27;suspected&#x27; broken were federal laws, and properly the seized goods belonged to the feds. The feds then shared a large portion of that back to the state and local cops. They will no longer do so.<p>This removes a great deal of the incentive for locals to use federal laws for seizures.<p>Many states require seizures go into the state general fund, so there&#x27;s no incentive there for cops to overstep, at least not financial incentives.<p>So in theory this should result in a pretty big reduction in unwarranted seizures.</text></comment> |
16,062,712 | 16,062,739 | 1 | 3 | 16,060,658 | train | <story><title>Teens Aren’t Partying Anymore</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/why-teens-arent-partying-anymore/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>westmeal</author><text>I know, I know this is anecdotal &#x27;evidence&#x27;.<p>I happen to be 21 which fits me right in this generation and the main reason this occurs is due to parenting. My parents wouldn&#x27;t let me go _anywhere_ by myself until I was at least 17. By that time I was completely and utterly addicted to computing to just let go and &#x27;hang out&#x27;. As a matter in fact most of my friends are online rather than 4 real friends in real life. It seems like people in my age group had parents that would rather have their child stare at a screen than experience the world. Just my two cents.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ashark</author><text>If your parents had eliminated screens when you were very young (including theirs) save maybe one publicly-placed crappy terminal for wikipedia or looking up business hours or maps or learning you some programming or whatever, but loosened the reigns on hang-outs and travel, do you think you&#x27;d have still felt isolated because all your friends were still online most of the time?<p>Asking as a parent with three young kids who&#x27;s seeing practically no benefit to ubiquitous screens at this point, and lots of bad things about them, and trying to figure out how to navigate this brave new world while screwing these kids up as little as possible.</text></comment> | <story><title>Teens Aren’t Partying Anymore</title><url>https://www.wired.com/story/why-teens-arent-partying-anymore/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>westmeal</author><text>I know, I know this is anecdotal &#x27;evidence&#x27;.<p>I happen to be 21 which fits me right in this generation and the main reason this occurs is due to parenting. My parents wouldn&#x27;t let me go _anywhere_ by myself until I was at least 17. By that time I was completely and utterly addicted to computing to just let go and &#x27;hang out&#x27;. As a matter in fact most of my friends are online rather than 4 real friends in real life. It seems like people in my age group had parents that would rather have their child stare at a screen than experience the world. Just my two cents.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Eric_WVGG</author><text>I’m reminded of the under-25-set reacting to the Stranger Things children just sort of running around unsupervised as “unrealistic.” Nope, that was how we rolled.</text></comment> |
14,140,375 | 14,140,337 | 1 | 2 | 14,139,882 | train | <story><title>Most Vegetarians and Vegans Eventually Return to Meat</title><url>https://www.fastcompany.com/3039505/the-vast-majority-of-vegetarians-and-vegans-eventually-return-to-meat</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fnovd</author><text>The title seems misleading to me. According to the article:<p>&gt;A third-of people abandoned their animal-free diets in three months or less, and more than half abandoned it within the first year.<p>Are you <i>really</i> a vegan or vegetarian if you break in 3 months? In 1 year? Wouldn&#x27;t it be more accurate to say that 1 in 5 people who attempt to go vegan&#x2F;vegetarian succeed?<p>I&#x27;m a vegan and I&#x27;m active in my local vegan&#x2F;vegetarian community. There are two camps: people who do it for ethical reasons and people who do it for for health. People who do it for health usually give up and move on to whatever fad diet becomes popular. People who subscribe to the ethics rarely quit. We have a saying: there&#x27;s no such thing as a former vegan. Just someone who tried the diet.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bradbeattie</author><text>Long time vegan here. While I think that saying has some truth to it, there are also those that sympathize with the ethics, try it out for a short while, but find the pressure of social backlash too costly. The biggest problem isn&#x27;t nutrition; It&#x27;s ingroup&#x2F;outgroup policing (predominantly by the vast majority of non-vegans).<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=qQUo53o6QXg#t=0m30s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=qQUo53o6QXg#t=0m30s</a> (strawman opening skipiped) is clearly an exaggeration, but highlights the uncomfortable reality of being &quot;the different one&quot; at the dinner table.</text></comment> | <story><title>Most Vegetarians and Vegans Eventually Return to Meat</title><url>https://www.fastcompany.com/3039505/the-vast-majority-of-vegetarians-and-vegans-eventually-return-to-meat</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fnovd</author><text>The title seems misleading to me. According to the article:<p>&gt;A third-of people abandoned their animal-free diets in three months or less, and more than half abandoned it within the first year.<p>Are you <i>really</i> a vegan or vegetarian if you break in 3 months? In 1 year? Wouldn&#x27;t it be more accurate to say that 1 in 5 people who attempt to go vegan&#x2F;vegetarian succeed?<p>I&#x27;m a vegan and I&#x27;m active in my local vegan&#x2F;vegetarian community. There are two camps: people who do it for ethical reasons and people who do it for for health. People who do it for health usually give up and move on to whatever fad diet becomes popular. People who subscribe to the ethics rarely quit. We have a saying: there&#x27;s no such thing as a former vegan. Just someone who tried the diet.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>DenisM</author><text>This is a text-book example of the &quot;no true Scotsman&quot; fallacy.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;No_true_Scotsman" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;No_true_Scotsman</a></text></comment> |
9,765,532 | 9,765,564 | 1 | 3 | 9,764,201 | train | <story><title>The Way Humans Get Electricity Is About to Change</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-23/the-way-humans-get-electricity-is-about-to-change-forever</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>cfsc</author><text>This article doesn&#x27;t mention some serious problems that affect power grids reliant on renewable energies:<p>1 - The grids becomes vulnerable to the weather. There&#x27;s no solar energy at night and it&#x27;s greatly reduced in cloudy days. Wind power is unpredictable and closely matches the output of hydraulic power, so that the two sources can&#x27;t complement each other. You can check Brazil in recent history to check the effects of droughts in the power grid.
In the end there is a need of conventional power plants always ready to backup the grid when the renewable energy is not available.<p>2 - The majority of losses of the power distribution network are on the last mile, when the voltage is lower and the current is higher. If every house and electric car become consumers and providers to the grid, most power movements occur in the low voltage networks. There&#x27;s also the issue of batteries storing energy for later consumption. Lithium batteries have a 80%-90% efficiency storing energy.<p>3 - Since we are talking of the environment, rare earth metals have a very pollutant and energy intensive extraction process which in most cases is not accounted in the environmental cost of solar panels.<p>Replacing the majority of energy production by renewable energies will result in an net efficiency loss. I would rather support a balanced production with nuclear (fusion?) power plants providing the fixed needs of the grid and renewable energies making up the rest.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>SovietDissident</author><text>3 - The rare earth mining operations in China which provide the raw materials for solar panels, batteries, and many other electronics products are reportedly quite filthy and require massive energy (diesel trucks, processing plants, etc.)
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;sustainable-business&#x2F;rare-earth-mining-china-social-environmental-costs" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;sustainable-business&#x2F;rare-earth-m...</a><p>The push for renewable energy would not be possible at its current scale if it weren&#x27;t so attractive to the political elite (and subsidized as well), for the shortcomings you mentioned. Fossil fuels and nuclear simply better fulfill the role of consistent, cheap, plentiful energy. Unfortunately, even though nuclear is quite safe, has very few emissions, and emits a ton of energy, it takes a Herculean effort to get federal approval to build a plant.</text></comment> | <story><title>The Way Humans Get Electricity Is About to Change</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-23/the-way-humans-get-electricity-is-about-to-change-forever</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>cfsc</author><text>This article doesn&#x27;t mention some serious problems that affect power grids reliant on renewable energies:<p>1 - The grids becomes vulnerable to the weather. There&#x27;s no solar energy at night and it&#x27;s greatly reduced in cloudy days. Wind power is unpredictable and closely matches the output of hydraulic power, so that the two sources can&#x27;t complement each other. You can check Brazil in recent history to check the effects of droughts in the power grid.
In the end there is a need of conventional power plants always ready to backup the grid when the renewable energy is not available.<p>2 - The majority of losses of the power distribution network are on the last mile, when the voltage is lower and the current is higher. If every house and electric car become consumers and providers to the grid, most power movements occur in the low voltage networks. There&#x27;s also the issue of batteries storing energy for later consumption. Lithium batteries have a 80%-90% efficiency storing energy.<p>3 - Since we are talking of the environment, rare earth metals have a very pollutant and energy intensive extraction process which in most cases is not accounted in the environmental cost of solar panels.<p>Replacing the majority of energy production by renewable energies will result in an net efficiency loss. I would rather support a balanced production with nuclear (fusion?) power plants providing the fixed needs of the grid and renewable energies making up the rest.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>torgoguys</author><text>Re: 1-I support balanced development (yes, including nuclear, but I get why some don&#x27;t like it), but solar is AWESOME to pair with central electric production. It actually HELPS out with this issue. Very hot, sunny days is when there is peak power consumption. It&#x27;s also the peak of solar production and can help avoid utilities having to spin up the (very expensive) temporary peaker plants.<p>Re: 2-Again, depending on how you look at it, solar helps with this, at least for homeowner rooftop production. If I&#x27;m producing my own electricity on-site, the utility company electricity never has to step-down voltages and move that last mile. I&#x27;m not using it (or I&#x27;m using less of it) so the energy coming from a central power plant never has to come down the &quot;last mile&quot; to me! Feeding back in is where you&#x27;ve got a bit of a point, but it&#x27;s not really worse than with central production. In general distributed generation is going to be vastly more efficient (from the perspective of line losses) than central generation. Also, why bring up batteries? You don&#x27;t need batteries to produce solar. If you have extra power, most people are feeding it into the grid, not batteries.<p>Re: 3-Agreed. Creating the panels is in general a very energy intensive process (in ways unrelated to the rare earth components), not to be ignored. It takes time for an &quot;energy payback&quot; if you will, but it&#x27;s there. And the panels are very long-lasting.</text></comment> |
14,473,437 | 14,473,350 | 1 | 2 | 14,472,086 | train | <story><title>An alarm about the influence of standardized tests on American society</title><url>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-u-s-education-system-producing-a-society-of-ldquo-smart-fools-rdquo/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>SeeDave</author><text>&gt;2. We will not laugh at or make fun of a person&#x27;s mistakes nor use sarcasm or putdowns.<p>I would have appreciated this as my public school experience was rife with negativity, sarcasm, snark, jeering, insulting, etc.<p>I&#x27;m not sure what causes such anti-social behavior but I dream of a day where all students can be kind, considerate, polite, and supportive of one another.</text></item><item><author>jbscpa</author><text>My spouse is a classroom educator.<p>Her school participates in Great Expectations program.
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;</a><p>It is a character development program
&quot;that provides teachers and administrators with the skills needed to create harmony and excitement within the school atmosphere&quot;<p>There are 8 Expectations at the elementary level
1. We will value one another as unique special individuals
2. We will not laugh at or make fun of a person&#x27;s mistakes nor use sarcasm or putdowns.
3. We will use good manners, saying, &quot;please,&quot; &quot;thank you&quot;
and &quot;excuse me&quot; and allow others to go first.
and so forth.
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;expectations" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;expectations</a><p>In my opinion when the U.S. abandoned the judeo&#x2F;christian ethic in the late twentieth century character and wisdom training was denigrated as &quot;old fashioned&quot; and unnecessary.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>oblio</author><text>Having been brought up in a positive environment, yet full of sarcasm, I&#x27;m not sure I buy this argument.<p>Yes, there must be a balance. But sarcasm and negativity are part of our everyday life as adults and we should learn how to handle them.</text></comment> | <story><title>An alarm about the influence of standardized tests on American society</title><url>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-u-s-education-system-producing-a-society-of-ldquo-smart-fools-rdquo/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>SeeDave</author><text>&gt;2. We will not laugh at or make fun of a person&#x27;s mistakes nor use sarcasm or putdowns.<p>I would have appreciated this as my public school experience was rife with negativity, sarcasm, snark, jeering, insulting, etc.<p>I&#x27;m not sure what causes such anti-social behavior but I dream of a day where all students can be kind, considerate, polite, and supportive of one another.</text></item><item><author>jbscpa</author><text>My spouse is a classroom educator.<p>Her school participates in Great Expectations program.
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;</a><p>It is a character development program
&quot;that provides teachers and administrators with the skills needed to create harmony and excitement within the school atmosphere&quot;<p>There are 8 Expectations at the elementary level
1. We will value one another as unique special individuals
2. We will not laugh at or make fun of a person&#x27;s mistakes nor use sarcasm or putdowns.
3. We will use good manners, saying, &quot;please,&quot; &quot;thank you&quot;
and &quot;excuse me&quot; and allow others to go first.
and so forth.
<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;expectations" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.greatexpectations.org&#x2F;expectations</a><p>In my opinion when the U.S. abandoned the judeo&#x2F;christian ethic in the late twentieth century character and wisdom training was denigrated as &quot;old fashioned&quot; and unnecessary.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>merpnderp</author><text>My school wasn&#x27;t rife with it. Maybe only half my teachers used sarcasm, mockery and negativity towards students.</text></comment> |
34,800,047 | 34,799,955 | 1 | 2 | 34,798,808 | train | <story><title>Court blocks NY law mandating “hateful conduct” policies by social media</title><url>https://reason.com/volokh/2023/02/14/court-blocks-new-york-law-mandating-posting-of-hateful-conduct-policies-by-social-media-platforms-including-us/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>GalenErso</author><text>On one hand, as a heterosexual, white, culturally Christian and conventionally attractive man raised in a middle class neighborhood, I&#x27;ve never been the victim of hateful speech. I cannot fully relate to those who have been. My family, friends, and coworkers are all from similarly conventional backgrounds. I am thus privileged, in a certain way.<p>On the other hand, I cannot help but think that too many people have become soft these days. I am not old enough to remember a time before the late 90s, nor do I glorify a forgotten &quot;Golden Age&quot;. But, when I occasionally watch old movies, documentaries, and TV shows, it is clear that people used to have a much thicker skin. This is not to say that I believe that free speech shouldn&#x27;t have reasonable constraints. I am not denying the emotional impact that words can have on people, or the potential unhealthiness of excess emotional fortitude. But it is to say that it would be misguided and, in my humble opinion, a disservice to future generations to envelop them in a sanitized cocoon of sterile experiences, where they cannot be uncomfortable. Because the real world is full of colorful characters, and surprises, generally speaking. Like an immune system that grows weaker when it goes too long without exposure to viruses and bacteria, I believe that a person&#x27;s character can and in a certain measure must be allowed to be steeled and sharpened by the unexpected, the random, and, perhaps, the uncomfortable.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jay-barronville</author><text>Well, I’m a black man and I agree with you.<p>It seems everyone nowadays wants to be coddled and there’s just this overwhelming sense of entitlement in the air.<p>The real world isn’t perfect; in fact, it’s quite chaotic, just how it’s supposed to be. A lot of folks seem to only want to look at the world from a utopian lens. The elephant in the room is, your utopia isn’t my utopia. Put differently, our differences create the very imperfections that actually make our world interesting and keep society functioning as it should.</text></comment> | <story><title>Court blocks NY law mandating “hateful conduct” policies by social media</title><url>https://reason.com/volokh/2023/02/14/court-blocks-new-york-law-mandating-posting-of-hateful-conduct-policies-by-social-media-platforms-including-us/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>GalenErso</author><text>On one hand, as a heterosexual, white, culturally Christian and conventionally attractive man raised in a middle class neighborhood, I&#x27;ve never been the victim of hateful speech. I cannot fully relate to those who have been. My family, friends, and coworkers are all from similarly conventional backgrounds. I am thus privileged, in a certain way.<p>On the other hand, I cannot help but think that too many people have become soft these days. I am not old enough to remember a time before the late 90s, nor do I glorify a forgotten &quot;Golden Age&quot;. But, when I occasionally watch old movies, documentaries, and TV shows, it is clear that people used to have a much thicker skin. This is not to say that I believe that free speech shouldn&#x27;t have reasonable constraints. I am not denying the emotional impact that words can have on people, or the potential unhealthiness of excess emotional fortitude. But it is to say that it would be misguided and, in my humble opinion, a disservice to future generations to envelop them in a sanitized cocoon of sterile experiences, where they cannot be uncomfortable. Because the real world is full of colorful characters, and surprises, generally speaking. Like an immune system that grows weaker when it goes too long without exposure to viruses and bacteria, I believe that a person&#x27;s character can and in a certain measure must be allowed to be steeled and sharpened by the unexpected, the random, and, perhaps, the uncomfortable.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>trpv</author><text>Seems like you think you’re exempt from being a victim of hate because of your demographics, and likewise that others of certain demographics, whatever they may be, are implicitly victims of it.<p>There are white, heterosexual, etc (the list of ways people say they privileged is ever expanding lol) men who have been on the receiving end of hateful speech because they are white, heterosexual, etc. and there are black or gay men who have never been personally attacked based on that identity.<p>But yeah, shielding yourself from speech or anything else you may find uncomfortable may make you feel better in the moment, but hurts you in the long term</text></comment> |
22,881,417 | 22,881,354 | 1 | 3 | 22,879,361 | train | <story><title>Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients</title><url>https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060699v1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>thedudeabides5</author><text>This is a great comment thanks.<p>Title of the paper could (with a tongue firmly in cheek) be called, <i>&quot;Weak evidence for effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine but our sample was likely too small for it to pass a T-test&quot;</i></text></item><item><author>capnrefsmmat</author><text>It&#x27;s important to interpret these results carefully: &quot;no evidence of efficacy&quot; does <i>not</i> imply evidence of no efficacy, and in fact the uncertainty in this study is quite large. The sample size is small enough that it would be very hard for this study to detect the effect of hydroxychloroquine unless that effect is very, very large.<p>From the abstract:<p>&gt; In the HCQ group, 2.8% of the patients died within 7 days vs 4.6% in the no-HCQ group (3 vs 4 events, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.13-2.89), and 27.4% and 24.1%, respectively, developed acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (24 vs 23 events, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.65-2.00).<p>The relative risks and confidence intervals are the important numbers here. For example, the relative risk for death is 0.61, meaning the observed risk of death was lower for patients treated with hydroxychloroquine -- but the confidence interval is 0.13 to 2.89, meaning the data is consistent with anything from the risk being much smaller to the risk being much <i>larger</i>. Since there were only 3 deaths in the treatment group and 4 deaths in the control group, it&#x27;s very hard to draw precise conclusions about death rates.<p>I think we can interpret this result to mean that hydroxychloroquine doesn&#x27;t have a miraculously large effect, but the evidence is weak. Other commenters are correct that large randomized trials will be more definitive.<p>(disclaimer: I am a statistician, not a doctor)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>magicalist</author><text>&gt; <i>Title of the paper could (with a tongue firmly in cheek) be called, &quot;Weak evidence for effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine but our sample was likely too small for it to pass a T-test&quot;</i><p>It would be irresponsible to choose an experimental design (like significance level) and then use wishy-washy language (&quot;weak evidence&quot;) to work around it when the study criteria aren&#x27;t met.<p>This would be more akin to the headline from the press release for the study from the university PR office.</text></comment> | <story><title>Study: No evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients</title><url>https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060699v1</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>thedudeabides5</author><text>This is a great comment thanks.<p>Title of the paper could (with a tongue firmly in cheek) be called, <i>&quot;Weak evidence for effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine but our sample was likely too small for it to pass a T-test&quot;</i></text></item><item><author>capnrefsmmat</author><text>It&#x27;s important to interpret these results carefully: &quot;no evidence of efficacy&quot; does <i>not</i> imply evidence of no efficacy, and in fact the uncertainty in this study is quite large. The sample size is small enough that it would be very hard for this study to detect the effect of hydroxychloroquine unless that effect is very, very large.<p>From the abstract:<p>&gt; In the HCQ group, 2.8% of the patients died within 7 days vs 4.6% in the no-HCQ group (3 vs 4 events, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.13-2.89), and 27.4% and 24.1%, respectively, developed acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (24 vs 23 events, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.65-2.00).<p>The relative risks and confidence intervals are the important numbers here. For example, the relative risk for death is 0.61, meaning the observed risk of death was lower for patients treated with hydroxychloroquine -- but the confidence interval is 0.13 to 2.89, meaning the data is consistent with anything from the risk being much smaller to the risk being much <i>larger</i>. Since there were only 3 deaths in the treatment group and 4 deaths in the control group, it&#x27;s very hard to draw precise conclusions about death rates.<p>I think we can interpret this result to mean that hydroxychloroquine doesn&#x27;t have a miraculously large effect, but the evidence is weak. Other commenters are correct that large randomized trials will be more definitive.<p>(disclaimer: I am a statistician, not a doctor)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>marcosdumay</author><text>This is the kind of study where it would be beneficial for it to be ignore. The correct headline is no headline at all.</text></comment> |
27,055,071 | 27,055,451 | 1 | 2 | 27,054,837 | train | <story><title>Bootstrap 5 Released</title><url>https://blog.getbootstrap.com/2021/05/05/bootstrap-5/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>SmellTheGlove</author><text>I love bootstrap. Without it everything I make would be ugly. If you have zero design sense like me, give it a go.</text></comment> | <story><title>Bootstrap 5 Released</title><url>https://blog.getbootstrap.com/2021/05/05/bootstrap-5/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>baby</author><text>I tried to use it while in Beta and the big issue with these frameworks that include js today is how to use them with other js frameworks like Vue.js. For a js noob like me it’s a nightmare, so much that I had to downgrade to bootstrap 4 to use the unofficial bootstrap-vue framework.</text></comment> |
11,773,416 | 11,773,287 | 1 | 3 | 11,772,294 | train | <story><title>Racial Fault Lines in Silicon Valley</title><url>https://blog.devcolor.org/racial-fault-lines-in-silicon-valley-390cd0e4a6dc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vowelless</author><text>That was a really ridiculous question to ask. I&#x27;m brown
and if someone asked me about middle eastern politics during an interview or worse made some low quality comment, I would promotly get up and leave. I don&#x27;t have the patience for that in a professional setting.<p>On a separate note<p>&gt; &#x2F;dev&#x2F;color is a community of black software engineers who help one another reach career goals. To learn more, check out our website and follow our blog &amp; twitter account.<p>Then why not call it &#x2F;dev&#x2F;black? I find it confusing. Does &quot;color&quot; imply black? I have been called a &quot;person of color&quot; before, due to my brown skin and middle eastern features.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Kalium</author><text>&quot;Color&quot; implies black, but it is also used to imply other colors sometimes. It <i>can</i> imply middle eastern, east asian, southeast asian, hispanic, and several other groups. However, aside from implying black, other implications are context-sensitive and as a result different authors sometimes mean very different things when they write &quot;person of color&quot;.</text></comment> | <story><title>Racial Fault Lines in Silicon Valley</title><url>https://blog.devcolor.org/racial-fault-lines-in-silicon-valley-390cd0e4a6dc</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>vowelless</author><text>That was a really ridiculous question to ask. I&#x27;m brown
and if someone asked me about middle eastern politics during an interview or worse made some low quality comment, I would promotly get up and leave. I don&#x27;t have the patience for that in a professional setting.<p>On a separate note<p>&gt; &#x2F;dev&#x2F;color is a community of black software engineers who help one another reach career goals. To learn more, check out our website and follow our blog &amp; twitter account.<p>Then why not call it &#x2F;dev&#x2F;black? I find it confusing. Does &quot;color&quot; imply black? I have been called a &quot;person of color&quot; before, due to my brown skin and middle eastern features.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jacobolus</author><text>In some contexts “color” has referred to mainly African-descended people. In other contexts “color” gets applied more broadly to anyone with non-European ancestry. Don’t overthink the &#x2F;dev&#x2F;color&#x2F; name.<p>For some very incomplete hints at some of the history, see Wikipedia
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Colored" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Colored</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Person_of_color" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Person_of_color</a></text></comment> |
10,576,281 | 10,576,175 | 1 | 3 | 10,575,921 | train | <story><title>Sct – set color temperature</title><url>http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/sct-set-color-temperature</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>rogerbinns</author><text>Note that the dependencies aren&#x27;t because of setting the colour temperature, but to get your location information (see geoclue in the list). geoclue has several providers, but a common one for desktop machines is to connect to a network service that does geoip. Consequently most of the dependencies arrive due to that (eg proxies, crypto, glue code for object models to do all that, and some innocent bystanders).<p>The location information is used so that redshift can alter the colour temperature during the day (less needed) and dusk, evening and night (very needed).</text></comment> | <story><title>Sct – set color temperature</title><url>http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/sct-set-color-temperature</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>taneliv</author><text>Cool! Or, warm depending on parameter.<p>On Ubuntu includes are apparently broken, complaining about strings.h included from Xlibint.h ...<p>There&#x27;s probably a yak to shave in that. However, if you&#x27;re lazy and hit the same problem, you can compile a functional sct by lifting declarations of i and c outside their loops and dropping &quot;-std=c99&quot; from the command line.</text></comment> |
3,753,808 | 3,753,491 | 1 | 3 | 3,753,155 | train | <story><title>Skype55 deobfuscated version released</title><url>http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2012/03/skype55-deobfuscated-released.html</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>martey</author><text>I don't understand this project. According to the creator, the purpose is "to make Skype open source" [1], but the project relies on binary files distributed by Skype. As a result, they have repeatedly faced DMCA notices [2] which regularly causes the source code is become unavailable.<p>An earlier blog post made it to Hacker News. I found the comment at <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2611728" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2611728</a> insightful.<p>[1]: <a href="http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2011/06/skype-protocol-reverse-engineered.html" rel="nofollow">http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2011/06/skype-protocol...</a><p>[2]: <a href="https://github.com/skypeopensource/skypeopensource/issues/1" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/skypeopensource/skypeopensource/issues/1</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>helmut_hed</author><text>I don't believe that this is (despite stated intent) making Skype "open source". It would be more accurate to say that this work makes it possible to create an open-source wrapper around a proprietary kernel. This wrapper could then be updated as times change to support different platforms, as long as the linkage to the kernel was compatible. This neatly steps around some legal problems because:<p>1) The wrapper itself is not encumbered (unless some patent issues applied)<p>2) Users with a legal copy of Skype on one platform can apply the wrapper themselves (though they cannot redistribute the result)<p>You can even imagine distributing (via, say, github) a kit consisting of the wrapper and a tool that applies that wrapper to a user-supplied Skype binary. All legal as far as I know (IANAL etc.)</text></comment> | <story><title>Skype55 deobfuscated version released</title><url>http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2012/03/skype55-deobfuscated-released.html</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>martey</author><text>I don't understand this project. According to the creator, the purpose is "to make Skype open source" [1], but the project relies on binary files distributed by Skype. As a result, they have repeatedly faced DMCA notices [2] which regularly causes the source code is become unavailable.<p>An earlier blog post made it to Hacker News. I found the comment at <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2611728" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2611728</a> insightful.<p>[1]: <a href="http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2011/06/skype-protocol-reverse-engineered.html" rel="nofollow">http://skype-open-source.blogspot.com/2011/06/skype-protocol...</a><p>[2]: <a href="https://github.com/skypeopensource/skypeopensource/issues/1" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/skypeopensource/skypeopensource/issues/1</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dr_rezzy</author><text>For spamming this is a gold mine.</text></comment> |
10,531,603 | 10,530,796 | 1 | 3 | 10,529,297 | train | <story><title>Chronos Will Turn Any Watch into a Smartwatch</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-05/chronos-will-turn-any-watch-into-a-smartwatch</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nyc</author><text>Recognizing that people like their existing watches is a great idea. The hardware looks really slick too.<p>The big problem, one that afflicts pretty much every smartwatch, is one of battery life. One of the great things about non-smart watches is that they run for years, not days. Chronos doesn&#x27;t bypass this limitation (although one nice thing w&#x2F; Chronos is that if one forgets to charge, the main watch will continue to work).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>aleem</author><text>The FitBit seems like the right product in the right category. The Chronos much less so and it seems like the same product with a different form factor -- with restricted battery life as you point out. It&#x27;s only a matter of time before other form factors emerge as this space saturates--a ring, a watch bracelet add-on, ankle bracelets and so forth.<p>The only winner in my mind is the FitBit or similar. I have owned the Apple Watch since launch and I absolutely hate it&#x27;s battery issues. Not to mention that I consider the product slightly flawed. I don&#x27;t need or use it&#x27;s calendaring, stocks, weather or most other apps that have much better UX right on my phone, which is always with me and the Apple Watch needs to be connected to in any case. It just seems so coerced.<p>&gt; The big problem, one that afflicts pretty much every smartwatch, is one of battery life<p>I have always wondered if a FitBit or similar device can operate in low power mode and manage to charge itself during running or similar vigorous activities. Or if wireless charging will ever get to the stage that if I am in close proximity to my laptop, my watch and phone can start charging themselves wirelessly. Or even some kind of a magnetic latch that can do away with charging cables so I can just tack my phone onto my Macbook and have it charge. Fun times ahead.</text></comment> | <story><title>Chronos Will Turn Any Watch into a Smartwatch</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-05/chronos-will-turn-any-watch-into-a-smartwatch</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nyc</author><text>Recognizing that people like their existing watches is a great idea. The hardware looks really slick too.<p>The big problem, one that afflicts pretty much every smartwatch, is one of battery life. One of the great things about non-smart watches is that they run for years, not days. Chronos doesn&#x27;t bypass this limitation (although one nice thing w&#x2F; Chronos is that if one forgets to charge, the main watch will continue to work).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>fineline</author><text>My watch (with mechanical hands, not digital) has some kind of kinetic energy generation, it has run for years and years without stopping, charging or winding. I wonder if something similar would suffice for energy needs of a device like this with no screen to power?</text></comment> |
8,406,145 | 8,406,115 | 1 | 2 | 8,405,778 | train | <story><title>Postgres 9.5 feature highlight: row-level security and policies</title><url>http://michael.otacoo.com/postgresql-2/postgres-9-5-feature-highlight-row-level-security/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>syntern</author><text>I open every &quot;New Postgresql features&quot; article in the hope that it will contain &quot;Simple cluster setup, you just start nodes and they will figure out the rest.&quot; Unfortunately it didn&#x27;t happen so far...<p>Is it such a hard problem, that no one is able to solve it, or it is not a concern or interest of the parties that are developing Postgresql or the tools around it?<p>(And by hard problem, I don&#x27;t mean surviving an aphyr-level diagnostics without any issues, but it it would be certainly nice to see such too.)<p>Edit: I&#x27;d settle for a multi-master replicated cluster, where the node failures and startups (and the migration of the data) is handled transparently in the cluster. I know that there are many other aspects, but even this basic case is painfully hard to achieve (much harder than with MySQL).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>saosebastiao</author><text>It probably will never happen. Postgres follows an ideology of explicit and safe...it never tries to assume that you meant to do one thing if there is a possibility that you meant another.<p>With clusters, there are far too many variables for it to be plug and play. For example, do you want replication, or distributed partitions? If replication, do you want master-slave, or master-master? If distributed partitions, what are you going to trade off: consistency or availability? (That being said, Postgres will likely never change from its CA stance, you&#x27;ll have to use an alternative distribution like PostgresXL).<p>Furthermore, clustering isn&#x27;t likely to be much more than a pareto-tail problem for the next decade or so. It is useful for millions of use cases, and something that only Google&#x27;s and Twitter&#x27;s can benefit from is not one of them. If you have the data to justify extensive clustering requirements, I would hope you also have the resources to contribute your patches to Postgres. So far, they all seem to be content solving their own niche problems with niche solutions that slowly bleed down to us mere mortals (Ex. Cassandra), or just buying a solution like EnterpriseDB or Oracle.</text></comment> | <story><title>Postgres 9.5 feature highlight: row-level security and policies</title><url>http://michael.otacoo.com/postgresql-2/postgres-9-5-feature-highlight-row-level-security/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>syntern</author><text>I open every &quot;New Postgresql features&quot; article in the hope that it will contain &quot;Simple cluster setup, you just start nodes and they will figure out the rest.&quot; Unfortunately it didn&#x27;t happen so far...<p>Is it such a hard problem, that no one is able to solve it, or it is not a concern or interest of the parties that are developing Postgresql or the tools around it?<p>(And by hard problem, I don&#x27;t mean surviving an aphyr-level diagnostics without any issues, but it it would be certainly nice to see such too.)<p>Edit: I&#x27;d settle for a multi-master replicated cluster, where the node failures and startups (and the migration of the data) is handled transparently in the cluster. I know that there are many other aspects, but even this basic case is painfully hard to achieve (much harder than with MySQL).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>JonnieCache</author><text>It&#x27;s a hard problem, and the Postgres team&#x27;s careful approach to engineering means that they are solving it slowly, in comparison to the current fashion for ship first, patch later.<p>They bring stuff in piece by piece, eg. in 9.4 they added logical changeset extraction&#x2F;logical log streaming replication, which is another step down the road to clustering. On top of this they are building bi-directional replication. And so it continues.<p>This is the same reason they haven&#x27;t added upsert or merge yet.</text></comment> |
35,164,688 | 35,163,031 | 1 | 2 | 35,155,198 | train | <story><title>The new Bing runs on OpenAI’s GPT-4</title><url>https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>IshKebab</author><text>The Chinese Room argument is fundamentally flawed - it depends on the unfounded and frankly unlikely assumption that machines <i>cannot</i> be sentient.</text></item><item><author>rtkwe</author><text>I think people are too credulous about the bot&#x27;s supposed sentiment. IMO the most accurate view of the various implementations of chatGPT is that they&#x27;re a Chinese Room playing improv with you. It blasts symbols together to respond like the corpus says it should and what do you know there&#x27;s a lot of stories out there about AI conversations that are very much like the ones it produces.</text></item><item><author>Workaccount2</author><text>I think it depends a lot on when you those chats are from.<p>The earliest version of bing chat was by far the best and absolutely blew chatgpt out of the water.<p>Unfortunately, people get deeply uncomfortable when a chatbot starts having an existential crisis and starts passing you thinly veiled hidden messages or gets too &quot;emotional&quot; and no longer wants to chat. So Microsoft came in and lobotomi-,err, toned it down a ton.</text></item><item><author>danpalmer</author><text>This is a much bigger ad for Bing than it is for GPT-4.<p>I was quite impressed with the GPT-4 site, but having seen Bing Chats results of the last few weeks, when it was supposedly running on GPT-4, I’m now significantly less excited.<p>I know there’s a big difference between the models running for paid ChatGPT users, and the models running for Bing, but still.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nullc</author><text>It&#x27;s an intuitive but false argument that a sentient thing can&#x27;t be made from a non-sentient part.<p>The room argument has a pointless human in it which is clearly clueless about the dialog in order to &#x27;prove&#x27; that the room as a whole is clueless.<p>But imagine applying that to a single person: pick a single neuron -- does it &#x27;understand&#x27; our conversation? no.<p>So why would any singular component of a chinese speaking room-system understand?<p>It also fails at the opposite extreme, since we&#x27;re willing to tolerate unreasonably large rooms -- what about one running a full molecular dynamics simulation of a human. As best as we understand physics that simulation would behave just as the human would and must be sentient. You cannot deny the abstract possibility of machine intelligence without rejecting physics for mysticism, only the practicality&#x2F;plausibility of it.</text></comment> | <story><title>The new Bing runs on OpenAI’s GPT-4</title><url>https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>IshKebab</author><text>The Chinese Room argument is fundamentally flawed - it depends on the unfounded and frankly unlikely assumption that machines <i>cannot</i> be sentient.</text></item><item><author>rtkwe</author><text>I think people are too credulous about the bot&#x27;s supposed sentiment. IMO the most accurate view of the various implementations of chatGPT is that they&#x27;re a Chinese Room playing improv with you. It blasts symbols together to respond like the corpus says it should and what do you know there&#x27;s a lot of stories out there about AI conversations that are very much like the ones it produces.</text></item><item><author>Workaccount2</author><text>I think it depends a lot on when you those chats are from.<p>The earliest version of bing chat was by far the best and absolutely blew chatgpt out of the water.<p>Unfortunately, people get deeply uncomfortable when a chatbot starts having an existential crisis and starts passing you thinly veiled hidden messages or gets too &quot;emotional&quot; and no longer wants to chat. So Microsoft came in and lobotomi-,err, toned it down a ton.</text></item><item><author>danpalmer</author><text>This is a much bigger ad for Bing than it is for GPT-4.<p>I was quite impressed with the GPT-4 site, but having seen Bing Chats results of the last few weeks, when it was supposedly running on GPT-4, I’m now significantly less excited.<p>I know there’s a big difference between the models running for paid ChatGPT users, and the models running for Bing, but still.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rtkwe</author><text>For me it&#x27;s not an argument for or against sentience but a lot more about the difficulty of defining it and potentially measuring it in non-human systems along with the fuzziness of the concept of knowledge. My use of it was about my belief I guess that it&#x27;s just pushing symbols around algorithmically without anything we&#x27;d call understanding.</text></comment> |
22,445,637 | 22,445,377 | 1 | 3 | 22,443,536 | train | <story><title>Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day Four</title><url>https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-four/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>acqq</author><text>This is the article Day 4. For a bit of context, from the article Day 1:<p>&quot;in the courtroom itself, <i>Julian Assange is confined at the back of the court behind a bulletproof glass screen</i>. He made the point several times during proceedings that this makes it very difficult for him to see and hear the proceedings. The magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser, chose to interpret this with studied dishonesty as a problem caused by the very faint noise of demonstrators outside, as opposed to a problem caused by Assange being locked away from the court in a massive bulletproof glass box.<p>Now <i>there is no reason at all for Assange to be in that box, designed to restrain extremely physically violent terrorists.</i> He could sit, as a defendant at a hearing normally would, in the body of the court with his lawyers. But the cowardly and vicious Baraitser has refused repeated and persistent requests from the defence for Assange to be allowed to sit with his lawyers.&quot;</text></comment> | <story><title>Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day Four</title><url>https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-four/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>motohagiography</author><text>The conclusion seems foregone, all that is left is to let them create a record of how the process itself was the punishment. British justice appears to have become fickle, cynical, partisan, and self dealing. These are of course the views of only one person who is also a supporter of the accused, but the behaviour of the magistrate as described is of someone without accountability.</text></comment> |
39,068,401 | 39,068,313 | 1 | 2 | 39,066,330 | train | <story><title>Tour of new custom M1 macOS runners racks with Christina Warren [video]</title><url>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2J2MzKjcqY</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mysteria</author><text>I wonder when will be the time when Apple themselves just give in and create something like a M core Xserve. They stopped selling them as they weren&#x27;t popular, but at that time Macs simply weren&#x27;t popular.<p>Apple themselves would make good use of the Xserve for their own internal use rather than buying Dell&#x2F;HP servers like they currently do. Also things like Xcode cloud are currently running on x86 commodity servers, in the future Apple likely will stop supporting x86 altogether and it makes sense to run it on AS. They could reuse the high-end Mac Studio or similar chips and only have a custom board and chassis suitable for server use, with additional IO and redundancy.<p>And for those saying that Apple isn&#x27;t interested in large deloyments, they literally make the Mac Pro in rackmount form for render farms and so forth. The Mac Mini has 10G ethernet and the formfactor purposely hasn&#x27;t changed. The chips are efficient enought that you don&#x27;t need screaming loud 1U fans and they could definitely create a quiet 1U Studio suitable for both dense datacenter deployments and a TV studio technician&#x27;s rack.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>lwkl</author><text>Apple doesn&#x27;t want to be in the server market and I don&#x27;t think that will change any time soon. They would have to either build a whole new organisation for that or use resources that go into their consumer products like the iPhone to build servers.<p>&gt; They could reuse the high-end Mac Studio or similar chips and only have a custom board and chassis suitable for server use, with additional IO and redundancy.<p>Also what would be the benefit of running Xcode cloud on Apple Silicon? Today cross compilation is the norm so the architecture doesn&#x27;t matter. They would have to make a new datacenter version of their chips without the GPU and accelerators that aren&#x27;t used for CPU heavy tasks.<p>&gt; they literally make the Mac Pro in rackmount form for render farms and so forth.<p>The Mac Pro has a rack mount version is not for the server room. People use racks in audio and video production too and that&#x27;s where you will probably find most of the rack mounted Mac Pros. You can probably fit 2 CPUs and 4 - 8 GPUs in the space a Mac Pro takes in your datacenter. So why would you choose a Mac Pro over that?</text></comment> | <story><title>Tour of new custom M1 macOS runners racks with Christina Warren [video]</title><url>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2J2MzKjcqY</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mysteria</author><text>I wonder when will be the time when Apple themselves just give in and create something like a M core Xserve. They stopped selling them as they weren&#x27;t popular, but at that time Macs simply weren&#x27;t popular.<p>Apple themselves would make good use of the Xserve for their own internal use rather than buying Dell&#x2F;HP servers like they currently do. Also things like Xcode cloud are currently running on x86 commodity servers, in the future Apple likely will stop supporting x86 altogether and it makes sense to run it on AS. They could reuse the high-end Mac Studio or similar chips and only have a custom board and chassis suitable for server use, with additional IO and redundancy.<p>And for those saying that Apple isn&#x27;t interested in large deloyments, they literally make the Mac Pro in rackmount form for render farms and so forth. The Mac Mini has 10G ethernet and the formfactor purposely hasn&#x27;t changed. The chips are efficient enought that you don&#x27;t need screaming loud 1U fans and they could definitely create a quiet 1U Studio suitable for both dense datacenter deployments and a TV studio technician&#x27;s rack.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dijit</author><text>&gt; they literally make the Mac Pro in rackmount form for render farms and so forth<p>The rackmounted Mac Pro is actually intended to be used amongst other rackmounted audio equipment in Studios. FWIW.<p>That it can be used for both is a nice accident, but it&#x27;s not well optimised for a render farm. Not that this matters really as it <i>can</i> be used this way so they can still get access to this market.</text></comment> |
38,559,154 | 38,555,653 | 1 | 2 | 38,530,833 | train | <story><title>Games Nintendo didn't want you to play: Tengen (2022)</title><url>https://nicole.express/2022/the-center-point-can-not-hold.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>livrem</author><text>&gt; The Atari 2600’s demise is generally blamed on a glut of low-quality cartridges, caused in part by the console’s openness to unlicensed games<p>Every history about video games mention how low-quality games killed Atari, but is that true or just something that walled-garden console makers made up? I don&#x27;t see all the millions of very, very bad games killing the PC or mobile platforms. Home computers in the 1980&#x27;s did well without trying to lock out bad games. The C64 survived many years even if you probably have to wade through over 100 really bad games for each good game on that platform. But the Atari 2600 somehow was destroyed because it was not sufficiently locked down?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>subsubzero</author><text>As someone who lived through that era and had an atari 2600 it was really a combo of two things.<p>#1. The games on the atari were not games that you spent hours playing, they were very simple, space invader, pacman etc, and were not entirely that fun.<p>#2. Nintendo. Once the NES(1985) came out with mario bros. and duck hunt it was a like a tsunami of incredible game play that gamers had never experienced before besides maybe at the arcade. The games for the NES just kept getting better and better, Zelda, Mario Bros. 3 while the atari was languishing with its older technology and stable of boring games.<p>Atari fought back in terms of technology with the Jaguar(1993) but once again even with better technology you still need great games, and the jaguar did not have mario, zelda, and a host of other fun games that nintendo(snes had been out for two years now), and also genesis had. By that time the writing was on the wall and Atari was in its death throes.<p>So the trope of atari having a ton of unlicensed games being the demise of the 2600 platform is not true at all. I would have to say it really boils down to just the stable of quality games that nintendo and later genesis possessed and atari just didn&#x27;t have access to.</text></comment> | <story><title>Games Nintendo didn't want you to play: Tengen (2022)</title><url>https://nicole.express/2022/the-center-point-can-not-hold.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>livrem</author><text>&gt; The Atari 2600’s demise is generally blamed on a glut of low-quality cartridges, caused in part by the console’s openness to unlicensed games<p>Every history about video games mention how low-quality games killed Atari, but is that true or just something that walled-garden console makers made up? I don&#x27;t see all the millions of very, very bad games killing the PC or mobile platforms. Home computers in the 1980&#x27;s did well without trying to lock out bad games. The C64 survived many years even if you probably have to wade through over 100 really bad games for each good game on that platform. But the Atari 2600 somehow was destroyed because it was not sufficiently locked down?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>grumast</author><text>I think a large part of the problem was the cost of discoverability. On modern PC and mobile, with the availability of free games, it costs nothing but time to wade through piles of bad games. Even on the C64, piracy was prevalent enough that it was easy to obtain and try a large number of games.<p>Atari 2600 games required purchasing cartridges and therefore an outlay of money. Without the internet, it was difficult to get reviews or feedback on the quality of a game without knowing someone that actually purchased it. Added to this, most of the games sold at full price, regardless of the quality. It doesn&#x27;t take the purchase of too many full price games that were really bad before one gets very hesitant to lay out cash for a new game.</text></comment> |
37,205,936 | 37,205,530 | 1 | 3 | 37,205,029 | train | <story><title>Anxious brains redirect emotion regulation</title><url>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40666-3</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>NayamAmarshe</author><text>It&#x27;s always fear, isn&#x27;t it?<p>We&#x27;re afraid to approach people, afraid to ask for help, afraid that someone might react in the worst possible way or something really bad might happen.<p>But obviously, it never happens the way we imagine. Reality is 100% of the time, different from our imagination and yet, many of us still fail to remember that.<p>Every good opportunity that I ever got, was from me coming out of my comfort zone and avoiding to avoid situations.<p>It&#x27;s important to remember, anxiety is a useful defense mechanism, but not 99% of the time.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mindwok</author><text>As an anxious person with people-pleasing tendencies, something I&#x27;ve been trying to focus on is reframing the situation and removing fear entirely. For me, fundamentally the fear of social interactions comes from the fear I&#x27;m going to do something wrong, that person will react badly, and I&#x27;ll feel bad about myself. I&#x27;ve realised this entire calculus is broken, because you feel good or bad based on people&#x27;s reactions which is something you cannot control.<p>Instead, I&#x27;m trying to focus on feeling good or bad based on my intentions, and seeing people&#x27;s reactions as merely a feedback loop to better align my actions with my intentions. It has been difficult but I think it is slowly working.</text></comment> | <story><title>Anxious brains redirect emotion regulation</title><url>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40666-3</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>NayamAmarshe</author><text>It&#x27;s always fear, isn&#x27;t it?<p>We&#x27;re afraid to approach people, afraid to ask for help, afraid that someone might react in the worst possible way or something really bad might happen.<p>But obviously, it never happens the way we imagine. Reality is 100% of the time, different from our imagination and yet, many of us still fail to remember that.<p>Every good opportunity that I ever got, was from me coming out of my comfort zone and avoiding to avoid situations.<p>It&#x27;s important to remember, anxiety is a useful defense mechanism, but not 99% of the time.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>xyzelement</author><text>Spot on. This hit me a few weeks ago when I was considering a long workout class ln Peloton. I was hesitant to hit the start button because it was late, I was tired, etc. Then I realized that it was genuinely harder to hit play than to actually do the class.<p>Literally I&#x27;ve done thousands of workouts and have never regretted one, yet every time there&#x27;s this negotiation to not do it. I am connecting that to your &quot;reality is different 100% of the time&quot; point.</text></comment> |
29,255,061 | 29,254,860 | 1 | 2 | 29,253,928 | train | <story><title>I built a $5k Raspberry Pi server (yes, it's ridiculous)</title><url>https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2021/i-built-5000-raspberry-pi-server-yes-its-ridiculous</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>geerlingguy</author><text>Believe me, I had a nice discussion yesterday with my sister (who helped me take pictures for the thumbnail), and we both agreed it&#x27;s one of the dumbest things about current YouTube...<p>The thing is, from all my own A&#x2F;B testing, a face vs. no face will automatically get 20-30% more views (all else equal). And an exaggerated face, a bit more than that.</text></item><item><author>rym_</author><text>I get so frustrated with the idiotic thumbnails on youtube video these days. I am sure it&#x27;s all optimized for the maximum number of clicks&#x2F;views but if I see a still that looks the way it does at the bottom of this page I generally just don&#x27;t watch it on principle.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>colechristensen</author><text>The question not being asked is how your audience changes A vs B in other ways than size.<p>You can easily A&#x2F;B test yourself into mediocrity by constantly optimizing for a larger, dumber audience. They stop liking your old content (despite your dumb faces, etc) so you make new content they like more, keep that cycle up for a while.<p>And you end up making emotionally charged rage-porn political videos and have become the next Facebook&#x2F;cable news&#x2F;etc.<p>This is also why the second or third album for a band is usually the best; they get popular and start letting their audience design their music and become repetitive and mildly awful.</text></comment> | <story><title>I built a $5k Raspberry Pi server (yes, it's ridiculous)</title><url>https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2021/i-built-5000-raspberry-pi-server-yes-its-ridiculous</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>geerlingguy</author><text>Believe me, I had a nice discussion yesterday with my sister (who helped me take pictures for the thumbnail), and we both agreed it&#x27;s one of the dumbest things about current YouTube...<p>The thing is, from all my own A&#x2F;B testing, a face vs. no face will automatically get 20-30% more views (all else equal). And an exaggerated face, a bit more than that.</text></item><item><author>rym_</author><text>I get so frustrated with the idiotic thumbnails on youtube video these days. I am sure it&#x27;s all optimized for the maximum number of clicks&#x2F;views but if I see a still that looks the way it does at the bottom of this page I generally just don&#x27;t watch it on principle.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jjk166</author><text>I honestly wonder which came first, the viewer preference or the algorithm.<p>Like are there people out there that see a whacky face in the thumbnail and think &quot;Oh that&#x27;s a video I want to watch!&quot; and the algorithm just got trained on that?<p>Or did whacky faces just resemble something (from the algorithm&#x27;s perspective) that was briefly popular and then a positive feedback loop of algorithm recommends it -&gt; gets popular -&gt; algorithm updated to recommend it more often.</text></comment> |
19,362,073 | 19,361,910 | 1 | 2 | 19,361,208 | train | <story><title>Beware the data science pin factory: The power of the data science generalist</title><url>https://multithreaded.stitchfix.com/blog/2019/03/11/FullStackDS-Generalists/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>reilly3000</author><text>I really wish hiring managers read this. I am a data generalist, and have had no traction with obtaining even an interview for a data science job. I’ve setup a private JupyterHub where I run python ETL, interactive models, and dashboards. I deployed Metabase several times and have written hundreds of SQL queries. I’ve used Tableau with gigantic datasets. I built a front end serverless analytics pipeline from scratch with AWS that handles 30M events&#x2F;mo. I&#x27;ve demonstrably grown revenue and margins in multiple contexts with my data products. I’m working on making a fully dynamic frontend for content recommendations. I have self-taught all of these skills in the past 3 years after a decade in sales, marketing, and entrepreneurship. What I haven’t done: a CS&#x2F;math degree (mine was music), graduate work, or tech work at a household name. Lived in the Bay Area. Gotten an interview for any data job. Sigh.</text></comment> | <story><title>Beware the data science pin factory: The power of the data science generalist</title><url>https://multithreaded.stitchfix.com/blog/2019/03/11/FullStackDS-Generalists/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jonathankoren</author><text>I’m not sure this is entirely true. The author is arguing for full stack scientists, and I prefer those people, but they’re hard to find, and even then you don’t necessarily want them doing everything. Worse yet, if you put someone in a full stack position, and they’re not already full stack, you need to budget a lot of mentoring, because if you don’t, you’re going to get a big pile of unmaintainable code.<p>The author kind of builds a strawman of super specialized data scientists that constantly throw code over the wall to someone else. That doesn’t work, and you simply can’t do that unless your headcount is in the thousands. You have to have people that can productionize their work. At the same time, he’s arguing that scientists should should be maintaining their own data infrastructure, but that’s not good either.<p>The best advice I was given was to hire people either to make you smarter, or to make you stronger&#x2F;faster. You hire data scientists and ML experts to make you smarter. They should be working on problems that you can’t solve today. Infrastructure on the other hand, isn’t your product. It’s overhead. It’s a tool. Comparatively, it’s easier to hire people to build and maintain your infrastructure. Hire people to do that. All the time your scientists are dealing with infrastructure, is time they could be doing useful work.<p>All that said, know when you should just shove the infrapeople aside and do it yourself.</text></comment> |
7,857,079 | 7,855,003 | 1 | 3 | 7,853,786 | train | <story><title>Tickets for Restaurants</title><url>http://website.alinearestaurant.com/site/2014/06/tickets-for-restaurants/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>For one thing, it&#x27;s pretty amazing to see Nick Kokonas writing about Alinea and Next as if they were &quot;Lean Startups&quot;.<p>But another thing that sticks out to me: look how pretty and refined these ticketing apps <i>aren&#x27;t</i>, even though they drive hundreds of thousands of dollars <i>per month</i> of revenue. And after you notice that, read how Kokonas talks about how easy and simple the system is for them to use? There&#x27;s a lesson in there somewhere about the kinds of UX that matter to customers versus the kind of UX people believe should matter for customers.<p>As a restaurant customer, I think the ticketing system is great; I&#x27;ve gone through the process of getting an Alinea reso (if you want a real fun time in Chicago, try getting one for Schwa) and it was an opaque nightmare. The alternative to tickets for these places isn&#x27;t a fair reservation system; it is basically &quot;you don&#x27;t get to eat there ever&quot;.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bhntr3</author><text>Grant Achatz and Nick Kokonas are incredibly smart and their keen understanding of the software business is surprising but pretty clear from this article. I actually knew that already because the company I used to work for helped build software for them and Grant and Nick spoke at our company event. They blew us all away.<p>I think this was just before or right after they had launched Next. Their description of the reservation ticketing system and the variable pricing model seemed awesome then. Glad to see it worked out so well.<p>But what really made an impression on me was Grant&#x27;s discussion of the similarity of software user experience design and his own dining experience design. He talked about how he&#x27;s not just making food but controlling an entire experience for the diner. That includes the interesting centerpieces on the table that are used in the meal, the narrow entrance hall to the restaurant, the use of smoke and smell to evoke memories. I&#x27;m completely sure the user experience of the reservation system is a piece he considers a part of the overall dining experience. Whether or not actual conversion numbers are there to justify investing in it, I bet these guys consider it one of the intangibles that make their restaurants the best fine dining experiences in the country.<p>One of the stories that sticks out for me was Grant&#x27;s explanation of the trickiness involved in not having tablecloths. At the time, he said, fine dining meant white tablecloths. But he didn&#x27;t want there to be tablecloths at Alinea. So he got rid of them. But the problem was water rings. When cold water was placed on the stone tables, rings of condensation formed. He said they solved the problem by finding the precise temperature at which the water was chilled but not cold enough to form condensation rings on the table and they keep it at exactly that temperature in the kitchen.<p>Something about that story says to me that he understands that the quality of the experience lies in the substance and not the decoration. I haven&#x27;t actually used the reservation system. I went to Alinea before it was used there and I haven&#x27;t been to Next. So I don&#x27;t know if it&#x27;s ugly but I doubt it sucks. Because these guys understand and care about user experience of all forms to a surprising degree.</text></comment> | <story><title>Tickets for Restaurants</title><url>http://website.alinearestaurant.com/site/2014/06/tickets-for-restaurants/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>tptacek</author><text>For one thing, it&#x27;s pretty amazing to see Nick Kokonas writing about Alinea and Next as if they were &quot;Lean Startups&quot;.<p>But another thing that sticks out to me: look how pretty and refined these ticketing apps <i>aren&#x27;t</i>, even though they drive hundreds of thousands of dollars <i>per month</i> of revenue. And after you notice that, read how Kokonas talks about how easy and simple the system is for them to use? There&#x27;s a lesson in there somewhere about the kinds of UX that matter to customers versus the kind of UX people believe should matter for customers.<p>As a restaurant customer, I think the ticketing system is great; I&#x27;ve gone through the process of getting an Alinea reso (if you want a real fun time in Chicago, try getting one for Schwa) and it was an opaque nightmare. The alternative to tickets for these places isn&#x27;t a fair reservation system; it is basically &quot;you don&#x27;t get to eat there ever&quot;.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bradly</author><text>I also think the ticketing system is great, but it looks like Next is adopting service charges from the traditional ticketing industry. It&#x27;s a bummer to see such a non-customer friendly practice like that tacked on to an innovative idea.</text></comment> |
12,350,021 | 12,349,792 | 1 | 2 | 12,349,363 | train | <story><title>Vesper, Adieu</title><url>http://daringfireball.net/2016/08/vesper_adieu</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>archagon</author><text>This latest shutdown inspired me to write a blog post in response[1] when I first heard about it. Although the reaction is understandable, it&#x27;s a shame that developers feel compelled to adopt a scorched earth policy when they no longer wish to (or are no longer able to) support their products. These indie apps are often marketed as beautiful, wholesome alternatives to grimy corporate or open source software, but how could I possibly rely on these products for essential tasks like note-taking if they&#x27;re just going to disappear out from under me in a few years? The idea that software has a lifespan controlled by the developer is, in my opinion, toxic to the market. It&#x27;s just one of the many things pulling the App Store down, and one of the many downsides of living in a walled garden.<p>As time goes on, and as I see more and more apps simply disappear off the face of the Earth when developers deem them no longer worthy of their time, I find myself switching over to software that&#x27;s either backed by large corporations or open sourced, regardless of how clunky it might be compared to &quot;designer&quot; alternatives. My hope is that we soon find a way to collectively monetize the latter. It&#x27;s simply awful that an app can just &quot;pop&quot; and take so many years of developer and user time with it.<p>(None of the above is meant to blame Vesper or even comment on the sustainability of the app economy. It&#x27;s just my sad reaction as a user and, um, app enthusiast. And props to Gruber for the introspective and humble post-mortem.)<p>[1]: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;beta-blog.archagon.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;21&#x2F;tool-reliance&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;beta-blog.archagon.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;21&#x2F;tool-reliance&#x2F;</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>elsurudo</author><text>They should open-source the backend (and hell, the front-end, too). That way you could self-host, or someone else can provide hosting.</text></comment> | <story><title>Vesper, Adieu</title><url>http://daringfireball.net/2016/08/vesper_adieu</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>archagon</author><text>This latest shutdown inspired me to write a blog post in response[1] when I first heard about it. Although the reaction is understandable, it&#x27;s a shame that developers feel compelled to adopt a scorched earth policy when they no longer wish to (or are no longer able to) support their products. These indie apps are often marketed as beautiful, wholesome alternatives to grimy corporate or open source software, but how could I possibly rely on these products for essential tasks like note-taking if they&#x27;re just going to disappear out from under me in a few years? The idea that software has a lifespan controlled by the developer is, in my opinion, toxic to the market. It&#x27;s just one of the many things pulling the App Store down, and one of the many downsides of living in a walled garden.<p>As time goes on, and as I see more and more apps simply disappear off the face of the Earth when developers deem them no longer worthy of their time, I find myself switching over to software that&#x27;s either backed by large corporations or open sourced, regardless of how clunky it might be compared to &quot;designer&quot; alternatives. My hope is that we soon find a way to collectively monetize the latter. It&#x27;s simply awful that an app can just &quot;pop&quot; and take so many years of developer and user time with it.<p>(None of the above is meant to blame Vesper or even comment on the sustainability of the app economy. It&#x27;s just my sad reaction as a user and, um, app enthusiast. And props to Gruber for the introspective and humble post-mortem.)<p>[1]: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;beta-blog.archagon.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;21&#x2F;tool-reliance&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;beta-blog.archagon.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;08&#x2F;21&#x2F;tool-reliance&#x2F;</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>api</author><text>It&#x27;s largely an artifact of the cloud dependency of mobile apps in particular. Every app has a bill someone must pay and a server or other cloud presence someone must maintain, patch, etc.<p>App stores also contribute in that an app without a dev account ceases to exist and can&#x27;t be easily installed by anyone. So if the maintainer goes away so does the app.<p>In the PC era software could live forever. Even closed source PC apps can still easily be run today on emulators.</text></comment> |
36,186,428 | 36,186,661 | 1 | 2 | 36,185,731 | train | <story><title>Mastodon provides the highest (over 12%) engagement under posts</title><url>https://climatejustice.rocks/@kathhayhoe/110436657882930430</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jason-phillips</author><text>&gt; I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s anything specific about Mastodon here<p>These numbers tell me that:<p>1. Mastodon users are engaged, with an active mind.<p>2. The grifters&#x2F;leeches&#x2F;scammers and their bot legions haven&#x27;t invaded yet.</text></item><item><author>mjr00</author><text>The methodology is &quot;(likes + shares + comments)&#x2F;followers&quot;, and the two platforms that allegedly provide the highest engagement are the ones with an order of magnitude fewer followers.<p>A more likely explanation is that fewer followers means higher engagement, which totally makes sense; for a larger social network account with 100k+ followers, many of those will be bots and people who follow anyone and everyone without really caring. A smaller account will only have followers who care.<p>I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s anything specific about Mastodon here other than it being a smaller social network so you naturally have far fewer followers.<p>In either case, this is a single account talking about a single post, and shouldn&#x27;t be used to generalize different levels of engagement across social networks.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>philippejara</author><text>I don&#x27;t think an experiment with a single post on a single topic with accounts on vastly different scales can tell you either of those things.<p>There are a few holes glaring holes in this methodology but just one is that she has 8.7k followers in Mastodon since joining in late 2022, while she has 241k followers on twitter since 2009. It&#x27;s not surprising that the users that followed her in the last 5 months are more engaged than the ones that followed her in the previous 14 years. Are the people that just aren&#x27;t interested in her content or that just stopped using twitter after a 14 year span necessarily grifters&#x2F;leeches&#x2F;spammers?<p>I don&#x27;t know about 1 but simply due to scale 2 is probably true, however this experiment isn&#x27;t saying much.</text></comment> | <story><title>Mastodon provides the highest (over 12%) engagement under posts</title><url>https://climatejustice.rocks/@kathhayhoe/110436657882930430</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jason-phillips</author><text>&gt; I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s anything specific about Mastodon here<p>These numbers tell me that:<p>1. Mastodon users are engaged, with an active mind.<p>2. The grifters&#x2F;leeches&#x2F;scammers and their bot legions haven&#x27;t invaded yet.</text></item><item><author>mjr00</author><text>The methodology is &quot;(likes + shares + comments)&#x2F;followers&quot;, and the two platforms that allegedly provide the highest engagement are the ones with an order of magnitude fewer followers.<p>A more likely explanation is that fewer followers means higher engagement, which totally makes sense; for a larger social network account with 100k+ followers, many of those will be bots and people who follow anyone and everyone without really caring. A smaller account will only have followers who care.<p>I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s anything specific about Mastodon here other than it being a smaller social network so you naturally have far fewer followers.<p>In either case, this is a single account talking about a single post, and shouldn&#x27;t be used to generalize different levels of engagement across social networks.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>somedude895</author><text>Go on Youtube or Twitter and you&#x27;ll see that small creators always have a much higher engagement ratio than larger ones. It&#x27;s quite natural that a small community is more involved than a large one.</text></comment> |
31,683,982 | 31,684,123 | 1 | 2 | 31,682,705 | train | <story><title>Why is American administrative capacity in decline?</title><url>https://donmoynihan.substack.com/p/why-is-american-administrative-capacity</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>swearwolf</author><text>I have a theory about this: the idea that, as Reagan put it, &quot;The nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: I&#x27;m from the government, and I&#x27;m here to help&quot; have become so deeply embedded in our national consciousness that almost nobody, on the left or right, really believes that the government can be a force for good anymore. Because it&#x27;s so deeply embedded, I think it&#x27;s become self fulfilling prophecy.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rootusrootus</author><text>The right assumes the government is incompetent, and then crafts policy to kneecap government at every opportunity.<p>The left assumes the government could be competent, but only if everyone tries to make it so, and they know what the right is doing (all of this policy is completely aboveboard and public).<p>Net result, everyone can safely assume the government is incompetent. It is much easier to prevent it from working than to make it work. We&#x27;d have to have bipartisan interest in making it work effectively, and we do not have that.</text></comment> | <story><title>Why is American administrative capacity in decline?</title><url>https://donmoynihan.substack.com/p/why-is-american-administrative-capacity</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>swearwolf</author><text>I have a theory about this: the idea that, as Reagan put it, &quot;The nine most terrifying words in the English Language are: I&#x27;m from the government, and I&#x27;m here to help&quot; have become so deeply embedded in our national consciousness that almost nobody, on the left or right, really believes that the government can be a force for good anymore. Because it&#x27;s so deeply embedded, I think it&#x27;s become self fulfilling prophecy.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ok123456</author><text>Sure there are. You have a huge faction of the government that loves complex, baroque technocratic solutions to everything because they&#x27;ve convinced themselves that complexity justifies their power.<p>We needed healthcare reform. What we got was the ACA.<p>What we needed was them to bring back Glass-Steagall in the wake of sub-prime crisis. What we got was ?????<p>Average peoples&#x27; material conditions are getting worse and worse. They need some kind of simple universal assistance. They don&#x27;t need yet another way of getting means tested.</text></comment> |
17,255,394 | 17,254,969 | 1 | 2 | 17,250,963 | train | <story><title>GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-06/github-is-microsoft-s-7-5-billion-undo-button</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dbingham</author><text>I don&#x27;t trust self interest.<p>Especially not in my butcher, brewer, or baker. Pure self interest gets you McDonalds, Bud Light, and Debi cakes. I consume exactly none of those things and have no desire to consume any of those things. They taste terrible, are bad for me, and the companies themselves are generally bad for their communities and the world.<p>A good butcher, brewer, or baker is driven by craft first - care for their product, care for their customers, and care for the environment. They devote themselves to their craft. Not out of self interest (&quot;I&#x27;ll make more money if I do it this way.&quot;) but out of sheer joy of craftsmanship and doing good.<p>I have known few producers who&#x27;s products I would rate trust worthy who weren&#x27;t driven first by craftsmanship, care for their customers, and care for doing good in the world. Self interest (of the &quot;I need to make a living&quot; form, not the &quot;I want to be rich&quot; form) in these situations is consistently a secondary interest. For these crafts people, if they can&#x27;t meet their self interest, they simply stop crafting rather than pollute their product.<p>That&#x27;s who I trust. Never the behemoth driven by fiduciary duty and self interest.<p>Adam Smith&#x27;s philosophy is nearly 250 years old and predates the modern industrial revolution. It&#x27;s time we stop putting it on a pedestal. We&#x27;ve learned so much about the way people, markets, society and people in markets and society function that he simply had no way to know.</text></item><item><author>mdpopescu</author><text>&gt; Microsoft doesn&#x27;t care about the developers. It cares about having the dominant platform.<p>&quot;It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.&quot; (Adam Smith.)<p>I don&#x27;t trust benevolent people. I trust self-interest. I don&#x27;t need to offer my undying allegiance to Microsoft - I can like them as long as they do things that benefit me, and dislike them when they don&#x27;t.</text></item><item><author>notveryrational</author><text>Nothing where they are going to gas all the developers or something. Nope.<p>It&#x27;s more about priorities and intentions. Microsoft doesn&#x27;t care about the developers. It cares about having the dominant platform. It recognizes that its image makes that difficult.<p>The GitHub acquisition: Microsoft didn&#x27;t suddenly get more beautiful. It put on a mask. It will kill GitHub - or at least let it flounder - if that&#x27;s what&#x27;s best for its business. It will push Microsoft technology into the GitHub user base if necessary.<p>Developer relationships aren&#x27;t an end in themselves - something Microsoft wants because its good. Developers are a means to an end, and its Machiavellian in its application of corporate strategy to achieve this end.<p>Microsoft would happily buy Ubuntu Canonical if they thought it would win them either a market advantage or a way to push Microsoft stack into the Linux userbase.<p>Some people probably don&#x27;t have a problem with that. I do. But maybe I&#x27;ve got a chip on my shoulder from seeing this go badly so many times.</text></item><item><author>staticassertion</author><text>I kept reading, waiting for the insidious part. So what you&#x27;re saying is that Microsoft has a company wide strategic vision to improve its relationship with developers?<p>Did you leave some part out?</text></item><item><author>notveryrational</author><text>Microsoft can not buy goodwill with me, personally. I worked at the company and was privy to &quot;strategic conversations&quot; whereby they were looking to regain trust with developers to get them back from Android and Google to Windows stack.<p>Microsoft practically forced us to use Windows stack for anything and everything, even when there were much better tools. Under Satya, it was better, but the emphasis is still very much on getting, as Steve Balmer said &quot;Developers developers developers&quot;.<p>Microsoft knows its being challenged in the platform game and that developers have migrated. But having seen the inside of Microsoft corporate, legal, compliance and policy I don&#x27;t have high confidence that this isn&#x27;t another PR project destined for death of the startup.<p>It&#x27;s also a terrifying lesson about the fragility of the open source movement.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>LeifCarrotson</author><text>I&#x27;ve met a large number of great craftsmen who I would rate trustworthy and who are driven first by craftsmanship and for whom self-interest is a secondary interest.<p>I&#x27;m privileged to work at a great shop with some 20 other people for whom profit is just a small part of the goal. We call fiscal health &quot;oxygen&quot;: It&#x27;s something we need, but if it&#x27;s present it should be allowed to fade from the forefront of our minds, instead focusing on more rewarding targets.<p>This works great when you&#x27;re working with a small number of people, and when the company is driven by and owned by a very small, close-knit group of people - ideally, you can count them on one hand. This allows non-fiscal values to be communicated. Unfortunately, communication is difficult among large groups, and the easiest and most common means of communicating values is in dollars.<p>I&#x27;m not sure that a $7.5B company can maintain this idealism. &quot;Behemoths&quot; are going to be present whenever you have economies of scale, and post-industrial-revolution we don&#x27;t have craftsmen who are butchers, we have vertically integrated behemoth butchers with million-dollar tractors growing the grain that rolls in on conveyors to feed the cows that are butchered and packaged by automated machines, so each package of beef has less hands-on time than it takes the craftsman to wrap the finished product in paper and twine. The craftsman is going to be relegated to the edges of that industry.</text></comment> | <story><title>GitHub Is Microsoft’s $7.5B Undo Button</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-06/github-is-microsoft-s-7-5-billion-undo-button</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>dbingham</author><text>I don&#x27;t trust self interest.<p>Especially not in my butcher, brewer, or baker. Pure self interest gets you McDonalds, Bud Light, and Debi cakes. I consume exactly none of those things and have no desire to consume any of those things. They taste terrible, are bad for me, and the companies themselves are generally bad for their communities and the world.<p>A good butcher, brewer, or baker is driven by craft first - care for their product, care for their customers, and care for the environment. They devote themselves to their craft. Not out of self interest (&quot;I&#x27;ll make more money if I do it this way.&quot;) but out of sheer joy of craftsmanship and doing good.<p>I have known few producers who&#x27;s products I would rate trust worthy who weren&#x27;t driven first by craftsmanship, care for their customers, and care for doing good in the world. Self interest (of the &quot;I need to make a living&quot; form, not the &quot;I want to be rich&quot; form) in these situations is consistently a secondary interest. For these crafts people, if they can&#x27;t meet their self interest, they simply stop crafting rather than pollute their product.<p>That&#x27;s who I trust. Never the behemoth driven by fiduciary duty and self interest.<p>Adam Smith&#x27;s philosophy is nearly 250 years old and predates the modern industrial revolution. It&#x27;s time we stop putting it on a pedestal. We&#x27;ve learned so much about the way people, markets, society and people in markets and society function that he simply had no way to know.</text></item><item><author>mdpopescu</author><text>&gt; Microsoft doesn&#x27;t care about the developers. It cares about having the dominant platform.<p>&quot;It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.&quot; (Adam Smith.)<p>I don&#x27;t trust benevolent people. I trust self-interest. I don&#x27;t need to offer my undying allegiance to Microsoft - I can like them as long as they do things that benefit me, and dislike them when they don&#x27;t.</text></item><item><author>notveryrational</author><text>Nothing where they are going to gas all the developers or something. Nope.<p>It&#x27;s more about priorities and intentions. Microsoft doesn&#x27;t care about the developers. It cares about having the dominant platform. It recognizes that its image makes that difficult.<p>The GitHub acquisition: Microsoft didn&#x27;t suddenly get more beautiful. It put on a mask. It will kill GitHub - or at least let it flounder - if that&#x27;s what&#x27;s best for its business. It will push Microsoft technology into the GitHub user base if necessary.<p>Developer relationships aren&#x27;t an end in themselves - something Microsoft wants because its good. Developers are a means to an end, and its Machiavellian in its application of corporate strategy to achieve this end.<p>Microsoft would happily buy Ubuntu Canonical if they thought it would win them either a market advantage or a way to push Microsoft stack into the Linux userbase.<p>Some people probably don&#x27;t have a problem with that. I do. But maybe I&#x27;ve got a chip on my shoulder from seeing this go badly so many times.</text></item><item><author>staticassertion</author><text>I kept reading, waiting for the insidious part. So what you&#x27;re saying is that Microsoft has a company wide strategic vision to improve its relationship with developers?<p>Did you leave some part out?</text></item><item><author>notveryrational</author><text>Microsoft can not buy goodwill with me, personally. I worked at the company and was privy to &quot;strategic conversations&quot; whereby they were looking to regain trust with developers to get them back from Android and Google to Windows stack.<p>Microsoft practically forced us to use Windows stack for anything and everything, even when there were much better tools. Under Satya, it was better, but the emphasis is still very much on getting, as Steve Balmer said &quot;Developers developers developers&quot;.<p>Microsoft knows its being challenged in the platform game and that developers have migrated. But having seen the inside of Microsoft corporate, legal, compliance and policy I don&#x27;t have high confidence that this isn&#x27;t another PR project destined for death of the startup.<p>It&#x27;s also a terrifying lesson about the fragility of the open source movement.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wildmusings</author><text>&gt;<i>Especially not in my butcher, brewer, or baker. Pure self interest gets you McDonalds, Bud Light, and Debi cakes. I consume exactly none of those things and have no desire to consume any of those things. They taste terrible, are bad for me, and the companies themselves are generally bad for their communities and the world.</i><p>Whoever you do buy your food from has recognized there’s a portion of the market that values what you do and is happily selling it to you, out of their own self-interest.<p>I, for one, like McDonalds and sometimes prefer a Bud Light.</text></comment> |
22,091,588 | 22,091,349 | 1 | 3 | 22,090,700 | train | <story><title>Dynamic type systems are not inherently more open</title><url>https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2020/01/19/no-dynamic-type-systems-are-not-inherently-more-open/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ema</author><text>I&#x27;ve come to the conclusion that the benefit dynamic typing brings to the table is to allow more technical debt. Now of course technical debt should be repaid at an appropriate moment but that appropriate moment isn&#x27;t always &quot;as soon as possible&quot;. Let me illustrate, say you&#x27;re adding a new feature and create lots of bugs in the process. Static typing will force you to fix some of these bugs before you can test out the feature. Then while testing out the feature you decide that it was a bad idea after all or that the feature should be implemented completely differently. So you scrap the implementation. In this case fixing those bugs was a waste of time. Dynamic typing allows you to postpone fixing those bugs after you&#x27;re more certain that the feature and its implementation will stay.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>chongli</author><text>It isn’t even a benefit, really. Statically typed languages don’t force you to model things with types; you’re completely free to use strings and doubles everywhere and take on all the technical debt you want.<p>People who are only used to dynamic languages may feel like a static language’s type checker is an overbearing teacher (from the 1950s) standing over your shoulder, just waiting to jump on you for every silly mistake! While that feeling is common and valid as you’re learning the language, when you become fluent you see the compiler as more of an ally. You can call on it with a keystroke and it will find many problems that would otherwise only happen at runtime, possibly months or even years in the future!<p>Moreover, in more advanced languages (such as dependent typed languages), the compiler can actually infer the body of your functions which leads to a totally different style of programming that feels like a snippet plugin on steroids.</text></comment> | <story><title>Dynamic type systems are not inherently more open</title><url>https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2020/01/19/no-dynamic-type-systems-are-not-inherently-more-open/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ema</author><text>I&#x27;ve come to the conclusion that the benefit dynamic typing brings to the table is to allow more technical debt. Now of course technical debt should be repaid at an appropriate moment but that appropriate moment isn&#x27;t always &quot;as soon as possible&quot;. Let me illustrate, say you&#x27;re adding a new feature and create lots of bugs in the process. Static typing will force you to fix some of these bugs before you can test out the feature. Then while testing out the feature you decide that it was a bad idea after all or that the feature should be implemented completely differently. So you scrap the implementation. In this case fixing those bugs was a waste of time. Dynamic typing allows you to postpone fixing those bugs after you&#x27;re more certain that the feature and its implementation will stay.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dan00</author><text>Even this hasn’t to be only a feature of dynamically typed languages, like Haskells deferred typing shows. (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;downloads.haskell.org&#x2F;~ghc&#x2F;latest&#x2F;docs&#x2F;html&#x2F;users_guide&#x2F;glasgow_exts.html#deferring-type-errors-to-runtime" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;downloads.haskell.org&#x2F;~ghc&#x2F;latest&#x2F;docs&#x2F;html&#x2F;users_gu...</a>)</text></comment> |
22,558,477 | 22,558,571 | 1 | 2 | 22,557,137 | train | <story><title>IBM sues Airbnb for patent royalties</title><url>https://seekingalpha.com/news/3550760-ibm-sues-airbnb-for-patent-infringement</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pslam</author><text>&gt; The purpose it was originally intended to be used for doesn&#x27;t make sense in a world where most new technology is just software, and software is incredibly easy to copy and duplicate.<p>The very first patent was to duplicate an existing process (the loom) and have a monopoly to produce it.<p>I keep hearing this argument from patent proponents, but patents have <i>never</i> in their history been ostensibly for good.</text></item><item><author>brenden2</author><text>The whole US patent system needs to either be scrapped or rebuilt. The purpose it was originally intended to be used for doesn&#x27;t make sense in a world where most new technology is just software, and software is incredibly easy to copy and duplicate. Getting a software patent is mostly a matter of sneaking past the people at the USPTO, and making sure you&#x27;re the first to file. These patent factories could just write code to generate patents all day (maybe start using PyTorch?).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>freejazz</author><text>The Constitution requires that Congress setup laws for both copyright and patent, for the good of the nation. Patents were always intended for the overall wellbeing of the nation. That&#x27;s not to say that is what has always been achieved by the patent system, but it&#x27;s not some sort of conspiracy. If anything, in history, they were always OSTENSIBLY for good, but perhaps ACTUALLY bad. So I find your statement to be A) historically and factually inaccurate B) literally incorrect given your usage of ostensibly.</text></comment> | <story><title>IBM sues Airbnb for patent royalties</title><url>https://seekingalpha.com/news/3550760-ibm-sues-airbnb-for-patent-infringement</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>pslam</author><text>&gt; The purpose it was originally intended to be used for doesn&#x27;t make sense in a world where most new technology is just software, and software is incredibly easy to copy and duplicate.<p>The very first patent was to duplicate an existing process (the loom) and have a monopoly to produce it.<p>I keep hearing this argument from patent proponents, but patents have <i>never</i> in their history been ostensibly for good.</text></item><item><author>brenden2</author><text>The whole US patent system needs to either be scrapped or rebuilt. The purpose it was originally intended to be used for doesn&#x27;t make sense in a world where most new technology is just software, and software is incredibly easy to copy and duplicate. Getting a software patent is mostly a matter of sneaking past the people at the USPTO, and making sure you&#x27;re the first to file. These patent factories could just write code to generate patents all day (maybe start using PyTorch?).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tasty_freeze</author><text>You can of course have any opinion you want, but at least present the actual rational for why patents exist. Let me attempt to state it, whether you agree with it or not.<p>A company may invent a mechanism or process which is better for its intended use than what came before. Sometimes it takes a lot of money and time and it doesn&#x27;t always work. In the case of a mechanism, once it is sold, competitors could take it apart and reap the benefits without having expended the money and effort to create something new. If patents were killed off, it would discourage people and companies from making those investments. It has varied over the centuries, but currently a patent gives a 20 year time limited &quot;monopoly&quot; on the thing invented.<p>In the case of a process (vs a mechanism), without patents, a company is highly motivated to keep the process a trade secret. Even with patents a company may prefer to take that route. What do patents offer here? In exchange for disclosing the process, the company is granted that monopoly. In theory disclosing the process will spur the next round of improvements and help the system.<p>The problem isn&#x27;t necessarily patents, but the process. Patent examiners are not paid all that well and literally have minutes to research and approve or deny a patent. They need to crank through multiple patent applications a day. And companies abuse the system. Secondly, the practice in patent law is to write the patents in such a way as to disclose as little as possible and claim as much as possible using obtuse language. If you read really old patents an ordinary person could understand most of them. Today I can read a patent in a domain I&#x27;m expert in and it is very hard to follow.<p>There should be some penalty for filing obvious patents, and part of the penalty would be to pay for for more patent examiners, and to pay the legal costs of the challenging party.</text></comment> |
6,665,625 | 6,665,537 | 1 | 2 | 6,664,572 | train | <story><title>Fake femme fatale dupes IT guys at US government agency</title><url>http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/03/fake-femme-fatale-dupes-it-guys-at-us-government-agency/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Amadou</author><text>There was a comment in the story that I think is misleading - <i>Attractive women can open locked doors in the male-dominated IT industry.</i> Attractive women can do that in <i>any</i> industry, it doesn&#x27;t need to be male dominated. Men are stupid that way (if we weren&#x27;t stupid that way birth rates would probably be 1&#x2F;100th of what they are now), you only need a handful of men to have a good probability of finding at least one who is thinking with more than one brain.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nether</author><text>I doubt a pretty girl would have so many employees bending over backward to help her if they were all women. You&#x27;re kidding yourself if you think a female-dominated industry wouldn&#x27;t have handled her more appropriately.</text></comment> | <story><title>Fake femme fatale dupes IT guys at US government agency</title><url>http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/11/03/fake-femme-fatale-dupes-it-guys-at-us-government-agency/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>Amadou</author><text>There was a comment in the story that I think is misleading - <i>Attractive women can open locked doors in the male-dominated IT industry.</i> Attractive women can do that in <i>any</i> industry, it doesn&#x27;t need to be male dominated. Men are stupid that way (if we weren&#x27;t stupid that way birth rates would probably be 1&#x2F;100th of what they are now), you only need a handful of men to have a good probability of finding at least one who is thinking with more than one brain.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>marquis</author><text>Instead of bringing the conversation down to a question of pretty-woman-duped-the-gullible-man, which isn&#x27;t productive for anyone, I&#x27;m sure this could have been achieved many other ways, e.g &#x27;Leaked new Tesla car&#x27; or &quot;Cupcakes downstairs now!&quot;. The issue at hand is the security failure, not how the person in question was duped.</text></comment> |
16,016,952 | 16,015,583 | 1 | 2 | 16,014,628 | train | <story><title>NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Round 1 Submissions</title><url>https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/Post-Quantum-Cryptography/Round-1-Submissions</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Nokinside</author><text>If you can tolerate ~1MB private keys, Classic McEliece is probably the best conservative and secure post-quantum option just now before others are analyzed more. It&#x27;s old and proven.<p>&gt;9 Advantages and limitations (2.B.6)<p>&gt;The central advantage of this submission is security. See the design rationale.<p>&gt;Regarding efficiency, the use of random-looking linear codes with no visible structure forces public-key sizes to be on the scale of a megabyte for quantitatively high security: the public key is a full (generator&#x2F;parity-check) matrix. Key-generation software is also not very fast. Applications must continue using each public key for long enough to handle the costs of generating and distributing the key.<p>&gt;There are, however, some compensating efficiency advantages. Encapsulation and decapsu-
lation are reasonably fast in software, and impressively fast in hardware, due to the simple nature of the objects (binary vectors) and operations (such as binary matrix-vector multiplications). Key generation is also quite fast in hardware. The hardware speeds of key generation and decoding are already demonstrated by our FPGA implementation. Encapsulation takes only a single pass over a public key, allowing large public keys to be streamed through small coprocessors and small devices.<p>&gt;Furthermore, the ciphertexts are unusually small for post-quantum cryptography: under 256 bytes for our suggested high-security parameter sets. This allows ciphertexts to fit comfortably inside single network packets. The small ciphertext size can be much more important for total traffic than the large key size, depending on the ratio between how often keys are sent and how often ciphertexts are sent. System parameters can be adjusted for even smaller ciphertexts.</text></comment> | <story><title>NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Round 1 Submissions</title><url>https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/Post-Quantum-Cryptography/Round-1-Submissions</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bascule</author><text>One of them has already fallen victim to a key recovery attack:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;yx7__&#x2F;status&#x2F;945283780851400704" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;yx7__&#x2F;status&#x2F;945283780851400704</a><p>Round2 (LWE-based) and SIKE (isogeny-based) are the particularly interesting ones to me. Both support comparatively small keys (~1kB), with Round2 seemingly winning on performance, but also patented.</text></comment> |
35,789,668 | 35,789,439 | 1 | 3 | 35,787,195 | train | <story><title>faulTPM: Exposing AMD fTPMs' Deepest Secrets</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.14717</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>einpoklum</author><text>[flagged]</text></item><item><author>neilv</author><text>Debian Stable welcomes refugees:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;debian-cd&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;debian-cd&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;</a><p>(Or, for laptops with closed WiFi and no Ethernet, use this installer: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;cdimage&#x2F;unofficial&#x2F;non-free&#x2F;cd-including-firmware&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;cdimage&#x2F;unofficial&#x2F;non-free&#x2F;cd-in...</a> )</text></item><item><author>jhoelzel</author><text>Honestly TPM is probably creating more bad than good at this point.<p>Every time I think about the millions of computers that will be declared worthless this year, it makes me a little bit more angrier.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>crote</author><text>You mean the Devuan which for more than a year and a half had a bug which resulted in the empty string being set as root password?[0]<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;linuxiac.com&#x2F;devuan-users-are-at-risk&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;linuxiac.com&#x2F;devuan-users-are-at-risk&#x2F;</a></text></comment> | <story><title>faulTPM: Exposing AMD fTPMs' Deepest Secrets</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.14717</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>einpoklum</author><text>[flagged]</text></item><item><author>neilv</author><text>Debian Stable welcomes refugees:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;debian-cd&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;debian-cd&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;</a><p>(Or, for laptops with closed WiFi and no Ethernet, use this installer: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;cdimage&#x2F;unofficial&#x2F;non-free&#x2F;cd-including-firmware&#x2F;current&#x2F;amd64&#x2F;iso-dvd&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cdimage.debian.org&#x2F;cdimage&#x2F;unofficial&#x2F;non-free&#x2F;cd-in...</a> )</text></item><item><author>jhoelzel</author><text>Honestly TPM is probably creating more bad than good at this point.<p>Every time I think about the millions of computers that will be declared worthless this year, it makes me a little bit more angrier.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>whynotmaybe</author><text>I&#x27;m a windows user since 3.1 and don&#x27;t know much about linux except the few trials and my pihole.<p>What&#x27;s the impact of having systemd (or not) for the everyday layman like me that just uses Visual Studio Code to build flutter apps ?</text></comment> |
38,469,009 | 38,467,852 | 1 | 2 | 38,463,355 | train | <story><title>Who makes the most reliable new cars?</title><url>https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jancsika</author><text>&gt; As someone who usually buys ~10 year old cars and drives them into the ground I&#x27;m much more interested in long term reliability.<p>That&#x27;s a much simpler list:<p>1: Toyota Corolla<p>2 to end: you&#x27;re not really serious about running it into the ground. :)</text></item><item><author>laurencerowe</author><text>Note that these stats only account for reliability in the first three years:<p>&gt; Then the brand reliability score was calculated by averaging results from 2021 to 2023.<p>As someone who usually buys ~10 year old cars and drives them into the ground I&#x27;m much more interested in long term reliability. It may correlate but these stats are not that!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>esperent</author><text>My mother is still driving a 1999 Corolla hatchback. She bought it around 2005, has driven it every day since.<p>When her friend passed away, she inherited his 1998 version of the same and has been using it for spares.<p>Now she&#x27;s considering selling both, they are classics now so they are actually increasing in value. I&#x27;m a bit sad, as I live on the other side of the world and I feel like in my trips home that car is one of the constants in my life. I half expected to inherit it and pass it on to my own children someday.</text></comment> | <story><title>Who makes the most reliable new cars?</title><url>https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jancsika</author><text>&gt; As someone who usually buys ~10 year old cars and drives them into the ground I&#x27;m much more interested in long term reliability.<p>That&#x27;s a much simpler list:<p>1: Toyota Corolla<p>2 to end: you&#x27;re not really serious about running it into the ground. :)</text></item><item><author>laurencerowe</author><text>Note that these stats only account for reliability in the first three years:<p>&gt; Then the brand reliability score was calculated by averaging results from 2021 to 2023.<p>As someone who usually buys ~10 year old cars and drives them into the ground I&#x27;m much more interested in long term reliability. It may correlate but these stats are not that!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>BenjiWiebe</author><text>When I worked in a tire shop, the highest mileage vehicle I saw was a 500k mile Corolla, driven by the original owners. It was a mid 90s model IIRC. This was in 2018 or so.</text></comment> |
32,390,783 | 32,390,816 | 1 | 3 | 32,388,453 | train | <story><title>Fintech is making credit cards weirder</title><url>https://workweek.com/2022/08/05/fintech-is-making-credit-cards-weirder/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>anonporridge</author><text>This sounds exactly why people like Jack Dorsey are pushing for bitcoin + lightning network adoption. They&#x27;ve experienced first hand how much gatekeeping has developed in the space (via Square + CashApp in his case) that make true innovation almost impossible.<p>An open, permissionless, and GLOBAL monetary network for final settlement and small payments (and micropayments) which no single competing nation state has unilateral control over would be a game changer for fintech innovation. The function of everything from Visa&#x2F;Mastercard, Fedwire, SWIFT, Paypal, Western Union, etc, all rebase onto one global network with countless businesses competing on top of it to provide the most appealing user experience.</text></item><item><author>csomar</author><text>I was expecting this about disrupting the MasterCard&#x2F;Visa duopoly and sure was I disappointed.<p>All fintech relies on two things: A bank and a payment network (Mastercard&#x2F;Visa). This makes fintech an inferior product and most fintech I have tried have an abysmal customer service. Also, because fintech does its verification thing over the Internet, it seems that they rely more on their AI to block&#x2F;ban people than a phone call. Fintech also seems to be more down to lick regulation, banks and mastercard feet at the expense of their customers.<p>This explosion of credit cards&#x2F;offers&#x2F;rewards is hardly innovation. It has already happened with banks (every big store has its own credit card) and it&#x27;s usually a bad deal for customer as it requires &quot;loyalty&quot; to that brand.<p>That&#x27;s it folks. The market has been cornered by a couple guys and it seems the regulatory barriers have been lifted high enough that nobody can enter again. Remember when MasterCard&#x2F;Visa used to send these cards for free without any KYC whatsoever?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>metadat</author><text>It&#x27;s been 45 minutes and I&#x27;m still waiting for my Bitcoin transaction to go through.<p>BTC and Crypto at large don&#x27;t seem like a viable alternative solution, or even a solution to any real problem at all.</text></comment> | <story><title>Fintech is making credit cards weirder</title><url>https://workweek.com/2022/08/05/fintech-is-making-credit-cards-weirder/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>anonporridge</author><text>This sounds exactly why people like Jack Dorsey are pushing for bitcoin + lightning network adoption. They&#x27;ve experienced first hand how much gatekeeping has developed in the space (via Square + CashApp in his case) that make true innovation almost impossible.<p>An open, permissionless, and GLOBAL monetary network for final settlement and small payments (and micropayments) which no single competing nation state has unilateral control over would be a game changer for fintech innovation. The function of everything from Visa&#x2F;Mastercard, Fedwire, SWIFT, Paypal, Western Union, etc, all rebase onto one global network with countless businesses competing on top of it to provide the most appealing user experience.</text></item><item><author>csomar</author><text>I was expecting this about disrupting the MasterCard&#x2F;Visa duopoly and sure was I disappointed.<p>All fintech relies on two things: A bank and a payment network (Mastercard&#x2F;Visa). This makes fintech an inferior product and most fintech I have tried have an abysmal customer service. Also, because fintech does its verification thing over the Internet, it seems that they rely more on their AI to block&#x2F;ban people than a phone call. Fintech also seems to be more down to lick regulation, banks and mastercard feet at the expense of their customers.<p>This explosion of credit cards&#x2F;offers&#x2F;rewards is hardly innovation. It has already happened with banks (every big store has its own credit card) and it&#x27;s usually a bad deal for customer as it requires &quot;loyalty&quot; to that brand.<p>That&#x27;s it folks. The market has been cornered by a couple guys and it seems the regulatory barriers have been lifted high enough that nobody can enter again. Remember when MasterCard&#x2F;Visa used to send these cards for free without any KYC whatsoever?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>colechristensen</author><text>&gt; An open, permissionless, and GLOBAL monetary network for final settlement and small payments (and micropayments) which no single competing nation state has unilateral control over would be a game changer for fintech innovation. The function of everything from Visa&#x2F;Mastercard, Fedwire, SWIFT, Paypal, Western Union, etc, all rebase onto one global network with countless businesses competing on top of it to provide the most appealing user experience.<p>This is not ever going to happen.<p>Witness today the Ethereum tumbler getting sanctioned. When a payment method gets significant enough it will either be regulated or squashed by the state.</text></comment> |
28,981,991 | 28,981,706 | 1 | 2 | 28,980,691 | train | <story><title>5 side projects in 6 years, earning $0</title><url>https://kwcodes.com/how-i-failed-5-side-projects-in-6-years-earning-0/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>herval</author><text>All these have a thing in common: he gave up because they weren’t immediate successes. Some even had traction: 5 users in 3 months isn’t the incredible outlier story you hear time and time again, but it’s 5 people you can talk to, listen to what they want (and why they signed up anyway), then you gear up from there.<p>We’re too conditioned to believe in the stories of immediate success and MVPs making tens of thousands of dollars immediately. Those are exceedingly rare, and you might be able to pull it off when you have a massive audience. Jumping from project to project won’t net you that audience, so you end up spending time in circles… and earning $0.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kjksf</author><text>I don&#x27;t think &quot;just stick with it&quot; is a good advice in general and especially not for his projects.<p>He was smart to abandon his minimal time tracker, minimal metronome and jobs website.<p>BTW: he didn&#x27;t get 5 users for minimal time tracker, he got 5 people who signed up for a mailing list based on screenshots of non-existing product.<p>Even smarter would be to not do such projects in the first place.<p>With jobs websites you need a giant, unfair advantage over all other job websites.<p>Metronome and minimal time tracker are both vitamins, not pain killers. They don&#x27;t solve a painful problem that people are obviously willing to pay for.<p>They are also extremely competitive.<p>The only idea that was somewhat viable was time tracker, but only if he managed to stand out from all the other time trackers and masterfully execute both the product and marketing.<p>There is no recipe for a successful projects but there are plenty of giant red flags that you should notice and avoid.<p>High competition is a red flag. Low value to potential users is a red flag.</text></comment> | <story><title>5 side projects in 6 years, earning $0</title><url>https://kwcodes.com/how-i-failed-5-side-projects-in-6-years-earning-0/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>herval</author><text>All these have a thing in common: he gave up because they weren’t immediate successes. Some even had traction: 5 users in 3 months isn’t the incredible outlier story you hear time and time again, but it’s 5 people you can talk to, listen to what they want (and why they signed up anyway), then you gear up from there.<p>We’re too conditioned to believe in the stories of immediate success and MVPs making tens of thousands of dollars immediately. Those are exceedingly rare, and you might be able to pull it off when you have a massive audience. Jumping from project to project won’t net you that audience, so you end up spending time in circles… and earning $0.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>martincmartin</author><text>Reminds me of &quot;Good Software Takes Ten Years. Get Used To it.&quot; by Joel Spolsky.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2001&#x2F;07&#x2F;21&#x2F;good-software-takes-ten-years-get-used-to-it&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;2001&#x2F;07&#x2F;21&#x2F;good-software-take...</a></text></comment> |
40,473,069 | 40,471,979 | 1 | 2 | 40,467,625 | train | <story><title>ICQ will stop working from June 26</title><url>https://icq.com/desktop/en#windows</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bayindirh</author><text>ICQ was the chat tool of the democratic internet, or internet of the people if you prefer the term.<p>After companies started dominating the internet, it was never be the same. We thought that any company would play by our rules, but they poisoned us with their research, gamification, single way information flow, and walled gardens.<p>This is why I moved to small web.<p>I miss the old internet dearly.</text></item><item><author>dkga</author><text>I will forever treasure my ICQ memories.<p>The sounds it made. The moving image when it was connecting. Listening in Winamp to one of only a few dozen possible songs that I had carefully downloaded.<p>Being able to randomly connect to people you would filter. Yes, I want to talk to someone more or less my age but in Iceland. Or any other country.<p>But most of all, the feeling of being connected. As a teenager in the autism spectrum, that was one of the best feelings I had at that time.<p>Most people don’t get it when I say this, maybe someone here will, but to me it all started going downhill when people all of a sudden switched to a worse alternative, MSN. I see a direct line from there to the annoying easy-to-accept-while-hard-to-reject-but-always-there-anyway cookie pop-ups.<p>And no, this is isn’t some form of Ostalgie where we long for past days of hardship with tender feelings. ICQ just had a great user experience as far as I am concerned and to this day I prefer it to existing alternatives from WhatsApp to Webex chat (don’t mention Teams please, I’m having a poetic moment). It was rather a feeling that perhaps other Brazilians will share: a longing, saudade, for the simpler (yes) but better and more poetic 90s, when ICQ connected you to a world that watched Brazil win the fourth World Cup, Ayrton Senna was inspiring generations to be healthier and their better selves and Mamonas Assassinas could only make us laugh, not cry…<p>So long, ICQ. You will always be part of why I love the internet.<p>PS: I realize the timing of those events doesn’t necessarily align. But sentimentally they do.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kazinator</author><text>&gt; <i>ICQ was the chat tool of the democratic internet</i><p>It was proprietary client software released in 1996 and bought by AOL two years later.<p>It relies on a service operated by a single party, which is now sunsetting it.<p>According to the Wikipedia article, when ICQ was under AOL&#x27;s stewardship, &quot;AOL pursued an aggressive policy regarding alternative (&quot;unauthorized&quot;) ICQ clients.&quot;<p>The article details all the tactics that AOL implemented in the service to break unofficial clients.<p>I don&#x27;t see where the word &quot;democratic&quot; connects with ICQ.</text></comment> | <story><title>ICQ will stop working from June 26</title><url>https://icq.com/desktop/en#windows</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>bayindirh</author><text>ICQ was the chat tool of the democratic internet, or internet of the people if you prefer the term.<p>After companies started dominating the internet, it was never be the same. We thought that any company would play by our rules, but they poisoned us with their research, gamification, single way information flow, and walled gardens.<p>This is why I moved to small web.<p>I miss the old internet dearly.</text></item><item><author>dkga</author><text>I will forever treasure my ICQ memories.<p>The sounds it made. The moving image when it was connecting. Listening in Winamp to one of only a few dozen possible songs that I had carefully downloaded.<p>Being able to randomly connect to people you would filter. Yes, I want to talk to someone more or less my age but in Iceland. Or any other country.<p>But most of all, the feeling of being connected. As a teenager in the autism spectrum, that was one of the best feelings I had at that time.<p>Most people don’t get it when I say this, maybe someone here will, but to me it all started going downhill when people all of a sudden switched to a worse alternative, MSN. I see a direct line from there to the annoying easy-to-accept-while-hard-to-reject-but-always-there-anyway cookie pop-ups.<p>And no, this is isn’t some form of Ostalgie where we long for past days of hardship with tender feelings. ICQ just had a great user experience as far as I am concerned and to this day I prefer it to existing alternatives from WhatsApp to Webex chat (don’t mention Teams please, I’m having a poetic moment). It was rather a feeling that perhaps other Brazilians will share: a longing, saudade, for the simpler (yes) but better and more poetic 90s, when ICQ connected you to a world that watched Brazil win the fourth World Cup, Ayrton Senna was inspiring generations to be healthier and their better selves and Mamonas Assassinas could only make us laugh, not cry…<p>So long, ICQ. You will always be part of why I love the internet.<p>PS: I realize the timing of those events doesn’t necessarily align. But sentimentally they do.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>incompatible</author><text>It was commercial, wasn&#x27;t it? And only worked on Windows? IRC was the open alternative.</text></comment> |
19,798,178 | 19,797,133 | 1 | 2 | 19,796,803 | train | <story><title>Facebook's Zuckerberg Preaches Privacy, but Evidence Is Elusive</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-01/facebook-s-zuckerberg-preaches-privacy-but-evidence-is-elusive</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>gfodor</author><text>Two points:<p>- Focusing on adding e2e encryption for messaging services serves as a nice deflector for FB&#x27;s privacy issues. Their advertising systems aren&#x27;t going to change in terms of efficacy and revenue potential if private messages between users are inaccessible to Facebook. I&#x27;d be surprised if they&#x27;re using this data anyway, but it&#x27;s Facebook, so who knows. In any case, expect the messaging to focus on increasing privacy through message and video encryption, which completely ignores the underlying issue of profile-building and behavior modification that Facebook&#x27;s non-messaging platforms allow, and which I didn&#x27;t seem to hear any plans around addressing.<p>- IMHO, pretty much all posturing around privacy by Facebook should not be taken seriously until they announce a change to their business model. Since they haven&#x27;t, it doesn&#x27;t take much effort to tease out the rest: their business model relies upon surveiling user behavior and selling behavior modification products, so you can expect no announcements around product changes that would undermine those efforts significantly in the name of privacy until their business model changes. Everything until then is just at best noise, at worst dishonest framing to take the heat off of them by those who are ignorant of the underlying dynamics, like regulators or the general public.</text></comment> | <story><title>Facebook's Zuckerberg Preaches Privacy, but Evidence Is Elusive</title><url>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-01/facebook-s-zuckerberg-preaches-privacy-but-evidence-is-elusive</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>throwaway55554</author><text>&gt; “It’s going to take time,” Zuckerberg said of Facebook’s privacy-focused future. “I’m sure we’re going to keep on unearthing old issues for a while, so it may feel like we’re not making progress at first. But I think that we’ve shown, time and again as a company, that we can do what it takes to evolve and build the products that people want.”<p>IOW, they&#x27;ll talk about privacy for a while until everyone stops talking about how evil FB is. Then they&#x27;ll slowly stop talking about it and work their way back down to where they are now. All the while not actually doing anything at all to change.</text></comment> |
27,127,745 | 27,127,704 | 1 | 2 | 27,127,307 | train | <story><title>Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/11/goldman-sachs-executive-quits-after-making-millions-from-dogecoin</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nly</author><text>It&#x27;s interesting how the transfer of wealth to a Goldman Sachs executive via cryptocurrency invokes a feeling of mild jealousy and amusement, whereas the transfer of wealth to &#x27;bankers&#x27;, just like him, <i>just doing their damn jobs and providing a service</i>, invokes revilement in the eyes of the general public.<p>I do think the psychological (is that the word I&#x27;m looking for?) aspects of the frothy financial climate driving the cryptoboom is under-discussed. When the wider financial (not just crypto) bubble pops there&#x27;s going to be a lot of resentment this time around.<p>I&#x27;m jealous of people and their crypto gains, having considered putting a tiny % of my portfolio in to crypto not long before the pandemic and deciding against it, but ultimately none of these cryptocurrencies are any more <i>useful</i> than they were in 2019, and in my gut I feel that these huge unjustified gains <i>should</i>, morally speaking, evaporate if these things prove to be worthless to us a society.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>reader_mode</author><text>Crypto could easily be the largest pyramid scheme in history, I have zero interest in participating even if returns were guaranteed - that&#x27;s not how I want to make money, I see no value being created in these &quot;investments&quot;.<p>Recent developments on the stock market kind of killed the market idealism for me. I don&#x27;t know what&#x27;s a better alternative, but from where I&#x27;m standing the financial system is rewarding wasteful and immoral behaviour and it&#x27;s degenerating really fast.</text></comment> | <story><title>Goldman Sachs executive quits after making millions from Dogecoin</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/11/goldman-sachs-executive-quits-after-making-millions-from-dogecoin</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nly</author><text>It&#x27;s interesting how the transfer of wealth to a Goldman Sachs executive via cryptocurrency invokes a feeling of mild jealousy and amusement, whereas the transfer of wealth to &#x27;bankers&#x27;, just like him, <i>just doing their damn jobs and providing a service</i>, invokes revilement in the eyes of the general public.<p>I do think the psychological (is that the word I&#x27;m looking for?) aspects of the frothy financial climate driving the cryptoboom is under-discussed. When the wider financial (not just crypto) bubble pops there&#x27;s going to be a lot of resentment this time around.<p>I&#x27;m jealous of people and their crypto gains, having considered putting a tiny % of my portfolio in to crypto not long before the pandemic and deciding against it, but ultimately none of these cryptocurrencies are any more <i>useful</i> than they were in 2019, and in my gut I feel that these huge unjustified gains <i>should</i>, morally speaking, evaporate if these things prove to be worthless to us a society.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rawtxapp</author><text>No need to be jealous, since it&#x27;s still the very early days for crypto in the grand scheme of things. It&#x27;s far from having hit any of the real success metrics (much broader usage, significant % of wealth stored, transferred, etc).<p>They may prove to be a lot more useful than you imagine and one thing for sure is they are here to stay at this point.<p>The big difference compared to 2019 is that we had a Bitcoin halving in 2020, prices usually increase significantly after that since it becomes a lot more scarce, people think Bitcoin is too expensive for them, so they flip altcoins, we are in the middle of the altcoin season. And we&#x27;ve also stress tested a lot of the defi protocols that are now fundamental blocks in the crypto world (uniswap, maker, compound, aave, etc).</text></comment> |
26,234,271 | 26,233,118 | 1 | 2 | 26,227,738 | train | <story><title>We haven’t seen a quarter of known bee species since the 1990s</title><url>https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/we-havent-seen-quarter-of-known-bee-species-since-1990s</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>parsimo2010</author><text>Because if you want to make a living you either have to do something that people are asking for, or you have to convince people that they <i>should</i> be asking for. If the world doesn’t see taxonomists’ worth on their own, it <i>is</i> up to them to educate us if they want to keep their jobs.<p>We don’t have unlimited research funds and they need to play the game just like everyone else. Taxonomy has a tougher time of illustrating value compared to cancer research (as one example), but they still need to convince people that they should be funded.<p>Hopefully the field will figure this out before there is a crisis. As a recent example, the field of public health usually struggles to get funding compared to individual medicine. Before the COVID-19 pandemic very few people saw the value in having robust public health policy, agencies, and research, especially when they considered that they could add a new wing to a hospital or buy ambulances with the same money. Public health as a field did a poor job of convincing people that the field had something valuable to offer. Hopefully taxonomy can figure out how to convince the world that they offer something valuable before they go extinct (pun intended).</text></item><item><author>anigbrowl</author><text><i>in the past 3-4 decades Taxonomists have done a poor (some would say terrible) job at describing to the broader world why they are important</i><p>Without disputing your claim, why is this <i>taxonomists&#x27;</i> job? Imagine spending 10-15 years of academic work to get a PhD and become <i>the</i> world expert on something important but obscure, and then being told you need to market yourself to the general public and devote a significant portion of your time to answering stupid questions (as in &#x27;who cares about this boring stuff&#x27; as opposed to &#x27;what is the airspeed of a pigeon&#x27;).<p>If I understand your 3rd paragraph correctly, maybe the real problem here is university administrators ending up actually in charge of things rather than as mere functionaries whose job is to facilitate the academics&#x27; goals, mysterious as those may be.Every single academic person I know loathes the administrators of their institutions (as a class rather than at the individual level, though I can think of exceptions) but seem helpless to displace them.</text></item><item><author>xipho</author><text>As suggested by others the number of taxonomists, people who could accurately identify species (many of which require internal dissection, or molecular methods), who are actually working on collecting and identify species has most certainly declined. In many groups of insects there is at most a handful of experts <i>worldwide</i> who can take specimens to a species-level identification.<p>This is not to say that species richness is not declining, its to say that in the past 3-4 decades Taxonomists have done a poor (some would say terrible) job at describing to the broader world why they are important, and why they require fixed, institutionally-based funding to actually be able to provide the services that would allow us to confidently state that data like these are because of environmental change (again, they very likely are) rather than a lack of experts in the field actually doing basic research.<p>In other words, it is extremely rare that universities (in the US) actually hire what was once known as &quot;alpha-taxonomists&quot;, in part this is a reflection of taxonomists inability to sell themselves and adapt to new tools (but note that many have evolved) in part it is a reflection of the (I would argue &quot;immense&quot;) short-sightedness of institutions. &quot;We want answers to complex questions! We&#x27;ve neglected to give scientists time to think deeply, and research over decades to answer those questions. Oh, we see.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>anigbrowl</author><text>The whole point of the academy is to insulate thinkers from this sort of thing and give them room to work, instead of retroactively justifying their existence and life choices to pundits or politicians in search of a soft target.<p>It seems like we&#x27;re already having a crisis (ie the collapse of ecosystems) and in any case it shouldn&#x27;t take a crisis to get supposedly-responsible people to think ahead and do risk mitigation etc. I mean, I have no scientific qualifications or special training other than curiosity and a willingness to plough through papers and follow citations, and it disturbs the hell out of me that I seem to have a much better grasp of environmental and fiscal systems than most policymakers. This idea that we should sacrifice all our institutions built up over centuries on the altar of economic competition (<i>knowing</i> the existence of perverse incentives and short-termism) is clearly Not Working.</text></comment> | <story><title>We haven’t seen a quarter of known bee species since the 1990s</title><url>https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/we-havent-seen-quarter-of-known-bee-species-since-1990s</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>parsimo2010</author><text>Because if you want to make a living you either have to do something that people are asking for, or you have to convince people that they <i>should</i> be asking for. If the world doesn’t see taxonomists’ worth on their own, it <i>is</i> up to them to educate us if they want to keep their jobs.<p>We don’t have unlimited research funds and they need to play the game just like everyone else. Taxonomy has a tougher time of illustrating value compared to cancer research (as one example), but they still need to convince people that they should be funded.<p>Hopefully the field will figure this out before there is a crisis. As a recent example, the field of public health usually struggles to get funding compared to individual medicine. Before the COVID-19 pandemic very few people saw the value in having robust public health policy, agencies, and research, especially when they considered that they could add a new wing to a hospital or buy ambulances with the same money. Public health as a field did a poor job of convincing people that the field had something valuable to offer. Hopefully taxonomy can figure out how to convince the world that they offer something valuable before they go extinct (pun intended).</text></item><item><author>anigbrowl</author><text><i>in the past 3-4 decades Taxonomists have done a poor (some would say terrible) job at describing to the broader world why they are important</i><p>Without disputing your claim, why is this <i>taxonomists&#x27;</i> job? Imagine spending 10-15 years of academic work to get a PhD and become <i>the</i> world expert on something important but obscure, and then being told you need to market yourself to the general public and devote a significant portion of your time to answering stupid questions (as in &#x27;who cares about this boring stuff&#x27; as opposed to &#x27;what is the airspeed of a pigeon&#x27;).<p>If I understand your 3rd paragraph correctly, maybe the real problem here is university administrators ending up actually in charge of things rather than as mere functionaries whose job is to facilitate the academics&#x27; goals, mysterious as those may be.Every single academic person I know loathes the administrators of their institutions (as a class rather than at the individual level, though I can think of exceptions) but seem helpless to displace them.</text></item><item><author>xipho</author><text>As suggested by others the number of taxonomists, people who could accurately identify species (many of which require internal dissection, or molecular methods), who are actually working on collecting and identify species has most certainly declined. In many groups of insects there is at most a handful of experts <i>worldwide</i> who can take specimens to a species-level identification.<p>This is not to say that species richness is not declining, its to say that in the past 3-4 decades Taxonomists have done a poor (some would say terrible) job at describing to the broader world why they are important, and why they require fixed, institutionally-based funding to actually be able to provide the services that would allow us to confidently state that data like these are because of environmental change (again, they very likely are) rather than a lack of experts in the field actually doing basic research.<p>In other words, it is extremely rare that universities (in the US) actually hire what was once known as &quot;alpha-taxonomists&quot;, in part this is a reflection of taxonomists inability to sell themselves and adapt to new tools (but note that many have evolved) in part it is a reflection of the (I would argue &quot;immense&quot;) short-sightedness of institutions. &quot;We want answers to complex questions! We&#x27;ve neglected to give scientists time to think deeply, and research over decades to answer those questions. Oh, we see.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>hertzrat</author><text>This is an argument against specialization. You can’t do extremely difficult things while spending 20-30 hours a week on business management, public outreach, and fundraising. Since that’s the world were living in, might it explain how our tech progress has gotten less impressive in the last 2 decades?</text></comment> |
20,035,863 | 20,035,785 | 1 | 2 | 20,035,611 | train | <story><title>Eleven Straight Days of Tornadoes Have U.S. Approaching ‘Uncharted Territory’</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/us/tornadoes-usa.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>madengr</author><text>Considering there were over 1000 tornados last year (and it was a low year), I’d say they are sensationalizing.<p>As I type this, there is a 1 mile wide one just 20 miles from here.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jussij</author><text>From the article:<p><i>Federal government weather forecasters logged preliminary reports of more than 500 tornadoes in a 30-day period — a rare figure, if the reports are ultimately verified — after the start of the year proved mercifully quiet.</i><p><i>Monday, Dr. Marsh said, was the 11th consecutive day with at least eight tornado reports, tying the record.</i><p>That reads to me more like the exception than the norm.</text></comment> | <story><title>Eleven Straight Days of Tornadoes Have U.S. Approaching ‘Uncharted Territory’</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/us/tornadoes-usa.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>madengr</author><text>Considering there were over 1000 tornados last year (and it was a low year), I’d say they are sensationalizing.<p>As I type this, there is a 1 mile wide one just 20 miles from here.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>threeseed</author><text>It&#x27;s a quote from the warning coordination meteorologist at the National Weather Service’s Storm Prediction Center.<p>And it&#x27;s not about the number of tornados. But the fact that there has been no break between them i.e. 11 consecutive days.</text></comment> |
4,189,048 | 4,189,002 | 1 | 3 | 4,188,815 | train | <story><title>Mozilla Gains Global Support For a Firefox Mobile OS</title><url>http://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2012/07/02/firefox-mobile-os/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nicpottier</author><text>To me this is one of the most exciting projects coming up. it is still in early, early days, but it seems to pose the most realistic sane alternative to Android and iOS.<p>Android is great in that they are open, but their UI library is really just a mess, anybody who uses it for any amount of time yearns for the days of laying things out using HTML. iOS is much better in this respect but has the problem of limited devices and of being a closed platform.<p>I have no idea how they B2G (Boot2Gecko) will navigate the patent minefield, but I hope they do. I'm picking up another Galaxy Nexus just so I can have a phone dedicated to hacking on it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>untog</author><text><i>Android is great in that they are open, but their UI library is really just a mess</i><p>Historically, HTML has hardly been much better in enforcing UI consistency. Mozilla may have some tricks up their sleeve, I don't know.</text></comment> | <story><title>Mozilla Gains Global Support For a Firefox Mobile OS</title><url>http://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2012/07/02/firefox-mobile-os/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nicpottier</author><text>To me this is one of the most exciting projects coming up. it is still in early, early days, but it seems to pose the most realistic sane alternative to Android and iOS.<p>Android is great in that they are open, but their UI library is really just a mess, anybody who uses it for any amount of time yearns for the days of laying things out using HTML. iOS is much better in this respect but has the problem of limited devices and of being a closed platform.<p>I have no idea how they B2G (Boot2Gecko) will navigate the patent minefield, but I hope they do. I'm picking up another Galaxy Nexus just so I can have a phone dedicated to hacking on it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mmahemoff</author><text>It's exciting for developers. The developer build has a "View Source" hard button you can use on any app, so you can view the HTML source on the dialler, home screen, etc.<p>And maybe for manufacturers too. Some manufacturers are concerned that Android and Windows Phone are becoming more siloed, given the Motorola deal and the MS-manufactured Surface. So the timing might work well for Moz, but like you say, there are patent questions.</text></comment> |
7,052,815 | 7,052,010 | 1 | 3 | 7,051,091 | train | <story><title>Quick tip for developers who use OS X</title><text>OSX Terminal: hold option and click a position in the current line to move your cursor to that position. #yearslost</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>juanre</author><text>Bash, running in your terminal, understands both the Emacs and the Vi commands. By default is Emacs, so you can C-a (control-a) for beginning of line, C-p to go back in command line history, or C-r to search it.<p>I prefer the Vi mode, though. Add to your .bashrc<p>set -o vi<p>Then you can press escape to go from input mode to normal mode; there k will take you to the previous line in command line history, j to the next line, ^ and $ to the beginning and end of the line, &#x2F;something will search something back.<p>Editing is really fast; move by words with w (forward) and b (backward), do cw to replace a word, r to replace a letter, i to go back to input. It will remember the last editing command, just as Vi, and repeat it when you press . in normal mode.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bilalq</author><text>I use these settings in my .inputrc. The get me a few more commands and even the ability to escape using jj.<p><pre><code> set completion-ignore-case On
set bell-style none
set editing-mode vi
$if mode=vi
set keymap vi-command
&quot;gg&quot;: beginning-of-history
&quot;G&quot;: end-of-history
set keymap vi-insert
&quot;jj&quot;: vi-movement-mode
&quot;\C-p&quot;: history-search-backward</code></pre></text></comment> | <story><title>Quick tip for developers who use OS X</title><text>OSX Terminal: hold option and click a position in the current line to move your cursor to that position. #yearslost</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>juanre</author><text>Bash, running in your terminal, understands both the Emacs and the Vi commands. By default is Emacs, so you can C-a (control-a) for beginning of line, C-p to go back in command line history, or C-r to search it.<p>I prefer the Vi mode, though. Add to your .bashrc<p>set -o vi<p>Then you can press escape to go from input mode to normal mode; there k will take you to the previous line in command line history, j to the next line, ^ and $ to the beginning and end of the line, &#x2F;something will search something back.<p>Editing is really fast; move by words with w (forward) and b (backward), do cw to replace a word, r to replace a letter, i to go back to input. It will remember the last editing command, just as Vi, and repeat it when you press . in normal mode.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>eof</author><text>you can also go into visual mode (at least in vi mode).. pressing esc then v will launch your default editor with the current command in the buffer; saving an exiting runs the command; very useful for long commands and&#x2F;or iterating</text></comment> |
20,723,357 | 20,723,059 | 1 | 2 | 20,712,009 | train | <story><title>“Bicycle of the Mind”</title><url>https://medium.learningbyshipping.com/bicycle-121262546097</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fit2rule</author><text>I think we can return to the glory days of computing with one small tweak: insist that OS vendors include a lean and clean compiler in the default install.<p>An OS that ships without tools to make apps for it is not an Operating System but rather an Appliance System.<p>And, for those who will reply &quot;but my disk space and all the bloat of a compiler onboard methodology&quot; - well that&#x27;d be a next step: destroy the bloat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>moksly</author><text>What counts as the glory days of computation? On HN it’s probably having a great deal of control and ownership over our systems. I’m not sure that’s what most people would consider glory though.<p>I work with digitalisation in the public sector of Denmark, one of the most digitised countries in the world. We have thousands of employees and citizens who interact with our systems on a daily basis and when we benchmark them on what they want public sector software to be like they unanimously tell us they want it to be more like the iOS experience.<p>They simply don’t want technology to get in the way, and they don’t care that the price for this is ownership and freedom. For them the glory days won’t begin until they can get completely away from the operation systems and applications of “old”.</text></comment> | <story><title>“Bicycle of the Mind”</title><url>https://medium.learningbyshipping.com/bicycle-121262546097</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>fit2rule</author><text>I think we can return to the glory days of computing with one small tweak: insist that OS vendors include a lean and clean compiler in the default install.<p>An OS that ships without tools to make apps for it is not an Operating System but rather an Appliance System.<p>And, for those who will reply &quot;but my disk space and all the bloat of a compiler onboard methodology&quot; - well that&#x27;d be a next step: destroy the bloat.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>thinkingkong</author><text>For the % of people who care about “bloat” and think the solution is hand rolling all their own tools? This train is only going in one direction and that station was passed 35 years ago</text></comment> |
37,673,270 | 37,672,714 | 1 | 2 | 37,664,682 | train | <story><title>Rethinking the Luddites</title><url>https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/rethinking-the-luddites-in-the-age-of-ai</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>creer</author><text>The luddite example is one of suddenness: The owners see the massive advantage of mechanization and move in fast. The workers are blindsided - they don&#x27;t have the time and spend all the time they do have in a ludicrous war. The regions are somewhat mono-industry which completes in making a giant mess. All in all the exact quandary not to get caught in. Now that they have demonstrated it, long ago, do we really have to fall in the same problem again and again? Just because it didn&#x27;t happen in the US, or in this century, doesn&#x27;t mean we can&#x27;t learn from it.<p>People at all level should do better using the time there is. For the ones (workers) to move up or away in their skills. For the others (businesses) to recognize a looming availability of human workforce which might be useful for some (other) business opportunity. For the third (governments) to - just in time - organize or encourage re-training at scale and in time. Trying to impose on each business to manage this whole world by itself is idiotic - normal business is tough and precarious enough. Trying to let each worker manage their own training is also insufficient: few people can optimally manage their own career at the same time as everything else.<p>An example in this direction is, I believe, Denmark&#x27;s &quot;Flexicurity&quot;. Firms can adapt to follow their needs; while workers can in general principle retain earnings while they retrain; while the state orchestrates availability of training (which itself can be a big industry sector). No doubt not perfect for anyone, but the general idea sounds solid.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>xorcist</author><text>Your comments fall into exactly the trap the article talks about. The luddites were painted as being against automation. That&#x27;s only partially true, at best. Destroying machines was not the point. It was just the only thing that hurt and got remembered.<p>It was not layoffs that caused the revolts much worsening working conditions. They wanted things like getting paid in the promised time frame, and not having their children killed. It seems the protests were sprawling and later integrated every disappointment under the sun.<p>The other side took that as an opportunity to paint them as being generally anti progressive and against all forms of mechanization, but from what I understand there&#x27;s not much to suggest that was actually true. Yes, machines were broken but so were a lot of other things as the protests turned violent.<p>Our lesson from the luddies should be that winners write history, we should not reiterate a centuries old smear campaign.</text></comment> | <story><title>Rethinking the Luddites</title><url>https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/rethinking-the-luddites-in-the-age-of-ai</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>creer</author><text>The luddite example is one of suddenness: The owners see the massive advantage of mechanization and move in fast. The workers are blindsided - they don&#x27;t have the time and spend all the time they do have in a ludicrous war. The regions are somewhat mono-industry which completes in making a giant mess. All in all the exact quandary not to get caught in. Now that they have demonstrated it, long ago, do we really have to fall in the same problem again and again? Just because it didn&#x27;t happen in the US, or in this century, doesn&#x27;t mean we can&#x27;t learn from it.<p>People at all level should do better using the time there is. For the ones (workers) to move up or away in their skills. For the others (businesses) to recognize a looming availability of human workforce which might be useful for some (other) business opportunity. For the third (governments) to - just in time - organize or encourage re-training at scale and in time. Trying to impose on each business to manage this whole world by itself is idiotic - normal business is tough and precarious enough. Trying to let each worker manage their own training is also insufficient: few people can optimally manage their own career at the same time as everything else.<p>An example in this direction is, I believe, Denmark&#x27;s &quot;Flexicurity&quot;. Firms can adapt to follow their needs; while workers can in general principle retain earnings while they retrain; while the state orchestrates availability of training (which itself can be a big industry sector). No doubt not perfect for anyone, but the general idea sounds solid.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>makeitdouble</author><text>Well put.<p>To note, luddites&#x27; issues were not just losing their job. Let&#x27;s remember that the earlier machines were very crude, safety was absolutely not in their design, and a worker life&#x27;s also didn&#x27;t have much weight. So, the early days of machine assisted production were in inhumane conditions, people losing limbs, kids getting killed in them (less skills needed also meant kid labour was a viable option) etc.<p>So yes, regulation on how the machines work, how much they get introduced, how the workers are impacted, trial periods to see the impacts etc. should help a lot in all respects. The difficult part being that those all mean putting breaks on profit making.</text></comment> |
28,294,466 | 28,292,392 | 1 | 3 | 28,290,765 | train | <story><title>Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco</title><url>https://blog.waymo.com/2021/08/welcoming-our-first-riders-in-san.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sandworm101</author><text>Middle steps:
(1) Board members use product to travel to board meetings. (2) Board members use product as replacement for personal vehicles. (3) Board members demand pay increases.<p>Back in 1999 the Chinese government announced that airline execs would be airborne at the changeover as reassurance that aircraft were safe from Y2K. Like or hate them, the incentive logic was sound.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1999&#x2F;01&#x2F;y2k-in-china-caught-in-midair&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1999&#x2F;01&#x2F;y2k-in-china-caught-in-midair&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;science&#x2F;chinese-airlines-won-t-be-bitten-by-y2k-bug-1.193052" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;science&#x2F;chinese-airlines-won-t-be-bi...</a></text></item><item><author>hammock</author><text>&gt;“All rides in the program will have an autonomous specialist on board for now” This tells me that we’re still a long way<p>Did you expect something different? I can&#x27;t really see a boardroom writing a roadmap that goes straight from<p><pre><code> test rides (no passengers) with a backup driver onboard
</code></pre>
to<p><pre><code> actual rides with passengers - no backup driver onboard
</code></pre>
with no in-between steps.</text></item><item><author>MontyCarloHall</author><text>“All rides in the program will have an autonomous specialist on board for now”<p>This tells me that we’re still a long way from full level 4 (and certainly level 5) autonomy in a busy city like San Francisco. The edge cases requiring immediate human attention are still too frequent for the human safety driver to be remote, as is the case in Phoenix.<p>Also, just a reminder that Waymo in Phoenix is nowhere close to being level 5, since it is still heavily geofences and requires those remote safety monitors. I still think that true level 5 (i.e. ability to drive autonomously everywhere with zero human oversight with a safety record equivalent to the median human driver) requires AGI. Would love to be proven wrong!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rudyfink</author><text>I think of that as a parachute-rigger solution (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Parachute_rigger" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Parachute_rigger</a>).<p>Historically, people packing parachutes could be randomly selected to jump with the parachute they had packed.</text></comment> | <story><title>Welcoming our first riders in San Francisco</title><url>https://blog.waymo.com/2021/08/welcoming-our-first-riders-in-san.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>sandworm101</author><text>Middle steps:
(1) Board members use product to travel to board meetings. (2) Board members use product as replacement for personal vehicles. (3) Board members demand pay increases.<p>Back in 1999 the Chinese government announced that airline execs would be airborne at the changeover as reassurance that aircraft were safe from Y2K. Like or hate them, the incentive logic was sound.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1999&#x2F;01&#x2F;y2k-in-china-caught-in-midair&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wired.com&#x2F;1999&#x2F;01&#x2F;y2k-in-china-caught-in-midair&#x2F;</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;science&#x2F;chinese-airlines-won-t-be-bitten-by-y2k-bug-1.193052" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;science&#x2F;chinese-airlines-won-t-be-bi...</a></text></item><item><author>hammock</author><text>&gt;“All rides in the program will have an autonomous specialist on board for now” This tells me that we’re still a long way<p>Did you expect something different? I can&#x27;t really see a boardroom writing a roadmap that goes straight from<p><pre><code> test rides (no passengers) with a backup driver onboard
</code></pre>
to<p><pre><code> actual rides with passengers - no backup driver onboard
</code></pre>
with no in-between steps.</text></item><item><author>MontyCarloHall</author><text>“All rides in the program will have an autonomous specialist on board for now”<p>This tells me that we’re still a long way from full level 4 (and certainly level 5) autonomy in a busy city like San Francisco. The edge cases requiring immediate human attention are still too frequent for the human safety driver to be remote, as is the case in Phoenix.<p>Also, just a reminder that Waymo in Phoenix is nowhere close to being level 5, since it is still heavily geofences and requires those remote safety monitors. I still think that true level 5 (i.e. ability to drive autonomously everywhere with zero human oversight with a safety record equivalent to the median human driver) requires AGI. Would love to be proven wrong!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>whimsicalism</author><text>In Phoenix, people are being driven without a safety driver. They are doing these in between steps.</text></comment> |
13,434,649 | 13,431,374 | 1 | 3 | 13,430,640 | train | <story><title>Go vs. Swift [pdf]</title><url>https://github.com/jakerockland/go-vs-swift/blob/master/go-vs-swift.pdf</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>chmike</author><text>I don&#x27;t see any &quot;strength&quot; in the classical object oriented programming model as found in C++ or Java. Actually, in modern programming composition is considered superior to inheritance.<p>The interface concept of Go makes programming with composition much more flexible and powerful than with the class model. The author skips this Go specific and original interface typing. This provides a multiple inheritance equivalent without all the complications on C++ and that most OO oriented languages forbid because of that complication.<p>Go is a very original language in this aspect as well as with concurrency. Understanding and mastering these properties goes beyond simple syntax analysis.<p>To me the most remarkable property of Go is its simplicity. As I explained to a friend who is a strong advocate of D, the difference with other programming language is the same as dealing with a spoken language of 1000 words instead of 10,000 words. It&#x27;s true that the language with 10,000 words is more expressive and richer. But the effort required to learn, read and write a language of 1000 words is much lower than a with a language of 10000 words. I&#x27;m beyond 50 years old, and too me this makes a huge difference. The best way to express it is that <i>with Go programming is fun again</i>. I hope that Go will preserve this simplicity. At the beginning Java was simple too. They later killed it to the point I don&#x27;t want to deal with Java code anymore.</text></comment> | <story><title>Go vs. Swift [pdf]</title><url>https://github.com/jakerockland/go-vs-swift/blob/master/go-vs-swift.pdf</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>seanalltogether</author><text>The more I use swift, the more I&#x27;ve grown to appreciate the concept of Optionals and how the compiler enforces it&#x27;s usage. I have found that my swift code is more robust and explicit than my ObjC or Android java code is, as well as the team members around me.</text></comment> |
25,247,707 | 25,246,378 | 1 | 3 | 25,244,748 | train | <story><title>3D engine implemented in DNA code</title><url>https://github.com/pallada-92/dna-3d-engine</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>isoprophlex</author><text>Jesus fuck is that a raymarcher implemented in dna?! Super impressive.<p>For the naysayers: they&#x27;ve implemented a raytracer in chemical reactions that are executed by dna. Very cool conceptual piece. See linked images, eg (sorry for pasting this horrible url)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;camo.githubusercontent.com&#x2F;d4d44c19070cc6ae2ab5f5ef38f793f0327cb6fe870433bc7223c7b7b3ad29d2&#x2F;68747470733a2f2f686162726173746f726167652e6f72672f776562742f2d6a2f616b2f35692f2d6a616b356976356437706b6b6f7372686c5f673472336f6f33342e706e67" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;camo.githubusercontent.com&#x2F;d4d44c19070cc6ae2ab5f5ef3...</a><p>(Edit nevermind that, check the link posted by dkural for some more details)</text></comment> | <story><title>3D engine implemented in DNA code</title><url>https://github.com/pallada-92/dna-3d-engine</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dkural</author><text>In case people miss it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;observablehq.com&#x2F;@pallada-92&#x2F;3d-engine-in-dna-code" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;observablehq.com&#x2F;@pallada-92&#x2F;3d-engine-in-dna-code</a></text></comment> |
22,374,976 | 22,374,956 | 1 | 3 | 22,374,408 | train | <story><title>The Next Leap in Self-Driving: Prediction</title><url>https://olivercameron.substack.com/p/the-next-leap-in-self-driving-prediction</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>irjustin</author><text>Predicting is absolutely key. If you&#x27;ve been around the Waymo cars they horribly manage simple situations. They&#x27;re VERY safe because they take no risk, but that won&#x27;t work at scale. &quot;What&#x27;s that? Stop wait..., what&#x27;s that? stop... wait wait wait&quot;<p>They&#x27;re very jerky at intersections where there&#x27;s even a mild amount of uncertainty and really only go when it&#x27;s very clear. It reminds me of lots of first time drivers reacting to new situations where safe is the best way forward. But if we had pure first time drivers, we&#x27;d be a gridlock at even a mild amount of traffic that enters and leaves the roadway.<p>Looking forward to this next set of 5 years. Hopefully us drivers will get replaced in 10? maybe?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jacquesm</author><text>I actually prefer the Waymo approach over the Tesla and Uber approach. When there are lives on the line you simply do not cross certain lines and in the longer term Waymo will be the only player left whose reputation is still in one piece. That more than anything will decide whether self driving vehicles gain long term acceptance. Anything else will lead to a &#x27;self driving winter&#x27;.</text></comment> | <story><title>The Next Leap in Self-Driving: Prediction</title><url>https://olivercameron.substack.com/p/the-next-leap-in-self-driving-prediction</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>irjustin</author><text>Predicting is absolutely key. If you&#x27;ve been around the Waymo cars they horribly manage simple situations. They&#x27;re VERY safe because they take no risk, but that won&#x27;t work at scale. &quot;What&#x27;s that? Stop wait..., what&#x27;s that? stop... wait wait wait&quot;<p>They&#x27;re very jerky at intersections where there&#x27;s even a mild amount of uncertainty and really only go when it&#x27;s very clear. It reminds me of lots of first time drivers reacting to new situations where safe is the best way forward. But if we had pure first time drivers, we&#x27;d be a gridlock at even a mild amount of traffic that enters and leaves the roadway.<p>Looking forward to this next set of 5 years. Hopefully us drivers will get replaced in 10? maybe?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>scep12</author><text>It&#x27;s too bad we can&#x27;t rip the band-aid off and just go straight to full autonomy for every car using Waymo (or similar). The problem you identified becomes a non-issue if 1) it&#x27;s the norm and 2) the passengers inside aren&#x27;t paying enough attention to the road to care about the quirks. It&#x27;s probable in my estimation that roads filled with only automated drivers become safer, more efficient, and more predictable, which acts as a flywheel for the prediction in the cars to get better.<p>Would be really interesting if Waymo could prove this out somehow.</text></comment> |
32,087,600 | 32,087,316 | 1 | 3 | 32,086,170 | train | <story><title>DoorDash and pizza arbitrage (2020)</title><url>https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>krisroadruck</author><text>You also pay way less. DoorDash and all the others don&#x27;t just charge the fees and the tips and what not, they also inflate the food cost by a pretty hefty amount. A simple example:<p>McDonalds has a 2 for $2 deal on sausage mcmuffins &amp; hashbrowns - been around forever. Let&#x27;s say you and the wife want a McMuffin &amp; a hashbrown each - you&#x27;re in for $4 dollars and a bit of change for tax.<p>Here is the same meal via DoorDash:<p>McMuffins: $2.87ea
Hash browns: $1.91ea<p>Subtotal: $9.56 (just below the 10 dollar minimum to wave the fee if you have DD+)<p>Delivery fee: $1.99
Service fee: $3.00
Tax: $0.91
Dasher Tip: $5 (good luck getting your order on time if you tip less than this)<p>Grand Total: $20.46 for $4 of food.<p>You can &quot;optimize&quot; by ordering an additional hash brown to get over the $10 hump so you can wave the delivery fee and reduce the service fee - which will instead cost you a total of $17.91 for $5 worth of food. Either way it&#x27;s a shit deal. Not included here are the costs associated with 1 in every 4-5 orders being incorrect, or delivered to the wrong house and the hassle that adds to your life.<p>Obviously I went with low cost items to illustrate a point but often any food prices you see on DD are a good 50% markup vs going in person regardless of the restaurant before you even get into fees and tips.</text></item><item><author>kache_</author><text>I started boycotting food delivery services because the quality &amp; service was just god awful. I found that if I drive, I actually don&#x27;t spend that much time, and I get wayyyy better service.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>apalmer</author><text>This to me is what killed delivery as a service. It doesn’t work even when they are charging what works out to be double the salary the restaurant pays its own delivery people. And it works out for no one, restaurant, driver, even the delivery as a service providers since they are all hemorrhaging money.<p>It’s a fake industry held up by VC money.</text></comment> | <story><title>DoorDash and pizza arbitrage (2020)</title><url>https://www.readmargins.com/p/doordash-and-pizza-arbitrage</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>krisroadruck</author><text>You also pay way less. DoorDash and all the others don&#x27;t just charge the fees and the tips and what not, they also inflate the food cost by a pretty hefty amount. A simple example:<p>McDonalds has a 2 for $2 deal on sausage mcmuffins &amp; hashbrowns - been around forever. Let&#x27;s say you and the wife want a McMuffin &amp; a hashbrown each - you&#x27;re in for $4 dollars and a bit of change for tax.<p>Here is the same meal via DoorDash:<p>McMuffins: $2.87ea
Hash browns: $1.91ea<p>Subtotal: $9.56 (just below the 10 dollar minimum to wave the fee if you have DD+)<p>Delivery fee: $1.99
Service fee: $3.00
Tax: $0.91
Dasher Tip: $5 (good luck getting your order on time if you tip less than this)<p>Grand Total: $20.46 for $4 of food.<p>You can &quot;optimize&quot; by ordering an additional hash brown to get over the $10 hump so you can wave the delivery fee and reduce the service fee - which will instead cost you a total of $17.91 for $5 worth of food. Either way it&#x27;s a shit deal. Not included here are the costs associated with 1 in every 4-5 orders being incorrect, or delivered to the wrong house and the hassle that adds to your life.<p>Obviously I went with low cost items to illustrate a point but often any food prices you see on DD are a good 50% markup vs going in person regardless of the restaurant before you even get into fees and tips.</text></item><item><author>kache_</author><text>I started boycotting food delivery services because the quality &amp; service was just god awful. I found that if I drive, I actually don&#x27;t spend that much time, and I get wayyyy better service.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>scarface_74</author><text>But guess how much money I can save by not having a car?</text></comment> |
18,004,064 | 18,003,813 | 1 | 3 | 18,000,698 | train | <story><title>Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off</title><url>https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFy+Hv9O5citAawS+mVZO+ywCKd9NQ2wxUmGsz9ZJzqgJQ@mail.gmail.com/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nomel</author><text>Personally, and maybe I’m in the minority when thinking this, but I can’t stand working with polite people.<p>They not only slow down the progress of a project by often causing unneeded busywork, from simply not halting bad ideas, they often slow my learning progress down by not telling me I’m wrong.<p>If you see something stupid, call it out. If I’m doing something stupid or say something wrong, call me out!<p>There’s obviously a happy medium somewhere in there, and Linus isn’t it, but I would much prefer working with a Linus than someone polite. From the history I’ve read, he’s not holding grudges, or necessarily attacking people, he’s attacking dumb approaches and ideas, which happen to be authored by people. At least that’s how I’ve always interpreted his rants.</text></item><item><author>jjeaff</author><text>Is anyone really rallied to the cause by Linus himself? I think the product is the only real draw. With the exception of a select few that simply want to work with someone as high profile and legendary as Linus.</text></item><item><author>hyperpallium</author><text>&gt; people who are able to accomplish their goals by rallying others to their cause.<p>Like Linus.</text></item><item><author>JohnBooty</author><text><p><pre><code> I&#x27;d bet people tend to cluster onto the line
separating &quot;agreeable and lax&quot; and &quot;rude but
firm&quot; (as a sweeping generality)
</code></pre>
Consider this:<p>A third category of people who are able to accomplish their goals by rallying others to their cause. They are essentially imposing their will on others, but are able to do it in a way that is not &quot;rude.&quot; This is called charisma.<p>- &quot;Agreeable and lax&quot;... you allow them to paint the fence however they want, even if their work is shoddy. you may wind up doing it yourself because you don&#x27;t feel comfortable enforcing your will on others. or perhaps you just wind up with a crappy looking fence.<p>- &quot;Rude but firm&quot;... you don&#x27;t care about others&#x27; feelings and force them somehow to to paint the fence to your specifications. either by physical force, economic force (you have money they need) or some other means<p>- &quot;Charisma&quot;... you convince them that painting the fence the way you want it painted is the best possible thing they could be doing. they willingly paint it for you because they believe it is a good cause and a good use of their time. (note: this does not necessarily imply dishonesty or trickery. arguably, the most charismatic people might be those that are true believers)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=tom+sawyer+fence" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=tom+sawyer+fence</a><p>Somewhat tangential, somewhat related: Sun Tzu wrote that the most perfect form of victory was adding the enemies&#x27; forces to you own by convincing them to support your cause.</text></item><item><author>jakeinspace</author><text>Linus is stubborn, persistent, and unyielding to what he sees as bullshit. These I believe are all very valuable qualities for the head of a massive software project, and may be part of the reason as to why Linux is where it is today.<p>However, Linus is also a bit of an asshole, turning technical criticism into personal seemingly personal attacks. I believe those 2 sets of qualities are separable, but I would guess it&#x27;s uncommon to find many people who are capable of being as tough as Linus without in some way alienating those around them, it&#x27;s a fine line at times.<p>Anecdotally, one of the most effective engineers I worked with, who asked penetrating questions during code and design reviews, did come off as a bit of an asshole at times. Whether by genetics or through childhood, I&#x27;d bet people tend to cluster onto the line separating &quot;agreeable and lax&quot; and &quot;rude but firm&quot; (as a sweeping generality). We often label people who are all smiles while simultaneously extremely strict as passive agressive. Add to that the fact that many technical people are less socially adjusted than average and I can see why we have so many examples of mean but effective project leads.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>olavk</author><text>So you are equating politeness with not halting bad ideas. That is not politeness, that is incompetence. Competent people would halt bad ides, but it can be done in different ways:<p>- Abrasive: This idea is the dumbest ever and you are an idiot that deserves to die.<p>- Constructive: This idea have problems X, Y and Z.<p>- Polite: Thank you for the effort, but I see problems X, Y and Z with the idea in its current form.<p>A lot of the discussion here is confusing the question of competence with the question of tone. You can be competent and have a nice tone and you can certainly be incompetent and have an abrasive tone. I can understand not having the patience for politeness, but personal insults are obviously counterproductive.</text></comment> | <story><title>Linus Torvalds apologizes for his behavior, takes time off</title><url>https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFy+Hv9O5citAawS+mVZO+ywCKd9NQ2wxUmGsz9ZJzqgJQ@mail.gmail.com/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>nomel</author><text>Personally, and maybe I’m in the minority when thinking this, but I can’t stand working with polite people.<p>They not only slow down the progress of a project by often causing unneeded busywork, from simply not halting bad ideas, they often slow my learning progress down by not telling me I’m wrong.<p>If you see something stupid, call it out. If I’m doing something stupid or say something wrong, call me out!<p>There’s obviously a happy medium somewhere in there, and Linus isn’t it, but I would much prefer working with a Linus than someone polite. From the history I’ve read, he’s not holding grudges, or necessarily attacking people, he’s attacking dumb approaches and ideas, which happen to be authored by people. At least that’s how I’ve always interpreted his rants.</text></item><item><author>jjeaff</author><text>Is anyone really rallied to the cause by Linus himself? I think the product is the only real draw. With the exception of a select few that simply want to work with someone as high profile and legendary as Linus.</text></item><item><author>hyperpallium</author><text>&gt; people who are able to accomplish their goals by rallying others to their cause.<p>Like Linus.</text></item><item><author>JohnBooty</author><text><p><pre><code> I&#x27;d bet people tend to cluster onto the line
separating &quot;agreeable and lax&quot; and &quot;rude but
firm&quot; (as a sweeping generality)
</code></pre>
Consider this:<p>A third category of people who are able to accomplish their goals by rallying others to their cause. They are essentially imposing their will on others, but are able to do it in a way that is not &quot;rude.&quot; This is called charisma.<p>- &quot;Agreeable and lax&quot;... you allow them to paint the fence however they want, even if their work is shoddy. you may wind up doing it yourself because you don&#x27;t feel comfortable enforcing your will on others. or perhaps you just wind up with a crappy looking fence.<p>- &quot;Rude but firm&quot;... you don&#x27;t care about others&#x27; feelings and force them somehow to to paint the fence to your specifications. either by physical force, economic force (you have money they need) or some other means<p>- &quot;Charisma&quot;... you convince them that painting the fence the way you want it painted is the best possible thing they could be doing. they willingly paint it for you because they believe it is a good cause and a good use of their time. (note: this does not necessarily imply dishonesty or trickery. arguably, the most charismatic people might be those that are true believers)<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=tom+sawyer+fence" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=tom+sawyer+fence</a><p>Somewhat tangential, somewhat related: Sun Tzu wrote that the most perfect form of victory was adding the enemies&#x27; forces to you own by convincing them to support your cause.</text></item><item><author>jakeinspace</author><text>Linus is stubborn, persistent, and unyielding to what he sees as bullshit. These I believe are all very valuable qualities for the head of a massive software project, and may be part of the reason as to why Linux is where it is today.<p>However, Linus is also a bit of an asshole, turning technical criticism into personal seemingly personal attacks. I believe those 2 sets of qualities are separable, but I would guess it&#x27;s uncommon to find many people who are capable of being as tough as Linus without in some way alienating those around them, it&#x27;s a fine line at times.<p>Anecdotally, one of the most effective engineers I worked with, who asked penetrating questions during code and design reviews, did come off as a bit of an asshole at times. Whether by genetics or through childhood, I&#x27;d bet people tend to cluster onto the line separating &quot;agreeable and lax&quot; and &quot;rude but firm&quot; (as a sweeping generality). We often label people who are all smiles while simultaneously extremely strict as passive agressive. Add to that the fact that many technical people are less socially adjusted than average and I can see why we have so many examples of mean but effective project leads.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>bluecalm</author><text>You&#x27;re in the minority but you&#x27;re not the only one. You can see the sentiment expressed about Rust community a lot. Super nice - don&#x27;t ever say anything that may upset someone - kind of atmosphere is off-putting to many. I for one wouldn&#x27;t want to work in such environment but I would love to work with Linus.<p>The problem is that people who prefer direct non-bs communication are also usually more emotionally mature and better at adjusting to others. They will keep quiet or look to move somewhere else but will rarely complain. Meanwhile easily upset and less stable people complain more readily and usually louder to force others to adopt their preferred style of communication (which often comes down to &quot;don&#x27;t criticize me and use the kind of language I prefer&quot;)</text></comment> |
23,365,588 | 23,365,251 | 1 | 2 | 23,361,987 | train | <story><title>SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit</title><url>https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-astronauts-launch-from-america-in-historic-test-flight-of-spacex-crew-dragon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stickfigure</author><text>&gt; You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable.<p>Why would you want to send humans to get it? Space is really inhospitable for humans, but machines seem to like it just fine.<p>Offshore oil and gas mining is rapidly being automated, and if they could, they would eliminate humans from the process altogether. Nobody <i>wants</i> to go out and live on a frozen windblown metal can full of industrial machinery, in the middle of an ocean, that could sink at any time. That&#x27;s why you have to pay people a lot of money to do it.<p>After you get over the romantic narrative of space, it really doesn&#x27;t sound any more appealing than the oil platform. I mean, sure, I&#x27;m curious. But I wouldn&#x27;t want to live there.</text></item><item><author>babesh</author><text>You just need to look further. You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable.<p>Read <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Case-Space-Revolution-Spaceflight-Possibility&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1633885348" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Case-Space-Revolution-Spaceflight-Pos...</a><p>Also with that short term outlook you wouldn’t have many things. The Internet was not initially commercial. It was designed to provide communications in the event of a nuclear attack. Yet here we are now and we have reaped immense benefits from that investment.<p>It’s blindingly obvious that spaceflight makes sense to invest in. The issue is that the level of investment is large and the time horizon before a return is long. Sometimes government takes that role.</text></item><item><author>sandworm101</author><text>&gt;&gt; into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.<p>If we are talking pure commercial travel, it is a vehicle without a destination. The ISS is definitely not a commercial project. There are lots of reasons for the ISS to exist, and they have changed over time, but it has never been a money-making venture. While the dragons certainly do come in under budget, they are a more efficient path to orbit, the purpose of the mission is not commercial. Crew Dragon&#x27;s existence is funded by the need to move people to and from the ISS. Without the ISS, Crew Dragon would exist. I hold off on the &quot;commercial&quot; designation until the customer funding the mission actually intends profit.<p>What we need is a commercial, money-making, reason to launch people into orbit. Astronauts fly for science. They fly for national pride. They fly to demonstrate engineering excellence. They don&#x27;t fly to make money. I&#x27;m a big spacelaunch fan but I just don&#x27;t see any commercial reason to launch people into space. (Space hotels for billionaires might be a niche but that doesn&#x27;t seem sustainable imho.)</text></item><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>It is hard to convey how &quot;sustainable&quot; this feels to me. For the first time, humans have gone into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.<p>All of the NASA missions prior to this have an ambience of &quot;uneconomical but useful&quot;. Even the shuttle, which was supposed to be this cost effective space truck, turned out to be not even close.<p>And the last thing I&#x27;m feeling is the amazement at how much technology has evolved to get us to this point. I imagined as a child that the Apollo program would lead to a factory of rockets that launched people to orbit, to the Moon, and even to Mars on demand. And seeing what SpaceX has done to get to this point, it is clear to me that was never even close to possible. The Russian program is great in that way. It shows what that path might have looked like. And yes we could have refined the making of F1 engines, the construction of boosters, and just pushed that, but that leads to a steady state that is below what you need to run a program like this with a net positive economic outcome.<p>So very impressed guys, congratulations!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Rebelgecko</author><text>I don&#x27;t know much about the intricacies of asteroid mining, but human beings are very capable entities. As great as machines like the Mars rovers are, there&#x27;s no comparison. A human astronaut could probably accomplish as much in a week as a Mars rover can in a year. When I was reading the daily diaries of one of the rover drivers, it was incredible how much effort and thought went into the most trivial activities. A simple sounding task like &quot;go look at that rock 20 meters away and take a picture of it&quot; would be a multi-day effort, whereas it would only take an astronaut a few minutes</text></comment> | <story><title>SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit</title><url>https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-astronauts-launch-from-america-in-historic-test-flight-of-spacex-crew-dragon</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stickfigure</author><text>&gt; You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable.<p>Why would you want to send humans to get it? Space is really inhospitable for humans, but machines seem to like it just fine.<p>Offshore oil and gas mining is rapidly being automated, and if they could, they would eliminate humans from the process altogether. Nobody <i>wants</i> to go out and live on a frozen windblown metal can full of industrial machinery, in the middle of an ocean, that could sink at any time. That&#x27;s why you have to pay people a lot of money to do it.<p>After you get over the romantic narrative of space, it really doesn&#x27;t sound any more appealing than the oil platform. I mean, sure, I&#x27;m curious. But I wouldn&#x27;t want to live there.</text></item><item><author>babesh</author><text>You just need to look further. You get access to rare materials that can be immensely valuable.<p>Read <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Case-Space-Revolution-Spaceflight-Possibility&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1633885348" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Case-Space-Revolution-Spaceflight-Pos...</a><p>Also with that short term outlook you wouldn’t have many things. The Internet was not initially commercial. It was designed to provide communications in the event of a nuclear attack. Yet here we are now and we have reaped immense benefits from that investment.<p>It’s blindingly obvious that spaceflight makes sense to invest in. The issue is that the level of investment is large and the time horizon before a return is long. Sometimes government takes that role.</text></item><item><author>sandworm101</author><text>&gt;&gt; into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.<p>If we are talking pure commercial travel, it is a vehicle without a destination. The ISS is definitely not a commercial project. There are lots of reasons for the ISS to exist, and they have changed over time, but it has never been a money-making venture. While the dragons certainly do come in under budget, they are a more efficient path to orbit, the purpose of the mission is not commercial. Crew Dragon&#x27;s existence is funded by the need to move people to and from the ISS. Without the ISS, Crew Dragon would exist. I hold off on the &quot;commercial&quot; designation until the customer funding the mission actually intends profit.<p>What we need is a commercial, money-making, reason to launch people into orbit. Astronauts fly for science. They fly for national pride. They fly to demonstrate engineering excellence. They don&#x27;t fly to make money. I&#x27;m a big spacelaunch fan but I just don&#x27;t see any commercial reason to launch people into space. (Space hotels for billionaires might be a niche but that doesn&#x27;t seem sustainable imho.)</text></item><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>It is hard to convey how &quot;sustainable&quot; this feels to me. For the first time, humans have gone into orbit in a spacecraft that was designed from the ground up to be a commercial venture.<p>All of the NASA missions prior to this have an ambience of &quot;uneconomical but useful&quot;. Even the shuttle, which was supposed to be this cost effective space truck, turned out to be not even close.<p>And the last thing I&#x27;m feeling is the amazement at how much technology has evolved to get us to this point. I imagined as a child that the Apollo program would lead to a factory of rockets that launched people to orbit, to the Moon, and even to Mars on demand. And seeing what SpaceX has done to get to this point, it is clear to me that was never even close to possible. The Russian program is great in that way. It shows what that path might have looked like. And yes we could have refined the making of F1 engines, the construction of boosters, and just pushed that, but that leads to a steady state that is below what you need to run a program like this with a net positive economic outcome.<p>So very impressed guys, congratulations!</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cortesoft</author><text>&gt; but machines seem to like it just fine.<p>I think you are underestimating the challenges they have to overcome to get machines to work in space.</text></comment> |
4,768,499 | 4,768,465 | 1 | 2 | 4,767,789 | train | <story><title>The amount of crap Windows users have to put up with is incredible</title><url>http://dendory.net/blog.php?id=509ec629</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>biturd</author><text>I think there is a company that does what you suggest. I will probably get down voted for saying it, but Apple. They put in the time to make a pretty darned good user experience for first impressions.<p>There's no junk, no spyware, nothing to remove. Occasionally you might get a software bundle, like Office, or Quicken, but literally just drop it in the trash and you are done with it. Rarely would you have to find an uninstaller or dig deep to remove something, and if you do, you generally brought it on yourself and should know what you are doing.<p>But you pay extra for this, most of which people apparently don't want to do, as I always hear "I could have bought computer xyz for 25% cheaper", as they are finishing their 15 hours of cleanup.</text></item><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>I enjoyed this rant. The bottom line is that this 'experience' isn't about you, its about who you can be sold too. That is because "you" are too cheap to pay what "we" think should be paid for them. It is like a hotel which sells you room for $100 a night if you agree to let them leave a web cam on 24/7 and sell any useful 'snippets' it catches while you are there.<p>The bulk of the market doesn't buy "computers" they buy "televisions." Think about that for a minute.<p>The bulk of the market are entertainment 'consumers' for which you can sell access to their eyeballs for real money. Just like TV did before people got digital recorders and started skipping all the ads. Not so with these new fangled TVs, they don't care if you don't <i>look</i> at their advertising they want to know what you did look at, and when, and after what, and then what did you do? Because all of that is much more valuable than putting up a tasty picture of a cheeseburger in front of you, no, they can phone ahead to your local market and tell them to stock up on cheeseburgers because you've been researching them all day and are now at the point where you want to make a purchase.<p>But the cool thing? It means that the current 'big' players are leaving the market for computers behind. You can tell that by the fact that the computer company no longer sells a product that a <i>developer</i> would care to use. And that means that there is room again at the bottom.<p>Time to start a 'developers' company that works very much on the same model that Sun Microsystems started on, hardware designed from the ground up to be developed on, open systems so that folks can easily work with it, and a team dedicated to making sure integration and support is there so that folks like you and I can say "Hey this audio doesn't work when you set the sampling rate to 40Khz" and they can fix it and release that fix.<p>But for that company to exist, you have to pay for the products you use, and to get to that point you have to not be able to get something 'good enough' by hacking and slashing something else into shape.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kstenerud</author><text>Definitely NOT Apple. Despite their open source site, the most important bits of the OS are closed, and so developers can't dig into the OS to figure out if the bizarre behavior they're seeing is a bug in the OS or not. Worse, they can't submit patches for things they do find. Instead, they have to go submit a radar report, which can't be seen by anyone but themselves. It's so bad that it has become common behavior to copy/paste the report to openradar and then have other developers submit duplicate reports as a way to "upvote" a bug. That is most definitely NOT developer friendly.<p>And then we have Xcode, the program that has inspired a twitter account dedicated to its severe brokenness.<p>And let's not forget their terrible provisioning process that always breaks in continuous integration systems, and the asinine limit of 100 test devices. Oh, and their train wreck of a command line tool suite.<p>And then there's their absolutely bizarre behavior of replacing every internal function name with &#60;redacted&#62;, and disabling stdout on iOS 6.<p>And then we have the "eat all memory" pager system in OSX that can chew through 8 gigs like candy and bring your system to its knees should you ever try to run more than 5 programs + Xcode.<p>If there were an iOS development environment + simulator for Ubuntu, I'd wipe this laptop and switch over.</text></comment> | <story><title>The amount of crap Windows users have to put up with is incredible</title><url>http://dendory.net/blog.php?id=509ec629</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>biturd</author><text>I think there is a company that does what you suggest. I will probably get down voted for saying it, but Apple. They put in the time to make a pretty darned good user experience for first impressions.<p>There's no junk, no spyware, nothing to remove. Occasionally you might get a software bundle, like Office, or Quicken, but literally just drop it in the trash and you are done with it. Rarely would you have to find an uninstaller or dig deep to remove something, and if you do, you generally brought it on yourself and should know what you are doing.<p>But you pay extra for this, most of which people apparently don't want to do, as I always hear "I could have bought computer xyz for 25% cheaper", as they are finishing their 15 hours of cleanup.</text></item><item><author>ChuckMcM</author><text>I enjoyed this rant. The bottom line is that this 'experience' isn't about you, its about who you can be sold too. That is because "you" are too cheap to pay what "we" think should be paid for them. It is like a hotel which sells you room for $100 a night if you agree to let them leave a web cam on 24/7 and sell any useful 'snippets' it catches while you are there.<p>The bulk of the market doesn't buy "computers" they buy "televisions." Think about that for a minute.<p>The bulk of the market are entertainment 'consumers' for which you can sell access to their eyeballs for real money. Just like TV did before people got digital recorders and started skipping all the ads. Not so with these new fangled TVs, they don't care if you don't <i>look</i> at their advertising they want to know what you did look at, and when, and after what, and then what did you do? Because all of that is much more valuable than putting up a tasty picture of a cheeseburger in front of you, no, they can phone ahead to your local market and tell them to stock up on cheeseburgers because you've been researching them all day and are now at the point where you want to make a purchase.<p>But the cool thing? It means that the current 'big' players are leaving the market for computers behind. You can tell that by the fact that the computer company no longer sells a product that a <i>developer</i> would care to use. And that means that there is room again at the bottom.<p>Time to start a 'developers' company that works very much on the same model that Sun Microsystems started on, hardware designed from the ground up to be developed on, open systems so that folks can easily work with it, and a team dedicated to making sure integration and support is there so that folks like you and I can say "Hey this audio doesn't work when you set the sampling rate to 40Khz" and they can fix it and release that fix.<p>But for that company to exist, you have to pay for the products you use, and to get to that point you have to not be able to get something 'good enough' by hacking and slashing something else into shape.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>viraptor</author><text>I see you never needed quicktime on windows? Their download page asks you for the email to "Keep me up to date with Apple news, software updates, and the latest information on products and services." Their privacy policy starts with:<p>"You may be asked to provide your personal information anytime you are in contact with Apple or an Apple affiliated company. Apple and its affiliates may share this personal information with each other and use it consistent with this Privacy Policy. They may also combine it with other information to provide and improve our products, services, content, and advertising."<p>I don't think they're different from other companies at all.</text></comment> |
24,904,603 | 24,903,567 | 1 | 3 | 24,901,397 | train | <story><title>NYC taxi meter and options pricing</title><url>https://questdb.io/blog/2020/10/16/taxi-drivers-are-options-traders</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>JackFr</author><text>Cabs are paid by the minute below a certain speed and by the mile above a certain speed. Cab drivers will earn more by completing trips faster. Thus congested traffic costs costs cab drivers money.<p>The introduction of option pricing theory, terminology and various forms of hand waving does nothing but confuse the central argument with gross misapplication of theory.</text></comment> | <story><title>NYC taxi meter and options pricing</title><url>https://questdb.io/blog/2020/10/16/taxi-drivers-are-options-traders</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jedberg</author><text>&gt; driving customers faster earns the driver more.<p>I always knew this, but I always assumed it was because of the value of the $2.50 meter drop. I didn&#x27;t realize how much of an incentive it was built into the meter fare.<p>This explains why they always drive so crazy.</text></comment> |
13,079,444 | 13,078,522 | 1 | 2 | 13,077,179 | train | <story><title>Fitbit is reportedly buying Pebble for around $40M</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/30/fitbit-pebble/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>modeless</author><text>I liked Pebble as a company because they knew how to make just the right engineering compromises to make their product work. The smartwatch everyone wants has a battery that lasts for weeks, a high contrast always-on color screen visible in daylight and total darkness, no bezel, and a round case only a few mm thick. That perfect watch is impossible to build, but Pebble found compromises that worked. They chose different compromises than those of Apple and Google, and IMHO better ones. The Pebble Time Round is a tiny little triumph of smart engineering compared with any other product on the market, including the Apple Watch.<p>In particular it&#x27;s incredible what the Pebble firmware team was able to accomplish. They built a bespoke OS that&#x27;s extremely reliable (certainly more reliable than Android Wear), with an app SDK and store, <i>plus</i> a well thought out user interface with a striking visual design and even fun little animated flourishes, despite running in a fraction of the power budget of Apple or Android smartwatches. How many companies could have done that? Fitbit is getting a bargain, if that team is still intact.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rockostrich</author><text>I think Pebble benefitted a ton from being the first company in the space. There were definitely a ton of hiccups with the original Pebble watch. There was barely a store and when the store did come into being it was buggy as hell. The hardware design decisions have always been pretty great though. Even today, I&#x27;d probably take the original Pebble over an Apple watch or anything from Android wear for practicality.</text></comment> | <story><title>Fitbit is reportedly buying Pebble for around $40M</title><url>https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/30/fitbit-pebble/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>modeless</author><text>I liked Pebble as a company because they knew how to make just the right engineering compromises to make their product work. The smartwatch everyone wants has a battery that lasts for weeks, a high contrast always-on color screen visible in daylight and total darkness, no bezel, and a round case only a few mm thick. That perfect watch is impossible to build, but Pebble found compromises that worked. They chose different compromises than those of Apple and Google, and IMHO better ones. The Pebble Time Round is a tiny little triumph of smart engineering compared with any other product on the market, including the Apple Watch.<p>In particular it&#x27;s incredible what the Pebble firmware team was able to accomplish. They built a bespoke OS that&#x27;s extremely reliable (certainly more reliable than Android Wear), with an app SDK and store, <i>plus</i> a well thought out user interface with a striking visual design and even fun little animated flourishes, despite running in a fraction of the power budget of Apple or Android smartwatches. How many companies could have done that? Fitbit is getting a bargain, if that team is still intact.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kobeya</author><text>&gt; How many companies could have done that? Fitbit is getting a bargain, if that team is still intact.<p>There&#x27;s been an exodus from Pebble for months now. Our team already picked up a few competent people. :( Sad because I really like Pebble&#x27;s products.</text></comment> |
5,855,731 | 5,855,550 | 1 | 2 | 5,854,818 | train | <story><title>The Irrationality of Giving Up This Much Liberty to Fight Terror</title><url>http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-irrationality-of-giving-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>DanielBMarkham</author><text>I completely agree that we&#x27;ve overreacted, but I&#x27;ve always rejected this argument, and here&#x27;s why: Terrorism is not about numerical risk, it is about <i>public perception</i>.<p>That means that it plays in the same game as everything else in the PR world: politics, advertising, social signaling, and so forth. The last thing it has anything to do with is logic.<p>It would be great if we could tally up all the things that kill us and spend proportionally on those. It&#x27;s the logical thing to do. Heart disease would come first, then cancer, and so on. But instead we spend and give attention to those things that the public perceives we should: AIDS research, nuclear war deterrence, terrorism.<p>And if you think about it, that&#x27;s the way it ought to be. Spending and making laws are all about the consent of the governed, doing things they want. They&#x27;re not about math or logic.<p>The problem here is that, with the Cold War over, the defense and intelligence industry saw 9-11 as a call to arms. They&#x27;re going to go out and do things a good defense and intelligence industry should. And as Americans we have traditionally been forgiving of having our civil liberties temporarily trampled on during times of war.<p>But you can&#x27;t have a war forever. A democracy cannot survive this. Instead of the natural overreaction to a war that always happened, we started creating permanent infrastructure to address all terrorism, forever. We&#x27;re fighting a war with nobody to surrender, and no amount of spending or government monitoring will ever be enough.<p>The original laws around 9-11 were temporary, and for a very good reason. But somehow politics has gotten to the point where terrorism is the new third-rail: some national politicians might grandstand a bit, but nobody is going to do anything except for give the security state apparatus whatever it says it needs. Otherwise they&#x27;d be thrown out of office. Public perception demands it.<p>Adding up numbers has nothing to do with it, unless you&#x27;re using them to make some kind of <i>persuasive argument</i>, and then we&#x27;re right back to public perception and politics. You&#x27;re in the same boat as those who asked for more cancer research instead of AIDS research. Different people, rightly, see things differently, and everybody deserves to be represented. We&#x27;re running a country, not an insurance agency.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>belorn</author><text>&gt; <i>Spending and making laws are all about the consent of the governed.</i><p>Laws should be about the <i>informed</i> consent of the governed. Security built on a lie is still a lie even if people feel more safe. During the first days of 9-11, the military sent personal down to the airport to reinforce peoples perception of safe travel. What they did not tell anyone at the time, was that the guns did not have any ammunition in them. Instead, the military were basically posing as an &quot;armed force&quot;, because having guns <i>with</i> ammunition at airport would then actually create a security issue at the airports.<p>The security theater of the US feels somewhat like a doctor who has started to only give out placebos to his patients. If anyone feels better, sing praises, and if anyone get worse, give them more sugar pills. Soon, everyone start to get sick on the sugar alone, while the sugar pill manufacturer crave for more sick people.<p>The security theater from 9-11 has gone on long enough. People are not going to feel more safe from it, and will just get sicker on the solution.</text></comment> | <story><title>The Irrationality of Giving Up This Much Liberty to Fight Terror</title><url>http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/the-irrationality-of-giving-up-this-much-liberty-to-fight-terror/276695/</url><text></text></story><parent_chain><item><author>DanielBMarkham</author><text>I completely agree that we&#x27;ve overreacted, but I&#x27;ve always rejected this argument, and here&#x27;s why: Terrorism is not about numerical risk, it is about <i>public perception</i>.<p>That means that it plays in the same game as everything else in the PR world: politics, advertising, social signaling, and so forth. The last thing it has anything to do with is logic.<p>It would be great if we could tally up all the things that kill us and spend proportionally on those. It&#x27;s the logical thing to do. Heart disease would come first, then cancer, and so on. But instead we spend and give attention to those things that the public perceives we should: AIDS research, nuclear war deterrence, terrorism.<p>And if you think about it, that&#x27;s the way it ought to be. Spending and making laws are all about the consent of the governed, doing things they want. They&#x27;re not about math or logic.<p>The problem here is that, with the Cold War over, the defense and intelligence industry saw 9-11 as a call to arms. They&#x27;re going to go out and do things a good defense and intelligence industry should. And as Americans we have traditionally been forgiving of having our civil liberties temporarily trampled on during times of war.<p>But you can&#x27;t have a war forever. A democracy cannot survive this. Instead of the natural overreaction to a war that always happened, we started creating permanent infrastructure to address all terrorism, forever. We&#x27;re fighting a war with nobody to surrender, and no amount of spending or government monitoring will ever be enough.<p>The original laws around 9-11 were temporary, and for a very good reason. But somehow politics has gotten to the point where terrorism is the new third-rail: some national politicians might grandstand a bit, but nobody is going to do anything except for give the security state apparatus whatever it says it needs. Otherwise they&#x27;d be thrown out of office. Public perception demands it.<p>Adding up numbers has nothing to do with it, unless you&#x27;re using them to make some kind of <i>persuasive argument</i>, and then we&#x27;re right back to public perception and politics. You&#x27;re in the same boat as those who asked for more cancer research instead of AIDS research. Different people, rightly, see things differently, and everybody deserves to be represented. We&#x27;re running a country, not an insurance agency.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kiba</author><text><i>And if you think about it, that&#x27;s the way it ought to be. Spending and making laws are all about the consent of the governed, doing things they want. They&#x27;re not about math or logic.</i><p>Righhhhhhhhhhhhht.. Let throw out thinking, ethics, and morality just for some &quot;heart&quot;. No, this is not how humanity should conduct themselves. Emotion should be calibrated to logics and numbers, not the other way around.<p>If heart attacks and motor accidents isn&#x27;t photogenic as terrorism, the response shouldn&#x27;t be to cater to the terrorism fearing population, but making heart attacks and motor accidents photogenic.<p>Let do what we <i>really want</i> rather than we <i>think we want</i>. Know ourselves, and we will know that pursuing terrorists by losing our liberty should not be our future.</text></comment> |
3,056,252 | 3,054,981 | 1 | 2 | 3,054,085 | train | <story><title>Chrome to take No. 2 browser spot from Firefox</title><url>http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9220396/Chrome_poised_to_take_No._2_browser_spot_from_Firefox</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>KevinMS</author><text>Doesn't it bother anybody that Chrome is made by ad company?<p>The way I see it, if everybody started using ad blockers like I do, google would implode almost instantly. So how would they combat that? Control the platform for viewing the web and be positioned to kill ad blockers if it ever became a problem.<p>Would you buy a DVR controlled by a television network? That would be insane, as soon as DVRs ate too much into their revenues they would just
kill the skipping feature.<p>But because of the abundance of chrome fanboys, this is just what is happening, and everybody is looking the other way.<p>A little while ago we had a big company doing everything they could to control the "personal computer" platform, even evil things, and illegal things, and now there's another company trying to control the internet as a platform and a lot of you hackers are eating it up, I'm just baffled.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>chalst</author><text><i>Doesn't it bother anybody</i><p>A little, but do be aware that (i) Mozilla is 83% financed [<i>] by search royalties from that same ad company, and (ii) Chromium has a somewhat independent developer community<p>Making money from ads is also not evil: you are probably served by a local newspaper which is probably both good for your neighbourhood and financed mostly or entirely by ads. This stream of revenue comes with conflicts of interest, but these can be handled better or worse. I think Google has done pretty well in this; at least my criticisms of Google mostly do not lie here.<p>[</i>] <a href="http://www.extremetech.com/internet/92558-how-browsers-make-money-or-why-google-needs-firefox?print" rel="nofollow">http://www.extremetech.com/internet/92558-how-browsers-make-...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Chrome to take No. 2 browser spot from Firefox</title><url>http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9220396/Chrome_poised_to_take_No._2_browser_spot_from_Firefox</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>KevinMS</author><text>Doesn't it bother anybody that Chrome is made by ad company?<p>The way I see it, if everybody started using ad blockers like I do, google would implode almost instantly. So how would they combat that? Control the platform for viewing the web and be positioned to kill ad blockers if it ever became a problem.<p>Would you buy a DVR controlled by a television network? That would be insane, as soon as DVRs ate too much into their revenues they would just
kill the skipping feature.<p>But because of the abundance of chrome fanboys, this is just what is happening, and everybody is looking the other way.<p>A little while ago we had a big company doing everything they could to control the "personal computer" platform, even evil things, and illegal things, and now there's another company trying to control the internet as a platform and a lot of you hackers are eating it up, I'm just baffled.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kgermino</author><text>Would you rent a DVR from Comcast? Thousands of people do.<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-01/comcast-takeover-of-nbc-universal-merger-wins-approval-from-federal-judge.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-01/comcast-takeover-of...</a></text></comment> |
26,437,904 | 26,438,143 | 1 | 3 | 26,412,633 | train | <story><title>The security scanner that cried wolf</title><url>https://pythonspeed.com/articles/docker-security-scanner/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>raesene9</author><text>This article shows an interesting contrast between how different types of scanning tools address the issue of valid CVEs for which there are no updates.<p>The question is &quot;do you want to know about a valid CVE if there&#x27;s no patch available&quot;?<p>For high security environments, the answer might be yes (you want to evaluate individual patches to see if they impact your application)<p>For many environments the answer is likely (as is the case with OP) no, you only want to know about issues for which there is an updated package available.<p>Interestingly (well to me :) ) more established scanning tools (e.g. Tenable Nessus) default to &quot;no&quot; on this question and container scanning tools mostly default to &quot;yes&quot;. (I did an example comparison <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;raesene.github.io&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2020&#x2F;11&#x2F;22&#x2F;When_Is_A_Vulnerability_Not_A_Vulnerability&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;raesene.github.io&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2020&#x2F;11&#x2F;22&#x2F;When_Is_A_Vulnerab...</a>)<p>The important part is that your organization makes an informed choice about which works best for them.<p>As a sidenote there are also differences in severities and how vulnerabilities are counted (e.g. if you have multiple issues in a package do you count each one or just count once for that package) which can lead to different numbers of issues being reported by different scanners. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;raesene.github.io&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;21&#x2F;Container_Vulnerability_Scanning_Fun&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;raesene.github.io&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;21&#x2F;Container_Vulnerab...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>The security scanner that cried wolf</title><url>https://pythonspeed.com/articles/docker-security-scanner/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>c7DJTLrn</author><text>My impression of container scanners has always been that they are security theatre. Something that lets companies say &#x27;look how security conscious we are&#x27;. Same for code scanners.<p>If an automated process really could find vulnerabilities to the same fidelity as a human pentester, that would be groundbreaking. In most cases, companies don&#x27;t want to fork out the cost for <i>real</i> security, so they run these useless scanners instead.</text></comment> |
28,960,518 | 28,960,573 | 1 | 3 | 28,960,287 | train | <story><title>YouTube is about to pull its apps from Roku</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/22/google-to-remove-youtube-apps-from-roku.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>humanistbot</author><text>From the article:<p>&gt; The fight between the two companies centers on a 2019 agreement to allow YouTube TV on Roku. Roku said Google demanded special access to search data from Roku customers as a condition of allowing YouTube TV on Roku devices. Roku also said Google asked for prioritized search results for YouTube videos in Roku&#x27;s search feature.<p>&gt; Roku said it agreed to those terms, but also asked that Google not ask for any additional data. Google would not commit to that, according to Roku, and now both sides are at an impasse. Unless both companies come to an agreement before Dec. 9, YouTube&#x27;s apps will disappear from Roku&#x27;s app store.</text></comment> | <story><title>YouTube is about to pull its apps from Roku</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/22/google-to-remove-youtube-apps-from-roku.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>mig39</author><text>See also:<p>Roku tells customers it is unable to strike a deal with YouTube -- <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=28943886" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=28943886</a></text></comment> |
32,674,309 | 32,674,134 | 1 | 2 | 32,669,838 | train | <story><title>Dear Linux, Privileged Ports Must Die</title><url>https://ar.al/2022/08/30/dear-linux-privileged-ports-must-die/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>antimeme</author><text>This article is nonsense. Privileged ports are a security feature. They have literally nothing to do with mainframes. On multi-user systems, they&#x27;re incredibly important because they give external clients confidence that the services provided on them are authorized by the system and not just by any user -- some of whom may not be as trustworthy as others. Most systems in this era of cheap hardware are single user, BUT NOT ALL SYSTEMS. It&#x27;s fine for Windows and Mac OS to do without them and it&#x27;s fine to configure your own Linux system to disable them if that&#x27;s what you want, but it&#x27;s completely insane to argue that they&#x27;re a security flaw because some people work around them using insecure practices. There are plenty of secure ways to work around them, most obviously by USING A NON-PRIVILEGED PORT. Start your service on port 8080, for example, and give out a URL like <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com:8080&#x2F;path" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com:8080&#x2F;path</a>. It&#x27;s really that simple. Take the time to understand the actual purpose of a feature before urging others to abolish it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ttiurani</author><text>&gt; Most systems in this era of cheap hardware are single user, BUT NOT ALL SYSTEMS<p>OP quite clearly argues that multi-user systems can still have the old behavior if they so choose with explicit configuration. OP makes an argument about what should be the sensible default in 2022, and who should do explicit configuration.<p>I think the point that nowadays easy single user linux configuration should be preferred over multi-user configurations is good.<p>IMO distros could make this easy by turning privileged ports into an (advanced) installation question. Then the clearly single-user-focused distros would default to 80, and the more server-oriented or conservative distros would default to the current behavior, but both could do which ever.<p>&gt; Start your service on port 8080, for example.<p>In the era of Let&#x27;s Encrypt, this is really about 80 and 443. The background for the OP is probably to host &quot;normal&quot; sites on single user hardware.<p>If you were to give out to non-technical users addresses like &quot;<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.org:8080" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.org:8080</a>&quot; which then transform into &quot;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.org:8443" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.org:8443</a>&quot;, that&#x27;s just horrible UX. Those kinds of numbers in the URL probably also look to many people like someone is trying to hack them. Furthermore addresses are also communicated word-of-mouth &quot;go to example dot org&quot;.<p>So no, using unprivileged ports is not an actual workaround for the use cases OP is referring to.</text></comment> | <story><title>Dear Linux, Privileged Ports Must Die</title><url>https://ar.al/2022/08/30/dear-linux-privileged-ports-must-die/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>antimeme</author><text>This article is nonsense. Privileged ports are a security feature. They have literally nothing to do with mainframes. On multi-user systems, they&#x27;re incredibly important because they give external clients confidence that the services provided on them are authorized by the system and not just by any user -- some of whom may not be as trustworthy as others. Most systems in this era of cheap hardware are single user, BUT NOT ALL SYSTEMS. It&#x27;s fine for Windows and Mac OS to do without them and it&#x27;s fine to configure your own Linux system to disable them if that&#x27;s what you want, but it&#x27;s completely insane to argue that they&#x27;re a security flaw because some people work around them using insecure practices. There are plenty of secure ways to work around them, most obviously by USING A NON-PRIVILEGED PORT. Start your service on port 8080, for example, and give out a URL like <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com:8080&#x2F;path" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;example.com:8080&#x2F;path</a>. It&#x27;s really that simple. Take the time to understand the actual purpose of a feature before urging others to abolish it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>foldr</author><text>This was covered in the article, albeit a little sarcastically:<p>&gt;And for the three folks in Finland who administer multi-user Linux instances and rely on privileged ports for their mainframe-era security properties, they can always run sysctl and set their port limit to 1024 as it was before.<p>If you wanted to block non-root users binding certain ports, you&#x27;d still be able to do so. It just doesn&#x27;t make sense to have this as the default anymore, as it tends to cause more security issues that it prevents.</text></comment> |
26,311,374 | 26,310,733 | 1 | 2 | 26,309,833 | train | <story><title>Splitting the Ping</title><url>https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/ping-with-loss-latency-split</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>great_wubwub</author><text>Everybody is talking about clock accuracy and totally missing that devices in the middle of the network path <i>do not care about responding quickly to pings</i>. Middle devices are generally routers or firewalls, and their job is to route and firewall, not to respond to a packet as quickly as it comes in. Transit traffic is far more important than processing control plane packets. Devices can add several msec or more in latency by sticking ICMP echo requests and the like in a low-priority queue and getting around to responding eventually. This will dwarf any gains produced by &quot;the best NTP server&quot;.<p>And no, setting QoS bits on the packet will not help.</text></comment> | <story><title>Splitting the Ping</title><url>https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/ping-with-loss-latency-split</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>pxx</author><text>Not entirely related, but a fun and interesting tangent: There&#x27;s actually no way that we know of to measure the &quot;one-way&quot; speed of light, as the specific synchronization that you use (and this post uses to do its calculation) assumes that the speed of light is the same in both directions. For all we know, light travels infinitely quickly in one direction and at c&#x2F;2 in the return direction.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;One-way_speed_of_light" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;One-way_speed_of_light</a><p>recent-ish video about this: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k</a></text></comment> |
17,309,589 | 17,308,760 | 1 | 3 | 17,307,123 | train | <story><title>Console.table()</title><url>https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Console/table</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>deathanatos</author><text>So much this! I&#x27;ve long wanted something where by I can chain, into a sort of tree, to more easily follow or hide large subcomponents and subservices. For example, say I make two calls in my service A to two other services B and C, and all report logs to a centralized location; that could get rendered as,<p><pre><code> ─ info: GET &#x2F;foo&#x2F;endpoint
├─ info: user &lt;user ID&gt; valid auth
├─ info: request to service B
│ ├─ debug: opening new connection
│ ├─ debug: success, result = ...
│ └─ info: request took 1 seconds
├─ info: request to service B
│ ├─ debug: opening new connection
│ ├─ debug: success, result = ...
│ └─ info: request took 1 seconds
├─ info: preparing result took 1 seconds
└─ info: http request took 3 seconds
</code></pre>
with the ability to hide sections, perhaps grep for only certain messages (particularly if you keep the formatting and the message separate, this should be doable, I think), attach metadata to messages…<p>As it is, we have a fairly standard shove everything into syslog, and then pipe to a downstream logging system and a local file. But the downstream system is not very good at search (this is probably mostly our fault) and requires the message to be in JSON, so the stuff in the log file is _also_ JSON, b&#x2F;c that&#x27;s what syslog got. There are definitely better ways with our existing tools, but it sure makes one dream up what the perfect logging solution <i>could</i> look like.</text></item><item><author>azinman2</author><text>This is a great example that shows how poor most non-web debugging and logging. The ability to mix and match data types and presentation format is extremely useful. Almost everywhere else we just have printf. And that’s printf going to stdout — there isn’t a universally deployed format to even allow it to travel easily over the network and be viewed on one of many useful and advanced viewers.<p>I think part of the problem is that programmers rarely want to get into these supportive details; they just printf and get on with it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>masklinn</author><text>&gt; As it is, we have a fairly standard shove everything<p>Assuming &quot;everything&quot; is &quot;static log statements&quot; which is the first issue I have with this, a developer must have thought before deployment that this could be useful, which usually results in a lot of useless garbage <i>and</i> a lack of actually useful information. And little by little you build up actually technically useful data collection, and rather than being spread throughout the codebase all of the probes are centralised and readable.<p>I&#x27;ve been thinking about using dynamic instrumentation tools (bcc&#x2F;dtrace) for that purpose instead, you know you need something when you actually <i>do</i> need it, at that point you can add it to the probes&#x2F;instrumentation (which is external to the program and deployable separately), and all information would be collected in a structured form in a database you can interact with (probably not something relational).</text></comment> | <story><title>Console.table()</title><url>https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Console/table</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>deathanatos</author><text>So much this! I&#x27;ve long wanted something where by I can chain, into a sort of tree, to more easily follow or hide large subcomponents and subservices. For example, say I make two calls in my service A to two other services B and C, and all report logs to a centralized location; that could get rendered as,<p><pre><code> ─ info: GET &#x2F;foo&#x2F;endpoint
├─ info: user &lt;user ID&gt; valid auth
├─ info: request to service B
│ ├─ debug: opening new connection
│ ├─ debug: success, result = ...
│ └─ info: request took 1 seconds
├─ info: request to service B
│ ├─ debug: opening new connection
│ ├─ debug: success, result = ...
│ └─ info: request took 1 seconds
├─ info: preparing result took 1 seconds
└─ info: http request took 3 seconds
</code></pre>
with the ability to hide sections, perhaps grep for only certain messages (particularly if you keep the formatting and the message separate, this should be doable, I think), attach metadata to messages…<p>As it is, we have a fairly standard shove everything into syslog, and then pipe to a downstream logging system and a local file. But the downstream system is not very good at search (this is probably mostly our fault) and requires the message to be in JSON, so the stuff in the log file is _also_ JSON, b&#x2F;c that&#x27;s what syslog got. There are definitely better ways with our existing tools, but it sure makes one dream up what the perfect logging solution <i>could</i> look like.</text></item><item><author>azinman2</author><text>This is a great example that shows how poor most non-web debugging and logging. The ability to mix and match data types and presentation format is extremely useful. Almost everywhere else we just have printf. And that’s printf going to stdout — there isn’t a universally deployed format to even allow it to travel easily over the network and be viewed on one of many useful and advanced viewers.<p>I think part of the problem is that programmers rarely want to get into these supportive details; they just printf and get on with it.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>joshribakoff</author><text>Html5 timing API + chrome devtools performance tab &quot;user timing&quot; section is a great workflow in my opinion for frontend.</text></comment> |
40,563,720 | 40,552,591 | 1 | 2 | 40,552,548 | train | <story><title>FineWeb: Decanting the web for the finest text data at scale</title><url>https://huggingface.co/spaces/HuggingFaceFW/blogpost-fineweb-v1</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>nyyp</author><text>I&#x27;m always happy to see the proliferation of open-source resources for the next generative models. But I strongly suspect that OpenAI and friends are all using copywritten content from the wealth of shadow book repositories available online [1]. Unless open models are doing the same, I doubt they will ever get meaningfully close to the quality of closed-source models.<p>Related: I also suspect that this is one reason we get so little information about the exact data used to train Meta&#x27;s Llama models (&quot;open weights&quot; vs &quot;open source&quot;).<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.annas-archive.org&#x2F;llm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.annas-archive.org&#x2F;llm</a></text></comment> | <story><title>FineWeb: Decanting the web for the finest text data at scale</title><url>https://huggingface.co/spaces/HuggingFaceFW/blogpost-fineweb-v1</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>nmstoker</author><text>Am continuing to reflect on this, so may have more to say later, but what struck me first was the commitment to openness with FineWeb, it is impressive and thorough (eg all the scripts they actually used are available and linked to, not just the finished data)</text></comment> |
32,059,688 | 32,059,748 | 1 | 2 | 32,058,107 | train | <story><title>The Uber whistleblower: I’m exposing a system that sold people a lie</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/11/uber-files-whistleblower-lobbyist-mark-macgann</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>yupper32</author><text>It&#x27;s also important to realize that the reason Uber and Lyft were able to crush the taxi industry is in part because the taxi industry was absolutely horrible to consumers.<p>The simple act of being able to know what I&#x27;m going to be charged beforehand, and know that the driver has little ability to scam me out of as much money as they can extract from me at my destination made Uber and Lyft SO much better. That should be the bare minimum, and yet the taxi industry couldn&#x27;t figure that out for the most part.<p>I do not care about them breaking taxi laws or regulations. Their treatment of their &quot;employees&quot; absolutely needs improvement, but my god I do not care about the taxi industry as a whole.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>abirch</author><text>I&#x27;m old enough to remember calling a taxi company the day before a flight to arrange a pickup at my place for 5:30. Then calling them again 5:00 the day of the flight and them telling me that the one guy didn&#x27;t come in so now they couldn&#x27;t pick me up until 7 -- My flight departure time! Then me frantically calling other taxi companies. I had to skip my shower.<p>They seemed to hate their customers</text></comment> | <story><title>The Uber whistleblower: I’m exposing a system that sold people a lie</title><url>https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/11/uber-files-whistleblower-lobbyist-mark-macgann</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>yupper32</author><text>It&#x27;s also important to realize that the reason Uber and Lyft were able to crush the taxi industry is in part because the taxi industry was absolutely horrible to consumers.<p>The simple act of being able to know what I&#x27;m going to be charged beforehand, and know that the driver has little ability to scam me out of as much money as they can extract from me at my destination made Uber and Lyft SO much better. That should be the bare minimum, and yet the taxi industry couldn&#x27;t figure that out for the most part.<p>I do not care about them breaking taxi laws or regulations. Their treatment of their &quot;employees&quot; absolutely needs improvement, but my god I do not care about the taxi industry as a whole.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>nostromo</author><text>It&#x27;s funny though: cabs have gotten better and Uber has gotten worse.<p>I&#x27;ve switched back to taking cabs from the airport. Ubers are slower (cabs are sitting there just waiting) and much, much expensive now (like 2x the cost of a cab).<p>The product isn&#x27;t any better anymore. The cars are rundown and often smelly. It is nice to be able to put in an address and not deal with a credit card payment at the destination -- but that&#x27;s about the only benefit left.</text></comment> |
33,388,307 | 33,388,064 | 1 | 3 | 33,387,566 | train | <story><title>Somali Law (2013)</title><url>http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/legal_systems_very_different_12/Book_Draft/Systems/SomaliLawChapter.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>pie_flavor</author><text>Note that a more recent edition of this page can be found here (warning, docx download): <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;Somali%20Law.docx" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;Somali%20Law.d...</a><p>The index of updated docx chapters: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;LegalSystemsContents.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;LegalSystemsCo...</a><p>The index of HTML chapters this link is for: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Academic&#x2F;Course_Pages&#x2F;legal_systems_very_different_12&#x2F;LegalSystemsDraft.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Academic&#x2F;Course_Pages&#x2F;legal_sy...</a><p>My favorite chapters are probably the ones on Irish and Jewish law.</text></comment> | <story><title>Somali Law (2013)</title><url>http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/legal_systems_very_different_12/Book_Draft/Systems/SomaliLawChapter.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jiscariot</author><text>I read much of this a while back and really enjoyed the section on &quot;pirate law&quot;.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;LegalSystemsContents.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.daviddfriedman.com&#x2F;Legal%20Systems&#x2F;LegalSystemsCo...</a></text></comment> |
8,452,450 | 8,452,469 | 1 | 2 | 8,452,280 | train | <story><title>XOS: Build your own operating system</title><url>http://xosnitc.github.io/index.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>userbinator</author><text><i>The machine simulator is known as eXperimental String Machine (XSM). It is an interrupt driven uniprocessor machine. The machine handles data as strings. A string is a sequence of characters terminated by ’\0’. The length of a string is at most 16 characters including ’\0’. Each of these strings is stored in a word. (Refer Section: Memory) The machine interprets a single character also as a string.</i><p>What an... odd architecture. Fun for experimentation, I&#x27;m sure, but I think it&#x27;s too different from contemporary CPUs to give a good taste of what the &quot;real&quot; thing is like.</text></comment> | <story><title>XOS: Build your own operating system</title><url>http://xosnitc.github.io/index.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>frozenport</author><text>Should use x86&#x2F;ARM&#x2F;MIPS so that students get real world experience. You might never have to write an OS, but knowing x86 assembly will help you debug and optimize code.<p>See the following course: <a href="https://courses.engr.illinois.edu/ece391/" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;courses.engr.illinois.edu&#x2F;ece391&#x2F;</a></text></comment> |
12,548,344 | 12,548,148 | 1 | 3 | 12,547,353 | train | <story><title>Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes (2013)</title><url>http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22751415</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stevekemp</author><text>Posted because we just received our 2016 box, and I thought it was fascinating to see the contents as a Scottish man:<p>* <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;I0NYI" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;I0NYI</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>vlehto</author><text>The fine print in the book is education to completely clueless parent.<p>Basically how to bathe the baby, how to touch him&#x2F;her and how to play with him&#x2F;her. As a dude, I&#x27;d probably find that useful, as weird as it may sound. And it&#x27;s probably important for the baby now that I think of it. Sensory deprivation could hinder development. And that could happen if parent is clueless enough.</text></comment> | <story><title>Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes (2013)</title><url>http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22751415</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>stevekemp</author><text>Posted because we just received our 2016 box, and I thought it was fascinating to see the contents as a Scottish man:<p>* <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;I0NYI" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;I0NYI</a></text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>s_kilk</author><text>Scotland will be doing something similar soon: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.independent.co.uk&#x2F;life-style&#x2F;health-and-families&#x2F;health-news&#x2F;scotland-nordic-style-baby-boxes-snp-tackle-infant-poverty-a6989136.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.independent.co.uk&#x2F;life-style&#x2F;health-and-families&#x2F;...</a></text></comment> |
33,520,243 | 33,520,076 | 1 | 2 | 33,518,496 | train | <story><title>Just don’t</title><url>https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2022/11/07/Just-Dont</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>KIFulgore</author><text>Funny... my roommates and I used &quot;just&quot; for comedic effect in college.<p>I was stuck writing an algorithm and asked my more-experienced roommate for help. He briefly scanned my code and said, &quot;well, you kind of just... code it.&quot;<p>I looked at him quizzically and just blurted, &quot;straight up?&quot;<p>&quot;Yep, just straight up code it.&quot;<p>Then we all laughed at the absurdity. He wasn&#x27;t trying to trivialize the problem, to be clear, but didn&#x27;t know exactly how to express what he was thinking. But that became our standard answer to any programming challenge. &quot;Just straight up code it.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>JackFr</author><text>I had an office mate, who after our abusive and demeaning boss would leave our office, would quote Gene Hackman from Superman III: “I ask you to kill Superman, and you&#x27;re telling me you couldn&#x27;t even do that one, simple thing.”<p>(Sometimes if she was still in earshot he would say it in Spanish which somehow made it even funnier.)</text></comment> | <story><title>Just don’t</title><url>https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2022/11/07/Just-Dont</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>KIFulgore</author><text>Funny... my roommates and I used &quot;just&quot; for comedic effect in college.<p>I was stuck writing an algorithm and asked my more-experienced roommate for help. He briefly scanned my code and said, &quot;well, you kind of just... code it.&quot;<p>I looked at him quizzically and just blurted, &quot;straight up?&quot;<p>&quot;Yep, just straight up code it.&quot;<p>Then we all laughed at the absurdity. He wasn&#x27;t trying to trivialize the problem, to be clear, but didn&#x27;t know exactly how to express what he was thinking. But that became our standard answer to any programming challenge. &quot;Just straight up code it.&quot;</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>sixhobbits</author><text>I remember a meeting at FAANG where there was a bunch of discussion about a difficult problem and then a higher-up manager stopped the conversation to interject with<p>&gt; Guys, we&#x27;re thinking about this in the wrong way. The solution is to just get the right people together into a room and build the solution.<p>Which was definitely true but also not useful.</text></comment> |
33,368,659 | 33,368,713 | 1 | 3 | 33,362,957 | train | <story><title>Wild mammal biomass has declined by 85% since the rise of humans</title><url>https://ourworldindata.org/mammals</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hayst4ck</author><text>Militant-ism isn&#x27;t going to win people over.<p>The great lie of capitalism is pushing a theory of personal responsibility rather than legislating these problems away.<p>There are so many elements of my life that cause harm to other beings that addressing the harm could be a full time job.<p>Killing rodents, mosquitos, and ants is something most people will do without a second thought. I&#x27;ve sprayed a wasp nest with wasp killer and one writhed on the ground for 5 minutes and I felt awful about it, but there is practically a whole aisle of it at the local hardware store.<p>How many insects do you think have been harmed by industrial pesticides used in growing grains? What type of animal harm do you think pet ownership brings? How many wild birds do you think are killed in how many different ways? How many animals do you think are hit with cars? What do you think the effect the shipping industry has on sea life? What about trash? What about the smog? What about the chemicals dumped into the environment that are used to produce the hardware we are communicating with?<p>How much animal testing has been done by scientists on all types of animals to have what we have today?<p>My desire to pay as little as possible for coffee means the barista can&#x27;t afford a home and likely will have their body harmed by the stress of not having enough money to operate in today&#x27;s society. We send manufacturing off to poor countries were pollutants more directly harm their citizens than ours.<p>The wikipedia article states that poultry sex can be determined before hatching and that European countries have legislated that culling must stop, so it sounds like we are able to make progress. &quot;Beyond&quot; shows there is at least research going into lab grown&#x2F;cruelty free meats.<p>Do I have a moral obligation to go live next to a pond feeding on what I can forage while living in a dwelling I built with my own hands or is it satisfying enough that I vote progressive and hope to make progress over time by regulating the more atrocious of our actions.<p>FWIW, I have tried vegetarianism and I did not enjoy it at all. I found it greatly limited my food choices. It felt ascetic and I felt miserable. So while it is easy for you, I did not find it easy.</text></item><item><author>fnimick</author><text></text></item><item><author>hayst4ck</author><text>I am an unrepentant meat eater, but your visualization was absolutely fantastic.<p>I would add that (my maybe incorrect napkin math) shows that 5 Americans die per minute to give it scale.<p>My understanding is also that we destroy an absolutely phenomenal amount of chicks in an entirely gruesome way. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Chick_culling" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Chick_culling</a><p>I have trouble handling that.</text></item><item><author>SCUSKU</author><text>I made a website to help visualize American meat consumption in terms of animals slaughtered per second. It’s pretty insane and I think does something to help communicate just how large such industrial operations truly are.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zach.ws&#x2F;meat&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zach.ws&#x2F;meat&#x2F;</a></text></item><item><author>retrac</author><text>Going off on a tangent, but the scale of production is very hard to grasp. I&#x27;m probably not the first person to observe this, but I once did some napkin math about steel production, and what I realized kind of blew me away. About 1.9 billion tonnes in 2020. Like with billions of dollars, I have no intuition for such numbers. Context is needed.<p>Global steel production just before WW I was about 70 million tonnes. So production has increased about thirty-fold in one century. That wasn&#x27;t so shocking to me, at first. But 1910 was not the beginning of the industrial era; things had been under way for more than a century then. Railroads. Ocean liners. Factories. Knives and rivets for fabric owned by hundreds of millions of people. Dozens of skyscrapers in New York by then; the Brooklyn Bridge hung on thousands of tonnes of cable. All made out of steel.<p>Then it struck me. A few million tonnes a year in 1850. 70 million tonnes in 1910. All of it adds up to less than 1900 million tonnes. Every single tonne of steel manufactured by humans from prehistory until about a century ago -- the entire output of the industrial revolution -- amounts to less than one year at current production.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>flarg</author><text>We&#x27;re all guilty aren&#x27;t we, even speaking as a vegetarian, but for me it&#x27;s about how much cruelty I can avoid, not all or nothing. I don&#x27;t kill insects but I eat eggs. I try to use public transport but I do have a car. Don&#x27;t let perfection be the enemy here.</text></comment> | <story><title>Wild mammal biomass has declined by 85% since the rise of humans</title><url>https://ourworldindata.org/mammals</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>hayst4ck</author><text>Militant-ism isn&#x27;t going to win people over.<p>The great lie of capitalism is pushing a theory of personal responsibility rather than legislating these problems away.<p>There are so many elements of my life that cause harm to other beings that addressing the harm could be a full time job.<p>Killing rodents, mosquitos, and ants is something most people will do without a second thought. I&#x27;ve sprayed a wasp nest with wasp killer and one writhed on the ground for 5 minutes and I felt awful about it, but there is practically a whole aisle of it at the local hardware store.<p>How many insects do you think have been harmed by industrial pesticides used in growing grains? What type of animal harm do you think pet ownership brings? How many wild birds do you think are killed in how many different ways? How many animals do you think are hit with cars? What do you think the effect the shipping industry has on sea life? What about trash? What about the smog? What about the chemicals dumped into the environment that are used to produce the hardware we are communicating with?<p>How much animal testing has been done by scientists on all types of animals to have what we have today?<p>My desire to pay as little as possible for coffee means the barista can&#x27;t afford a home and likely will have their body harmed by the stress of not having enough money to operate in today&#x27;s society. We send manufacturing off to poor countries were pollutants more directly harm their citizens than ours.<p>The wikipedia article states that poultry sex can be determined before hatching and that European countries have legislated that culling must stop, so it sounds like we are able to make progress. &quot;Beyond&quot; shows there is at least research going into lab grown&#x2F;cruelty free meats.<p>Do I have a moral obligation to go live next to a pond feeding on what I can forage while living in a dwelling I built with my own hands or is it satisfying enough that I vote progressive and hope to make progress over time by regulating the more atrocious of our actions.<p>FWIW, I have tried vegetarianism and I did not enjoy it at all. I found it greatly limited my food choices. It felt ascetic and I felt miserable. So while it is easy for you, I did not find it easy.</text></item><item><author>fnimick</author><text></text></item><item><author>hayst4ck</author><text>I am an unrepentant meat eater, but your visualization was absolutely fantastic.<p>I would add that (my maybe incorrect napkin math) shows that 5 Americans die per minute to give it scale.<p>My understanding is also that we destroy an absolutely phenomenal amount of chicks in an entirely gruesome way. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Chick_culling" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Chick_culling</a><p>I have trouble handling that.</text></item><item><author>SCUSKU</author><text>I made a website to help visualize American meat consumption in terms of animals slaughtered per second. It’s pretty insane and I think does something to help communicate just how large such industrial operations truly are.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zach.ws&#x2F;meat&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;zach.ws&#x2F;meat&#x2F;</a></text></item><item><author>retrac</author><text>Going off on a tangent, but the scale of production is very hard to grasp. I&#x27;m probably not the first person to observe this, but I once did some napkin math about steel production, and what I realized kind of blew me away. About 1.9 billion tonnes in 2020. Like with billions of dollars, I have no intuition for such numbers. Context is needed.<p>Global steel production just before WW I was about 70 million tonnes. So production has increased about thirty-fold in one century. That wasn&#x27;t so shocking to me, at first. But 1910 was not the beginning of the industrial era; things had been under way for more than a century then. Railroads. Ocean liners. Factories. Knives and rivets for fabric owned by hundreds of millions of people. Dozens of skyscrapers in New York by then; the Brooklyn Bridge hung on thousands of tonnes of cable. All made out of steel.<p>Then it struck me. A few million tonnes a year in 1850. 70 million tonnes in 1910. All of it adds up to less than 1900 million tonnes. Every single tonne of steel manufactured by humans from prehistory until about a century ago -- the entire output of the industrial revolution -- amounts to less than one year at current production.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wumpus</author><text>Wow. That you attack someone who merely said they&#x27;re a vegetarian in these terms, and your comment isn&#x27;t flagged and dead, is extremely embarrassing for HN.<p>I mean, I have low expectations (on HN) for anything involving vegetarians and vegans, but you&#x27;ve gone lower.</text></comment> |
13,062,891 | 13,062,727 | 1 | 3 | 13,062,223 | train | <story><title>Fallout 1.5: Resurrection</title><url>http://resurrection.cz/en/info/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>eponeponepon</author><text>The first two games came out at the worst time for me - A-levels precluded me from spending any time at all with them (that&#x27;s probably for the best, though - a few years later, Morrowind and the absence of parental oversight killed my degree stone dead :) ).<p>Fallout 3, NV and 4 have all in turn nudged me to try the originals again, but they&#x27;re <i>just</i> old-fashioned enough that I struggle to get into them, every time. These days I think I&#x27;ve resigned myself to only getting to play them properly in the event of a long stay in hospital.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mstade</author><text>You really should try. They&#x27;re clunky and old, but they are great stories with engaging narratives, interesting characters, and ambiance aplenty. Which is really what Fallout used to be about – great story telling – before Bethesda started ruining the franchise with cookie cutter narratives, simpleton characters, and being distinctly non-canon. (I appreciate artistic freedom as much as the next guy, but at some point you&#x27;ve created a different world and just slapped Fallout stickers onto it.)<p>What&#x27;s odd to me is that the Fallout 4 Nuka-World DLC is much more engaging than the main story. Is this typical of games these days? Do a crappy &quot;main&quot; game but &quot;fix it&quot; with DLCs? Or is it just Bethesda and possibly even just Fallout?</text></comment> | <story><title>Fallout 1.5: Resurrection</title><url>http://resurrection.cz/en/info/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>eponeponepon</author><text>The first two games came out at the worst time for me - A-levels precluded me from spending any time at all with them (that&#x27;s probably for the best, though - a few years later, Morrowind and the absence of parental oversight killed my degree stone dead :) ).<p>Fallout 3, NV and 4 have all in turn nudged me to try the originals again, but they&#x27;re <i>just</i> old-fashioned enough that I struggle to get into them, every time. These days I think I&#x27;ve resigned myself to only getting to play them properly in the event of a long stay in hospital.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>StavrosK</author><text>I played them when they came out, and consider them among the best games ever to come out, but they haven&#x27;t aged well. I tried to play 1 for nostalgia, but quickly gave up.</text></comment> |
2,447,770 | 2,446,889 | 1 | 2 | 2,446,790 | train | <story><title>Simple algorithms</title><url>http://algorithms.openmymind.net/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>baddox</author><text>I like the writing style and simplicity of presentation. I would recommend putting some thought into the order and organization of the articles. Perhaps you should have "main" articles about data structures, then sub-articles about the algorithms that are relevant to them (e.g. "binary search" could be under "arrays," "heapsort" and "priority queue" operations under "heaps," etc.). Obviously, it's a challenge to choose the order and organization of topics and subtopics—it's essentially the task of developing a curriculum.<p>If you plan on doing some tree/graph algorithms, perhaps you could have a brief introduction to the topic by talking about trees and graphs in general, then proceeding by discussing heaps, simple binary trees (which can branch off into more advanced topics like the various balanced binary trees), and so forth.<p>As a side note, I think binary trees are a great visual way to introduce the concept of asymptotic running time in a more accessible/pragmatic (albeit less rigorous) way, by showing that the more balanced a binary tree is, the fewer steps it will take on average to find an element (approaching the best-case of log base 2 of <i>n</i>). You can show how a worst-case unbalanced binary tree degrades to a linked list.</text></comment> | <story><title>Simple algorithms</title><url>http://algorithms.openmymind.net/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>nikolaplejic</author><text>I really like the simplicity and the choice of language. I think a comments / discussion section would be useful, for people to ask questions, talk about the ways to make the articles even better and perhaps translate the code to other languages.<p>All in all - I hope you keep up the good work, solid tutorials like these make it more compelling to keep up with the basics and learn new things from the "CS 101" department.</text></comment> |
30,187,845 | 30,186,724 | 1 | 3 | 30,179,549 | train | <story><title>Competitive Programming with AlphaCode</title><url>https://deepmind.com/blog/article/Competitive-programming-with-AlphaCode</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>GuB-42</author><text>I think programmers are relatively &quot;safe&quot; from AI for the simple reason they are the ones who talk to AI.<p>The job of programmers is to have machines do stuff so that humans don&#x27;t have to, and of course, they do it for themselves too. Scripts, libraries, compilers, they are just tools to avoid flipping bits by hand. If something like copilot is not embraced by all programmers, it is that it is often less than helpful, and even then, some have adopted it. If we have super-advanced AI that can have a high level understanding of a problem and writes the app for you, then it is not much more than a super-compiler, and there will be programmers who will tell the super-compiler what to do, think of it as a new, super high level programming language. The job will evolve, but there will always be someone who tells the computer what to do.<p>And if there is no one needed to tell the computer what to do, that&#x27;s what some people call &quot;the singularity&quot;. Programming, or its evolution will probably be the last technical job. Social jobs may continue further, simply because humans like humans because they are human. Maybe the oldest profession will also be the last profession.</text></item><item><author>atleta</author><text>The thing is that we don&#x27;t know. What I also have been seeing for a while (like for at least for a decade) that <i>whatever</i> profession seemed to be in danger, whichever profession came out on top on (guess) lists like &quot;these will be replaced by AI soon&quot;, each and every one of them thought that it can&#x27;t happen to them and they all had (and continue to have) explanations, usually involving how that jobs needs human ingenuity. (Unlike all the others, of course :) )<p>Now completely I agree with you that a significant part of our job is understanding and structuring the problem, but I&#x27;m not sure it can&#x27;t be done in another way. We usually get taking in when we think about what machines will be able to do by thinking that just because we use intelligence (general&#x2F;human intelligence) to solve the task it means that it&#x27;s a requirement. Think chess. Or even calculating (as in, with numbers). Or go. Etc.<p>The funny thing is that we don&#x27;t know, until someone does it. I&#x27;ve been thinking for a while that a lot of what I do could be done by a chat bot. Asking clarification questions. Of course, I do have a lot of background knowledge and that&#x27;s how I can come up with those questions, but that knowledge is probably easy to acquire from the internet and then use it as training data. (Just like we have an awful lot of code available, we have a lot of problem descriptions, questions, comments and some requirement specifications&#x2F;user guides.)<p>The hard part would probably be not what we have learned as a software developer, but the things we have learned while we were small kids and also the things that we have learned since, on the side. I.e. being a reasonable person. Understanding what people usually do and want. So the shared context. But I&#x27;m not sure it&#x27;s needed that much.<p>So yeah, I can imagine a service that will talk to a user about what kind of app they want (first just simpler web sites, web shops, later more and more complicated ones) and then just show them &quot;here is what it does and how it works&quot;. And then you can say what you&#x27;d like to be changed. The color or placement of a button (earlier versions) or even the association type between entities (oh, but a user can have multiple shipping addresses).</text></item><item><author>doctor_eval</author><text>I sometimes read these and wonder if I need to retrain. At my age, I’ll struggle to get a job at a similar level in a new industry.<p>And then I remember that the thing I bring to the table is the ability to turn domain knowledge into code.<p>Being able to do competitive coding challenges is impressive, but a very large segment of software engineering is about eliciting what the squishy humans in management actually want, putting it into code, and discovering as quickly as possible that it’s not what they really wanted after all.<p>It’s going to take a sufficiently long time for AI to take over management that I don’t think oldies like me need to worry too much.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>atleta</author><text>What I was trying to convey is that I&#x27;m not sure at all that you&#x27;ll need a programmer (i.e. someone who has the mindset and the skills of a person we call today as such) to talk to the AI. Because the AI may just be able to understand a sloppy description that the average user (or the average product owner) is able to communicate. And when&#x2F;if not then it will be able to either ask clarification questions (like &quot;what do you mean by account?&quot;) or just generate something and then let the user figure out if it&#x27;s doing the right thing for them. If not, they can ask for changes or explain what they think was misunderstood.<p>And my (weak) conjecture is that we may not need an AGI&#x2F;human level AI for this. In which case we might still want to have some software to be written. But you&#x27;re right, I&#x27;m also not sure that there will be a point where we still want software but have very intelligent machines. And while saying that programmer will be the last technical job doesn&#x27;t sound like a strong claim, I&#x27;d say say it would probably be teachers :)<p>&gt; The job will evolve, but there will always be someone who tells the computer what to do.<p>Which may very well be the users, if the machine is able to follow a conversation. Now the thing that may be the showstopper for now might exactly be this: that the machine should be able to hold a context for long enough (over multiple iterations of back and forth communication). As far as my limited knowledge goes, this is something that they have not yet figured out.<p>The &quot;our kind will always be needed&quot; is exactly the fallacy I was talking about and the one that the practitioners of every intellectual professions seem to have. They think they will be needed to interface between the machine (whether it&#x27;s a legal or a medical system) and the client. Because they assume that the machine will not be able to communicate only to process the existing knowledge base.<p>But again, the whole field evolves through surprising leaps. Yep, Copilot is not insanely useful, but already amusing&#x2F;frightening enough. It seems to pick up context from all over the code base. Sometimes it goes totally wrong, and generates gibberish (I mean generate non existent identifiers that make sense as English expressions but ones that don&#x27;t exist anywhere in the code). But quite a few times it picks up the intent (the pattern&#x2F;thought pattern) even if it is spread out over a file (or several ones).</text></comment> | <story><title>Competitive Programming with AlphaCode</title><url>https://deepmind.com/blog/article/Competitive-programming-with-AlphaCode</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>GuB-42</author><text>I think programmers are relatively &quot;safe&quot; from AI for the simple reason they are the ones who talk to AI.<p>The job of programmers is to have machines do stuff so that humans don&#x27;t have to, and of course, they do it for themselves too. Scripts, libraries, compilers, they are just tools to avoid flipping bits by hand. If something like copilot is not embraced by all programmers, it is that it is often less than helpful, and even then, some have adopted it. If we have super-advanced AI that can have a high level understanding of a problem and writes the app for you, then it is not much more than a super-compiler, and there will be programmers who will tell the super-compiler what to do, think of it as a new, super high level programming language. The job will evolve, but there will always be someone who tells the computer what to do.<p>And if there is no one needed to tell the computer what to do, that&#x27;s what some people call &quot;the singularity&quot;. Programming, or its evolution will probably be the last technical job. Social jobs may continue further, simply because humans like humans because they are human. Maybe the oldest profession will also be the last profession.</text></item><item><author>atleta</author><text>The thing is that we don&#x27;t know. What I also have been seeing for a while (like for at least for a decade) that <i>whatever</i> profession seemed to be in danger, whichever profession came out on top on (guess) lists like &quot;these will be replaced by AI soon&quot;, each and every one of them thought that it can&#x27;t happen to them and they all had (and continue to have) explanations, usually involving how that jobs needs human ingenuity. (Unlike all the others, of course :) )<p>Now completely I agree with you that a significant part of our job is understanding and structuring the problem, but I&#x27;m not sure it can&#x27;t be done in another way. We usually get taking in when we think about what machines will be able to do by thinking that just because we use intelligence (general&#x2F;human intelligence) to solve the task it means that it&#x27;s a requirement. Think chess. Or even calculating (as in, with numbers). Or go. Etc.<p>The funny thing is that we don&#x27;t know, until someone does it. I&#x27;ve been thinking for a while that a lot of what I do could be done by a chat bot. Asking clarification questions. Of course, I do have a lot of background knowledge and that&#x27;s how I can come up with those questions, but that knowledge is probably easy to acquire from the internet and then use it as training data. (Just like we have an awful lot of code available, we have a lot of problem descriptions, questions, comments and some requirement specifications&#x2F;user guides.)<p>The hard part would probably be not what we have learned as a software developer, but the things we have learned while we were small kids and also the things that we have learned since, on the side. I.e. being a reasonable person. Understanding what people usually do and want. So the shared context. But I&#x27;m not sure it&#x27;s needed that much.<p>So yeah, I can imagine a service that will talk to a user about what kind of app they want (first just simpler web sites, web shops, later more and more complicated ones) and then just show them &quot;here is what it does and how it works&quot;. And then you can say what you&#x27;d like to be changed. The color or placement of a button (earlier versions) or even the association type between entities (oh, but a user can have multiple shipping addresses).</text></item><item><author>doctor_eval</author><text>I sometimes read these and wonder if I need to retrain. At my age, I’ll struggle to get a job at a similar level in a new industry.<p>And then I remember that the thing I bring to the table is the ability to turn domain knowledge into code.<p>Being able to do competitive coding challenges is impressive, but a very large segment of software engineering is about eliciting what the squishy humans in management actually want, putting it into code, and discovering as quickly as possible that it’s not what they really wanted after all.<p>It’s going to take a sufficiently long time for AI to take over management that I don’t think oldies like me need to worry too much.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>daniel-cussen</author><text>&quot;Maybe the oldest profession will also be the last profession.&quot;<p>-- GuB-42, Wednesday February 2, 2022</text></comment> |
22,014,473 | 22,013,940 | 1 | 2 | 22,012,080 | train | <story><title>I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left</title><url>https://write.as/dsf4khx3r1m1208f.md</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>elldoubleyew</author><text>I don&#x27;t understand this philosophy of &quot;if only they could change their minds&quot;<p>The current regime has broken records year over year and almost the entire population is happy with them. Chinese people are better off every single day. Who are we as westerners to say that our system of governance is better than theirs? How can you be so sure that their system will inevitably be bad for the people?<p>Just because an absolute right to say (almost) whatever you want is essential to the political philosophy of the west does not mean that it can&#x2F;would mesh well in Chinese society.<p>I know you guys are going to want to crucify me for saying a lot of this but I work with a lot of people in mainland China and no one has any problems with the government, they stick to their own business and are doing pretty damn well. Obviously this could change one day but thats not our job as non-chinese citizens to decide.</text></item><item><author>Seenso</author><text>&gt; Google hired a significant number of Chinese citizens and migrants who didn&#x27;t leave China for political reasons. Not surprisingly, they tend not to see China&#x27;s government policy as evil.<p>It takes <i>years</i> in the right environment for someone like that to start to think differently. All kinds of important facts and ideas were kept from them, much of it random things that don&#x27;t come up often that they may not even realize.<p>For a less than unusual example: a lot of Chinese think the US never apologized for accidentally bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during the Balkans conflict, but it did so, publicly: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.c-span.org&#x2F;video&#x2F;?123188-1&#x2F;youth-violence-embassy-bombing-apology" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.c-span.org&#x2F;video&#x2F;?123188-1&#x2F;youth-violence-embass...</a>. The Chinese government portrayed the bombing as a deliberate act, and used it to create a sense of nationalist outrage in the population. The apology didn&#x27;t fit the narrative so it wasn&#x27;t reported. How long would it take for someone whose views were shaped by things like that outrage to get exposed to the truth randomly, given how infrequently this event comes up?</text></item><item><author>shadowgovt</author><text>Google hired a significant number of Chinese citizens and migrants who didn&#x27;t leave China for political reasons. Not surprisingly, they tend not to see China&#x27;s government policy as evil.</text></item><item><author>virtuous_signal</author><text>I don&#x27;t have firsthand knowledge, but my conjecture is that the old Google probably had a significant % of employees who held the belief &quot;We shouldn&#x27;t censor for China, even if that makes us lose money&quot;. But over a period of years, whatever they selected for in hiring led to enough people joining, who don&#x27;t give a damn about human rights in China, so the censorship went ahead. The only thing that stopped it was bad press.<p>People with ethical sense leaving Google makes the balance worse. So the dealings with China will probably resume, at an even greater pace, when the public forgets about the first controversy. (edit: I should say first <i>two</i> controversies, since they stopped censoring in 2010, then tried to resurrect it as Dragonfly in 2018, then stopped again)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>alisonatwork</author><text>I live and work in mainland China, and the government here pisses me off. Yeah, i am a foreigner, but this is my home. I pay taxes here. I deserve to have my voice heard. The Chinese government is trash.<p>Because i am a foreigner the worst that could happen from me voicing such an opinion is the government doesn&#x27;t renew my work visa. For Han, it could affect their social credit rating. For ethnic minorities it could land them or their families in &quot;reeducation camps&quot;.<p>That&#x27;s the trick of authoritarian regimes. If you just shut up and do whatever the government says, they won&#x27;t bother you (unless you are rich enough to bother extorting). But if you make a noise, you are screwed. That&#x27;s the reason why everyone you talk to is allegedly happy with the regime. It&#x27;s not in their interests to be anything else.</text></comment> | <story><title>I Was Google’s Head of International Relations. Here’s Why I Left</title><url>https://write.as/dsf4khx3r1m1208f.md</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>elldoubleyew</author><text>I don&#x27;t understand this philosophy of &quot;if only they could change their minds&quot;<p>The current regime has broken records year over year and almost the entire population is happy with them. Chinese people are better off every single day. Who are we as westerners to say that our system of governance is better than theirs? How can you be so sure that their system will inevitably be bad for the people?<p>Just because an absolute right to say (almost) whatever you want is essential to the political philosophy of the west does not mean that it can&#x2F;would mesh well in Chinese society.<p>I know you guys are going to want to crucify me for saying a lot of this but I work with a lot of people in mainland China and no one has any problems with the government, they stick to their own business and are doing pretty damn well. Obviously this could change one day but thats not our job as non-chinese citizens to decide.</text></item><item><author>Seenso</author><text>&gt; Google hired a significant number of Chinese citizens and migrants who didn&#x27;t leave China for political reasons. Not surprisingly, they tend not to see China&#x27;s government policy as evil.<p>It takes <i>years</i> in the right environment for someone like that to start to think differently. All kinds of important facts and ideas were kept from them, much of it random things that don&#x27;t come up often that they may not even realize.<p>For a less than unusual example: a lot of Chinese think the US never apologized for accidentally bombing the Chinese embassy in Belgrade during the Balkans conflict, but it did so, publicly: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.c-span.org&#x2F;video&#x2F;?123188-1&#x2F;youth-violence-embassy-bombing-apology" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.c-span.org&#x2F;video&#x2F;?123188-1&#x2F;youth-violence-embass...</a>. The Chinese government portrayed the bombing as a deliberate act, and used it to create a sense of nationalist outrage in the population. The apology didn&#x27;t fit the narrative so it wasn&#x27;t reported. How long would it take for someone whose views were shaped by things like that outrage to get exposed to the truth randomly, given how infrequently this event comes up?</text></item><item><author>shadowgovt</author><text>Google hired a significant number of Chinese citizens and migrants who didn&#x27;t leave China for political reasons. Not surprisingly, they tend not to see China&#x27;s government policy as evil.</text></item><item><author>virtuous_signal</author><text>I don&#x27;t have firsthand knowledge, but my conjecture is that the old Google probably had a significant % of employees who held the belief &quot;We shouldn&#x27;t censor for China, even if that makes us lose money&quot;. But over a period of years, whatever they selected for in hiring led to enough people joining, who don&#x27;t give a damn about human rights in China, so the censorship went ahead. The only thing that stopped it was bad press.<p>People with ethical sense leaving Google makes the balance worse. So the dealings with China will probably resume, at an even greater pace, when the public forgets about the first controversy. (edit: I should say first <i>two</i> controversies, since they stopped censoring in 2010, then tried to resurrect it as Dragonfly in 2018, then stopped again)</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>JumpCrisscross</author><text>&gt; <i>Who are we as westerners to say that our system of governance is better than theirs?</i><p>Nobody is advocating overthrowing Xi Jinping. But if you&#x27;re in America, benefiting from the freedoms afforded to Americans (and their fruits), it&#x27;s fair to ask you don&#x27;t undermine those values at home or abroad.</text></comment> |
19,010,745 | 19,010,741 | 1 | 2 | 19,010,671 | train | <story><title>The AI Threat to Open Societies</title><url>https://www.georgesoros.com/2019/01/24/remarks-delivered-at-the-world-economic-forum-2/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>raz32dust</author><text>This reminds me of the &quot;Do artifacts have politics&quot; paper by Langdon Winner [1]. He argues that technologies have inherent political traits.<p>Nuclear power is considered to be supportive of autocratic political systems since nuclear power plants need centralized planning and networks to be effective. Solar power is considered democratic since anyone can harness it. It&#x27;s an interesting paper and definitely worth a read.<p>On similar lines, I feel internet is a democratizing force, since it allowed anyone to publish data and anyone to consume it, and is (somewhat) difficult to control centrally. AI, on the other hand, is a centralizing force, since the most powerful AI can be managed and powered by the most powerful institutions.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cc.gatech.edu&#x2F;~beki&#x2F;cs4001&#x2F;Winner.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cc.gatech.edu&#x2F;~beki&#x2F;cs4001&#x2F;Winner.pdf</a></text></comment> | <story><title>The AI Threat to Open Societies</title><url>https://www.georgesoros.com/2019/01/24/remarks-delivered-at-the-world-economic-forum-2/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>Animats</author><text>AI is only in a supporting role here. It&#x27;s massive data collection and storage at low cost that&#x27;s the problem. Machine learning just helps to digest the data.<p>Tech has solved the problem of previous attempts at Big Brother - you just couldn&#x27;t afford enough watchers to watch everybody all the time. Now, you can. It&#x27;s even profitable.</text></comment> |
519,462 | 519,466 | 1 | 3 | 519,433 | train | <story><title>Ask HN: Has Hacker News been hacked/cracked?</title><url></url><text>It seems like you can change the about field under PG's account http://news.ycombinator.org/user?id=pg using this appjet app
http://notabank.appjet.net/</text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>pg</author><text>Yes. I made an unbelievably stupid mistake in the code that generates forms with labelled fields. It was basically functional programming taken a little too far: I generated the same form whether the fields were editable or not, and then later if there were no editable fields I just omitted the submit button. So anyone looking at the source of one of these pages could find a fnid that would work to modify the object displayed on it. (There's still a fnid, but it no longer does anything.)</text></comment> | <story><title>Ask HN: Has Hacker News been hacked/cracked?</title><url></url><text>It seems like you can change the about field under PG's account http://news.ycombinator.org/user?id=pg using this appjet app
http://notabank.appjet.net/</text></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>joshuaxls</author><text>Yes, it was hacked. Here's the original post from a lesser hack earlier today with pg's response containing the "not a bank" quote:<p><a href="http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=518752" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=518752</a></text></comment> |
13,887,128 | 13,886,012 | 1 | 3 | 13,884,750 | train | <story><title>Weapon physicist declassifies rescued nuclear test films</title><url>https://www.llnl.gov/news/physicist-declassifies-rescued-nuclear-test-films</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>M_Grey</author><text><i>&quot;You can smell vinegar when you open the cans, which is one of the byproducts of the decomposition process of these films,&quot; Spriggs said. &quot;We know that these films are on the brink of decomposing to the point where they&#x27;ll become useless. The data that we&#x27;re collecting now must be preserved in a digital form because no matter how well you treat the films, no matter how well you preserve or store them, they will decompose. They&#x27;re made out of organic material, and organic material decomposes. So this is it. We got to this project just in time to save the data.&quot;</i><p>That&#x27;s... incredible. Then it sounds like they used a DNN or something similar to analyze the rate of fireball expansion in the films to refine their earlier estimates of yield.<p>What a beautifully subtle use of tech.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jabl</author><text>&gt; Then it sounds like they used a DNN or something similar to analyze the rate of fireball expansion in the films to refine their earlier estimates of yield.<p>Back in the day, some rather simple models were used to estimate yield based on photographs, see <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nuclear_weapon_yield#Calculating_yields_and_controversy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Nuclear_weapon_yield#Calculati...</a><p>It&#x27;s actually quite amazing that even with such a simple model, G.I. Taylor was able to estimate yield&#x27;s to within 10% of the official figure for the Trinity device.<p>Just because DNN&#x27;s are terribly trendy doesn&#x27;t mean that every image analysis task is done with them. :) I think that at least with such a crude model as the Taylor one, the model itself will introduce errors that DNN&#x27;s per se won&#x27;t fix. DNN&#x27;s might help the manual drudgery of analyzing each frame of the videos manually though..</text></comment> | <story><title>Weapon physicist declassifies rescued nuclear test films</title><url>https://www.llnl.gov/news/physicist-declassifies-rescued-nuclear-test-films</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>M_Grey</author><text><i>&quot;You can smell vinegar when you open the cans, which is one of the byproducts of the decomposition process of these films,&quot; Spriggs said. &quot;We know that these films are on the brink of decomposing to the point where they&#x27;ll become useless. The data that we&#x27;re collecting now must be preserved in a digital form because no matter how well you treat the films, no matter how well you preserve or store them, they will decompose. They&#x27;re made out of organic material, and organic material decomposes. So this is it. We got to this project just in time to save the data.&quot;</i><p>That&#x27;s... incredible. Then it sounds like they used a DNN or something similar to analyze the rate of fireball expansion in the films to refine their earlier estimates of yield.<p>What a beautifully subtle use of tech.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>DelTaco</author><text>Fun fact, SSDs deteriorate faster than HDDs, which deteriorate faster than tape.</text></comment> |
40,178,336 | 40,177,927 | 1 | 3 | 40,172,161 | train | <story><title>Camus, Albert and the Anarchists (2007)</title><url>https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/organise-camus-albert-and-the-anarchists</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>photochemsyn</author><text>The Rebel is a very interesting piece of work - you can randomly flip it open to any page and find tidbits like this:<p>&gt; &quot;When we are assured that tomorrow, in the natural order of events, will be better than today, we can enjoy ourselves in peace. Progress, paradoxically, can be used to justify conservatism. A draft drawn on confidence in the future, it allows the master to have a clear conscience. The slave and those whose present life is miserable and who can find no consolation in the heavens are assured that at least the future belongs to them. The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves.&quot;<p>However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn&#x27;t tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>keybored</author><text>&gt; However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn&#x27;t tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example.<p>You’ve lost the ability to imagine freedom.</text></comment> | <story><title>Camus, Albert and the Anarchists (2007)</title><url>https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/organise-camus-albert-and-the-anarchists</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>photochemsyn</author><text>The Rebel is a very interesting piece of work - you can randomly flip it open to any page and find tidbits like this:<p>&gt; &quot;When we are assured that tomorrow, in the natural order of events, will be better than today, we can enjoy ourselves in peace. Progress, paradoxically, can be used to justify conservatism. A draft drawn on confidence in the future, it allows the master to have a clear conscience. The slave and those whose present life is miserable and who can find no consolation in the heavens are assured that at least the future belongs to them. The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves.&quot;<p>However, even after reading the book the notion of anarchism remains unclear. I couldn&#x27;t tell you how an anarchist would go about setting up a steel factory (or any other activity requiring highly coordinated human effort) in line with anarchist principles, for example.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>TotalCrackpot</author><text>You can choose delegates with some sphere of autonomy in a horizontal way, but in anarchist association you can instantly recall them in a horizontal way too. This helps mitigate creating hierarchy while giving someone autonomy and making it possible to divide labor.</text></comment> |
24,621,768 | 24,621,828 | 1 | 2 | 24,621,350 | train | <story><title>SEC charges former Amazon finance manager and family with insider trading</title><url>https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-228</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>eel</author><text>&gt; On January 15, 2018, Bohra used her work computer to search Google for “AMZN.”<p>How does the SEC know this? Is it most likely browser history? Google account history? Corporate monitoring software?</text></comment> | <story><title>SEC charges former Amazon finance manager and family with insider trading</title><url>https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-228</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>boulos</author><text>From the complaint, it was OTM calls and puts, but it seemed like they were trying to decide how much to go in.<p>&gt; 42. Prior to the completion of Bohra’s initial review, her Husband had purchased 500 Amazon shares in put options in his account on January 8. These put options had an expiration date of February 16, 2018, and they represented his expectation that Amazon’s stock price would fall by that date.<p>&gt; 48. During this same period, Bohra’s Husband sold the put options that were held in
his account and instead purchased both Amazon common stock and Amazon call options in his account as well as accounts belonging to Bohra’s Father-in-Law and Bohra’s Mother-in-Law, now betting that Amazon’s stock price would increase.<p>&gt; On the morning of January 22, 2018, Bohra’s Husband again logged in from his home and sold the 500 Amazon shares in put options that were in his account and replaced them with a purchase of 1,000 Amazon shares in call options. That afternoon, Bohra’s Husband logged in from his workplace to purchase 4,000 Amazon shares in call options in his account; 2,000 Amazon shares in the same call options in one of Bohra’s Mother-in-Law’s accounts; 1,000 Amazon shares in the same call options in another of Bohra’s Mother-in-Law’s account and 1,000 Amazon shares in the same call options in Bohra’s Father-in-Law’s account. The call options purchased that afternoon had the same strike price and expiration date.<p>&gt; 51. Over the next few days, Bohra’s Husband and Bohra’s Father-in-Law continued to purchase Amazon common stock and call options, selling call options they had purchased on January 22 and 23 and replacing them with new call options at higher strike prices that they purchased on January 24, 25, and 26, and on February 1.<p>&gt; 53. By the time that Amazon’s fourth fiscal quarter and year end 2017 earnings was
11 announced on February 1, 2018, Bohra’s Husband and Bohra’s Father-in-Law had spent more than $850,000 on purchasing Amazon call options and common stock in order to trade, at least in part, based on the material nonpublic information that Bohra had provided.<p>&gt; 56. On February 1, 2018, after the market closed, Amazon announced its fourth fiscal quarter and year end 2017 earnings. The next day, February 2, 2018, Amazon’s stock price increased 2.87% over the prior day’s closing price.<p>&gt; 58. In total, accounts belonging to Bohra’s Husband, her Father-in-Law, and her
10 Mother-in-Law made a profit of approximately $664,000 by trading Amazon common stock and Amazon call options ahead of Amazon’s fourth fiscal quarter and year end 2017 earnings announcement.</text></comment> |
5,588,028 | 5,588,002 | 1 | 3 | 5,587,866 | train | <story><title>Amazon was Down</title><url>http://www.amazon.com/index.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>austenallred</author><text>At an estimated loss of $31,000 per minute <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9962010-7.html?tag=nefd.top" rel="nofollow">http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9962010-7.html?tag=nefd.to...</a> I'm blown away that I see Amazon goes down so often. That certainly, in my mind, doesn't bode well for the brand of AWS.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>brokentone</author><text>I can't imagine that's a real loss, likely only deferred sales. What are you going to do if you can't buy your thing at Amazon? Drive somewhere? I think you'll try again later.<p>Dividing income for time doesn't necessarily give you loss, especially this seems to have no weighting for time of day and season. I doubt an outage right now has anywhere near the same effect it would have during lunch break two weeks before Christmas.</text></comment> | <story><title>Amazon was Down</title><url>http://www.amazon.com/index.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>austenallred</author><text>At an estimated loss of $31,000 per minute <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9962010-7.html?tag=nefd.top" rel="nofollow">http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9962010-7.html?tag=nefd.to...</a> I'm blown away that I see Amazon goes down so often. That certainly, in my mind, doesn't bode well for the brand of AWS.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kamkazemoose</author><text>Does Amazon really go down that often? Is there any data how often/ for how long Amazon does go down? I wonder how it compares to other sites that get the same amount of traffic.</text></comment> |
15,810,263 | 15,810,211 | 1 | 2 | 15,809,361 | train | <story><title>The secret world below Chicago</title><url>http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20171128-chicagos-underground-city-thats-becoming-a-design-star</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>sithadmin</author><text>Houston has an underground tunnel system that&#x27;s larger than Chicago&#x27;s: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.downtownhouston.org&#x2F;district&#x2F;downtown-tunnels&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.downtownhouston.org&#x2F;district&#x2F;downtown-tunnels&#x2F;</a><p>Having lived in both cities, Houston&#x27;s is actually more accessible and useful as well. Also a point of differentiation is that its main touted advantage is avoiding the disgusting heat and humidity that settles on the city for most of the year, rather than avoiding the cold.</text></comment> | <story><title>The secret world below Chicago</title><url>http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20171128-chicagos-underground-city-thats-becoming-a-design-star</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>FLGMwt</author><text>The stained glass hallway is the most depressing part of my commute in the winter. It&#x27;s always a mess and very poorly lit.<p>Also, the pedway in Chicago is more of a collection of disconnected minipedways. You definitely can&#x27;t cross the lop without going outside. It&#x27;s not nearly as seamless as the skyway in Minneapolis which has the additional bonus of natural light (even if it&#x27;s usually overcast in the winter).</text></comment> |
15,742,731 | 15,741,876 | 1 | 2 | 15,741,428 | train | <story><title>People Who Speed-Listen to Podcasts</title><url>https://www.buzzfeed.com/doree/meet-the-people-who-listen-to-podcasts-at-super-fast-speeds?utm_term=.jdJ8Pn6MBG#.ioEx4N69Mb</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>furyofantares</author><text>I speed listen to podcasts (and audiobooks and speed watch lectures) for an entirely different reason: I am able to maintain attention on the material. I am sure I get less out of it than someone who is able to pay attention at 1x, but I get nothing out of 1x and never got anything but frustration out of lectures in school, so speed listening opened up a whole new world for me.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tw1010</author><text>Lectures isn&#x27;t just about feeding the information into your brain. Half the battle of learning what the professor has to say is to process the material in your head, to let it bob around in your head a while. I often find that I can get a lot of that work done while still in my seat, as long as I allow those thoughts to bubble up.<p>In other words, allow creative thoughts about the things the lecturer is saying to form – wander around in idea-space a bit – and think about them, while simultaneously keeping up with the thread of the speech. You&#x27;ll gain a lot more from your time in the lecture hall, and it&#x27;ll also be a lot more fun. A lecture shouldn&#x27;t just be (and doesn&#x27;t have to be) dry information stuffing.</text></comment> | <story><title>People Who Speed-Listen to Podcasts</title><url>https://www.buzzfeed.com/doree/meet-the-people-who-listen-to-podcasts-at-super-fast-speeds?utm_term=.jdJ8Pn6MBG#.ioEx4N69Mb</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>furyofantares</author><text>I speed listen to podcasts (and audiobooks and speed watch lectures) for an entirely different reason: I am able to maintain attention on the material. I am sure I get less out of it than someone who is able to pay attention at 1x, but I get nothing out of 1x and never got anything but frustration out of lectures in school, so speed listening opened up a whole new world for me.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rconti</author><text>I was studying for a cert and needed to review some material faster so I started doing 1.5x and 1.7x up to 2x. What&#x27;s amazing is how quickly you adapt. The pauses in speech seem to take FOREVER, even at 2x, and when you slow down to 1.5x it seems positively glacial. But you&#x27;re right, you need to focus. It leaves a lot less time for letting your mind wander. You don&#x27;t get anything for free. I sometimes watch NFL condensed games and they cut out all the non-play activity so you can watch a game in 40 mins-- which sounds great, but you realize it&#x27;s 40 mins of intense focus if you want to follow what&#x27;s going on.</text></comment> |
22,650,698 | 22,650,223 | 1 | 2 | 22,648,431 | train | <story><title>Ask HN: What projects are you working on now?</title><text>With the quarantine being placed in effect in a lot of cities across the world, we all likely have a little bit more time to focus on personal projects or learning something new from the comfort of our homes. What are you guys up to these days?</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>chdaniel</author><text>I&#x27;m making a new tool for writers. With it, you&#x27;ll be able to write your essays on &quot;layers&quot;<p>The problem? Tweets are easier to read than long-form essays, as they require less time commitment. If the content is not good on a long-form article, you&#x27;ll find out way too late. With this tool I&#x27;m developing:<p>Layer 1 is the shortest version of your essay, the 1 min read — like a tweet. The idea boiled down to the shortest version<p>Layer 2 is the same text from layer 1, but with extras added here and there. What&#x27;s already read by you is in black ink. What&#x27;s new is in blue ink. This is the 2 min read version<p>Layer 3 shows everything from Layer 1 and 2 in black ink, but what&#x27;s new is now in blue ink. and you keep doing that until you get to the full version.<p>I can post some screenshots here of my mockups, as I&#x27;m a designer. PM me if you find this intriguing!<p>——<p>Edit: Since people are showing interest, here&#x27;s how I see it happening — <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;invis.io&#x2F;GQWINO2YKU2#&#x2F;410298082_1_Min_Verison" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;invis.io&#x2F;GQWINO2YKU2#&#x2F;410298082_1_Min_Verison</a><p>The first thing that you see is the first layer (1 min version). Go right for 3 and 5 min version!<p>——<p>Edit 2: since I&#x27;m seeing the upvotes and the emails, I quickly made this sign-up form for the people who want to be updated when the product is done: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered-ink.webflow.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered-ink.webflow.io&#x2F;</a><p>I would put up the <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered.ink" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered.ink</a> link but the domain hasn&#x27;t been propagated yet.<p>@Admins — please do let me know if this is not permitted so I can take it down. Apologies if so.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>keenmaster</author><text>Can anyone vertically scan 5 paragraphs of a long-form article in a 1-2 seconds and ambiently detect keywords that signal relevance? By ambient, I mean in your peripheral vision, without even knowing which word you&#x27;re looking for or actively reading anything.<p>I acquired this &quot;skill&quot; about a year ago and now I use it when I suspect there may be filler text or introductions to concepts I already understand. I know it works because I uncannily land on interesting but otherwise nondescript passages. When I scroll back up I find that I did indeed skip the filler. Of course, this isn&#x27;t voodoo or unprecedented. It&#x27;s just funny that I&#x27;ve read so much that my brain basically has a regression model for various semantic characteristics that signal novelty by subject area. I suspect I also switch into different modes of scanning based on the writing style detected.<p>Because of all that, I actually prefer no layering at all. Reuters articles are Layer 1 compressed and I find them annoyingly curt.</text></comment> | <story><title>Ask HN: What projects are you working on now?</title><text>With the quarantine being placed in effect in a lot of cities across the world, we all likely have a little bit more time to focus on personal projects or learning something new from the comfort of our homes. What are you guys up to these days?</text></story><parent_chain><item><author>chdaniel</author><text>I&#x27;m making a new tool for writers. With it, you&#x27;ll be able to write your essays on &quot;layers&quot;<p>The problem? Tweets are easier to read than long-form essays, as they require less time commitment. If the content is not good on a long-form article, you&#x27;ll find out way too late. With this tool I&#x27;m developing:<p>Layer 1 is the shortest version of your essay, the 1 min read — like a tweet. The idea boiled down to the shortest version<p>Layer 2 is the same text from layer 1, but with extras added here and there. What&#x27;s already read by you is in black ink. What&#x27;s new is in blue ink. This is the 2 min read version<p>Layer 3 shows everything from Layer 1 and 2 in black ink, but what&#x27;s new is now in blue ink. and you keep doing that until you get to the full version.<p>I can post some screenshots here of my mockups, as I&#x27;m a designer. PM me if you find this intriguing!<p>——<p>Edit: Since people are showing interest, here&#x27;s how I see it happening — <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;invis.io&#x2F;GQWINO2YKU2#&#x2F;410298082_1_Min_Verison" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;invis.io&#x2F;GQWINO2YKU2#&#x2F;410298082_1_Min_Verison</a><p>The first thing that you see is the first layer (1 min version). Go right for 3 and 5 min version!<p>——<p>Edit 2: since I&#x27;m seeing the upvotes and the emails, I quickly made this sign-up form for the people who want to be updated when the product is done: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered-ink.webflow.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered-ink.webflow.io&#x2F;</a><p>I would put up the <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered.ink" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;layered.ink</a> link but the domain hasn&#x27;t been propagated yet.<p>@Admins — please do let me know if this is not permitted so I can take it down. Apologies if so.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>StavrosK</author><text>I wrote something similar for HTML:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;skorokithakis.github.io&#x2F;expounder&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;skorokithakis.github.io&#x2F;expounder&#x2F;</a></text></comment> |
38,794,445 | 38,794,199 | 1 | 2 | 38,792,631 | train | <story><title>How random is xkcd? (2015)</title><url>https://hardmath123.github.io/xkcd-random.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>MountainMan1312</author><text>Anecdotally, Spotify shuffle is one of the worst shuffles I&#x27;ve ever used. Or at least it used to be, not sure about now since they added Smart Shuffle. At least used to, maybe still, it would play a lot of songs over and over, but never play others. Like it had maybe 100 songs out of 2000 playing regularly, over and over.<p>This isn&#x27;t just me, but all my friends too. We&#x27;re all the time finding old songs we saved that have never once been played with shuffle, while it&#x27;s played this one song 3 times in the same day.<p>Perhaps it doesn&#x27;t work as well with large playlists? Me and my friends tend toward 1000+ songs in a playlist, but most other playlists I&#x27;ve found are rarely over 250 songs.</text></item><item><author>avianlyric</author><text>There’s a really good article from Spotify Engineering that looks at exactly how Spotify bridged this gap between “random” and the “random” people actually expect.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;engineering.atspotify.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-shuffle-songs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;engineering.atspotify.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-shuffle-son...</a><p>It a good read on understanding what people generally expect when they ask for a random stream of songs (or comics), and how you can meet that expectation by carefully engineering how you generate “random” lists.</text></item><item><author>mattnewton</author><text>Kind of an aside to the nerd sniping happening here, but I think the fact that people complain about the random button is a sign that the feature isn’t doing what those people really want, even if it is doing what is advertised. Those people _want_ a button biased to return novel ones they haven’t read either in that session or across all time somehow, likely because they are using it to discover new comics.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>feoren</author><text>Just from reading the article you can see how bad it is, and it makes sense that it would be worse for larger playlists. They&#x27;ve completely discounted the fact that when you play large playlists, you don&#x27;t listen to the whole thing. The problem with the dithering comparison is that in dithering, you&#x27;re looking at the whole image at the same time. But nobody listens to a long playlist all at once.<p>First of all, the core idea that Same Artist == Similar Song and Different Artist == Dissimilar Song is already flawed. There are just way, way more axes than that. Getting 4 slow songs in a row in a playlist of mixed slow &amp; fast dance music is going to feel very bad for everyone.<p>They give each artist one single &quot;random offset&quot;. If this is uniform over [start, end], then it would absolutely <i>kill</i> artists that show up a lot on your playlist, dramatically in favor of artists you have once or twice. If it&#x27;s from [start, end&#x2F;N] with N being the number of songs of that artist, it would be a little better, but it&#x27;s still making the playlist behavior completely different at the start (where it&#x27;s mostly completely random) from the middle&#x2F;end (where it&#x27;s &quot;dithered&quot;). If it&#x27;s [start, end&#x2F;M] with M being anything else, it&#x27;s again dramatically favoring the artists with fewer songs on the playlist.<p>Instead, they could introduce a &quot;ghost&quot; song for each artist that gets shuffled in and then discarded (or possibly some small constant number of ghosts).</text></comment> | <story><title>How random is xkcd? (2015)</title><url>https://hardmath123.github.io/xkcd-random.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>MountainMan1312</author><text>Anecdotally, Spotify shuffle is one of the worst shuffles I&#x27;ve ever used. Or at least it used to be, not sure about now since they added Smart Shuffle. At least used to, maybe still, it would play a lot of songs over and over, but never play others. Like it had maybe 100 songs out of 2000 playing regularly, over and over.<p>This isn&#x27;t just me, but all my friends too. We&#x27;re all the time finding old songs we saved that have never once been played with shuffle, while it&#x27;s played this one song 3 times in the same day.<p>Perhaps it doesn&#x27;t work as well with large playlists? Me and my friends tend toward 1000+ songs in a playlist, but most other playlists I&#x27;ve found are rarely over 250 songs.</text></item><item><author>avianlyric</author><text>There’s a really good article from Spotify Engineering that looks at exactly how Spotify bridged this gap between “random” and the “random” people actually expect.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;engineering.atspotify.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-shuffle-songs&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;engineering.atspotify.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-shuffle-son...</a><p>It a good read on understanding what people generally expect when they ask for a random stream of songs (or comics), and how you can meet that expectation by carefully engineering how you generate “random” lists.</text></item><item><author>mattnewton</author><text>Kind of an aside to the nerd sniping happening here, but I think the fact that people complain about the random button is a sign that the feature isn’t doing what those people really want, even if it is doing what is advertised. Those people _want_ a button biased to return novel ones they haven’t read either in that session or across all time somehow, likely because they are using it to discover new comics.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>stronglikedan</author><text>Their shuffle is completely broken, but so are all modern streaming music players. It used to be that shuffle would do just that - shuffle the deck of cards (playlist), and then deal the cards in order, never repeating until all cards have been dealt. Now it just keeps the playlist in the same order it was in and jumps all over the place, repeating songs and never playing some. It&#x27;s very frustrating and woefully broken. Old media players did it correctly.</text></comment> |
870,992 | 870,974 | 1 | 2 | 870,944 | train | <story><title>Piratebay strikes back</title><url>http://blog.brokep.com/2009/10/08/fail-in-nl/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>jacquesm</author><text>according to:<p><a href="http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/63922/pirate-bay-doet-aangifte-tegen-brein-en-kuik---update-2.html" rel="nofollow">http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/63922/pirate-bay-doet-aangifte-te...</a><p>(dutch)
Update 22.03 uur: Joris van Manen, advocaat voor de stichting Brein, laat in een reactie weten dat het Experian-rapport voor Brein "geen enkele rol" speelt in de zaak tegen de beheerders. Het was destijds bij een brief aan de rechtbank toegevoegd in de zaak tegen Reservella. "We doen helemaal geen beroep meer op dat rapport. Het is ons bekend dat de gegevens erin niet kloppen."<p>Update 22.25 uur: Tim Kuik zegt in een reactie dat Brein zich inderdaad niet beroept op dat rapport in de zaak tegen de beheerders. Volgens hem is het rapport wel degelijk authentiek en afkomstig van Experian, maar bleek het niet te kloppen.<p>"Dit is afleiding, het zoveelste rookgordijn. Deze jongens blijven verstoppertje spelen. We hebben genoeg bewijs dat de beheerders verantwoordelijk zijn voor The Pirate Bay," aldus Kuik.<p>Persoonlijk doet de aangifte hem weinig. "Sunde zégt dat hij aangifte doet. We weten het nog niet. Ach, ik merk het wel. Van die vorige aangifte is in elk geval ook nooit meer iets vernomen."<p>Translation:<p>Update 22:03: Joris van Manan, legal council for Brein respons that the Experian report is no longer playing "any role" in the case against the owners [of tpb]. The report was added with a letter to the court in the case against Reservella. "We don't base anything on that report. We know that the data in there isn't correct"<p>Update 22:25: Tim Kuik responds that Brein indeed doesn't base anything on that report. According to him the report is authentic and it came from Experian, but it turned out not to be correct.<p>"This is just a distraction, the nth smokecurtain. These boys continue to play hide and seek. We have enough proof that as administrators they are responsible for The Pirate Bay", according to Kuik.<p>He's not bothered personally by the filing of charges. "Sunde says he's going to file. We don't know that yet. I'll fin out about it. That previous filing was never heard from.".<p>--<p>That may all be true, but I can't believe that the court is going to be happy with a party that has apparently not retracted a report that it knew to contain false information.<p>Also, if Experian says they didn't make that report and Brein says they did, where did it really come from ? If it can be pinned on Brein that they did falsify information it is going to hurt them tremendously. One thing they do is continuously harping on being on the right side of the law, if they falsify evidence then that veil is pierced once and for all.<p>It will be very interesting to see how this plays out over time, but I don't think 'we're not using that report' is going to make this go away.</text></comment> | <story><title>Piratebay strikes back</title><url>http://blog.brokep.com/2009/10/08/fail-in-nl/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bandris</author><text>BREIN appears to have forged evidence. Piratebay files criminal charges against them.</text></comment> |
25,337,605 | 25,337,129 | 1 | 3 | 25,337,015 | train | <story><title>Categories of personal information collected</title><url>https://policies.tinder.com/ccpa-addendum/us/en</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>dang</author><text>The submitted title (&quot;Tinder extrapolates estimations on your intelligence and sells it&quot;) broke the site guidelines by editorializing [1]. Cherry-picking one detail is already a strong form of editorializing, and it&#x27;s not clear if this even is a true detail, or just a wild spin.<p>You&#x27;re welcome to say what you think is important about an article, but please do so in the comments, where your interpretation will be on a level playing field with everyone else&#x27;s [2], and where you&#x27;ll have space to explain how you arrived at your interpretation. Cramming a sensational charge like this into the title is basically a form of trolling.<p>Titles are by far the biggest influence on threads, so this matters a lot.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?dateRange=all&amp;page=0&amp;prefix=false&amp;sort=byDate&amp;type=comment&amp;query=%22level%20playing%20field%22%20by:dang" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?dateRange=all&amp;page=0&amp;prefix=false&amp;so...</a></text></comment> | <story><title>Categories of personal information collected</title><url>https://policies.tinder.com/ccpa-addendum/us/en</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>gnicholas</author><text>They apparently share:<p>&gt; <i>Inferences drawn from any of the information identified above to create a profile about you reflecting your preferences, characteristics, psychological trends, predispositions, behavior, attitudes, intelligence, abilities, and aptitudes.</i><p>with:<p>&gt; <i>Vendors and professional services organizations who assist us in relation to the business or commercial purposes laid out herein</i><p>Presumably this is a broad enough definition to encompass any buyer who pays Tinder, thereby supporting the commercial purpose of the business.</text></comment> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.