skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If only it were as simple as just using Loop-Blinn. :) The technique described there will produce unacceptably bad antialiasing for body text. Loop-Blinn is fine if you want fast rendering with medium quality antialiasing, though. (Incidentally, it's better to just use supersampling or MLAA-style antialiasing with Loop-Blinn and not try to do the fancy shader-based AA described in that article.)

Additionally, the original Loop-Blinn technique uses a constrained Delaunay triangulation to produce the mesh, which is too expensive (O(n^3) IIRC) to compute in real time. You need a faster technique, which is really tricky because it has to preserve curves (splitting when convex hulls intersect) and deal with self-intersection. Most of the work in Pathfinder 2 has gone into optimizing this step. In practice people usually use the stencil buffer to compute the fill rule, which hurts performance as it effectively computes the winding number from scratch for each pixel.

The good news is that it's quite possible to render glyphs quickly and with excellent antialiasing on the GPU using other techniques. There's lots of miscellaneous engineering work to do, but I'm pretty confident in Pathfinder's approach these days.
Emmanuel Macron's campaign was hacked as well, but did not unleash any extraordinary findings beyond gigabytes of boring meeting arrangements and schedule confirmations.

Either the attackers expended less effort on Macron HQ vs DNC and never got to the juicy stuff, or someone within Macron camp ran a tight ship on what can and cannot go through insecure channels.
Same with phone numbers. In most parts of the world, local numbers (not fully-qualified with country code), are written/dialed with a leading zero.
Excel eats these and/or uses scientific notation!
I'd say require a WHERE on deletes. If you want "WHERE true" that's fine, but require a WHERE.
If you assume that most "stupid" people could avoid these situations if they tried harder and that social pressure to not "be stupid" causes people to act harder to not appear stupid, then it makes sense. (Both of those assumptions may be suspect, but the logic is okay.) This also makes sense of your IQ cutoff observation: some people may not be able to compensate for it with any amount of work or may not be able to understand social pressure.
Habit and Pickup Stix will take up the slack.
The most likely thing (imo) that will happen will be highway trains...there will be a real human driver in the front of the caravan, maybe just in a van or car, and then 1-10 self driving heavy duty trucks behind them. They'll draft off of each other and do 99% of the long haul route in an automated way.

Once each truck is near it's destination, it will peel off of the pack and park itself near the highway, at which point a real driver will hop in and finish the route.

I work in the telematics space, and work with extremely large fleets that you'd all recognize on the highway every day. None of them are afraid of self driving trucks disrupting them any time soon. However, these automated caravans could be their first opportunity to restructure the flow of their capacity across the country.
Thank you, I will look into it again, admittedly I think it's been at least a year since I last checked into see if it's possible.
The people that make it to the UK parliament got their education in debating chambers. This is taken seriously at the posh schools, e.g. Eton, and the posh universities, e.g. Oxford. It is not important in most state comprehensive schools or those universities that have access courses.

I was lucky enough to go to a comprehensive school where the debating chamber was important. The school does not have a debating chamber now. A few key teachers retired and momentum was lost. Strange how the must attend event no longer matters.
Your rationale-fu is strong!

Look, by whatever accident of history, programmers are currently in demand. If your shop is suicidal/trigger-happy on firing their valuable programmers, then just leave that place before that happens and find happier digs. Job #1 for any professional programmer should be to sleep well at night and not work overtime.

Stop making excuses for sloppy, rushed programming. Use your power to enforce good practices. Ah, but you say, "all that is relative, no one agrees on what the practices should be." More rationalizing; no more weak excuses! Every team can write unambiguous house rules that form the social contract over what definitions and expectations are regarding ready-ness, quality, done-ness, etc. Until the whole rest of the enterprise is behind you and aligned with you, all that matters is your team.

A right attitude is key. You, the programmer: do the simplest thing possible and use the scientific method when writing code through rigorous testing. Meaningful, working tests are proof.

After your team learns to hustle, then you have power to hold your product owner's feet to the fire! Question every bit of the requirements they set. Your designs should sell the work, embody those requirements, and draw out all the questions you have to the business - when you do a great job, they will ask and then answer all your questions and more for you. Sloppy, imprecise, crooked requirements must burn and be tested in the crucible of your design. You have the power to talk and argue and you have the power to say 'no'.

Reject any slow or unproductive tools, libraries, practices. Put tremendous, outsized, decadent effort into automating the hell out of everything mundane or annoying in your sphere. Always protect your brand/product/team: all vanity or pet tools/patterns/languages/CQRS-ES must eventually be jettisoned out the airlock whenever team productivity is being impacted.
Yeah, it's one of the two hard problems in computer science after all :)

In practice LRU caches work pretty well.
in most of the industries I've worked in, the teams have been extremely skeptical of Agile coaches/consultants

For good reason. I don't blame them.

The way I see it, there are very few of us around, although tons of people advertise using this term.

I'm the last of the general contractors when it comes to IT consulting. From where I sit, it looks like a vanishing breed. I'm a full-stack technical lead who has had tons of experience in different industries and technologies and ended up, somehow-or-another, training organizations in how to use teams. That's where the Agile comes in.

The work is this huge mix of technical and organization levels. A recent contract had two weeks of executive/director-level work setting up a roadmap for change, followed by a "dog and pony" show with the usual slides and games, followed by a deep-dive with a team of leads where we set up the entire production and CI/CD/DevOps pipeline/stack and learned TDD/ATTD and the rest of it while writing code for an upcoming project. (This was hands-on technical work along the lines of "how to automate cloud deployment using AWS/Ansible", "Ping-pong pair programming in Java/Javascript/Angular", and "Architecting a build pipeline for a team, program, and org")

I prefer the technical stuff, since so many coaches can't actually do the work (and I used to be a show-off). The fact that most coaches in many cases can't do the work sucks big time for the client. But it's not just technical. All of it is important. Unless you get the execs straightened out they'll screw up your org change without even meaning to. Unless somebody is running interference/coordinating with middle management nothing ever happens. And the place to start with the devs is with the leads/architects. Get them actually coding something. Oddly enough, there are a helluva lot of leads and architects out there that can't code. They need to get up to speed and to understand what success looks like. If you miss any of those levels, it's not going to work. So wether I want to or not, I end up working at all org levels, and the best title I've got for that is "Agile Technical Coach"

I've been bugging Bob about doing some Clean Coder material on backlogs, since they seem to be the thing that crosses all org levels and they're constantly a mess. Bob keeps hammering on doing things right when I think it's much more important to focus on doing the right things before you worry about what kind of craftsman you are. I've even pitched him on a couple of ideas. Who knows? You might see something there from me in the future.
>>Google is a risk-averse company. It simply won't gamble with its user base, no matter how high the costs are. Considering the cash arsenal the company has, I don't think it's a bad use of capital for Google.

If ain't broken...plus who knows, MS or Apple might just jump in and the they do have the cash. Would you want to be the Google exec that started the downfall?

Frankly even a nice chunk of Android development is a sort of traffic acquisition (Search bar for one.)
That's pretty much communism. Everyone forced to work and compensated according to a centrally planned ("adjusted") economy.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" - Karl Marx
Just create build.sh, deploy.sh and run those in steps -> no pain.
"I know there are tons of programmers churning out low-quality code."

People repeat this kind of sentiment all the time but is there anything to back it up? I know we've all run into to random bits of code we considered "low quality". But that can often be attributed to code that was written a very long time ago when programming practices were much different. At the time it was written it was likely high-quality code. It's like saying that a Gallbladder removal surgery from 20 years ago was "low quality" because it wasn't done orthoscopically, that technology was barely used at the time.

I'm starting to think that "tons of low-quality coders" is an industry myth to explain a variety of unrelated phenomena. The modern-day equivalent of the boogeyman. But let me know if I'm wrong.
>For a typical desktop PC, you want to have 100 draw calls or fewer per frame

Don't PC games use thousands of draw calls per frame?
Realistically, many workers do about 15 hours of actual solid work in a week. It's likely represented as a 10-20 range, but still much closer to ~15 than ~40.

The rest of the time is filler spent on lunches/meetings/communication and 'butts-in-seats' dog and pony show for bad managers.

So I wouldn't say the prediction is that far off-base. Plus we have another 12 years to go.
The whole point is to eliminate social programs.
Do you void the warranty if you install Lineage?
Do 50 push-ups while gradle syncs. touche
A Losing Legacy
This is an on-point critique of high school debate and hits on many of the reasons I didn't stick with it for more than a season.

My best friend growing up is a near mystical figure in the insular LD debate community and has coached a lot of nationally successful debaters, including his younger sister who won the TOC and is considered the most dominant LD debater ever as far as I know. Aside from him, at one point another close friend was #1 ranked in the country (he had the most TOC bids that year) and another won Novice Nationals. I was naturally good at it as well (I quit literally hours after winning the Novice state tournament), but I absolutely hated debate for all the reasons listed -- "spreading", abstruse philosophical critiques that always devolved into nuclear war, and the barely intelligible speed-talking that even motivated the dorkiest of debaters to practice circular breathing. I had to find a new friend group (for a while, we're still all close) because these guys talked about nothing except for debate.

> High school debate today is basically an intellectual game, not an exercise in truth-seeking.

I couldn't agree more, and I have said nearly the exact same thing to many people that are unfamiliar with high school debate.
Desktop PCs don't play games.
> Does anyone really honestly think that there's a high percentage of women out there wanting to give birth 10 to 20 times?

I think 10-20 is hyperbole but the inverse relationship between GDP and birth rates is well documented -- a chief argument being unemployed people have time to make babies.

> With that said, I only see those changes as more possible through UBI because people with their basic needs met have more time and mental space to engage in being more informed and more involved as citizens.

This is where UBI loses me. So many of it's advocates are convinced people freed from labor will become scholar poets. Proles will be proles whether you call it Marxism or UBI.
> articulating a complex argument well.

You do? (Or are you being sarcastic?) Did we watch the same video? I can't even understand what they are saying. Is it words?
I see the parallels that are being drawn to politics, but debate IS a scorable game. There's a winner and a judge. Of course game tactics are going to play a major role, and of course more arguments are going to be advantageous compared to fewer arguments. You might want debate to a Socratic exercise in truth-seeking, but if you wanted that, you wouldn't declare one team the winner. None of this is related to the current political climate, which has a much stranger problem around the rejection of facts and evidence and logic entirely.

If you want make debate about convincing an audience of laymen, the judgement needs to be done by an audience of laymen. Do that, and the pace of the debate will slow significantly, since there's no benefit to making an argument that the audience can't hear or understand. But then your complaint will become "these people are dumbing down their arguments and winning, how can we fix this?!"
> Are you fucking kidding me? Does anyone really honestly think that there's a high percentage of women out there wanting to give birth 10 to 20 times?

The numbers are overblown, but I see this as a real issue with utopian interpretations of UBI. I.e. those where, to quote the article, proponents expect "a majority of non-workers to live off the fruits of the labour of a small minority", as opposed to a more realistic UBI where the working poor use that free money to maybe cut one or two of their multiple jobs from their tight schedule.

But in the "utopian" version, a huge group would be left without anything to strive for. If the payout would be too generous, adding an entry level work income would not make a noticeable difference. When people are depraved of all other kinds of achievement, they are likely to use breeding as a substitute. If you can't climb or defend any ranks, you can still move up one level by spawning "subordinates". Instant status.

I feel bad just for thinking thoughts that cynical, but I can't help expecting that kind of outcome if it isn't openly addressed. A "nonutopian UBI" that just creates a smooth, regulation-free ramp (I almost want to say "interpolation") between welfare and full self-support would leave the cynic in me much more at ease.

(Edited: my writing is terrible)
Modifying Your Own Genes Is Just an Injection Away–If You’re Feeling Lucky
> The book argues that humans are not “naturally” monogamous. That might be true. But Sex at Dawn doesn’t prove it. The data are ambiguous.

Exactly. I still found it a stimulating read, but my "the evidence they present isn't justified" senses were going off from chapter 1.
"Corrosion"? It sounds like high school debate started relatively recently, in the 70s, and basically went downhill within a few years. So it's always been a sewer.

I enjoy "intellectual discussion", so I went to a college debate team practice once to see if I wanted to join (back in 2003 or so) - I walked out of there with my mind blown. There was absolutely nothing intellectual about college debate team. The entire point was just to see who could say the most words per minute. When I explicitly asked, I was told that content doesn't really matter, just fast talking.
Consider the term, "idiot".

The literal meaning (greek?) is "one who lives in a private world of their own".
I think one of the issues is the maintainer of an open source project will always have the final say in which patches are accepted. So the best way to not have any telemetry would be to fork the project and remove the offending code. Also historically, is /var/log any different from telemetry? I can easily figure out which applications were installed, what the hardware on the system is, which cron jobs were executed etc.

But in any case I agree that MS should definitely allow the owner of the machine the ability to block the transmission of any and all telemetry data.
Autonomous trucks may actually be a little more secure. The vast majority of truck thefts occur within 200 miles of the origin and truckers are strongly encouraged to not stop in this zone. Many still do though, either for legitimate reasons, or they're working with the thieves. Automated trucking will probably fix this problem. You can have automated trucks moving from secured site to secured site without worrying about exceeding a truckers 11 hour drive limit.
Similar to the ethical and philosophical basis of things like universal health care, a universal basic income could not work if done partially. If you adopt universal health care without enshrining in your society the utter importance of taking care of everyone because of their fundamental value as human beings absent all other factors - the outcome will be tyranny. If there is an ability for someone to say 'oh, but perhaps we shouldn't take care of person X because they made bad choices and it would save us money to do so' then you will rapidly see the definition of various health-related regulations created with the goal of reducing the cost burden of health care.

While one might be tempted to say 'that would just result in people living healthier lives', that would be a very superficial and unstudied evaluation. Behavior modification on a society-wide scale like that is radically dangerous. It might actually be the most dangerous thing in history, I'm not sure. I'd need to run some numbers, but I think there is a good chance that the unintended consequences of well-intentioned behavior modification like that has killed more than all wars combined.

Basic income is an interesting idea, but requires social support. It cannot succeed in a society which has been accustomed to seeing other people suffering less than themselves as the worst thing possible. This is a necessary legacy of the Protestant Work Ethic which dictates that a persons virtue is measured by the degree of suffering they endure for the benefit "of society" (in truth only for employers, not society at large). In that mindset, asking for reward is itself immoral and can only reduce a persons virtue. Either to receive or provide such rewards is an act of immorality, and though many can not actually recognize or admit it, this underlies how they see the world. The poor deserve their lot because they contribute little. The rich must be moral because they are rich (this is predicated on a fantastical delusion that riches are awarded only when a person has benefitted many). This is why so many people hate punitive damage judgements. They're not concerned with the well-being of the corporation being fined tens or hundreds of millions of dollars for acting harmfully. They are obsessed, to the point of willful self-destruction, with ensuring that some individual does not get a "payday" legal settlement.

Without a philosophical backing that justifies a universal basic income, it would continuously be under threat, with people from all sides attempting to reduce the income to the point that few could survive on it alone, attempting to push people to 'be productive' in a world that doesn't need productive people. It's not a situation you can simply ignore and hope people wake up to. It has to be discussed and justified and explained. Why should society at large provide for those who do not produce material products? At what level should they be supported? Should drug addicts and criminals be supported? When someone feels slighted that someone who has not suffered as much as they gets the same amount, how will you answer them?
Budapest?
To be honest I'm a external security assessor/pentester and I've not had much pushback from clients on this. That said I don't always get visibility of whether they implement our recommendations or not :)

To me, it's not really a debatable point that loading JS from a source you don't control implies trust in that source and therefore a risk that if they are compromised it affects your site.

Whether that risk is ok for a business depends on a number of factors like :-

- How trustworthy are the sources they're loading from?
- What reviews have they completed on the security of those sources?
- Do they have contracts in place with those sources that cover the requirement for security?
> I did policy debate in the late '90s, and this sounds pretty much the same to me as debate did then.

Really? I guess I've never watched high school debate, but my image was definitely not of hyperventilated slur-heavy slam-poetry.
You're free to run your own app store, like Amazon fire devices, and not subscribe to GMS. Why shouldn't Google get something in return for enabling phone makers with an OS and app store? They're a for profit company after all
> Turning a huge HVAC system off and back on again quickly if it's not designed for that would probably reduce its operating efficiency.

A lot of Rooftop Unit (RTU) controls typically take an on/off command from the Building Management System (BMS) and the BMS programming will have a deadband range (+/- 2°F) in which no action will occur to prevent the repeated cycling of RTUs.
Yeah. My wife has a friend who's a long-haul trucker. He gets profoundly disrespected by the current system, including showing up at 8AM to an appointment and being made wait all day, and sometimes into the next day, for his truck to be unloaded/loaded and ready for him to take.

And he's paid nothing for that. There's no penalty at all for wasting the trucker's time. I cite this as evidence that the truckers have no effective lobbying body, and therefore will in fact lose most of long-haul jobs over the next 15 years.
I did not say anything about there needing being a government entity that centrally does things to people. The "adjust accordingly" part could simply be market forces that "adjust" wages. Also, I didn't say anything about everyone getting the same rate of pay. What I said was reduce total work hours (or blocks if req'd), pay them more, put more people to work. That's it. I agree I don't think this should be realized though communism.
> Since then I’ve adopted custom prompt and color scheme for production.

An AHA moment for me. I've always wondered why people cared about all the terminal customization options (I grew up typing on an 80x48 AAA glass TTY). This is a good reason.

I've used a custom prompt with the host name built in for decades, but this kind of color issue makes sense!
What made me post the link was that it – disregarding its debatable pointlessness – showed a diverse set of methods and tools that are useful in android packaging.
And in some ways it is worse..

I remember at least one prod incident where a script made it out into prod and wiped out 100s of servers. Something like it had rm -rf /$SOME_ENV_VAR which was set in QA but not prod. Opps....
if you can't even _run your own software to perform tests_ then maybe you should reconsider developing software
How We Injected the New Bugfender Website with Personality and Boosted Growth
Sure, I think I allowed for that possibility. But as noted, I was basing this on my own experience - I know multiple people in all of these professions. Unlike the others, none of the accountants have loved the nuts and bolts work in the same way many of the others did. Could just be sample bias.
If You’re Freelancing on Upwork This Might Make You Reconsider
yeah, i had the same thought. this post cannot be taken as practical advice. interesting to see just how much bloat an apk contains though.