_uhtu

Cutting your own hair sounds like such a minor sacrifice if it means you can work whatever job you want to after 30 and retire at 40.

I've found that I'm actually happier when I am more frugal. Spending money on things, more often than not, just makes us lazier, not happier, in my experience.

This is exactly what "student-to-be" means.

But doesn't MM mean 2000 in roman numerals?

I didn't intend to put down your suggestion, like I said, online banks are great, but there isn't a capitol one, ally, or discover bank in my state. So for people who use cash, a credit union is an excellent choice.

Other people are going to suggest online banks, which are excellent, but you can't deposit/withdraw cash easily to those, which is the main purpose poorer people have for a bank account.

Instead, try local credit unions. As an example where I'm at, Indiana Members Credit Union has a checking account with all the normal perks of a checking account and no fees. And credit unions work together with the major banks to give their members access at most ATMs.

I've noticed an interesting thing in terms of "youtube rabbit holes" towards extreme content. I'm what American society would generally consider "liberal", and I watch a lot of videos about fixing climate change, medicare for all, etc. Interestingly, I don't usually get "liberal" recommendations on my home page.

However, if I watch a video from a conservative angle, even just one or two videos, I almost immediately get extreme right wing content in my recommendations. Stuff like PragerU, ReasonTV, NRATV, etc. Even watching videos that I wouldn't consider right wing, just critical of certain left wing sects, like h3h3 for example, tend to almost immediately lead me into videos like "DUMB FEMINISTS GET OWNED - COMPILATION".

It's strange the rabbit holes almost always take me deep into right wing territory, but never really into left wing territory.

I agree, the best CEO would slash their salary when the going got rough. However, there's no system to keep them accountable to this, so it doesn't happen except in places like Japan, where there's a culture around it.

What the CEO really has is 200x the affect on the company. A 15m bonus for a CEO may sound ridiculous but if picking that CEO led the company to 50m increase in revenue over an average CEO than it was well worth it to hire them.

Or at least, that's how CEOs sell themselves. I think that idea makes sense, but only if the company does well. If it doesn't the execs still have the power to grant themselves massive bonuses before the shareholders can react.

It's kind of like the classic 2% fee investment manager, they'll say they are the best at what they do, when of course they almost never beat the market. Still, regardless of how they do, they make bank. I think what really needs to happen is people need to learn to stop trusting people just because they talk smooth and make an optimistic pitch, and start focusing executive salaries on being entirely results based, with only a modest base salary.

But also, possibly, you'd have a lot more and a lot deeper interaction. This could be the kind of app Facebook was originally, where you added your friend and shared basically anything random without a focus on getting likes. Dumb inside jokes, unfiltered photos, etc.

Kinda like the texting groups friends often have these days. That's market that could potentially use some optimizaiton as texting isn't a great format to communicate with ~5-10 people.

A friend of mine just told me she's going back to school for a doctorate despite being a successful researcher at an Ivy league school. Basically if she wants to run a lab or lead projects with good funding, she needs the title, even if she doesn't learn much along the way.

I'm going to guess no, based on the fact that in Apollo 13 they had plenty of oxygen, but they needed to stop the buildup of CO2 or they would die, no amount of oxygen would help them, since CO2 is poisonous.

> A company that is not profitable now that is going to make a profit down the road is a good investment, since you'll be buying it at a discount on the market now.

This line of thinking is the reason a lot of people lose money investing. If investors are confident a company will one day be profitable, the price will trade at a value that is very close to what it will be when it hits those numbers. The market takes into account future cash flows.

In order to beat the market, you have to either know, or guess correctly, something that the rest of the market doesn't know. So, usually, you need luck or insider trading.

> Kink James VI

Quality Freudian slip here.

Manufacturing insulin isn't under patent or a trade secret is it? If the price of insulin rises, then manufacturing insulin becomes more economically viable, so new players will enter the arena, thus driving the price down.

Is there any reason this wouldn't be subject to the normal laws of supply and demand?

You mean like your bank account number, which is constantly typed into online forms of all sorts of websites. Or your credit card number, which you probably say verbally into the phone to pay your bills?

Truth is, lots of extremely sensitive data exists in insecure states all the time.

The article describes a psychological technique, and the comment describes how a person who is extremely relevant to modern politics uses that technique.

I feel the comment is exactly what comments are for, adding further context around an article with a different perspective. Can you explain why you think he shouldn't have made this comment, outside of "Bannon is not the only person who does this, you can't make this comment unless you mention every other form of media that does."

It's crazy that the government never decided to put these into a museum or sell them to an American museum. I think any of the several air and space museum's in America would be absolutely thrilled to purchase one of these and show it off.

I agree with this. I believe one of the biggest reasons public opinion switched to support gay marriage so quickly was because of public exposure of extremists like the Westboro Baptist Church. If ideas are that stupid and extreme, it helps people understand the real reality (sometimes at least)

If the chance I'm going to buy something that I've already bought again is close to 0, and it's not smart enough to find anything else for me that it thinks I should buy, then logically it should show me random things. That way I'm training the algorithm for them and maybe I'll find something I want.

That's not true, putting a product I've already ordered on my recommended list instead of something i actually want to buy is costing them money in lost sales.

I have a friend from the Netherlands and his bike was stolen, despite having a lock on it, the very first week he was in the US. He was completely dumbfounded, the idea of a bike getting stolen was just ridiculous for him, growing up in a such a high median income, highly developed country. And when he was in the US he was staying on campus at a presigious University. As far as my + his anecdotal evidence goes, the Netherlands is just much much safer in terms of not getting your bike stolen.

startWith, in this context of streams, means "let this value (in this case an empty string) be the first value the stream returns"

Amazon has lately been putting ads on prime video for other prime video shows. I have a feeling we're rapidly going towards most paid services having ads.

Also, on prime video, occasionally, pressing the fast forward button won't skip the ad. I'm sure it's one of those "bugs" that just happens to force the user to do something the company wants but the user doesn't but I have a feeling it might just stop working all the time and we'll be forced to sit through the whole ad on a paid service.

Bitwarden is the password manager that got my to finally start using a password manager with it's combination of full open source and good UI. I love that they are this security focused as well.

You say "Several major features land every year.", but you don't back that up.

In 2018 the major features we got object rest/spread and asynchronous interation. Rest/spread is a big feature that I forgot to mention, but async iteration is only useful in a few situations, I'd call it a minor feature.

In 2017 we got async/await, and shared memory/atomics. Only a few fringe code bases will use shared/memory/atomics, so I'd call async/await the only major feature.

In 2016 we got 0 major features. The only things in the entire spec (an entire year of language progress) was Array.includes and an exponent operator (). Both of those are very clearly "minor" features.

So in the last 3 years, I'd say we've had 2 or 3 major, mainstream features, that's very far from "several major features every year". Especially 2016 where there were 0 major features.

I see this idea that adding classes to JS was a bad thing a lot, but even though I don't ever use classes in my codebase, I don't know why it would make sense to remove them before adding new features, or to stall new features because they exist and I don't like them.

In my opinion, we should be moving forward with features that make functional paradigms easier, such as the pipeline operator, regardless of the fact that JS has object oriented features. There's no reason to stall new features just because different people want different features, at this moment we're pleasing no one with the slow release cycle.

I disagree. ES6 made JS much more palatable but it's still behind most modern languages in terms of number of features and in velocity of new features getting introduced. Javascript has actually been extremely slow to get new features compared to other languages.

Since ES6 (3 years ago), the only major, mainstream feature that has been added to JS has been async functions, which are awesome, but in that time Python (a language of similar age and global use) has gotten an optional type system, async/await, and _hundreds_ of standard library modules, classes, and functions.

In my opinion, JS badly needs more functions in it's standard library, which should move through the proposal policy quickly. However, common sense standard library functions like flatMap have been in the pipeline for years are still not in the final stage. We may not get flatMap, import(), trimStart, or trimEnd in ES2019, they are all stalled in Stage 3. There's no good arguments not to have these in the standard library, but we still have to wait years.

In addition to that, JS could really use some language features that make it's core paradigms, functional and object oriented, simpler, and have been in other languages for years. The pipeline operator would make functional programming much easier, and decorators would make object oriented programming easier. These are, in my opinion, common sense features since they are so well received in other langauges, but they get stalled out since they are seen as "bloating" the syntax, or making javascript "too opinionated on how to do something". Meanwhile, people are compiling full fledged functional languages (Reason, Elm, Purescript) to Javascript, because Javascript isn't keeping up with them on features. It could, but the TC39 review process is so slow that it's not worth waiting on. For those reasons, in my opinion, we should really be releasing new language features much quicker.

We use JWT for validating simple handoffs from server to server, allowing someone to briefly access a resources such as downloading a file from a server designed to do that. We set the expiration to only an hour, and JWT is excellent for this use case as it means we don't need to implement our entire login and database workflow on a machine that just serves files.

I have some troubles with the state hook. It may look nice to a novice developer, but when I look at it I just see confusing magic. I read what's happening and I just say wait, there's no closure or class here, how this state is stored is completely hidden from me.

I can see uses for the other types of hooks, but the state hook seems like it would be much better served with an HOC like Redux's connectToStore, which would be concise and non-magical.

Earth is is not even close to a closed system. There's a giant thermonuclear explosion factory in space that pumps insane amounts of energy into our system. If earth was a closed system it could not harbor life as entropy increased.