drorco

I wasn't referring to climate change, etc. when I replied to the nice Danish fellow. I was mostly referring to his note regarding the sense of community and equality in Denmark.

My point is that cultural dissimilarity creates a lot of mistrust and frustration. If I don't have the same common goal as my neighbor, and we have a completely different style--our chances to be in conflict are a lot higher, and so my likeliness of wanting to help him out are much lower.

I'm from Israel, and even if you look just at the Jewish demography, the differences between the different groups, are huge -- even though we all speak Hebrew, part of the Jewish culture/religion in some way, etc. The life goals of a secular Jew in Tel-Aviv, could be almost the complete opposite of a religious Jew in Jerusalem -- you can imagine the conflict to be quite immense, and hence the sense of community greatly eliminated.

Like dtwest says, you have embraced the local culture.

If someone from let's say, a rural village in central Asia, will immigrate to Sweden and will hold on to their original culture, I doubt the average Swedish guy will be as happy to pay that guy's medical bills, the same way they'd do for someone who does holds a similar culture.

I think one should not forget that Denmark's society is mostly homogenous. When you have a vastly dominant, culturally homogenous group, it's relatively easy to trust and support one another.

In a highly diverse country like the US, where the average New Yorker or new immigrant will have a completely different culture and world view from the average Joe in Missouri, and that's just two examples out of many, it's very difficult to build a culture of mutual trust, especially in comparison to the level of support Scandinavian countries offer to their communities.

lol my brain was automatically adding K each time MRR was mentioned. Completely missed that.

Nevertheless, nice work.

Looks like a great tool for finding hiking partners if you're able to build a large enough network. I'd probably not use it because I'd feel too many things could go wrong with strangers who are not committed to me like a tour guide. I've also never gone through the stage of hiking abroad with strangers in your early 20s so, I'm thinking I'm probably far from your target audience.

When my partner and I are traveling abroad, we love signing up to AirBnB experiences as it lets us to socialize with either great guides or other tourists, and not just be on our own all the time. The fact that we pay for it and each guide has reviews, gives us a peace of mind that the trip is almost guaranteed to be a success.

@elbajo posted an interesting comment about harassers looking for hookups in couch surfing platforms. I guess this is something that could happen more often if there's no payment involved for participants (unlike AirBnB experiences which is paid). I'm curious to know if you have any ideas on how to prevent that if the system remains free?

I found out that competitive sports are great to eliminate the boredom.

I'm taking weekly tennis lessons with my girlfriend and casual basketball matches with friends and neighbors. It's good cardio while you also catch up with friends and essentially play something.

I'm sure it's not perfect, but I think the saying applies here: "imperfect action beats perfect inaction".

You're probably right. Though I played it originally on a 286 with a simple internal speaker and it sounded a lot more basic.

Yes. There are laws in some countries for example that make the advertising of Tobacco illegal. That's a form of censorship people can say is reasonable, but it can also be a slippery slope towards harsher censorship around other things people might find harmful - the female body, sugar, gambling, abortion, meat, etc.

The question is if you want to give the government such a broad spectrum to censor, in which they'd start judging whether or not a product might be deemed potentially harmful.

I think there's never an end to it.

A paleo fan will think the same about a vegan/carbs ad, and so would an anti-vaxxer about a conventional health poster.

Harmful ideas can, and will reach those who are susceptible to it. I think the right way to oppose harmful ideas, is by gaining the education that would allow you, and others in society to judge such ideas.

The alternative of forbidding ads in public, is essentially censorship and making society even weaker as one way or another, harmful ideas will reach each and every one of us, and when they do, the less susceptible we are, the better.

It brings up an interesting question.

I live in Israel where there are constant conflicts about what is OK to be shown in public, especially between the religious and non-religious. In Jerusalem for example, some ultra-orthodox often vandalize any kind of poster that shows a woman in it. They just tear-out/spray over the women on the poster. Some are ridiculous cases where they defaced a poster of an old woman who survived the holocaust: https://www.timesofisrael.com/female-holocaust-survivors-por...

Even other groups could be pissed by posters that include things about women's hygiene or show models in swimsuits. In their eyes these are things they make a lot of effort to block from the eyes of their families, and having it in public breaches the culture and education they try to maintain. This is by itself interesting as public adverts can penetrate the most strict censorship that religious groups and cults maintain.

Seculars on the other hand can also be pissed about anti-abortion adverts, religious propaganda, scientology, etc. and ask for them to be banned.

As someone who's trying to be a "free-thinker" and tries to promote it, I think there's no point in hiding in a bubble, blocking yourself from seeing other ideas, even if they're crappy advertisements. All of this as long as the adverts/ideas fit within the aesthetics of the city they're in.

The risk of doing so is essentially losing free-thinking and some sort of communication with isolated social groups.

I don't know what's the quantitative trend.

I do know of several founders whose first company was a nasty ad-tech company (spyware), and after making their millions, their second company is a much more honorable digital health company.

You probably can find examples where such people can keep on creating nasty companies, so it would be interesting to see if there was a research about whether or not people pursue more honorable goals after they get lots of cash.

I think you could also say the same about gambling, porn and other questionable industries.

The thing is, it's usually much easier making money off these things then making money from solving impactful problems.

If you're a regular joe and you could spend your next 5 years with a 100% chance of making millions for finding exploits, or a 0.01% chance of solving P=NP, I think the irrational decision would be picking the latter.

This has been like that with many multiplayer games to some extent before the age of matchmaking. Someone sets up a dedicated server with certain mods/game configuration, and that would be yours and other randoms favorite server. Over time, you'd actually become a community.

I've gone back to play Unreal Tournament 2004 this past year in such dedicated servers, and it made me realize how badly matchmaking ruined the sense of community in MP games.

Sometimes teachers have a negative net value huh?

Brings up the point that if the education system can't properly teach a subject, maybe we're all better better off with it just not teaching the subject.

Huh? "Hamas is a radical Islamic fundamentalist organization that has stated that its highest priority is a Jihad (holy war) for the liberation of Palestine."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

Thanks!

It seems extracting a 3d model to be easily integrated with a program like Unity from the BDS files will not be trivial, and the 3d model as asteroidmission.org is relatively low-poly.

Nevertheless, it's pretty nice of them to release these.

It would have been cool if they'd release the 3d model, and then it could be put in some sort of an interactive demo.

> "Our kids, by contrast, have had pictures taken of them every week at least. With metadata so you know where you were. And they're digital images that won't fade"

They might still wonder "Why only 8K resolution?! Why aren't they in 3D and interactive?!"

There's also the other option similar to what happened after the New York Elevator Operator Strike in 1945 -- the total elimination of a profession.

https://www.inc.com/thomas-koulopoulos/100-years-ago-we-fear...

"It wasn't until the middle of the twentieth century that the tipping point came along for the driverless elevator as the result of a strike by the elevator operators' union in New York City in 1945.

The strike was devastating, costing the city an estimated one hundred million dollars. Suddenly, there was an economic incentive to go back to the automatic elevator. Over the next decade there was a massive effort to build trust in automatic elevators, which resulted in the elimination of tens of thousands of elevator operator jobs."

If Amazon is close enough to automating these jobs, then it will likely just automate it and fire whoever it can. If not, then you're likely making the path towards that faster.

I don't see any way for the employees to win this beyond buying a bit more time. Unless the employees, the government, and Amazon, find a way for them to get a profession in which they have more leverage thanks to the *high individual value* they provide, rather than being a temp for future robots.

One solution can be for a union, government, Amazon etc, is to put aside money for a fund that will invest in training these employees so they could one day not depend on these kind of low-leverage jobs.

There's truth to that, a lot of it depends on that developer's language skills and business network.

If you're a developer in the Ukraine with great English and reasonable business skills, you should be able to land a pretty good dev job with a global company.

Another, just as good dev in the Ukraine that only knows Russian/Ukrainian, will have much harder time and will likely be limited to working with just local companies, significantly limited with options.

Then Google will need to build a better search engine, otherwise people will just move to a search engine that can get them the better results.

A more recent similar case would be Starlink. Fast forward a few years and the night sky will be filled with satellites disturbing astronomers. It would be interesting to see how that one ends up. My bet, more outer-space telescopes to compensate for all the new disturbance.

I think what happens is that overtime certain groups have taken "ownership" over the word by using it as a racial slur but originally it just means "someone from Kush". In Hebrew if you take a location and add "I" as a suffix it means someone originating from that place, e.g: "Americai"-> someone from America, "Kushi"-> someone from Kush which is a country occasionally used in the bible to refer to Africa.

I guess in English there are also such words that originally had no use as a slur but later "denominated" to racial slurs.

The reference to Kushi->Kof (monkey) is totally off. Doesn't sound similar at all for my native Hebrew ears.

I wouldn't say this is accurate. Well, some might use it that way, but as a kid this is the word we were taught for black folk with no harm intended, it's also the name used in the bible--I believe it's originally from the bible.

Is there any resource you're aware of that makes accessible all of the current immigration/permanent residence policies of countries worldwide?

Some people like to work their way in reverse. I'd often pick a really complicated subject I'm after like "stellar fusion" and then work my way downwards and learn whatever I need to learn in order to understand it. If I had to start from differential mathematics, without knowing why I need it, I'd probably give up.

As someone who has been hiring a lot of freelance engineers for web dev projects, here are my tips assuming you'd like to check that path and assuming you are still not very experienced:

1. Only take projects you're confident you could ace. Customers would often not tolerate work that isn't accurate, not built according to best practices and is not delivered on time.

2. NEVER fail your client. Assuming the clients is honest and not someone looking to abuse you, if you've committed to a project you must complete it on time and deliver something great. If you can't make it one time, let the client know ASAP. If you can't get the right quality, let the client know ASAP. The client may ask to cancel the deal and get the money back but your reputation will not suffer as much as if you'd waste any more of their time by being late or delivering low quality deliverable.

3. Never submit your work without THOROUGHLY TESTING IT. I see way too many junior engineers saying "I'm done, check it out" only to find out whatever they build easily breaks the moment we start playing with it. CHECK YOUR SHIT before you deliver it or else your client will lose trust in you.

Even if your first few projects turn out to be not that great, if you'll learn from your mistakes and push through, you should be able to maintain clients who will be working with you for the long-term.

The amounts of money you're looking for are a non-issue for many companies.

As a founder who has an experience with kind of both and raised after more than a year generating revenue, I'd say the things you mentioned as negative are actually often positive. Facing with these problems head-on will burst a founder's "happy-bubble" of their perceived reality, and often early entrepreneurs tend to be over-optimistic. Inexperienced founders who raised funds may easily over-estimate the value of their business, hire prematurely, hire too expensive people who will not be ROI positive. Being forced to work with limited capital can make a talented & ambitious entrepreneur become very creative and efficient with its capital. The opposite of course is the distortion we're seeing in the market with "Softbankish" type of businesses who use their capital to distort the market. The optimal course of action is probably somewhere in the middle but my main point is I'd argue the things you mention as negative are actually positive and will allow for a founder, gradual and healthy growth.

One way technology can really decrease consumption is by turning humans to machines. If you are essentially a CPU, your energy consumption would likely be very low yet your computational power and lifespan could be much higher. This way earth could support a much higher quantity of "humans", being mostly electric, it could even leave the confinements of earth, this way freeing earth.

The only challenge left is to maintain cognitive growth drives when you're based on electricity, rather than hormones among other chemicals.

I'm one of the founders of a company that fosters a network of coders and this was one of its main ideas when we founded it - minimize the amount of communication overhead and allow coders to focus just on coding. Practically, you're getting assigned with Asana tasks that you tackle one after the other. Naturally, you can't avoid communication at at all but if you want, you can limit it to communicating pull-requests/scoping/QA etc.

Normally I wouldn't solicit people to sign up on HN, but since you asked for sources I figured I'll take the opportunity to help fulfill your search: https://www.codersclan.com/, if you sign up, mention you are the poster from HN and I'll make sure to speed the process up for you. Do note that the hourly rates start from $30/hour and that right now we're mostly looking for WordPress or front-end devs.

Another source you might want to look at is https://remote.co/ I think we even advertised there in the past, but naturally the type of work you'll get will depend on the contract you land.