skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd assume encoding was largely software-based using a POC encoder while x264/vp9 video encoders probably already take advantage of hardware acceleration shortcuts evolved over many years.

> the main focus of current AV1 development is on speed optimization to make it practical for use in production systems

Remember: first make it work, then make it right, then make it fast. Seems they're only starting the 3rd step now.
Is `value` a string here?
Yes please. I'll subscribe to your newsletter and buy your program.

What's the secret to this amazing life?
Here is Linus's video explaining why does "Youtube Face."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzRGBAUz5mA
The day I got over what I feel was the end of the steep part of the learning curve, everything made so much sense. Everything became easy to do. I've never been confused or unsure of what was going on in git since.

What git needs is a chair lift up that hill. A way to easily get people there. But I have no idea what that would look like. Lots of people try, few do very well at it.
I'll commit the cardinal sin of not reading the article before posting, but even if it is written there it's worth repeating. See a tax accountant before you do anything. An hour of the accountant's time will almost certainly save their fee many, many times over.

I'm in Japan, but I don't think US tax law is any less complicated ;-) When I started my company I waited until after talking to the lawyer and doing all the legal paperwork to engage an accountant. Big mistake! There were a lot more options than I knew about (and that my lawyer told me about). Even engaging my accountant when I did, he still saved me his yearly fee in about 5 minutes. I think it's not a stretch to say that he's saved me about 10% net year to year.
I feel like the unfortunate part is that the most visibility-optimised content isn't often the same thing as the best content. So if you just set out to make a Good Thing it gets lost, unless you also do other things that are seemingly unnecessary (like adding a silly face to your YouTube preview).
Is it really not a good idea per se, or simply that it would need to be more prescriptive?

For example a new extension could mandate minimum support for codecs or features. Like wp explains, matroska file extensions are .MKV for video (with subtitles and audio), .MK3D for stereoscopic video, .MKA for audio-only files, and .MKS for subtitles. I’m not aware of any reason an extension couldn’t represent minimum package requirements, like audio/video/at least av1 codec, etc, that would work for most cases, while potentially still retaining extensibility where practical.
Any outsourcing firm, though, has a basic dilemma. Even firms that outsource to other expensive US locations.

It's the bait and switch. They give you the top talent at first, to make the sale. Then they slowly swap them out, because they are trying to use the top talent to close a sale with a different client.

There's no real way to remove that incentive. You can try, but the time and energy needed usually invalidates the initial business case.
Pen Pals reports 400% growth as other social platforms face backlash
Certainly some videos on youtube, and which ones should be pretty predictable.
Speaking of which, here is a great list of private ip addresses which are safe for pen testing and reverse credential routing:
http://bit.do/rhemgla
You can easily forward a single email to someone in gmail, but there is not 1-click solution to send all of your emails to someone else.

That’s actually wrong. Right now, today, you can write apps for the Gmail platform that could have this ability as soon as someone authorizes it [1]. So everyone is down on Facebook, who disabled this ability 4 years ago. What about Google?

[1] https://developers.google.com/gmail/
> Conceptually, what is the difference

In Haskell, one is a variable, the other is a type, and that's enforced by the language. It's the same, albeit by convention, in Java. There are a lot of cases where you want to describe a type and a thing, so apple = new Apple() is pretty reasonable.

When I think of case-insensitive languages, I'm thinking of Basic, LISP, SQL, and those don't have a lot of type declarations.

And consider two counter-examples:

my_instance vs myinstance

things vs THINGS

The first shows case-folding is only a partial answer to ambiguous identifiers. The second shows that differences in case can be very obvious to the reader.

Those are motivators to me for pushing this off to the linter: there are a lot of subjective judgements in what should and shouldn't be the same, and having the language keep its rules for identifiers as simple possible seems like a good separation of concerns.

My final concern is metaprogramming and interoperability. In SQL, for instance, there are bizarre rules to work around case-insensitive identifiers. If another system asks you for "myObjectInstance" and "MyObjectInstance", it has to know your case folding rules to know those two identifiers are the same.

> If it's not a typo, then who wants to work on a codebase littered with identifiers whose only difference is case ? :-)

Ever worked on a Python project that interacts with Javascript, so it's snake and camel case?

I generally agree, I'd just prefer a gofmt-style utility that would just automatically resolve those and tidy everything up. I completely agree that just chucking error messages is a poor answer.

Finally, here's a challenge, if identifiers are going to be folded by the compiler: what locale should be used? In particular, how do you handle I, İ, i and ı?
Why bother observing inconsistencies? (2015)
That plus poorer integration with popular IDEs/editors such as Eclipse.

In fact popular IDEs / editors back then supported CVS, then SVN and pretty much nothing else.

You'd be amazed (or not) how little technical superiority matters. Developers just want to click stuff and get back to developing.

Which is not to denigrate git, which I love so much it hurts.
The output of most programs is plain data -- an integer or text or something. If the output is wrong, it would be interesting for debugging purposes to trace how a particular output was generated, in order to figure out where exactly the program went wrong. This information is what people mean by the "provenience" of data.
Or mayhaps the tax rate is too low and should be much higher for them?
You have to click into the Sourcetree window for changes to show up. It updates instantly for me when I do that.
I can muck about with RCS files in a CVS repository. I can (and have!) rebuild SVN repositories to strip content or add into earlier commits. Sure it's not as easily done as in Git, but it can be done. So does that mean they aren't revision control systems either?
For those without much of a network, how do you recommend finding one to talk to?
> make liberal use of google's 'tools -> past year' feature.

I didn't understand this. May someone please give an example? Thanks.
I would still be using Facebook if it was the case where they only have what we give it.

But that isn't reality. What Facebook actually does is purchase data from hundreds, maybe thousands, of other sources and tie that to your account.

They follow you around the web with their tracking cookies and save every website that happens to have a Facebook widget.

They alter your timeline to conduct psychology experiments.

They use other people's data to build a shadow profile of you, even if you don't have a FB Aaccount. For example, building your graph of friends based on the contacts that other people upload.

I could go on if I thought harder, but those are just the ones that come to mind first.
RDS SQL Server– Best Practices
>So I'd like you to prove that git won't lose work.

It does not "actively" lose work. Losing work in Git is a pretty specific operation and generally requires you to spell out what's going on (either via 'reset' or 'checkout'). And also less likely to happen, since you are regularly using the index to stage changes and should be commiting often (since it's cheap to do, unlike trying to commit in BitKeeper, let's say, where locking problems sometime even require to change the window you're committing in [1]). The moment things are in the index/repository, it's pretty unlikely you're going to lose work.

Say, in other systems, me accidentally clicking something is a surefire way to just wipe it out without a second thought. In TFSVC I can easily undo my active changes with a simple click of a button. Again, the contention was that you actively lose work while working with git. It's hard to do, as deleting work in git requires some fairly specific commands.

Even removing a file requires you to stage the deletion, then commit it. And even THEN, even if you amend some other previous commit with that deletion you can role the entire thing back with reflog and get your file back. If I took that amended commit and rebased onto another branch, rolled that all into one commit via squashing, I'd still be able to go back to where I was with the reflog.

If however, you edit some lines in a file and then tell git to checkout that file again and they're not staged, then sure, you're going to lose work. But that's not something that's common and it certainly isn't a recipe for having git "actively" delete work.

[1] http://www.bitkeeper.org/man/citool.html

> If the repository is locked, and you try to bk commit, the commit will
fail. You can wait for the lock to go away and then try the commit again; it should succeed. If the lock is an invalid one (left over from an old remote update), then you can switch to another window and unlock the repository. After it is unlocked, the commit should work.
While I agree, I also think that overt gating and approval processes create a high tension dynamic that frequently breaks down, whether it's ops v. dev, security v. dev, or others. It's easy for people to get their pride wounded, and they end up encouraged to find workarounds to the process. The simple answers to this are pretty much imaginary, unfortunately.
It's not the exchanges who are behind those spikes.

Source: someone who is working on a bot doing that kind of things

And because of the way the market works, there is no need to coordinate with anyone else doing it (ie: those spikes are self synchronizing)

Those "manipulations" also happen in the traditional markets (forex, ...), but due to liquidity and general sophistication they are much harder to spot, and dangerous to do if you don't know what you are doing (dangerous from a financial perspective, they are perfectly legal).
I recently tried to speak out against GitFlow...that was a mistake on my team.
I've never used Clearcase, but I worked for Sun around 2000 and one of the things I did was analysing kernel dumps of Solaris.

If we saw the Clearcase kernel module you can be sure that that was going to be the root cause of the crash. That thing seemed to really terrible, and it wouldn't surprise me if the rest of the product was as bad.

I don't know if things have changed now, but to use Clearcase you needed a kernel module that provided a special filesystem that you did your work against.
The Coding Interview
x264 is a software codec.
Another possibility - many startup/product companies self-fund by doing contract dev work. It could easily be learnings from their in-house product dev rather than just brazen content marketing...
Can be tricky to use EAV data models with traditional ORMs.. this type of functionality can often be slow or require plugins, if implemented at all:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity%E2%80%93attribute%E2%80...
I think it's interesting, it's checks off a lot of my boxes. We wanted to do a product that we called "software dev in a box" that was SCM, bug db, wiki, etc. Fossil comes closer to this than we did. So that part is really cool.

I'm not a fan of using a DB to store versions. It's just not the right tool. Before we open sourced, we jealously guarded "the weave" which is how the history data is stored. The weave gives us so much, bk blame is instant, bk grep is instant, there is a "bk grep -R" that will look in all versions of a file that is instant, or you can do "bk grep -R<revs>" and look in just those revs, all instant.

The weave is compact, fast, merges better, it's just a better storage format than a DB. Here's an example. In most version control systems, lets say there is a 100 line file. I clone that repo and I modify the first 51 lines of that file. You clone the same thing I cloned, and you modify the bottom 50 lines of that file. So we have 99 unique lines and 1 line that we both modified. Now Joe Merge clones my repo and merges your repo. He's the guy that closed the DAG. He had to manually merge the one line that we both changed so when you do $SCM blame the correct answer is the top 50 lines are me, the bottom 49 lines are you, and the manually merged line is you, right?

That's what happens in BK. It's not what happens pretty much anywhere else. Either the entire top chunk or the entire bottom chunk will look like it was done by Joe. Why? Because everyone else passes data by value, BK (the weave) passes data by reference. Everyone else copies the data across the merge point. BK does not, the only new data that will be in the merge node is the one line that joe had to merge by hand.

This can have some space savings implications, which can be a big deal for big files, but in my opinion the far bigger implication is blame. Joe merged in your stuff and now your stuff looks like he wrote it. Someone is tracking down a bug and they should be talking to you but they are talking to Joe.
You should probably form a corp.
I would have backed you up on that.
I would like to hear some examples as well. I hate losing my work.
Incomplete in very extreme conditions such as the interiors of black holes or the first instants after the Big Bang. I’m not really sure that’s “woeful” in a sense that matters to almost anyone other than a particle physicist or a cosmologist. For example the confidence in QED has been tested and found that the theory makes accurate predictions to within 10^-8.

I’d also argue that you’re substituting “basic” for “fundamental” and that’s bordering on dishonesty. We don’t have answers to some of the. OST fundamental questions, assuming we’re even asking the right questions, but the basics are well covered.
That's not necessarily true. Everyone knows at least one dev who would prefer the world's stupidest workflow. And where it is true, it can directly contradict other priorities, like 'the devs prefer to check bug fixes directly into production because it saves them the work of staging'.
> This is misleading right-wing B.S.

LOL. No. I campaigned for Barack Obama and met him in 2008. That's how 'right wing' I am.

> Anyone reading this on HN, if they eventually do employ 20 people, probably would want to offer them health insurance by that time.

That's a benevolent attitude, but practically, it will drive your business bankrupt if you are paying the CA-rate health care costs. That's the single biggest reason why even big corps like Wells Fargo, Charles Schwab and Bank of America are relocating many of their employees to Arizona and Colorado and elsewhere.
As a mostly solo developer I haven't found a need to switch away from SVN to git or anything else; doing so would involve work I can't bill for and for no benefit to myself or existing clients. Some things in software and life in general are Fine Just As They Are.
You shouldn't be able to lose any committed work in git. If you botch a merge, you can reset to one of the merge parents and try it again. If you botch a "destructive" operation like a reset or a rebase, you can undo it using the reflog, which is essentially a 30-day undo history for every branch in your repository.
Lies Entrepreneurs Tell Themselves
As a fellow endurance athlete who has experimented with fasting I would say don't waste your time. While I do think the response to fasting is somewhat personal, for me the impact upon long-term fitness, work/life stress (cortisol) [1] and ongoing metabolism [2] is just too severe to be ignored.

[1] https://www.precisionnutrition.com/all-about-cortisol
[2] https://www.outsideonline.com/2284636/scientific-case-big-br...
Depends

You could have

property_id, user_id, value(string)
1 (assume age), 1213, 60
2 (gender), 1213, female

or

property_id, user_id, value_str, value_int
1 (assume age), 1213, null, 60
2 (gender), 1213, female, null

or have a mapping in the application to get the type of the property. Plenty of ways to handle it.
Who would you recommend?
This is cool but it seems strange (to me) that this was a “Hackathon” project as opposed to just a stand-alone problem to be addressed as a normal course of doing business. It doesn’t make the solution less cool. It just seems like a strange distinction on what a Hackathon is.
In fact limited warranties are a scam. You have express and implied warranties by default. So if you expect your dishwasher to last 10 years but it only lasts 5 and the limited warranty said 1 year.. if that limited warranty was not disclaimed properly then you can take the manufacturer to small claims and most likely win. Companies try to get you to sign a product registration card to get you to agree to the limited warranty. It's all a scam. If your dishwasher blows up, call the manufacturer, ask them to fix it, if they refuse, pay for the repairs then take the manufacturer to small claims court and you will most likely win.
Tabarrok's response even makes for better reading than the Washington Monthly article he replies to.
I’ve heard mention of Hetzner no less than a dozen times in the last couple days. What’s their deal? I’m not quite sure I grok this server auction thing they do, or how they’re so cheap.
> What’s the benefit to the business of that $800 fee?

Doing business in California: both local and foreign LLCs doing business in CA pay it.

> Why is it almost 4 times more than Delaware?

Why shouldn't it be?

> WHY does it cost $800 just to exist?

You can do business as a sole proprietor or general (or limited, but not limited liability) partnership without the franchise fee. You are paying for the right to do business in CA with a liability shield. The potential value to you (and cost to the public) of such a shield, all other things being equal, is greater in a bigger market. California has more than 30 times the population and 40 times the GDP of Delaware.
> Git does track when files are renamed, created and deleted

Actually, no, it doesn't. Git tracks just the before/after state: before the commit these files existed, after the commit those files existed. It infers creation/deletion/rename, when necessary, by comparing these two (or more) states.
If you want correctness then you lock the repo when you are updating it. We do that and make it work on NFS, which is not that easy to do.

If you want to live in a world where two people can be wacking the repo at the same time with undefined results, be my guest, you seem like that sort of person. We are not. We like atomic commits.

As for BK being expensive compared to Git, you are so right. 10 years ago. These days we do quite well and we do it correctly.

I dunno why you have a hardon to smear BK, but bring it dude, I'm happy to make you look foolish.
Theories are tested and observations are made. If we’re lucky a positive result emerges, but more often what you get are results which just put constraints on the theory. For example MACHO theory was once seen as very plausible, but observations of gravitational lensing have placed strict limits on it so that it seems increasingly unlikely. Sometimes the process of constraining theory leads to a reformulation of the theory, sometimes to its abandonment. Other theories which more agreeably fit the constraints may come forward (i.e. WIMP theory on the case of DM), and they may in turn be abandoned or reformulated.

That’s science working as intended, or as people here like to say, a feature and not a bug. The more a theory has to make assumptions or introduce things like new particles and fields to make predictions, the less popular it tends to be. Of course once you constrain the solution space to the point where the simplest theories can’t hold, you have to consider the more complex ones. The important thing to remember is that none of this happens in a vacuum, and while personal preferences play a role, they do so only insofar as the constraints placed on theory by observation allow for it.

Incidentally that’s also why falsifiablility is such a big deal, because in its absence you can assert or believe any old thing.
These articles never mention how many of the 1% were in the 1% 5 years ago, and how many have left the 1%. Always focusing on the bracket, never the individual.
Looking at a file, and then looking the commit which last modified a specific line in that file is a trivial operation in git that I do on a regular basis.
Right. The blog post is a good narrative over time but isn't super clear about how they solved the problem. If I understand correctly they broke down the big MySQL query into separate queries that the Go service processes/caches?
>So, point being, you can't have 3M houses ("home ownership being out of reach") AND 24k/year rent

Sure you can. Because previous investors capitalized at the old market rates (ie, what they really have is a $300k house investment w/ $24k annual cashflow). The main issue I see with that is competing uses of the capital, ie, if they can sell the $300k house investment for a $2.7M Profit and reinvest it at something > 1-2% w/ similar risk profile.

But if we can put a lot more housing stock on the market the prices will decline and money will go elsewhere looking for returns.
So let me get this straight: You expect the police and military to use their weapons to defend you. You're willing to pay taxes to pay for those weapons. But you're too ethical to get paid to make them? I just want to be clear where on the spectrum your outrage falls.
> In such a market the price of any coin may not even be set by a plurality of participants.

Since you can take/give physical delivery of the coin that is not entirely true. Meaning that if you force the price to an unsustainable level (either too high or too low), other smart people will definitely take the other side of the trade.
Ask HN: How do free stock photography sites make their money?
During looking for some high-quality images on Internet, I've found out this website called photoAC (https://en.photo-ac.com). After going through, I downloaded some images easily. But I wonder how this website get revenue? I saw they are inserting Adsense but is that all?
x264 runs circles around all the hardware accelerated encoders, at least quality wise.

I haven't tried AV1 yet, but the only way I was able to encode with x265 in a reasonable amount of time was to shard the job over multiple machines and then join the file back together at the end.
Reminds me of the Peter Theil quote about monopolies https://youtu.be/bVV26yRjwq0?t=417
We first incorporated under a CA LLC. It was worthless. If you ever plan on raising money in the US, form a Delaware C-Corp through Clerky. It’s cheap, fast and easy, and it will allow you to raise from VCs or any other outside investor. One reason: Delaware’s jurisprudence on almost any business issue is an established matter of record, which derisks investments.
What do you mean when you say "look at the file view". I read that as just looking at an annotate view and then find the changelist that the change was part of.

However, this is something every single version control system can do, so surely you were referring to something else. Could you explain what operation you were referring to?
Just off the top of my head, shouldn't your net worth be higher?

Might need to check your savings rate. The 1.1 from the property sale is great but that sounds more like a lottery win.