thanhhaimai

I'm not sure I can agree with this. I have 2 EVs, and the tire looks almost brand new after like 10k miles. I think the driving habits matter more than whether the car is EV or not.

In case you're serious about the question, the answer is a yes.

Emphasis mine.

> Seventy-five percent of the prisoners in U.S. Marshals custody are detained in state, local and _private_ facilities; the remainder are housed in Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) facilities.

https://www.usmarshals.gov/what-we-do/prisoners/operation/cu...

Here is another source:

> The U.S. Marshals Service detains about 60,000 people a day who are awaiting federal trial or sentencing. While it doesn't operate jails, it does partner with public and private detention facilities. The service assesses detention conditions at these facilities.

> We found shortcomings in its oversight. For example, many deputies who reviewed state and local facilities hadn't received required training. Additionally, some facilities didn't meet some standards for 3 years in a row, including food safety standards.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106348

I think you overestimate how rich the bottom 70% of the world is.

The bottom 70% of the world's population would have less than $X00 in the bank, and wouldn't have much control over their lifestyle.

High Frequency Trading is one.

The only reason for me to ever boot into Windows is for gaming. As more and more games support SteamOS, it's increasingly tempting to just drop Windows altogether.

The status page is green, but there are outages reported: https://downdetector.com/status/google-cloud/

Another concept comes to mind: Identity Theft.

It's a crime from a criminal to scam the bank. Instead of the bank being held accountable for mistaking the identity (or don't do enough due diligent), the concept shifts the blame to the account owner, saying it's their fault for having their identity "stolen", despite them was not involved in the scam process.

For solo works, the terseness might work, but usually only in short term. Code I wrote 6 months ago looks like someone else's code. For team work, I'd prefer to be explicit if possible. It saves both my teammates' time and my time (when I eventually forget my own code 6 months from now).

> Your pessimism doesn't seem to be based on any kind of facts, unless I'm missing something here

Yes, the slow ramp of anti Wikipedia rhetoric is a documented fact, in both Russia and the USA: https://gizmodo.com/trump-doj-threatens-wikipedias-nonprofit...

It refers to this: https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/musks-xai-buys-social-...

> "xAI and X's futures are intertwined," Musk, who also heads automaker Tesla and SpaceX, wrote in a post on X: "Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent."

This move makes it more likely that the internal number for TSLA is not good, and Elon is expecting the price to go down.

He has access to the real revenue number. If it's going well, he wouldn't have to perform this maneuver. xAI was relatively separated from X and TSLA, and wasn't having the backlashes associated with the two. Now he risks having the xAI branding tarnished too. He wouldn't do this unless the TSLA internal numbers are bad and he has to protect himself first, at the cost of xAI brand.

> For one, that all bad things are actually good is not a tenet of Christianity and is not in the Bible

Just for my own learning, if it's not considered a tenet, why do I see this line of thought so often portrayed: "This <bad thing> is not bad. God made is so to test my faith."

Your source shows the "Market Share Worldwide". I don't see it shows the "Default Browser Worldwide".

AFAIK, in the US, the default for:

- Windows: Edge

- Mac: Safari

- Ubuntu: Firefox

I think the claim that "Google just pays PC makers to make Chrome the default browser" needs a clear source.

This is where I hope HN has a downvote option. This is not erroneous to the point I want to flag, but the quality is low enough that I want to counteract the upvotes. This is akin to spam in my opinion.

> Third, in developing our reasoning models, we’ve optimized somewhat less for math and computer science competition problems, and instead shifted focus towards real-world tasks that better reflect how businesses actually use LLMs.

Company: we find that optimizing for LeetCode level programming is not a good use of resources, and we should be training AI less on competition problems.

Also Company: we hire SWEs based on how much time they trained themselves on LeetCode

/joke of course

No worries at all! If the site is open sourced, I can help update the translation text.

Thanks for the site, and keep up the great work!

This is such a great collection!

However, many of the translations are incorrect. For example:

This text:

> Dưới ngọn cờ quang vinh của đảng, nhân dân Nghệ-An Xô Viết anh hùng

Is incorrectly translated as:

> Under the glorious flag of the Vietnamese Communist Party, the people of Nghe An will crush their American enemies.

But it should be:

> Under the glorious flag of the [Vietnamese Communist] Party, the people of Nghe An are Soviet heroes.

There was no mention of "crush their American enemies" at all.

I would exercise caution and encourage the readers to double check the translation.

Edit: after reading more of the page, I changed my post from "some incorrect" to "many incorrect"

> Think about it - if these formations were not leakproof on geological scale, there wouldn't be any oil and gas for us to extract in the first place.

This is survivor bias. We only see the sites where it didn't leak too much, and extract from it. The sites that leaked, we don't hear about them (no oil to extract). In fact, a quick search shows that there are many leaking sites (both on land and under the oceans). The argument you present is a case of survivor bias, especially on the time scale of multiple millions years.

The question becomes: Is this crime pardonable? If yes, how likely the current administration will pardon those people?

I'm curious what is the percentage of the population that prefers 3000k warm light. I personally disliked it. My mind constantly notices the distortion in color accuracy, and it's an unpleasant feeling. My preference is 5000k "day" light.

> The orthography may be inconsistently phonetic, as is the case with English spelling, or highly consistent, such as the Korean Hangul system. No writing system is perfectly phonetic. But phonetic systems enable the native speaker, with just a few dozen symbols, to reliably write whatever they can speak, and read out loud anything they can read.

I'm not sure if the author has studied Vietnamese. I'm a native Vietnamese, and I believe the language is perfectly phonetic.

If I hear a word, I can write it. If I see a word, I can pronounce it, regardless of whether I understand the meaning.

It's interesting that among the 4 countries (China/Japan/Korea/Vietnam), it's the only one that completely reinvented the language into Latin based. I think that refactor addressed the phonetic issue well enough. When I was there, there was also no TV program for "spelling bees" or something like that. Even a third grader could read/write almost any word (even when they don't understand the text yet)

Edit: adding to this original post to reply a common theme people brought up in multiple posts.

I think bringing up dialects and provincial accents is not convincing. There is one official way "gia đình" should be pronounced. It's taught in school, even in the South. Pronouncing it as "da đình" can still be understood, and it doesn't retract from the point that the language is phonetic.

In other words, assuming I know nothing about the meaning of the word, if I hear "da đình" I can correctly write down it as so. I wouldn't know that in Saigon that also means "gia đình". But I definitely can write it down exactly.

I don't think using provincial speaking accent is a good line of argument here. Otherwise, no language in the world can satisfy the phonetic requirements. Any group of people can have different accents, different tones, different sound length and pauses.

These are a lot of extraordinary claims. I would love to learn more about the evidence and what make you think this way. There are many successful companies that built scalable services with golang, so the burden of proof for the above claims are high.

> There is a lot of jargon and you do have to sit down and learn how things work, but once you do, deep learning is fairly simple.

This is my realization too. I think ML for SWE courses should focus on "translation" first. Like by "kernel" they mean this specific thing, not the normal meaning of kernel. This is similar to other fields like finance (which I'm working on). After you learn the language, it's actually not too terrible to understand.

> but also need to test the rules and see if they are really as important as everyone says.

Thank you.

Then I don't quite agree with the article on this. I don't need to "test the rules" myself to see if they are ready as important as everyone says. I can observe.

For example: I don't need to drive without a seatbelt to "test" whether seatbelt is as important as everyone says. I can observe that people without seatbelt have worse outcomes from accidents.

I think this might also be related to whether the kid grow up with parents they can trust and are able to explain the reasons behind "rules" to them. I was fortunate that my parents always tried their best to explain why I should or should not do something. I questioned them a lot, but defaulted to "trust" when they didnt have time to explain.

> Along a similar line, I’ve heard it say that if you consider yourself a peaceful person but are not actually capable of great violence, then are you actually peaceful or simply harmless?

Why not both peaceful and harmless (for the moment)? This is a function of time. I don't think it's possible to make that statement without supplying the time parameter.

Also, I don't think peaceful people are not capable of great violence. It's about choice. I'm capable of violence, but I choose to not use that capability.

I tried reading this, but for some reason I can't connect with it. The ideas that the author wrote seems very foreign to me (born and raised in Asia).

For example, this doesn't ring a bell :

> You thought that doing this – taking drugs, lying to your best friend – would give you the life you wanted; and then it doesn’t

Or this:

> You have to be bad in order to discover what kind of good you want to be (or are able to be).

To me, what was considered "good" was clearly laid out by parents and schools. I think it's the same here in the US: a large portion of the population follow the definition of "good" from their parents and churches (a bit less so from schools)

I would love to have some help to understand the article's viewpoint better.

Layoff should be done with a large cut, but one round. If done right, it gives people the motivation to turn things around. Multiple rounds of layoff in a short amount of time (multiple rounds per year for example) gives the signal that the management can't figure out what is needed to turn the company around. At that time, your bests and brightests will leave.

> in which case either the device is placed in "child safe" mode, or printed instructions are directly provided giving instructions to do such

It's not hard to imagine a jailbreak showing up shortly to defeat it. Even Apple can't prevent jail breaking for their devices. I think it's unreasonable to expect other consumer devices manufacturers to win a game of cats and mouses like that.

Requiring legislations on this is even worse. It will serve as a regulatory capture for big corps that can afford to invest on security.

> In the tax filing years 2020 and 2021, the average gross income of taxpayers who had moved from California to another state was about $137,000

Let's assume it's $150k for 2023 (high)

> What’s different is that in each of the prior two years, more than 250,000 Californians with at least a bachelor’s degree moved out, while an average of 175,000 college graduates from other states settled in California

That's 75k net loss, assuming 100% employment (high)

> In California, the top tax rate for personal income is 12.3%.

Assuming all loss income was at the highest bracket (high), the total loss in tax revenue: 75k * $150k * 0.123 = $1.38B

Realistically, the number could be lower because the calculation above is conservative.

> State budget analysts recently projected a record $68-billion deficit in the next fiscal year because of a 25% drop in personal income tax collection in 2023.

That's $1.38B vs $68B

I think we all agree that California has lost population, but I feel like the article is manipulating statistics to drive a misleading narrative. The deficit is real and needs addressing. It's more likely due to income dropping (lower salary due to lay off, lower realized capital gains, lower passive income, etc), rather than the "wealthiest" are leaving the state.