skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure why you want to twist this in to something else.

> Instead, you have to point to supposedly evil motives behind putting the PATENT file there

No where do I imply FB has evil motives for instituting the patent clause, nor do I hold FB to account for putting it there, I don't even dispute in any particular way that it deters patent litigation (at least not for FB), nor do I speculate FB will use the clause offensively. It's their choice and it's reasonable from their point of view. It's a big corporation doing things in a big corporation way.

> perform a character assassination

I think you've assassinated my above comment. What I've stated here about FB is not unreasonable or unfair. It's very odd that you would feel the need to defend a corporation as if you are describing a person (character assassination?). Tell me what is factually incorrect about the way I've described FB here? It matters what effect this corporation has on the wider ecosystem. Corporations of that nature behave in a way to maximize their own interests. This is not a commentary on its developers or even their legal team, it's just acknowledging FB for what it is.

> we want GPL, react’s license is not GPL (“In WP we take no exceptions to GPL compliance”)

It's rather ironic that you took issue to my earlier comment calling out an ignorant and arrogant notion, then make several of your own. The assumption that this is about being hard line about one variation of an OSS license obscures the fundamental objections here (why leave out the fact that I referred to "compatibility", which many licenses are). I have no special affinity for GPL, nor do most others in WP. It's a license that conveys certain freedoms and levels the playing field, this is all I care about.

The 'no exceptions' is a simple first principle in play in the WP ecosystem that acknowledges that all parties should be party to the same conditions in order the obtain the maximal benefit for all users. The WP community has been fairly aggressive in doing that and it has paid off in a big way. Over time there's been some push back from some individual companies wanting to license things in their own more restrictive way (thereby taking away freedoms from other users). Some businesses were resistant about that thinking it would undermine profits, but this has proven to be false. In fact very few companies operating in the WP space use complicated licenses even where it is perfectly kosher (a split license on CSS is fine but hardly used by theme developers for example). This has done great things for the ecosystem, almost all themes & plugins and apps have a simple to understand license that provides great freedoms - everybody benefits.

This is a nuance that might not be grasped when people are just looking at the patent clause in a vacuum, but the way we've pressured compliance has been possible on the basis that no company is a special snowflake, everybody gets to play by the same rules. Putting React in core dents our ability to reason on that basis (this not a unanimous opinion but lack of unanimity to the contrary undermines WP reputation on this issue irregardless).
Not OP, but I understand the OPs use of patriarchy as to mean a hierarchical power structure which justifies itself with the claim of protecting the weak, but in the end is just a repressive hierarchy.
Agreed. My problems with FB aren't deep rooted or ideological, I used to use it all the time. But now it's gotten so big, and I have so many friends, and friends-of-friends, it feels more like the open internet than a community of my friends.

It's hard to manage, but with the right controls and tweaks, they could make it more comfortable again... and I'd start using it again.

Kind of a good counter-example: LinkedIn may be much smaller and less loved, but when you post something there, you know it's going out to your work colleagues, and it'll maintain the respective level of discourse. FB is just all over the map.
Consider the success of Spotify over iTunes. People will always prefer an "all you can eat" approach, even if they don't end up consuming any more or spending more than if they bought individual units. You have the decision fatigue every time you buy content vs once when you subscribe.

The exception to this rule is obviously for a platform like Patreon, where it is about the relationship.
This should be getting more attention. From the perspective of the master branch, it has the benefits of squashed merges without losing your commit history.

I'll often have a patch that has a few things going on:

1. Refactor code in one file

2. Fix a bug in another module uncovered by the newly refactored code (maybe a code path that hasn't been hit until now)

3. Some quick fixes made while I was looking at that code

...if I made a mistake in step 1, it's likely that step 2, step 3, or both would be useful to keep. If it's squashed and merged, it may be difficult to undo just step 1. And it's good communication to keep each as their own commit because each is its own atomic change.

And I can always squash things myself as I feel the need.
You have to fumble about for the home button and do an extra click for Touch ID - it's not much different, except it requires less precision/friction on the part of the user for Face ID presumably.

Face ID should also significantly improve the UX around all interactions that used Touch ID prior (Apple Pay, authentication for third party apps, etc.).
> Consider the case where a dependency that is still in use on feature has been removed on master. When featureis being rebased onto master, the first re-applied commit will break your build, but as long as there are no merge conflicts, the rebase process will continue uninterrupted. The error from the first commit will remain present in all subsequent commits, resulting in a chain of broken commits.

Easy, just fixup the commit that (re)introduced the dependency.

> You pretend that the commits were written today, when they were in fact written yesterday,

The author and committer dates will differ accordingly.
Heinz ketchup QR code leads to porn site
Apart from the already mentioned alternative of having zero ads - more or less the way I see the 'net due to the rather extensive ad filtering I apply (on DNS, router and browser) - I'd prefer for ad companies to advertise on sites related to the material they're advertising. Sell drills? Advertise on DIY forums. Sell cat food? Sell on pet forums. Sell sex? Advertise on porn sites. Sell creepy products designed to profile users? Advertise on toilet paper.
Show HN: 1 KB JavaScript framework for building front-end applications
> When did you last unlock your phone without subsequently looking at it?

I unlock my phone and then not look at it when making phone payments (Apple Pay will definitely take a step back with this). I also switch between maps and driving apps in the car while keeping my eyes on the road. I often peek at something on my screen well outside of the FOV of any front camera. My use of my unlocked phone is not at all limited to things I need to take my face's positioning in account for.

I don't particularly appreciate being accused of a failure of imagination and then having to respond to an arbitrary limited assumption of my smartphone use. It's not my imagination that's the problem here.

But the point is moot. My entire issue with it that I don't want to wait to initiate unlocking once it's in front of my face. Even if FaceID is instant, and I would accept that all my use is in the FOV of the front camera, Apple still requires me to slide to unlock the device.
To me the amazing thing isn't that DEC pooh-poohed the idea of the PC, but rather that IBM was agile enough not to!
It's not that great of an experience out of the box. Non-tech savvy users can make use of MS Access.
Right. Which is why ci/cd and devops, etc were invented. If you're not patching and updating frequently, you're committing business malpractice.
I use the phrase 'Potemkin Markets' to describe a lot of this stuff.
Network Computer
Before the iPhone implemented it, every fingerprint scanner I used either took forever or was miserably unreliable. I was skeptical iPhone's scanner could do a good job. It proved me wrong.

Similarly, every facial recognition technology I have used has either taken forever or was miserably unreliable. This time I'm not betting against Apple.
This is a classic example of stupid science reporting. For decades now the classic diesel engine locomotive used in trains and the electric trains themselves are the largest electric vehicles of any kind. The Komatsu heavy truck is anything but accurate example of "World's largest electric vehicle".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_locomotive

And by the way all Diesel Submarines and Ships are also electric drive trains.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel%E2%80%93electric_transm...
That’s a lot of VC money. Ugh. I hope the folks I pay on patreon move to another site because I’m not interested in paying VC vultures. 450m for god sakes.
You mean solar?
One could argue that those social platforms are designed to keep you engaged.
That's just going to cause sites to edit the DOM after a video plays.
Yay! Thank goodness. I've got 3 different extensions trying to achieve that to some extent (Stop HTML5 Autoplay, Flashcontrol and uBlock for some elements the others miss). They still miss some bad stuff and block some good. I just wish they'd make it easy to block all video apart from things where you actually click the play button.
Way easier than that. Stuff like:

Select all of the following which manage the lifetime of an object:

shared_ptr
unique_ptr
raw pointer

Or:

Assuming foo() prints "foo" and bar() prints "bar" and both return false, what would be printed from the following expression?

if(foo() && bar()) {std::cout << "baz";}

So, basic modern C++ knowledge. I'm not testing their recall of header signatures, I'm testing if they can read code and if they would be able to Google the right terms to find what they need.

Plus 2 small algorithm problems that can each be solved in 5 lines of simple code, which they have 15 minutes each to do (top candidates take under 5 mins). The environment gives them a place to write tests (with some basic tests already written) and lets them compile their code and run tests as much as they want before they submit, with normal compiler messages if it fails to compile and also any debugging messages they put in their code printed. There is also a tutorial that they can repeat as many times as they want before starting the main test.

In later interviews I have mentioned to candidates that others couldn't solve the pre-screen problems, and they are always surprised that people so unqualified are applying for the job.
> I don't think it's true that atheists necessarily understand what a theist means by "everyone has a religion".

I had plenty of discussions on this topic and explored this statement in depth. "Everyone has a religion" is good predictor of inability to see difference between beliefs backed by the best available methodology of constructing and falsifying beliefs and beliefs which are religious beliefs.

If we try to see what is the core of rationality belief, we find there few philosophical principlec like Occam razor. And even that principles are subject of doubt and refinement. Rationality has no beliefs which are not justifyed by practice.

But theists (or some of them) reject difference between justified belief and unjustified one, it allows them to say "every belief is a religious one".

I even can demonstrate it with your words:

> You trust medications from doctors, for example. That's believing medicine will work and that's having faith in a doctor.

No, it is not a faith in doctor. It is faith in medicine, which is complex system which is doing research, gathering data, training specialists, inventing pills and so on. I know that it is just system, that system can make mistakes, that system really make mistakes. I even know weaknessess of that system and know which kinds of mistakes are more probable and which kinds are unlikely. I prefer doctors over praying because research shows, that doctors are more effective than praying.

So I have faith not in doctors, but in rationality as system allowing me to make decisions. But even rationality itself is not unjustified belief for me: show me other way that better than rationality, and I'll stop using rationality.

You can spent millenia trying to show to theist that it is nessesary to differentiate between religious belief and justified belief, but he feels that if he accepts argument, than he ought to reject ideas "everyone has a religion" and "religious belief is no worse than justified one". Feeling this he just fails to hear argument. So, my understanding of "everyone has a religion" can be reworded as "la-la-la-la, what you say?, la-la-la-la, I can hear nothing".
I think it's more like... gah, now I have to drop a G because this tech is incrementally better, lets find ways so I don't have to do that.
For Mac users, there's http://gitup.co/ (I'm not affiliated and it's FOSS).

GitUp is beautiful, incredibly fast and you operate directly on the (well laid-out) graph for almost everything, so you're always acutely aware of the commit history.

(I mostly use Windows + Linux at the moment and this is probably the piece of software I miss the most, even though I prefer shell for absolutely everything else)
The Case Against Civilization
> At ease soldier.

Thank you for the condescension. But if that was your point, you could have written it more clearly.
How can one be sure that an unlocked device won't be manipulated in order to make a false conviction?
If you want autoplay on Youtube you should be able click a whitelist button similar to the 'do you want notifications?' popup.
If you think companies like facebook can manipulate democracy, you have problems with open democracy, at least information-age democracy, not facebook in particular.

Undergirding democracy is the idea that citizens are intelligent and trustworthy enough to deal with yellow journalism, propaganda, etc. Or, at least, that is a downside of the least bad approach to governance so far.
This seems like a knee jerk reaction because a co-worker's sloppy rebase caused you to waste a day.

This highlights a bigger issue, many people don't learn their tools well enough.

I've been teaching my fellow senior engineers how to use git the last six months because they've only been using git GUIs until then. They're terrified of merge conflicts and they often make mistakes fixing them.

I'd rather educate people and let them make their own decisions once they can understand and justify the tradeoffs.
You provide a good argument.

> but what's the alternative?

The alternative is not to use the device, and/or find a replacement.

That may sound fairly dogmatic, but over the course of a decade or so, its pragmatic value becomes more apparent. If a piece of hardware works with free drivers, it will likely continue working until the magic smoke escapes. With binary blobs this is not a given, as various kernel upgrades (or even user land changes) might break the environment.

I realise that people no longer count the usability of their hardware in decades, but still, there is immense practical value in knowing that the thing you set up to work once will continue doing so allowing you to focus on the task you set it up for without requiring your attention.

This, of course, goes against the use case of chasing for example (graphical) performance through the use of proprietary drivers, but that raises the question of what that performance is used for, and whether these use cases are inherently pragmatic (catering to the newest generation of desktop environments, etc. It might be a good argument that these DE increase productivity for the user, but still, the "pragmatic" argument doesn't fall automatically to one side here).

On a larger collective scale, the long term pragmatic effects of using free drivers over proprietary drivers are not really disputed I think.

As a less technical example (because OS en FS are, as you mentioned, almost indistinguishable there):

Getting off FB is a recurring theme here on HN. Free Software values have always led me to eschew that particular site at the expense of social convenience. As I now read these various stories, I can safely conclude for myself that I indeed made the long term pragmatic choice.

Open Source here doesn't really have anything to say on the matter, where Free Software has always recognised sofware as a social institution as well as a practical tool. As such, it might be easier to recognise any long term detrimental social effects resulting in a long term pragmatic approach for individuals.
I still haven't grasped what Pinterest is for, in all honesty. And i have an account, by the way.
On a given feature branch the history is only important if there is more than one review until the work is complete. What the developer does in between these visible/public events is almost always not important. For example in a "make work, make right" situation where the original work is thrown away and rewritten you definitely are not interested in the history.
The trade off is usually ~same functionality but better graphics. Compare Office 1997 with Office 2017 and the average user sees a very modest improvement relative to how much better of a computer you need.
Caddy's mholt holds some similarities to Docker's shykes in that both lack business and open source acumen.
You just need to take Raspberry Pi Zero’s, install TOR nodes on them, and drop them anywhere with free WiFi and a working charger – so you can hide them in streetlights near starbucks, etc.

That would be enough to get thousands of nodes. (And probably a bit less illegal, although still not legal)
It's possible to build a lineageos ROM from source, mostly. There are still some binary blobs and it's true that virtually no one has the time to rigorously audit the entire source tree themselves anyway, but technically you do not absolutely have to trust a giant ROM binary that their auto-builder spit out.
Microsoft SharePoint 2013 Certification Training Online
A lot of atheists try to argue against religion on their own terms, using science, logic, and reason. Religion doesn't really stand a chance against that.

But it's far more convincing when faith and belief are considered in more non-rational human emotional terms. Having faith in a god is closer to appreciating a beautiful painting, feeling excited when you're about to go an adventure, feeling sad when a family member dies. Those feelings can't be explained through logic, you just feel them. This is nothing like having "faith" in a doctor or medicine. Further, while scientists may explain why humans evolved to have a particular feeling, they do not explain the feeling itself.

True, faith can be beaten back with logic and reason, much like a person can be convinced that a piece of music is bad. But the underlying emotion is integral to most people. Telling them to not believe is like telling them not to laugh.
Yours.org feature proposal: external content
First change is smaller cache, then fewer cores. Pentium 4 Willamett had 44 million transistors and a long pipeline etc.

8 core Ryzen on the other hand is 4,800 million.
For what it's worth, "Barcode Scanner" on Android was able to scan it effortlessly.
There's also the power of lobbyists to 'convince' the government that the company is bad in some manner, who might, in turn, start 'probing' the hell out of the company, much of which will be leaked or reported to the press causing massive amounts of negative perception - even if nothing comes of it.

Another is to leverage evangelists with creative donations to lower brand reputation

A long term approach might be to instill agents who are loyal to your cause within the company through hiring. Corporate espionage with the intent of making intentional poor decisions in order to cause harm.
A Programming Language for the Internet of Things [pdf]
This is wrong. You can easily read messages and reply to them from the lockscreen.
No. Canadian too, Canada has frankly draconian laws when it comes to free expression and possession of pornographic fiction.
it should be $300 to $500.
You could argue that keeping child porn out of thr US is keeping the nation safe from child pornographers.
Your analogy doesn't work.

We haven't moved on from http for web applications.
I dont understand that behavior - what if I just send the device via fedex/dhl? It will cross the border unchecked and I can pick it up on the other side.
Of course. Besides they can say that pedophile is a criminal so she/he might also want to bomb the capital. Or something.

Another stretch I know of is someone who is a US-citizen but did not want to give out their laptop password. So they try to wait him out at the airport for as long as they can - 8 hours I believe. No water (I mean who knows maybe you can build a bomb from water) no ability to stand up or walk (you might run). Sit in one spot for 8 hours. After which he still didn't want to give out the password and they had to let him in because he is USC and 8 hours ran out. So guess what they did - they packed him in a car and drove him to another airport (!!!) and told him the 8-hour clock resets (first amendment supposedly does not apply to airports on any ports of entry). After 2 hours the officer smiled and told him they can do it endlessly, because they will just come back to the previous airport. My friend gladly gave up password and was let go 45 minutes later.

Edit: no, my friend has not been anywhere with this. I asked him about this, he said that he is afraid of going anywhere since he had whole laptop hard drive with music that he cannot prove (anymore??) he has bought it, so it might be assumed illegal downloads. Its been almost 2 years. I think he moved on.
Well, assuming that you are adding features in parallel you have an history. You have a branch with feature A and are about to build feature B, which is now based on A, someone else is building feature C which is also based on A. Building B and C might require different or equal changes to A.

There's no guarantee that any of these features will be built in order since they might have different priorities, difficulties or level of acceptance so it's hard to tell which one must or will be done in what order. Rebasing pretty much settles that while merging is much more sane to that workflow. It's harder to keep it functional yes, but it's enabling parallel development. Using rebasing and/or merge isn't a source control problem but a feature management problem.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15262663
Since the author of BeFS (1999), Dominic Giampaolo, is the lead architect for Apple's APFS (2016), it would be more helpful if there's an article that shows the delta between BeFS and APFS.

In the intervening 17 years, Mr. Giampaolo surely learned new things that invalidated some assumptions in 1999 and/or discovered new demands on file systems that he didn't foresee.

Imo, the intellectual evolution from the vantage point of 2017 & hindsight would be much more interesting than trying to read through a 247 page pdf.
All your data is "safe" in a USA-based data center?
?? Who told you packages are not checked? Of course they are. Twice I ordered harddrive from USA to be shipped to Europe (10TBs are much cheaper than buying in EU) and twice it had attached huge brochure that my electronic device was inspected and images might be done and while they don't believe they damaged it, if I have issues with it, I should call.
The feud between science and religion has as much to do with politics and power as it does with arguments about reason and faith.
Yeah because physical searches at the border has any effect on that.

With that logic anything passing the border is a cause for "national security" but then the term has been washed up and basically useless. Bringing small stolen goods, like candy lifted from a store, across the border is not a national security concern.
Boxing Live Stream
About time someone calls them out on that BS