Why not work to become a billionaire, then donate your wealth? Or begin donating your earnings today? I would guess most people on Hacker News are in the upper decile of wealth globally — there are still billions of people living poverty. Feels like a fairer way to help people than trying to do it with other people’s wealth — the latter feels like hypocrisy.
Warren Buffett. Berkshire Hathaway has over $300B in cash reserves, Buffett owns 15% of Berkshire and directs investments — he chose to park all that value in cash reserves, roughly $50B of that is his share.
I’ve used [email protected] for the last 10 years or so. There have been probably a half dozen web forms where a regex expected 2-3 characters and I input an old gmail account that forwards to this address. Over the phone, the first@last part is easier to communicate since customer rep generally has the name info already. The .name throws them for a moment, but I’ve had one or two even tell me “oh, that’s cool, how did you do that?” which feels nice. It wasn’t my first choice, lastname.com was taken, but I like the precision of .name, arguably the most accurate TLD for a personal email address.
You earn gross income with your labor, on which you pay tax. The net is used to pay Jiffy Lube, which pays employer taxes on the mechanic’s labor, and passes that cost onto you, the customer. If you do your own labor for yourself, pay neither.
I think there’s a common misunderstanding that with IPv6 anyone can connect to anyone else. That’s not true.
My laptop has an IPv6 address, as does the router that routes its traffic. There’s no NAT, that’s true, but there’s still a firewall — only inbound packets from a destination host and port that have been sent to are allowed in. And in enterprise environments, from what I’ve seen, there’s a symmetric NAT on IPv6 anyway — packet comes from a different IPv6 address and randomized port than the one client sent it from, making peer connectivity impossible, as the source port varies by destination host and port.
I suspect one is masking that a call center is in a low wage country, e.g. make customer in U.S. believe they’re talking to someone in U.S. while paying a fraction of the U.S. wage.
It’s interesting, the grass is perhaps greener on the other side. My wife is planning on staying home with the kids when we have our second, and there’s a part of me that envy’s that freedom from worry on having to provide, being able to spend hours with our daughter while I may get a couple hours a night, our daughter is much closer to her mom already. In twenty years, the software I’ve written will likely have been long replaced — the bond invested in our children will be there forever.
Company has recurring expenses to keep your cloud-connected device running. They need recurring revenue to cover those costs. Depending on one-time revenue from the sale of new devices to cover the recurring expenses of existing devices is a pyramid scheme, no?
I have an IoT graveyard of devices from companies that did not charge a monthly fee and went under (Edyn garden sensor, Automatic car monitor, etc).
Organized by an employer, capital, and management. The orchestration, decision making, done well, is the difference between a highly valuable well functioning company, and dysfunctional paralysis. There are now multiple examples in history (pre-1989 Poland, Soviet Union, DPRK, etc.) that show the communal ownership of industry by labor does not create a high standard of living, enabled by plentiful goods, services, and innovation.
So that various sets of ideas can be tried as experiments. Also, so that groups of people with different values and ideas can live in their own worlds and not have to reach consensus on everything. I believe a lot of the division in the country could be solved by returning more decisions to state and local levels. Only centralize what the constitution requires.
As a DIYer, I like this. But why does this need legislation? If enough DIYers want this, wouldn’t they vote with their dollars and not buy unrepairable products?
From the article: “To get a TRULY random number sequence, you'd need to rely upon some truly random phenomenon, like the decay of a radioactive isotope.”
How is the true randomness of a physical phenomenon proved? Perhaps naively, I imagine that as an arithmetic-based software RNG is deterministic, so is a physical RNG, as otherwise the underlying physical process would be governed by no physical principals, no? Does random in this case not necessarily mean non-deterministic, but rather no statistically visible correlations?
The metrics for websites are flawed. For instance, time-on-site. If a user spends more time on a site before clicking back, maybe that site is more useful. Or maybe that site has made it purposely difficult to find the key information, such as recipe websites that place lots of unnecessary text and ads before to actual recipe. But that strategy gets the site better search engine rankings, which in turn ranks them higher and drives more traffic, which drives more ad revenue.
When I encounter a site where the first thing I see is a pop up to subscribe, or prompt about opting out of cookies, or 60 second ad to watch a 30 second video, I just leave the site.
The main benefit I’ve seen with more experience is being able to find better solutions to complex problems more quickly. Essentially, knowing the right way to do things up front rather than figuring it out as you go.
Often there are many design goals (eg low cost, low complexity, time to build, seamless integration with X, performance, memory and/or code footprint (particularly in embedded), compatibility with standard X, extensibility, futureproofing, etc). Tetrising all the pieces is probably NP hard — experience is akin to knowing the solution already, or something similar.