HN user
Precisely. In this world view, A Java programmer would also be confused with Scala, which is a JVM language.
(Or I guess you could write Scala in a non-functional, Java-y way, but that would defeat the purpose of using Scala...).
A. It was a joke.
B. What about Scala? Would you say Scala is a "good fit" for people leaving Java because it's also built on top of the JVM? Or would it be a "bad fit" because the idioms and functional-nature of Scala are vastly different than Java? Or how about Kotlin?
I'm not thinking about "successor" in terms of "Java-specific" design patterns. I'm thinking successor in terms of - can Rust, with concurrency as a first-class-citizen and C-like perf with a safer programming model, replace Java for many of the "higher-level" applications that would've typically been written in Java?
... and thus out of the ashes rose Rust lang...
For this precise reason, I've stopped buying things like baby food, baby toiletries, skin lotion, etc. from Amazon. I now purchase direct from the respective online store, or sites like walmart.com/target.com
Furthermore, this kind of stuff always makes me wonder if/when other genus will eventually evolve into "intelligent" beings (with "intelligent" being loosely defined).
The Homo genus evolved around ~2-3 million years ago; homo sapiens came about ~250K years ago. What's not to say that 2 to 3 million years from now, there'll be some other intelligent species from other genus branches? It always tickles my brain to think about this.
Also relevant: https://io9.gizmodo.com/5780020/if-humanity-went-extinct-wha...
lol
Anyone use the Eisenhower Matrix? A few really productive people I know seem to use it to great effect. Was wondering if anyone here has any tips with their experiences.
This comment reminds me of "the banality of evil" concept.
src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem#The_bana...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entire_History_of_You
Just sayin... :)
It's only fitting that the other trending piece on hacker news right now is this one -> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16652952
I don't think the Atlantic piece is suggesting that at all. The article is making the point that the delicate power balances behind the Chinese Communist Party is very complex, and that the soundbites we hear from our Western media (or any media for that matter) probably do not capture the full extent of the power dynamics, wheeling and dealing, and inner workings of the Chinese Communist Party.
Exactly.
Check this article out: "Xi Jinping May Be Less Powerful Than He Seems" ( https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/04/xi... )
The fact of the matter is that the outside world knows very little about the inner workings at the top of the Communist Party in China.
A great summary of the Dark Forest theory without giving away too much of the plot. This trilogy is one of the best books/stories I've ever read.
Props to Business Insider for writing this piece. I like to call them the "TMZ of Business News" - but once in a while they do very good reporting/pieces like this.
Of course it's hard to say if they completely, 100% invented anything from scratch. But they sure did "pioneer" a lot of unique practices that other software companies were not following at the time.
A specific example - the practice of keeping the entire codebase at the company under a single "source" repo. Pre-Google - it would've been considered outrageous to have the entire codebase of a sophisticated software company keep their entire software contents under a single repo. But Google did it, and other companies have followed suit successfully (as Google DNA has leaked to other companies).
Yes, of course keeping code in a single repo is not a "new invention". Linux is a single repo; many smaller companies have only a single repo because their only product is a single web app. Google keeps nearly 100% of their entire codebase in a single repo - and that was definitely a novel approach at the time.
Mostly just stuff any competent company would/should be doing. it's google though, so they act like it's super awesome.
Yes, you're absolutely correct. But here's the thing - it was actually Google that pioneered many of this. Many of the big/competent companies that are following these practices are because of Google's "DNA" leaking into those companies (via former employees bringing along the best practices learned at Google, etc.)
plastics and phthalates used to manufacture plastics -
* https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/undergoing-fertil...
* https://toxtown.nlm.nih.gov/text_version/chemicals.php?id=24
* https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/feb/10/phthala...
video here: https://twitter.com/i/moments/750914733155373056
This is also one of the reasons why Japan the Country has historically supported Judo more so than Karate (support via the Japanese government to promote it internationally, to the Olympics, etc).
Most linguists have historically categorized the Japonic languages and the Korean language as isolates. But, even though the technical elements between the two languages may bear no relationship with each other, the phonetic similarities between the two languages are pretty interesting. Also, at times, the grammatical features and structures between Japanese and Korean are more similar to each other than Japanese is to Chinese or Korean is to Chinese (e.g. Japanese and Korean are SOV word order [1] languages whereas Chinese is an SVO word order [2] language).
Of course, there's debate as to whether these similarities between the Japanese and Korean languages are a result of language convergence or divergence. But considering how close the two countries are (historically and geographically), it's probably a mix of both.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject%E2%80%93object%E2%80%93...
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject%E2%80%93verb%E2%80%93ob...
What else did he say?
>I think the article you linked actually gives ammunition to my claim that as time passes and memories fade with them, reunification is becoming less popular.
Yes, that article is stating that the trend amongst younger Koreans is moving away from reunification, but that's actually been an established fact for the past couple years now. If you read the article carefully, the trend was newsworthy at the time because reunification used to be a nearly unanimous sentiment in Korea, whereas now it is merely a majority sentiment.
I wasn't refuting your statement about the trend amongst the younger generation. I was refuting your generalization that the entire younger generation doesn't want reunification. It is much more complex than that, and there is still a sizable number of younger Koreans that still do want reunification. Nationalism in Korean culture is strong and Korean nationalism usually entails a reunification aspect of it.
It is also true that the primary concerns voiced by the opposition groups to reunification is economical, and they have been very vocal about it in recent years. But being vocal doesn't mean that it is representative of an entire demographic (e.g. squeaky wheel gets the grease).
>So, I what I was pointing to was the fact that while a lot of us in the west seem to think reunification is the end goal, a significant number of Koreans, the actual people who we are discussing, do not favor it.
There is a disconnect between what the Western media portrays to its Western audience about Korean reunification and the actions and goals of the Western governments. Yes, the average US citizen might assume that the US wants Korean reunification, but the State Department and the many other various US foreign policy groups can have very different goals and strategies. First and foremost, the US will always care most about stability in the region - if maintaining the status quo means stability (i.e stability without reunification), then so be it. Furthermore, the US's current priority in Korea is denuclearization of the peninsula. Denuclearization is only tangentially related with reunification, and the strategies for denuclearization do not necessarily require reunification.[1]
>It's ironic that in SK itself, people were much more interested in their pop culture, their daily lives
It isn't ironic at all, if you look at the history. The cycle of escalation/de-escalation by North Korea is so obvious now that most South Koreans don't even bat an eye with each provocation. Once in a while, an unfortunate event happens where there are some casualties, but most South Koreans know and believe that it won't escalate any further because an all out war would be disastrous to both sides. If you do a quick news search of North Korean provocations, there is a similar pattern since the mid-90s after Kim Jong-Il came in to power. Here's a headline [2] from 1999 that sounds like it could also be from 2002 or 2004 or 2009 or today.
I quote Dr. Jim Walsh, "I think we're just going to see more of the same, and we've been in this cycle a long time now, where we have provocation, followed by resolutions and naval exercises, military drills, and around and around it goes."[3]
It's been like this for over 20 years. The reason why it makes the news every time is because this cycle is not sustainable and will collapse one day. We just don't know when.
Actually, if you're really curious about the North Korean situation, Dr. Jim Walsh is an excellent person to start with. He's an American scholar with very good insights about the region (as well as foreign policy security, etc.)
Also, if you really want your mind blown, check out this photographer's project.[4] Yes, a lot of the craziness you hear about North Korea is true, and there is a lot of propaganda and suffering. But it's not all doom and gloom. I believe that once we stop looking at North Korea as the "other side" and start looking at them as people, we can start effectively engaging them.
[1] http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Korean_P...
[2] http://web.archive.org/web/20041028203647/http://www.cnn.com...
[3] http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/04/22/north-korea-nuclear
[4] http://iamkoream.com/photographer-aram-pan-presents-a-differ...
Not just the South, but China too. North Korean refugees are already a concern for China.[1] If the economy or the government collapses in North Korea, it's not hard to imagine chaos spilling over in to both countries.
You're conflating your Korean friends with the entire younger generation of South Korea. That's like saying all Americans supported the Iraq War because Bush was elected twice, or that all Russians support invading Ukraine.
Yes, the trend amongst the younger generation disfavors unification, but a sizable percentage of the younger generation still supports unification (49% of twenty-somethings in 2010 [1]).
Domestic sentiments inside South Korea are very complex (as is with any country). For example, some South Koreans strongly oppose the US military presence in the peninsula, while others greatly support it (and others simply don't care). Contemporary South Korean culture is very unique, and concepts of nationalism are very strong across the age demographics. But even the various forms of nationalism that exists is complex.
>It seems like the rest of the world wants them to reunite, but they don't want to.
This simple statement is simply not true. Or at best, it's incomplete. Once again, the region's relationships are very complex, and the desires of the various actors don't necessarily indicate a want for unification. US-China relations, US-Japan relations, Japan-Korea relations, Korea-China relations, etc. all have its nuances that make Korean unification a tricky event. It's hard to say that any one actor truly "wants" unification when they're all looking out for their self-interest (China doesn't want any more US military and influence in the region, US wants stability and prioritizes de-nuclearization of the peninsula, Japan's strategies are conflicting within their own domestic ranks, etc.)
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/27/south-north-kor...
Are you kidding me? Not "interesting" ideas?
Even the nanoparticles are mundane and not much more of an extension of the work that's been going on since the 90s on bio-chips for detection.
Using antibodies and tailored cancer treatment is still a reactive treatment. As the article states, the Google X Labs is aiming for "constant monitoring" of your body with these nanoparticles - hence creating a "proactive" ability to constantly monitor your body of potential issues. If achievable, that's pretty remarkable.
In comparison, Elon Musk seems like the true visionary.
Both Page and Musk are visionaries. The logic you use to criticize Page's "mundane" ideas can be equally applied to Musk - serious attempts at modern electric cars have been around since the 90s [1][2], and space travel has been around since the 60s. Your logic would dictate that Musk is merely extending the work in those fields.
Your criticism of Page's "moon shot" ideas not being world-changing/interesting greatly misses the point.
Page and Musk have different areas of strengths, but I don't think you can call one of them a "true visionary" compared to the other. They've already both proven to be incredibly prescient on more than occasion.
As for self-aware AI, we're a long ways away from that. Neither Page nor Musk nor anyone else is remotely close to self-aware AI.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC_Propulsion_tzero
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
It's a 2BR 2BA at about 1000 sq ft.
Yes, I agree that Homejoy's scheduling and billing experience is very nice.
I've been using different cleaners every time because of my experiences. But maybe next time, I should try sticking with just one. That way, the cleaner and I can start to build a relationship and they can get to know our apartment better. Then, maybe we can have a better overall experience.
I think we're in the midst of something like the "Industrial Revolution", but can't quite see it yet. Only in hindsight, once the dust settles, will we be able to make sense of what's happening and changing. We're entering a new kind of economy at a macro scale that the world has not quite witnessed before.
But the changes are happening around us, and I think this "independent contractor" model will be a big force during this new "industrial revolution." Companies, empowered by technology, are trying to become more cost efficient, and in a short-sighted way, the single largest cost sheet for any company are its employees.
Personally, I think Capitalism as we know it will reach its limits once technology reaches a certain threshold of efficiency; we just don't need as many people working the same amount of hours anymore.[1] (isn't that the very definition of efficiency?) Then we as a society will need to figure out another way to live (new-style of feudalism? welfare state?). But until that new model comes in to play, and we're in the middle of this new "industrial revolution", the contractor model will be set to dominate.
[1] http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/515926/how-tec...
"What’s more, to maintain its relationship with employees as independent contractors, the company can’t train them or provide much in the way of material assistance."
My wife and I have been using Homejoy for the past several months now, and I'm never satisfied with the results. After every cleaning, I tell myself that I'm going to look for a real cleaning service company next time. But then the low prices keep me coming back to Homejoy.
I've found the quality of service from the Homejoy cleaners to be insufficient. Every time it's always a different problem (I try to schedule cleanings when I'm home). One cleaner spent a disproportionate amount of time cleaning the toilet, and then didn't have time to clean the bathtub (I ended up scrubbing the bathtub myself after the cleaner left). Another time, the cleaners forget to dust off the TV stand, and I had to do it myself. I've had to clean or re-clean something myself about 80% of the time I've used Homejoy.
My complaints may sound insensitive, and fall under the category of "first-world problems", but when both my spouse and I are working long hours, hiring cleaning services can become very helpful (it's a common anecdote that hiring a housekeeper can save your marriage).
As the article states, my suspicion is that in this "independent contractor" model, Homejoy does not adequately train its contractors in cleaning, nor are the contractors they hire experienced in the cleaning industry. I remember reading that Homejoy used to put their contractors through an orientation/training program, but it's obviously not enough.
I've used other housekeeping services from real cleaning companies before, and they've always done an amazing job, especially compared to Homejoy. They're just usually two to three times more expensive. But maybe next time I'll really switch back to a real cleaning service (or at least try to find a city-single independent on craigslist).
Generating awareness is the first step to take in helping solve this issue (and a very difficult step at that). Good for Yao Ming!