skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> ARM CPUs are the de-facto standard in the embedded world (except for simple 8-bit MCUs), so what should Xilinx have done? Design their own, proprietary CPU architecture and ISA? Choose some other architecture with 2% market share? Both paths would have led to the immediate death of the whole product line.

Totally agree. IIRC, didn't Xilinx have another hard core CPU+FPGA design before the Zynq using a PowerPC? PPC is largely irrelevant these days. The high-performance embedded space is dominated by ARM today with x86 and PPC taking the rest. There's no way Xilinx would choose x86 with Intel owning Altera.

Maybe in 5-10 years RISC-V will start to eat some of ARM's share, but that remains to be seen.
what would you recommend for someone needing to add headers?
AirBnB was founded on TOS violating abusing Craiglist users with spam. Integrity is not how you growth hack a unicorn startup.
Tool support should be mentioned too. Eclipse or IntelliJ come to mind, the on-the-fly compilation and error checking, code navigation and debugging support are huge power multipliers.
If you want to do web backend in C, this approach is far from the only game in town. For instance, there is this: https://kore.io/

I like the idea of a web framework having a C API. We can make bindings to it in different languages and have a kind of semantic standard across the board, like is done with numerous other things: numeric libraries, crypto, GUI, ...
It would be cool if it was possible to make a google doc text only, that would basically solve the problem as the primary goal of markdown was to read and write like a normal text file.

It would be especially nice because that way the doc could still use all the cool collaboration features.
And most important how sure can one be that those libraries have been propely sanitized.
How to Remove Android Screen Lock Password, Pattern and PIN in 7 Minutes
I would also love to be able to explore alternate tunings. I often use DADGAD and CGCFCE for example, among myriad other open tunings.

This also opens up the possibility of using this for other string instruments with other tunings, like ukelele (gCEA) and banjo (gDGBD) et al.
I don’t see how the quality of the IDE has any influence on what selection of FPGA to use.

We select FPGAs based on HW features and that is that.

The tools are more than good enough for debugging or to kick off an occasional custom synthesis run when you don’t have the time to wrap it in a Makefile.
I too have always found ARC to be the sweet spot, the only downside is still having to care about retain cycles.
Nice! QML is really great for these things.

Author of the blog post here. I've started out the code in the post with a pure QML version of course and then replaced the model with a Rust model since the point of the blog is to show how to write the model in Rust.

I like your solution of using a DelegateModel to show All, Completed or Active items. I went for a different approach:

RowLayout {
property bool show: filter.currentIndex === 0
|| (filter.currentIndex === 1 && !completed)
|| (filter.currentIndex === 2 && completed)
visible: show
And nothing wrong with that. Stricter compiler is a good thing if you don't need it to be laxer.

My favourite flag in clang is -weverything. Everything I write in C I compile with it and fix whatever I reasonably can.
In much of the duvet-loving world (but not the US), you just use a duvet-cover on the comforter, and wash that as you would the top sheet.
If you love this stuff, be sure to check out the documentary "Film before film" (1985) by Werner Nekes (1944-2017) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nQl9C3CUcc and the other films in the six-part series Media Magica http://wernernekes.de/00_shop1/index.php?p=productsMore&iPro...
Are you suggesting that "qualia" does not exist, or that it should not be considered in the inquiry? Same for "free will" -- are you suggesting that it does not exist, or that it should not be considered in the inquiry? Is it simply because you feel the term is tainted by religion?
Two Quantum Computing Bills Are Coming to Congress
Normally I think that Chopra is a complete tool, but every one of his quotes and actions here seem lucid, if extremely guru-like. Nonetheless his Twitter feed and presentations still seem batty, and he still sells the supplements and other trash. Perhaps he can turn it on and off?
Yeah I wish this was taught in public school. Also I think that part of the problem is that concepts like 'wealth', 'purchasing power' or 'the time value of money' aren't discussed at all until first year University courses in Finance.

I wish more people understood that most of the time wealth is transferred, not destroyed.
Ah — I didn't look at the dates and assumed that the publication was the same date as the patent applications' filing, as opposed to the same date as their publications. In the latter case, it would indeed be a coincidence.
I play it on a Thinkpad T410 with an i5-M520 and it runs fairly decently. If an old laptop with a first generation i5 can run it, anything can lol
I've read about this project in the past and although it definitely is interesting it's still a bit unclear to me if this is a way to use Qt through Rust or the other way around. Reading through this example it seems like you use QML to structure you UI which is straightforward enough but there are a couple of qml crates which do pretty much the same thing without including an extra binding generation step (or C++ at all).

Searching through the repo [0,1] it seems like you still need to write a certain amount of C++ especially if you're using QtWidgets instead of QML. So in my eyes this seems like a way to incorporate Rust code into a Qt project rather than build a Qt interface for use in Rust, as the end program is essentially a C++ program with some Rust bits.

From what I understand if you have a fair amount of existing Rust code to reuse in a Qt GUI application this is probably the best way to get them to talk together but it's a still a bit far from "Qt GUI for your Rust programs". I get that the distinction between the two is a bit blurry but in any case you still need to write a considerable amount of C++ especially if you opt for the QtWidgets way.

Of course it is entirely possible that I've completely missed the point so in that case please correct me.

[0] https://github.com/KDE/rust-qt-binding-generator/tree/master...

[1] https://github.com/KDE/rust-qt-binding-generator/tree/master...
Nimby means people who want to benefit from something, like a power plant or a garbage dump or the moral comfort of tolerating poor people, but want someone else to suffer the externalities. "Of course I support homeless camps, but Not In My Back Yard"
At 200 petaflops, the US once again owns the world's fastest supercomputer
It's a lack of critical thinking that requires a disclaimer about the PDFs world view.
Thank you for the wonderful work.
The military is the enforcement of the leadership, so it's valid to criticize them. Just taking orders wasn't an excuse at nuremberg and it shouldn't be today, either.
As someone who wanted to ask a similar question to the OP, and didn't specifically know how to word it, the link on mental models really hit the nail on the head.
> Unfortunately, the more difficult it is to gather experimental evidence (as it is psychology), the more this desire takes over, I think.

And doubly unfortunately, even the gathering of experimental evidence is subject to this problem: funding is denied for politically incorrect studies, the methodological problems found in all real world experiments are emphasized in the studies we dislike, ignored in studies that confirm our biases, etc.
> and to have your output round-trip

Unless you're simply talking about round-trip within the application itself, that's not possible.
Would you mind giving a couple examples? (Other than complexity, I suppose.)

Still learning.
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2018/06/08/worlds-fastest-exas...
visited here a while back, amazing place, not only is it worth seeing for the decor and rarer vintage arcade machines its also cheaper than most arcades
The lack of multi-register store and load is one is one of my biggest gripes with the RISC-V ISA. It just hurts to see the compiler waste 32 x2 bytes just to save and restore register context. (It matters a lot when you have a little CPU with 4KB of program RAM.)

What does it matter that it’s not pure?
> following the America Invents Act (AIA) the US is now in a first to file system

This is partly true. If Alice invents a widget and publishes details without filing a patent application, she still has a one-year grace period in which to file a U.S. patent application [1], and if she's successful she'll get only U.S. patent rights (plus a few other countries, I forget which). But whether or not Alice publishes before filing, the longer she waits, the greater the risk that Bob will independently invent the widget, without deriving it from Alice, and will file first. Even after the AIA, we still aren't a "first to file" system — we're a "first inventor to file" system.

[1] https://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/102.html
Can confirm JVM is the most impressive software I’ve ever hacked. Some of the GC algorithm code is insane, same for the JIT.
Great observation. And in fact "serverless" is the way that Unix network servers used to work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inetd

CGI is also the way the web used to work. Spawning processes has only gotten faster since then. The entire "process spawning doesn't scale to the modern web" argument is completely and totally bogus. Today, spawning a process in Linux is only 10-20 microseconds slower than creating a thread: http://www.bitsnbites.eu/benchmarking-os-primitives/

The performance problems are elsewhere.
Sure, it's a bummer to see potentially cool stuff get canceled. But Ubuntu was all about innovation from the start. I wouldn't mind seeing twice as many canceled projects, because it's a sign that you're willing to put yourself out there and fail often. Innovation has a cost, and if part of that cost is "we can't support netbooks but other distros will, heck you can even use Xubuntu if you want" that's fine with me.
Ayn Rand, are you back from the dead? But seriously, that’s called taxation, and it’s a small price to pay for lovely amenities like roads and local government.
"Catechism" --- not a word one regularly encounters these days. I've seen it used most commonly in late 19th/early 20th century books. One recent example:

https://archive.org/details/newcatechismele01hawkgoog
Not an external resource but I've identified that there are thought tools I continually apply in my own thinking to gain new perspective. I started writing them down and organizing them which has immediately benefited me and maybe one day I'll have distilled them clearly enough to share with others. Kind of like a toolbox for the mind.

Anyway, my advice is write down your own thoughts and discoveries. You'd be surprised how much content there is when you start collecting it all in one place and it will help you be more critical of your inner workings
They’re honestly not quite miscible. I know that, when .NET came out, everyone responded with “haha they copied Java,” but the truth is that they make a pile of very different technical trade-offs. The CLR has explicit stack allocation, the JVM does not. The JVM is genuinely a JIT, the CLR is really all about AOT. The CLR has full support for low-level code (pointers and such), while the JVM does not. The JVM and its class library has been cross-platform from day one, the CLR in a meaningful sense has not. The CLR has a really simple FFI, the JVM traditionally has not. The CLR has reified generics, the JVM does not. The JVM has a much more advanced GC, the CLR’s use of value types and things like Span<> means that such an advanced GC is (at least arguably) not necessary, and so on.

I really love the CLR, and I think it’s just as much “alien technology” as the JVM. I suspect the lack of love for it likely has more to do with the official versions being Windows-only than anything else. But I think it’s also just true that, while they both fill the same niche in a grand way (they’re both high-level VMs), their details are sufficiently different that a direct comparison doesn’t honestly make a ton of sense.
I think this is purposefully muddying the issue - there's a reason that mens rea* is part of law; the state of mind a person has in an action weighs heavily on our judgement of the outcome.

Facebook, Twitter, et. al. are first and foremost data-mining ad agencies that also provide social networking services. The fact that you can also use them to target terrorist is not really a by design item, much like even though you can beat someone to death with a wrench, it's primary function and the design goal behind it is to secure nuts to bolts and screws.

So yes, there is a bit of a difference when Google's tech happens to also be used by the military for image analysis from drones and when Google willingly assists and participates in such projects.

The major concern a lot of people have is that it's a very big switch in market from what they were doing to Project Maven. People who otherwise were maybe concerned, or heck, even satisfied with Google's influence on their lives and happy to participate in reCAPTCHA and pay for Google services now find their work and money being used to pay for something they disagree with.

I do not appreciate the simplification of the outcomes, as no civilized society judges in that way - we consider the motive as well as the outcome, as well as the state of mind of the person who committed the act. Likewise, there's quite a bit of a difference in US Army RnD grabbing an open source project and embedding it into drone guidance systems and Google taking a Government Contract; aside from the willingness of Google in this state, they demonstrate their complicit nature as a company via the contract and the payments; the open source project likely wasn't even aware of it until they read about it in some news article or saw snippets of their code in a Press Release/Demo.

* I realize that this is meant as a method of judging guilt (hence Guilty Mind), but the concept is the same here. The state of one's mind in making an action should be relevant.
Interesting. Would you say there is a "thing inside the brain that observes" in the case of humans, or more specifically, in your case personally? Much of my argument rests on the flimsy pillar that I personally perceive myself as an observer in a way that is different from inanimate objects.

Perhaps the only difference is in the level of complexity?
During a recent Tesla earnings call, Mr. Musk, who has struggled with questions about his company’s financial losses and concerns about the quality of its vehicles, chastised the news media for not focusing on the deaths that autonomous technology could prevent — a remarkable stance from someone who has repeated warned the world that A.I. is a danger to humanity.

The reporter is being pretty disingenuous with the opinion they are injecting here. There is a huge gap between a general (super intelligent) AI, and a self-driving car, which is more-or-less a bunch of narrow AI's strung together. Self-driving cars do have the potential to save an enormous number of lives by being far less likely to get into a car accident than your average human driver. In 2916, 37,500 Americans died in car accidents (that's not including the accidents that led to maiming or less severe injuries). If the autonomous cars are only 10% safer than the average American, they could save about 3,000 people per year [0].

[0] https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-rand-report/
Yeah, took me several articles until I found out that the SD means Software Defined. Irks me when articles don’t define acronyms.
Remember when Tina Fey used to play Sarah Palin on SNL? I was not a McCain/Palin supporter, but often found myself in the uncomfortable position of defending her against those skits.

Probably a dozen people I knew or met thought that Sarah Palin actually believed she could "see Russia from her house", as the famous line went[1].

What Palin had actually said in an ABC interview was, "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."[2]

I would have been game to criticize her actual statement, a fairly empty argument that she somehow had foreign policy experience. But no --- good friends of mine actually believed this was a real statement. No amount of Googling could fix this problem, as I would then face the criticism that I was "getting information from the internet".

I want to like political satire, but every time I watch/read it I think back to the dozens of instances like this one where I have felt like an outsider simply for arguing that something on a comedy show was not actually real, and we should only debate things that were really said or happened.

[1] https://youtu.be/vSOLz1YBFG0?t=78

[2] http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/26/pa...
I would recommend Crystal via the Amber Framework. Really no trade-offs there as you get ruby-like syntax with C performance, type checking, and a compiled language.
Off-topic: I had to whitelist javascript on the AMP page to get it to load properly, where it promptly pulled down nine JS scripts:

https://imgur.com/SkQgMOU

Wasn't the whole point of AMP to stop this crap?
The United States had mustard gas munitions in the European theater in case they needed to retaliate against a first use of chemical weapons by the Germans. In 1943 the Germans launched a successful air raid on the port of Bari, Italy [1]. One of the ships destroyed in this attack was a U.S. freighter carrying mustard gas munitions. Many allied servicemen and Italian civilians were exposed to mustard gas in this attack, and their treatment was impaired because the military command absolutely did not want to reveal the presence of chemical agents to the Germans in fear that the Germans might use that as a justification for using their own chemical weapons.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raid_on_Bari
>So the modern version of that could just be dropping a folder into a special location there kernel knows to search for drivers, and include a control panel app.

Do you mean the kernel is going to load random files from a user writable location? That sounds like a security nightmare TBH. Also, then you can't safely lazy-load kernel drivers because you never know what the user has done to the folder. Or if the OS has to lock access to the folder then the user has no feedback as to why they can't "uninstall" stuff by simply deleting folders, etc, etc. There are dozens of problems. Turns out, people have already thought over those problems and proposed solutions :)

>otherwise you get DLL hell and require something like a package manager and all its associated limitations for basically no benefit at all.

You claiming there is no benefit to being able to install/remove/update third party shared libraries doesn't solve anything.

>just include a copy in the app folder, secure in the knowledge that it will never cause a conflict or break your application due to an update or some other application replacing it.

That assumes you have the rights to distribute the library and that the library is small enough.

>Desktops, a.k.a "Personal Computers", don't really have much of a multi-user use case.

Maybe not for you. For millions of other users, its a very important use case.

>None of this is anywhere near as complicated as the people who promote it like to pretend it is.

Well its certainly not complicated if you re-define the problems as non-problems.
You should really check out Crystal / Amber Framework. Based on what you've tried you might really like it.
I agree the article is misleadingly written, but presumably the Allies in WWII knew they had no plans to use mustard gas in the immediate future, whereas the enemy could not be relied upon to abstain.
Ask HN: Tips for safely parsing user provided JSON in browser?
This is a sanity check, I'm looking for any recent best practices or tips for this use case:

Client-side, browser, react app. A small form that accepts user provided JSON. Would like to make this a safe as possible to parse that JSON. User will most like upload a file, or paste the JSON directly in an input.

A user accessing the form would most likely be logged in to the app, so there might be cookies and/or keys in localStorage etc. Want to protect things like this when possible.

Was thinking of several defenses, including.

1. Hosting the form within an iframe in a different context/domain.

2. Not parsing the JSON in the browser, but sending off to a serverless/cloud function api that has no env/secrets/db connections etc to potentially access.

3. Checking string input with regex and other typical tools before parsing/using.

The JSON, once parsed and passes validation would be used to generate some other objects/data that would be later stored in a database.

Thanks in advance.
SCREENHUNTER PRO 7.0.975 FULL VERSION WITH CRACK and KEY
If you want the network most people use, it's fb. I wouldn't worry about it. The worst thing that fb does with your data is to customize the ads you see.
I would recommend this book: https://www.amazon.com/Art-Thinking-Clearly-Rolf-Dobelli/dp/...
Catholicism is just one of many Christian sects.

My favorite biblical passage:

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’

23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

https://www.biblica.com/bible/niv/matthew/7/

So, the Bible itself suggests that Christ himself foresaw that many evil things would be done in his name and he would disavow such people and deny them entry into heaven.

My personal opinion based on stories like the one below is that, yes, the Catholic Church has lost its way and is giving Christianity a bad name.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1883598,00...

I'm not Christian. I did attend church for a time in my twenties. I have plenty of criticisms of Christianity myself. It isn't really my cup of tea. I imagine it would have been 2000 years ago when it was being studied in secret in small groups. Now that it is a major religion, it strikes me as more a means to publicly identify as A Good Person.

There are inherent problems with publicly identifying as A Good Person. One of them is that there comes a point past which looking good and doing good part ways. If public identification as one of the good guys matters to you enough, you may well choke when it comes time to stand your ground against the tide of public opinion.

But my personal criticisms of religion do not in any way make me think it is reasonable to claim that religion is purely a source of evil and no good comes of it.
None of that happening has anything to do with technology.

The only reason we know about it is improvements in communications.

Nations having people killed across borders outside of the judicial system isn't a new thing, and it isn't going away. The technology to do it is incidental, and a very minor part of defense R&D output.

Functioning communications enables war crimes just as much as or more than weapons, so why not refuse to work on computer networking research too? (one could make a million such arguments about essentially everything)