bjeds

Thank you for your reply, I didn't expect I'd find a comment from an actual student of these schools here at HN. Your perspective is valuable.

If you follow Swedish media you probably know there's a large discussion/controversy right now about high school students (and younger kids) changing their behavior to avoid crime/trouble. For example see this recent article at SVT: https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/man-maste-vara-pa-sin-vak...

What's your take? Is this a problem in your school as well, or peer group? I'm genuinely curious: I'm old enough to never naturally meet people your age, but I'm not old enough to have kids or relatives your age.

I sort of agree with what you are saying (I'm also Swedish) but I think the incentives are different, and due to the American dominance of Hacker News readers it's worth to clear up:

Swedish middle class parents do not choose "good schools" because they want a "great education" for their kids as a competitive advantage... in the sense of a well-off American parent want their kids to go to Harvard or MIT or similar.

Swedish middle class parents choose "not-bad schools" (not the same as "good schools") because they want to shelter their kids from trouble and from problems, for example from the social issues from failed integration of immigrants.

So it's more about avoiding trouble and "white flight", than the education itself.

Wow, superb writeup, thank you author for writing it and the submitter for posting it!

Wow, that's very impressive for a one-man-project. If the author is reading this, can you describe the background to this software, why you started writing it, and how it's been going?

I think you should file a complaint to your local financial authorities.

That's not true in any way, shape, or form. Maybe it's true for you, but don't assume it's true for others or for the the rest of the world.

When I book a flight ticket, I go to the airline directly, which is true for more or less all people I know. For me this will typically be KLM, AirFrance, or SAS. These companies are Dutch, French, and Swedish.

There are no "500 silicon valley engineers" between me and them.

The world is bigger than your little world. I didn't even know what Expedia was until I looked it up.

Thank you for your reply! I didn't realize you were the author of the blog until now.

Out of curiosity, do the output formats of the different models differ? With output format I mean the way that the (current) time is represented.

Not being familiar with atomic clocks, my hope and expectation is that the output is something different than a single large integer (compare unix timestamp). :)

Please tell me more about your atomic clock. Which one did you eventually buy, how much did it cost, and how do you use it?

I can't be the only one who read the title as "Python 2.1" and expected a comparison detailing how recent versions of Python are slower than older ones (Python 2.1 is from 2001).

Now I'm a little bit curious how performance compares between latest and older versions. Anyone knows on top of their head?

Not sure how interesting this is, but since the article mentions Scandinavia and "homogeneous society", that's not really true either. Unlike Japan, Sweden keeps track, not of "race" but country of origin for migrants or children of migrants.

For Sweden, 36.5% of men aged 15-44 are either foreign born, or has at least one parent foreign born. This data is from the Statistics Sweden (SCB) for 2019.

In this cohort, 62.5% are from, or have a parent from, Africa/Asia (Middle East), 9.3% from Western Europe/USA, 3.5% from the other Nordic countries, an 24.7% are from "Other" countries.

I'm not sure about the data for the other Scandinavian countries.

This is so tiring.

I'm a Swedish man. Last time I visited the US was several years ago. I'm not particularly sympathetic towards Donald Trump or Parler. I'm definitely not here to defend nazism.

Not sure if it's intended, but if you intend to get sympathy and support for your cause (whatever that is) by calling me a nazi or implying my interest in internet infrastructure has anything to do with supporting nazism, then you are not gonna get very much sympathy from me.

So way to go with the polarization.

The real story here I think is how LACNIC handled this.

Who in their right mind will do infrastructural internet business in Latin America going forward if some self-righteous American man can cause them to revoke IP:s assigned to your company?

There is no indication that this Russian internet provider - who claim they are operating in Belize - had a say in the revocation of this IP space.

Looking at the website of DDoS-Guard, it looks to me like a fairly normal internet provider with fairly normal customers.

I hope they buy IP space in other regions going forward, that have due process without causing disruption for their business and their customers.

Not sure if intended, but this reply is really funny. Well done.

I guess that's a chicken-egg question. What comes first: a polarized populace or free news?

People who polarize are seen and heard a lot: they use free news articles on social media to spread their perspective to as many as possible, triggering a counter reaction on the other direction, also influencing the journalists because they get clicks.

How wonderful it would be if none of that was free so people had to pay to read whatever has been spread. The blast radius would be limited.

My gut feeling is that 80% of the world are not interested in using news instrumentally to force political views on others. They may get caught up into it, but wouldn't if they weren't continously confronted with it.

It's the age old rule that 95% on internet communities lurk, and 5% post content. The 5% are more insane than average. :-)

Today in 2021 people are USED to seeing free news on social media. But that's just the current status quo. Imagine a society where people did not see or share stuff like that, as seldom as people share music or tv-shows or other kinds of content? There is nothing special with "news". It just happened to be the thing that's free and constructed to make people emotional and angry.

If there were only subscription services not competing with free, I think people would buy something that's as neutral and unbiased as possible.

Personally I hope that the old "news industry" would just die already and be replaced by walled-off subscription services, like Netflix, specializing in different kinds of content.

A monolithic "news paper" covering different areas like sports, science, politics, what's on TV today, weather and so on is not optimal in the 21:st century because distribution is easier.

I'd then have subscriptions to services specializing in different kinds of content depending on interest. Because these services do not compete with free, they could spend more time on the articles and less time on hyperbole, polarization and anger - three tools that are great for growth and engagement, but detrimental to society.

I hear you.

Whether I like it or not, by now big o notation has fallen into the category of "folklore" that working engineers use and abuse informally without being very precise about it.

It's like the "proof by engineers induction": if some statement P(n) is true for P(0), P(1) and P(2), then P(n) is true for all n \in Z. :-)

Similarly if an engineer states that algorithm has a runtime of O(f(n)) that should probably be read as "as n grows very large (whatever that means) the runtime approximates (whatever that means) some bound (below, above, whatever) f(n). yolo.".

But people should at least be _aware_ that they are being imprecise about it.

If I read a blog post or StackOverflow post or whatever and I see big-theta notation I know that the person is probably precise with her definition. If I see big-o then it may be correct, or accidentally correct (happens often due to the nature of the definition) or mistaken.

If you are the kind of person that want to read an article titled "explained as easily as possible", I think you should just avoid saying the phrase "big oh" but instead talk about algorithm runtime more informally, like "quicksort has a worst case quadratic but average case n log n runtime".

The risk is otherwise you will shoot yourself in the foot, maybe during an interview or other situation, as Big O is just one out of many members in a family of notations that has a very specific mathematical definition, other common ones being small-o and big-theta.

Analysis of algorithms is more difficult than it appears. If you implement an algorithm in a high level language like Python you may get much worse runtime than you thought because some inner loop does arithmetic with bignum-style performance instead of hardware integer performance, for example. In such case you could talk of big-omega (your analysis is bounded-below instead of bounded-above, asymptotically).

This.

I think the OP is so eager to get back online he sees 3:40 every day and is using that timepoint as his troubleshooting clue.

However If he were to disconnect 3:10 and then just be offline an hour until plugging the device back he would probably see the reset happen 4:10 going forward.

I was thinking of the long period of slow economic growth, long period of low interest rates, "chronic deflation", and few tools left by central banks to stimulate the economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_(Japan)#Legacy

Keyword: track. As in the privacy concern of the government having direct insight into all your financial transactions.

Sure, they already have the opportunity to demand that information from Swedish commercial banks and other financial institutions, but it's not as convenient as the direct control they have with a centrally managed digital currency.

The really nice thing with fungible physical goods like paper currency or similar is they are not in any shape or form tied to my identity. That's a feature.

Here is one source about robberies being roughly twice (maybe 1.7-1.9x) as common in 2019 as the period 2006-2015: The graph says "Percentage (of population being) victim of robbery": https://www.bra.se/statistik/statistik-utifran-brottstyper/r...

As a Swedish person I don't see the point at all: Why would I want to use this? I would rather have a decentralized system of various banks and global companies (Mastercard, Visa, etc) track my transactions and spread out that risk, instead of one single state actor. I could also use, you know, cash.

Digital cash is first and foremost an instrument for new ways to do monetary policy, as more countries (like Sweden and EU) are heading towards a Japanese situation. Playing it as a tool for consumers to fight banks is just marketing/storytelling to gain support and adoption.

... but without the stigma.

But I think the guy himself has a point when he says he lowers the bar. Think how many different jobs (or "roles") there that can be ranked in a kind of hierarchy: not in the sense of a career ladder, but in services and expertise offered. Between the bottom of this hierarchy, and nothing, is a gap to fill.

Take for example personal protection. Sure, if I need a high tier of that service, I could get myself a bodyguard, maybe one of those with ex-military experience and all the combat training etc. Between that and "nothing" is a random joe who tags along to the Tinder date, like this guy.

Or sure I could meet a licensed therapist. Don't want to? Can meet a friend. Don't have one? This random dude to the rescue.

At the large companies I've worked for, Principal Engineers were more or less strong engineers with the management skills of a Director or VP. That is: strong people skills, project management, program management, leading teams, high business knowledge, strategy, etc. If necessary, they could easily go in and lead an organization of 30-200 people. But they choose to focus on a little bit more engineering/architecture instead of people.

As such there were only about 1 per 2000 employees, and they were always people who are actually Senior, like 20+ years work experience.

I'm impressed that the EU is taking action in this case and I hope they also look into the shutdown of Parler under antitrust legislation.

Parler was the number one downloaded social media app in the app store after all. According to BBC the most popular accounts on Parler were people like Sean Hannity and Ted Cruz, who each had followers in the millions.

Of course Parler had a problem with some - maybe even many - violent people, like the Washington rioters, but it seems to me that the vast majority of Parler users were not violent people, but fairly normal republicans of the kind that are still not banned on Twitter and Facebook (like the two persons I mentioned).

Removing the hyperbole on each side, I think it'd be interesting if the EU looked into this to conclude if the shutdown of Parler was ok or not.

Fair enough, I'm not a native English speaker and should maybe used a different word.

But that's still beside the point: there is still a fraction greater than 0% of his voters, who will feel (correctly or incorrectly) that their politician was censored. And therein lies the problem with the blocking decision.

It does not matter in any shape or form whether Facebook was right or wrong in their action in blocking Trump: This decision will radicalize more people, as a direct side effect or unintended consequence of their decision to block him due to the TOS violation. Trump is not just some internet lunatic, he is a political candidate and former POTUS that 70+ million people voted for.

That's beside the point: there is _obviously_ a fraction that is much greater than 0% of the people who voted for Trump (whether they voted for him or against his opponents) who will now feel oppressed because the person they voted for - whatever reason - is now banned from the largest social media network in the world. This fraction is from the large (millions) group of people who had nothing to do with the riots.

I mean, read the article: Facebook has realized the same thing and that's why they are recommending their employees to not wear Facebook branded clothing.

Like it or not, the pool of disillusioned people is now much larger and I'm not particularly keen on learning what effects that will have down the road.

That it'd come to this is pretty obvious I think.

I mean, Facebook de-platformized a politician that 70+ million people voted for.

It doesn't really matter if they had the right or wrong reasons in doing this: the pool of disillusioned people just grew tremendously and I can't see anyone claiming otherwise.

Or did Facebook think that all of these 70+ million people would just sit back quietly and accept that their politician was blocked (or perceived of being censored)?

EDIT: Clarified the last sentence do to using the word "censored" incorrectly: thanks for pointing it out.

I'd love if there were a list somewhere that keeps track of these shutdowns.

Donald Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter.

Law Enforcement Today from Facebook.

Ron Paul from Facebook.

Who am I missing?

<I deleted my comment because people only want to argue.>