I like the aesthetics of interpreting this through the academically fringe lens of “Quantum mechanics/entanglement plays some role in the human brain and solving the binding problem” and hope this relates more to making quantum-scale events capable of triggering action potentials at a statistically meaningful rate, than it does to mere energy savings.
Pulse is central to traditional Indian medicine (Ayurveda) [1]. Will be interesting to see what the science finds, although I wouldn’t personally volunteer to have a pumpless-heart. Sounds likely to have unintended consequences as you suggest.
"We can imagine collectively held physical spaces reclaimed from empty retail or abandoned venues hosting esoteric local scenes" Where is this happening?
This is dizzying. Over the summer Ford Motor Company had a valuation of <$24B (currently $46B), and yet in comparison to valuations across tech and especially the EV industry, doesn't seem far off what the market will accept for promises of tech-driven progress and growth. SPACs in theory seem like a great escape from the horrors of IPOs, but in the current manic climate it's all but inevitable that millions of retail investors are going to get fleeced when the SPACs collectively fall short of generating the necessary free cash-flow to justify their collective valuation. This could be years out, though, still, so hopefully there'll be some growing into valuations and a gradual come-off instead of a complete meltdown, but history shows we tend to make markets go boom and bust, so don't count on it.
That hasn't been my experience. It's directionally closer than the last generation of headsets, but my oculus quest mostly just sits around because pickup and use is still not the reality. In another few years I'm hoping we get to smart-phone level ease of use, that + superior capabilities will kick-off the real "bend in the curve" in VR or AR growth.
Look at how many negative words are in this post of yours and hopefully see the irony of what you’re saying. Twitter isn’t magic, it can only give you what it thinks you want from what you give it!
It's a matter of scale. If I go outside and turn on a leaf-blower I can tell you with relatively high confidence the speed and direction of general air movement five feet out from the nose. On the other hand, if I tried to tell you the speed and direction of a dozen particles at X, Y, Z location in coordinate space, the effects of chaos (particles individually colliding, etc) would make this infeasible with current technology. Similarly, describing climate is like describing the general direction and speed of air moving out from the leaf blower, while weather is like trying to make the same prediction for small groups of particles within the system. They might sound like similar tasks, but due to chaos one is doable and the other is nearly impossible.
All that being said, with regards to this particular study at the scale of 500 years it's likely our climate models nearly completely break down, as we've yet to successfully create one without significant divergence even a few decades out (although maybe that has changed as by definition the best ones we can test against only include those made before the year ~2000)
Probably more about the visibility than the outcome—an attempt to drive a narrative that Uber et al are corrupt regulatory-capturing entities that are manipulating the public through a suit like this could help the NO on Prop 22 cause. The trouble is, although that is substantially true, California legislators have broken things so badly with AB-5 that the public has no choice but to vote YES on Prop 22.
The anti-monopoly benefits of interoperability can be offset by the regulatory capture of forced interoperability if companies too small are subject to such rules, placing them at a disadvantage relative to largest players and increasing the likelihood that the status quo remains in place. That's the "Can't have your cake and eat it too" that's being referred to above I think—in other words, if you regulate the second-tier like the first-tier, the second-tier will never have a chance at becoming the first tier.
Hey Taylor, cool product! But why can't you see the purchase prices of the arguments? As the price moves around over time you can try to look at the date and graph independently, but some indicator showing the movement since purchase on each of everyone's arguments would be a lot more useful! Cheers.
Phoenix ships with Ecto ORM-style-binding to Postgres underneath (usually) for a good reason! :) And if you need that in memory magic where the serial nature of a genserver won't suffice for your load, you basically have built-in Redis with Erlang's ets. And if you really need insane performance on longer-cached items than ets is optimal for, Discord released https://github.com/discord/fastglobal
And if you don't want to put all those pieces together, like you said there's a rich set of modules people have built, like oban. Long rise and live the elixir monoliths ;) (although admittedly even Discord had to swap out some of their most intense functions with Rust, but how many people are writing systems that need to handle millions of concurrents?)
Perhaps it's a lot more than the AST that's attracting them? Like maybe the actor model (genservers)? Or OTP overall as a great platform for building self-healing, fast, distributed, functional systems? Or Immutability? There's lots of things to like about building on a foundation like Erlang.
Unfortunately had a bug I found today in which an event_notifier genserver was calling a method that checked against the database for the the state of an Event, to decide whether to send a notification and then update the event to record that notifications were sent and upon successful update send the notifications. But in the query to construct the list of users that should be notified, the User module was not imported at the top of the file and the notifications were failing to send. Of course, if the path had ever been run, it would have obviously failed and been the simplest type of error to rectify. This is why it's generally not an issue and is actually nice as it gives you direct visibility into dependencies. But, on rare exception, when you don't test the path because it's dependent on time-dependent state and are overly confident in the suitability of the untested code you're deploying to production, you get bit by the compiler that quietly warns and lack of static analysis (oh nice writing this comment just made me discover https://github.com/rrrene/credo)
Would the easiest way for someone that doesn't meet the wealth or multi-year income thresholds to become an accredited investor now be to take the Series 65?
I'm also suspicious, although most suspect as sibling comment to yours suggests, that it's likely something automated rather than malicious. Perhaps there's too few comments?
I think startups would have a lot easier time recruiting great people if they offered Stock Appreciation Rights [1] instead of typical options. I didn’t even know SARs existed, they’re so non-standard in the startup industry, until as a founder considering an open-ended hiring offer for the first time I desperately looked for some legal upside compensation system that wouldn’t screw me in all likely scenarios. Stock would mean tax bill upfront with high chance of failure. Options would likely expire before I could securely exercise and liquidate to cover costs.
I ultimately decided to stay the founder course, but glad to have found what I think is an acceptable compensation structure. Even if requiring it adds friction to deals until docs are standardized, at least people should know it’s an option. I’d be curious to understand if anyone has found a downside, except to the investors that build these anti-employee systems to arbitrage on knowledge asymmetry.
I'm not a lawyer, but presumably because there's US antitrust law, under which the courts may find Apple's contractual impositions to be illegal. They may also find they are legal, but if the court has any doubt they should grant Epic's request to stop retaliation.
The underlying research is suggesting that air pollution is the primary cause of 1/6 deaths worldwide [1], and fossil-fuel air pollution specifically 1/15. I'm not sure it passes the sanity check (wouldn't we have noticed sooner?). If air pollution is really responsible for 1/6 deaths then we've got a massive low-hanging fruit to greatly improve our life expectancy and quality of life that we should take advantage to remedy with gusto! But—I would like to see the counters and follow up studies with more conservatively tuned variables to see if they've over-projected by an order of magnitude or more. Regardless, we should reduce air pollution, but the science should inform our level of resource allocation and intensity. If it's really responsible for 16% of all deaths, then resources at least equal to those spent fighting comparable sources of death should be spent eliminating air pollution.
Until reading this I was under the impression that wire transfers were guaranteed funds. Nearly everyone’s heard of wire transfer scams where a scammers gets you to send funds and then it’s almost always irreversible/you’re screwed. But I didn’t realize you could receive a wire transfer and the bank could find it’s fake months later and remove the funds. That’s insane. Good to know for the future, but how then does one receive guaranteed funds? Cashier’s Cheque (or can those be found fake after deposit too?)? Is receiving something like Bitcoin/Ether the only way to guarantee funds are real? If you don’t trust the source what non-crypto mainstream financial transfer tools can you use and be guaranteed? Are PayPal funds guaranteed?
The CEO of Stripe, Patrick Collison, is pretty widely regarded as being a sweetheart, and at the age of 31 he’s already got almost 50% of the net worth Jobs had when he died. Arguably then, he’s far more successful for his age, and far kinder. There’s many other examples too, so this toxic “CEOs have to be assholes to succeed” trope should really die. Jobs was more likely successful in spite of his sometimes cruel idiosyncrasies, and almost certainly not because of them.
Don’t conflate ByteDance and TikTok. ByteDance makes the vast majority of its revenue from a mobile feed app called TouTiao and Chinese-TikTok called Douyin. It would be utterly insane if TikTok was making $5.6 billion a quarter already, but its likely not even at a tenth of that revenue yet.
Kind of interesting that the intro for the wikipedia on Conservatism in the United States [1] says "Conservative philosophy is also derived in part from ... laissez-faire economics (i.e. economic freedom and deregulation)" but that in this circumstance [2] the self-identified "conservative" group members were the most likely to support more regulation.
Hmmm iirc, and don’t take this as medical advice and do your own research/consult your doctor, but in states of ketosis in high fat diet, cholesterol rises but primarily in the form of HDL (high-density lipoprotein) while LDL (low-density lipoprotein) level drop. For heart disease, LDL is the concern as it’s floaty and thus gets stuck and accumulates in arteries, while HDL is considered more “good/harmless” as it doesn’t do that.
From a purely national interest standpoint, it's hardly surprising the US would be uninterested in negotiations given the fact it's the global digital products leader. While it's certainly true some such rules are worthwhile at the minimum tax level to stop global mega-corps avoiding taxes, like the old Double Irish loophole [1], the negotiations didn't break down over such provision, as the article mentions.
The negotiations broke down because the Europeans have failed to develop as successful a digital economy and run a large digital economic deficit with the United States. They want to levy a tax against an American import to help this trade imbalance, while claiming it doesn't amount to a trade tariff. Given the amount of economic value at stake, of course the Americans are going to view it as an unjust trade tariff and fight against it, while the Europeans will view it as a fair and justified tax for value captured in their domestic market. The global minimum tax has mutual agreement, however, so don't use that to distract or straw-man non-existent disagreement, avoiding the real and essentially intrinsically zero-sum crux of the disagreement here.
Since none of the six responses to this comment so far have the correct explanation, here you go: HN's ranking algorithm automatically heavily penalizes posts with high comment to upvote ratios, to stop presumed "flame wars". This system is imperfect and often removes interesting discussions, but they keep it in place anyways as it usually is flame warring that is suppressed. This system kicks into high gear and then progressively penalizes further as comment totals exceed upvote totals (or thereabouts).
It’s true, though, if they have a lot of manual support that could certainly hurt that, though. Or if they have a high customer acquisition cost. Excluding fixed costs if they are spending 50% per marginal user on marginal Dev/server costs, support, and customer acquisition, the numbers do start to get pretty uncomfortable. Would have to gain 50% more users to break even relative to the 3.3% cut.