jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Well.. here we have daylight saving time seven months a year, which really should mean that DST is 'normal time'.

That also mean that five months every year we have Daylight Losing Time. I want to abolish that.
> Why do "modern" societies accept these kinds of festivities, with all what is surrounding them?

The question can be widen to 'Why do "modern" society still include organized crime, poor working conditions, bribery and so on'.

The non glamorous, pragmatic answer is that these people turn to these "out of the system" groups for things that are not possible or acceptable within the official set of rules. When will we have a "modern" society where people don't try to circumvent society rules ? Well...

Actually, we could view it as hacking around morality and social rules. And we know some people will always have an itch for hacking things.
Mozilla and Google no longer have any sponsorship agreements. And I can guarantee you that to most developers in Mozilla, that agreement never gave any technical or political credence to Google and its actions.
I was not really thinking about application but the mathematics. It seems a reasonable decision to me that |a / b| = |a| / |b| and to not get results of different magnitude depending on sign changes only.
There are a few reasons I didn't pursue that — one of them that comes to mind because of having to deal with repeats - for example, let's say in round 1 you have TRIAL and in round 2 you have TRAIL. You see TR---, guess TRAIL in round one and the game marks it correct. In round 2, you see TR--- and guess TRAIL again.

I think that solution lock you experience - it's a little uncomfortable, but once you learn to wriggle your way out of it, you get that "aha" feeling I'm going for.
I've seen this and I really like it.

I think the UI is great, and love the overall direction of the product.

I know this will be hard to hear, but I want to provide my best feedback.

As a CTO, I will rarely, if ever, use a product like this that's not (at a minimum) open core.

I just can't risk building technical and business momentum around a startup that I don't know the longevity of.

I have no problem paying for software, it's business continuity that I'm concerned with.

For a great example of how to do this, I recommend checking out Mattermost. Also cal.com.

Those are two products I've selected for use in our tech stack.
https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/pe-community-tenets
I'm not deeply familiar with welfare policies, but anecdotally it sounds like much of Europe - the Scandinavian countries Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, along with others like Germany - have very generous welfare states, where I believe (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) one could basically live off of welfare indefinitely if they wanted to.

In Switzerland, apparently it's possible to work for 2 years, quit your job, then keep something like 60% of your old salary for 2 years until you find your next job. Yet this isn't something that many people actually do.

In Denmark, university students get paid a UBI.

Someone else mentioned taxation. Taxing land value would be the fairest tax and reduce the tax burden on labor, yet none of these countries really do that.
Depressing wages by importing modern strike-breakers is another issue.
Yep, two random exe, and no license is just what I saw before closing the page.
The illustrations on this landing page are beautiful!
In the case of a Galois field I think you're always intentionally reaching for the tool, you use it because of those implementation details. Making sure the struct's name clarifies that that's how the arithmetic works is appropriate.

In that case you definitely want to implement the standard Add trait, so the user can naturally write their maths. They've already opted in to the behavior with a call to Gf2::from.
I'll stop doing `brew install spectacle` and look for something else when it stops working :-)

M1 Mac, but I'm still on Big Sur. Maybe Monterey breaks it. Guess I'll find out soonish.

I'm reluctant to change a piece of software that's never given me so much as a hiccup in years of use, until I have to.
Hysterical because the entire concept is just a nightmare. Endless chain of updates like this that will force the platform to become less and less like reality.

Maybe it eventually evolves to everyone in separate pitch black and soundproof rooms sending messages in a web browser on Facebook.
I worked in public sector and was constantly bothered by the wastful.spending unaccpuntability, bull#@$ and politics. It was like a British of a fresh air to move to private sector. By comparison way more efficiently way less bull#$#@ and way less politics IMHO.

If I were to work for Meta, my sense of purpose would probably be that we help connect people around the world. Billions of people love and enjoy our product.

If I worked for Uber, I would feel pride how we've helped many people move around especially these without a lot of means.

If I worked for Amazon I'd be proud how we increase productivity across the world.

And on and on...

So for me at least it is the other way around, how can you feel purpose when you know your work can be done xN times more efficient? When you see through empty claims and politics to fight for budget.
This is the outcome of Apple's 2020 acquisition of Mobeewave.

https://www.pymnts.com/apple/2020/apple-buys-mobeewave-for-1...

It essentially turns an iOS device into a POS system.

Apple already gets 15 bps for all Apple Pay transactions. I'm curious to hear the additional monetization Apple plans to get for this.
Only up to a certain point. If you add a few pragmas before each line of code, your code is not completely illegible.

As an example, those linters that have a message for each programing style and a rule to convert between them are stupid. They might be useful as some other kind of code, but as linters they are not just useless, they are actively harmful.
I see this levelled a lot, especially by urban dwellers but I've never met this person that moved to the suburbs so they wouldn't have to see a pedestrian.

Most people I'm aware of move out because they have some innate claustrophobia, like a little more nature, want to have a garden, want to have a workshop.

Is there some low key xenophobia prevailing in the burbs? For sure. Are a lot of them bothered seeing homeless people because they're no longer used to it? For sure. Do a lot of them vote against policy that might alleviate poverty because it's easier to judge the empoverished from a distance? For sure. But I really don't think that's the fundamental motivator for people to move.

Everyone needs an Oasis. Some people find it in the stacks at the library, some in their own bedroom and some on 1/4 acres of manicured lawn and bushes.
Machine learning, AR, autonomous driving? That‘s Apple competencies that few car companies have.
If you're an end user or a small shop, you SOL when the hardware gets dropped. But a company like Google always has options. It's not like TI went out of business or stopped answering Google's phone calls out of spite. Google can totally afford to buy a source code license for the drivers and firmware, and they would realistically only be taking on a small added QA burden since they know everything works as-is with the old OS version and they know what they changed with their new OS version. If they were really serious about maintaining their product leadership, they could even hire some of the original team that wrote the drivers and firmware.
Rometty is the fall person.

Palmisano bailed when he recognized the ship was going down. She got handed the keys to the titanic. IBM has been on this collision course for a decade.

That's not to say she's executing brilliantly (or not), but I don't believe there's anything a new CEO could have done about this mess in the last few years that would have made a difference short-term. The consequences from the last 10 to 15 years of mismanagement were going to be paid for one way or another, sooner rather than later.
> See my response...

That's very interesting, and would definitely solve a lot of the problems with hot-reloading code.

>> There are many different versions of lisp, some of them are used for scripting, but most implementations of Common Lisp could be used for almost anything.

I was talking specifically talking about uses inside of production quality, high performance (e.g. AAA-quality) game engines. The only usage of lisp that I know of is inside Naughty Dog (Last of Us, Uncharted, Jak and Daxter, etc), who have used it internally for a long time. I hear they're lisp nuts, but even they don't try to write the game engine in it.

> Write version 0 in a high level language. Figure out the design and representation. Then rewrite the slow parts in a more efficient language.

For something small, retro, or 2D then maybe this could work. For anything else, this would be setting yourself up for failure.

You'll end up rewriting all or most in C or C++. This will cause you to miss deadlines and generally people will shit on your game on the internet.

Maybe it will be fast enough at this point, but odds are it won't. It will probably have the same problem as most game engines written in a high-level style, even if they're in C or C++. You'll fire up a profiler but there won't be any optimization targets. The whole program will be more or less equally slow. This is because you didn't design with memory access patterns in mind. 90% of the code will be spent waiting for memory to load during a cache miss.

Eventually, the game will be released and will struggle to hit 30fps. People will continue to shit on the game online, and that's if anybody bothers to play it.

Since you're starting now, it will probably be at least 4-5 year in the future, so even if 60fps expected by everybody yet, the oculus rift will be out, and anybody who plays your game on that will have a bad time. On the oculus, the framerate needs to be at least 90fps, or you risk inducing nausea. That means you have 9ms to update, and do two renders of the game (one for each eye), and if you can't make this target, your game isn't just slow, it's actively harmful to the users.

The only way to avoid this is to think about memory usage, access, and the cache from the very beginning. At that point, maybe you could still write it in lisp, but any benefit it would have given you is gone.

I've seen most of this first hand (on engines that were written in C++, but ignored the cache), and it really sucks.
The reason why they don't have arrest powers is because splitting up the particular duties involved in infringing liberties makes it impossible to pin it on anyone. The TSA can blame it on the locals, the locals can blame it on the TSA, and 9 times out of 10 they don't even need to find a patsy for a scapegoat.
There's a lot of cool stories hidden there. I know of one guy who is worth something like $100m. When he moved to a different town, he basically broke the school aid formula and had a dramatic impact on the schools revenue stream!
I'd like live TV from the channel selection fully integrated, not have to jump remotes, etc. I also think a single connection point should be able to not just display video and control the device, but power it too.

Perhaps at least higher output USB specs on TVs might eventually escape a separate power plug to the wall, but there's a lot of room for improvement.
Sony recently infused Epic with $250M for 1.4%

Source: https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/sony-epic-games-minority...
Bink isn't the codec, though that's good too, it's the software stack. How do you render AV1 on a PS4 or a Nintendo Switch, synchronize it with the audio stream? No, seriously, tell me.

GStreamer with its ridiculous threading architecture and lock-heavy approach? You think that's going to run on a console CPU? ffmpeg / libavcodec? Yes, we can hook that up, have it crank out YUV buffers and display those on the GPU, or we can just use Bink. Yes, it costs a ton of money, but based on when I evaluated it last, it was almost twice as fast as libvpx on our target platforms, it was well-suited for games (worked well with custom allocation strategies, didn't start a bunch of threads by itself, integrated well into our renderer), was easy to integrate, the toolchain was lovely, and when we needed help with a bug, we got an email back the same day from Jeff. RAD's support is top-notch.

Multimedia is not too big of a problem that a company like Epic can probably spend a few days integrating libvpx and opus to make a custom video solution, but big enough that most smaller studios with custom engines don't have time to spend on that, and those are the sort of problems that RAD likes to tackle.
That is not really the case in any meaningful way. I mean until just now they did not control the cpu or gpu on their laptops and desktops.
Here are some examples of our flashcards for Spanish: https://deckmill.com/decks/es

A little of backstory about this project: my co-founder and I are big fans of Anki, which is an awesome flashcard software and a really effective tool for language learning.

However, it's hard to find quality decks online. There are some apps with good flashcards, but they tend to be expensive. You certainly can make your own, but that's really time consuming. That's why we decided to build Deckmill, a repository of high quality, but affordable flashcards.

For those are interested in the tech, this is how we did it:
1. Used a mix of ML + hand curation to select 3000 sentences from tatoeba.org (a massive dataset)
2. Then machine translation to translate the sentences
3. Then we had native speakers review the translations
4. Wavenet to generate audio
5. genanki to put together the cards
Exactly. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Salesforce, YouTube are all led by these MBAs and seem to be doing just fine.
Stimulants can essentially directly increase your intelligence for a time. You think faster, answers can just pop into your head faster, you can code faster. Laser focus, a sense of unlimited capability, too. A more realistic version of the movie "Limitless".

They don't seem to help with creativity, and can do the opposite. It's easy to get concentrated on the wrong thing. I knew a PHP dev on pro vigil long term, and when he'd take an extra dose of stims, you could tell. A flurry of good idea emails in the morning, then disappeared into his office all day.

But... One time, he spent all day trying to optimize the platform for TLB misses. From PHP code, that made a MySQL call every ten lines. Without the hyper focus and drive of stims, no way anyone would waste a day chasing down such crazy thing. (What annoyed me even more was that this useless but "hard" work received a lot of respect from people that understood less...)

So simulants are best taken when one has a clear idea of what to work on and can get into that work right away. In many cases, I think they're a win, and for thought focused work, like students, mathematicians, programmers, simulants should be more widely available legally. Why should we not want most of the population to have performance enhancing medication? As you note, the state is well aware of the effectiveness.

Also note that stimulants can cause psychosis over time, so there is some risk in having everyone use them all the time. But a measured use, like an afterburner, seems like a good thing to have available.
Be sure to check out the videos of it in use [1] and the Lisp to GLSL translator [2].

[1] http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2VAYZE_4wRKKr5pJzfYD1...

[2] https://github.com/cbaggers/varjo
I think it's useful to point out that, much like with any other written language, there are two collaborative processes at play here--reading for understanding, and proofreading/editing. As someone who has a lot of 'detail' trouble (I miss a lot of detail in day-to-day life), but who is also a writer, editor and programmer--there's most-certainly a lot of room for improvement. I'll talk about writing for a bit before I bring this back to programming.

Many writers have a miserable time proofreading their own work--and it's this way because they already have a strong mental model of what they wrote. When our brain already has a strong model, it can hide a lot of detail from us. It's really just trying to help free our attention for _new_ detail, but in cases like this it causes problems. I suspect you're having trouble finding these minor issues in your own code, and I also suspect you'd find them more readily in code you aren't familiar with (if you're proficient at reading code you didn't write--itself a muscle that must be developed.)

My perception is that the biggest component of developing the ability to proofread my own writing was learning to edit other people's writing in a very exacting manner. Other people write differently than you do; when you edit them in an exacting manner, you're strengthening processes for applying arbitrary rules, deciding which arbitrary rules are worth enforcing, and building your own sense of style. When you just do this to yourself, it can take longer for you to develop strong opinions, because you aren't forced to encounter all of the mistakes and tics other writers make. Getting pissed off at all of the annoying shit other writers do will provide both the eye and motivation to attack your own writing with a scalpel. Learning to admire perfect pacing, metaphors, structure and word-choice will slowly prepare you to realize when you fall short. From there, it can help to apply what you've learned to older writing that you're less familiar with; the gap you need to read yourself clearly will shrink.

In programming, I think the most succinct analog to this process is refactoring other people's code (note: I didn't say rewrite. Avoid that temptation.) Likewise, it's also really useful to refactor your own code once it has become unfamiliar; you'll both realize how you've grown, and identify some of your own annoying tendencies. When you invest time in activities like this, you're building strong models of where things should be, and how they should be done. You'll cope with common problems, and develop a sense of how code can be written to make those mistakes harder to make in the first place, and easier to spot when you do.

I realize I haven't said a word about finding stray semicolons or an errant bracket, yet, but my point is: there are classes of mistake that are much easier to find when you're reading like an editor than when you're reading like a programmer.
Men take less paternity leave on average than women take maternity leave.

Not to mention that in the case of single births, you'll end up with the women taking maternity leave while the men don't. And with marriage stats the way they are...

Which means that it's still advantageous for the company to hire men over women. Amortizing costs doesn't magically make the cost go away, it just hides it.
Some of the largest manufacturers of LSD made it in pills.
"...but it's society as a whole causing this rather than government(s) specifically"

It sounds like you are claiming that state surveillance is actually a subset of social pressure surrounding what's socially acceptable behavior. You claim the latter to be a bigger and more serious problem. Perhaps you did not mean to claim that, but that is how it sounds.

Socially acceptable behavior is always changing as generations come and go.

For everyone's well-being, governments must always trend away from oppression, not toward.

Whatever you think about equality issues, surely we can agree that these things are not really the same, and government oppression certainly is not a subset of social norm issues.
Shriram Krishnamurthi (author of PLAI http://www.cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Books/ProgLangs/) recently suggested one: http://shriram.github.com/p4p/

I've been meaning to go through it in detail, but to be honest I really like s-expressions, really really. I'd even say the regularity of syntax is one of lisp's greatest features (even Clojure's [] and {} literals are going too far for my taste...)
I hear you but I also want to elaborate a little.

I got the impression from your post that you made a commitment to your new employer that you're going to start on a particular date. And your old employer wanted you to break that commitment because they had some deadlines of their own to meet.

At this point you if stay longer at your old job, you're inconveniencing two entities: (a) yourself because you're not going to look professional to your new employer if you make a commitment (or even give the impression of a commitment) to join at a particular time and then not deliver, and (b) your new employer because they may have made certain plans based on your availability.

In theory, it's possible that the work you were going to do at your old place is so important that this situation could result in a net positive even if you broke the commitment you made, but I think it's unlikely. And in any case, even if your old employer really really really wanted you around, they need to compensate the new place too, not just you!

The way I would've dealt with this would be to tell my boss something like this: "I can't stay longer because I've made a commitment to the new company and they have made plans based on my availability. However, if you think that having me around is very crucial, let's bring them into the loop as well and we can work out some terms under which you can compensate them and me for being more flexible in my leaving dates."

At this point, my guess is that a scumbag will backpedal because any stunt they pull will now be documented by multiple people.
Is it the ability to be on the street year round? Maybe the more comfortable you are living outside, the more likely to use it as a bathroom. Colder climates force the homeless to use shelters and similar resources during winter months.
That's because, unlike other countries, the US Supreme Court doesn't define speech that calls for imminent violence upon a person or group as "hate speech".

That specific type of imminent danger speech and it's expression are not protected by first amendment rights. It's right there in your Brandenbug v. Ohio.
My bad, off by about 15000 years

(sorry, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17776 . The bulb is a critical part of the plot!)
Gemini man is a better example of where this is heading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5y4kxhZIBA

A DF has a pretty specific meaning if you are diving into the technical aspects. It's an approach that has a lot of specific limitations that put a practical ceiling on how good it can be. For example, it's a 2D system that won't capture lighting differences with good accuracy. The limitations become more apparent as resolution increases.

Newer systems use source material to generate 3D facial models. The face in the target video is also 'motion captured.' The target video's lighting is estimated and a resulting face image is rendered and composited into the target. That's a lot closer to the pipeline of movies such as Gemini man.

So while DF isn't a technique used in movies, machine learning is heavily involved. It's built into model generation, motion capture, animation, etc. Artists will start with captured/generated assets and hand-tweak them to get the desired result.
Thanks a lot for the feedback, I appreciate it and I'll try to follow some of your suggestions.

Btw. you can quickly type labels by just typing @ :)
Can we call it what it is? A corporation is banning the president, not a software platform .
123 because, well, it's in order. And Maple street because there's one in almost every town in America. One could also use 1st St, Main St, Oak St, etc. Maple has a nice ring.
Truth? I'm not sure how anyone can characterize the statement "proprietary software is evil" as "truth." It's merely an opinion, and a very minority opinion at that.