skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One thing I've been concerned with lately is the tradeoff between systems that strengthen with training and systems that degrade with use.

Most of my favorite forms of exercise (climbing, hiking, running) are pretty hard on my joints, along with several other risks like shin splints and pulley injuries. I know there's some capacity to strengthen tendons and ligaments, but I can't find decent data on what tradeoffs I'm making at what levels of activity. Replacing everything I do with swimming and intermediate-rep weight training would almost certainly offer a better tradeoff, but I want to at least work out what price I'm paying.
Ok, now I just need to get this working in emacs.
Well,

The law of power linked above says to use the least powerful language appropriate for the task. So it's possible VB6 fell into the category not-powerful-enough/not-appropriate.
Saudi Retaliates, Pulls HyperLoop Funding as Silicon Valley Startups Quake
Not worried about secrets in repo?
> The Bankers also passively fought against Congress, by putting clauses in the bill that limited their power and removed them completely once the bill was passed.

That's...a quite implausible claim, supported by no cited evidence of any kind. (And not unique in the article in that respect.)

Much of this reads like the kind of conspiracy theories goldbugs have long spread that were later adopted by the cryptocurrency community, and is not supported by the few sources you list at the end (but do not specifically cite for particular claims.)
They can fork if they don't want to pre-install Google apps. Lots of Chinese phones have alternative app stores.
The reason why I thought about this was because whenever you look at any world war timeline shipwrecks, it is totally overtaken by aquatic life. I am sure those ships had enough toxic things on them maybe radio active stuff too but somehow nature reclaimed it.
> What is usually implemented in Lisp textbooks, is not Prolog

When a Lisp textbook says it implements Prolog, it implements it with unification. See for example Paradigms of AI Programming, by Peter Norvig - the chapters on implementing a Prolog compiler...
So Google will charge Samsung $1,000 per handset for Play Services, but then pay Samsung $1,000 to have Chrome, Gmail, YouTube, etc pre-installed.

Result: Google meets its legal obligations to unbundle their software but in practice the handset manufacturers don't have a choice.
> But we do need a gatekeeper

Having observed this area for 18 years now, I'll say that gatekeeper (a party which has unwaveringly observed and stuck to delivering the principles of software freedom) is the Free Software Foundation. This is the only reason why users gravitate to "open source" - not its sexy name, but the freedoms such software provides when a user wants to use/apply it.

Back in the day, the founding president of OSI justified VA Linux making the "alexandria" project closed source (the software that ran Sourceforge.net back in the day - back when sourceforge.net was a good citizen). The remains of "alexandria" was forked to form other projects such as GNU savannah, and there was a later fork named GForge IIRC.

https://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2001082501120prbzc...

There is only one organization that has unwaveringly sought freedoms for users of software. I've firsthand heard it being accused of promoting communism, and sometimes have wondered if it went too far. At least, they haven't wandered in their principles.
Since the author added a link to the Wire audit after I pointed out it existed, I think it means "third party has audited it and verified claims". On the other hand, they also still claim Telegram has been audited in this sense, which I have also pointed out and they have not resolved.
Dubai Firm Raised Billions from Gates, US Pledging to Do Good–Then It Fell Apart
The OSI defined "Open Source" so they kinda get to put the rules to it. There is an Open Source Definition (OSD) which states what the license to the software can and cannot do. It's primarily about licensing at the OSI, not about open source itself. The definition clarifies what can be considered "open source" so organizations that need structure have something to follow.

As for apps, there's no approval process for an application - only the license applied. And if you use one of the 83 OSI-approved licenses, you can be guaranteed that your software falls under the Open Source Definition, stewarded by the OSI.

So that's how the OSI fits in.
> The managers, that this paper describe, worship complexity without realizing it. They want as large a team as possible and thereby they make a problem complex because a large organization can cause the architecture to collapse.

Maybe we have different definitions of "worship", but this seems like accidental complexity, not reverence. If anything, people tend to worship simplicity.
The interface should be what saves a ton of time, and should not expose the underlying technical model (especially because that model may change at some point)
Sounds like Wahhaboutism.
Totally agree with this. I've heard Amazon does similar things, like multiple teams competing with each other to accomplish similar goals. Can be very healthy for the company if managed correctly.
The people are responsible for their government.
Ask HN: What news aggregator do you use?
I was a heavy user of the old Google News mobile app but it appears to have officially shut down today in favor of the new app, which I find woefully inadequate. The new app completely ignores my preferences including preferred sources and topics, and appears not to allow me to set my home country as the U.S., which was a big draw.
Lyft Picks Underwriters for IPO in 2019
I miss grooveshark, don't forget that semicolon. There wasnt a good replacement afterwards. Just a bunch of people playing shitty songs from games pretending to DJ
Sure, agree with everything you've said. Moreover, understanding how the brain truly works, think of how much value that could have for medicine, psychology, etc.

The point is, history has shown over and over, it may be more or less helpful in building the best general AI we can. We just don't know.

Making an unqualified declaration that it's required is hard not to see as hyperbole as this point in history.

So is his one statement wrong, yes. Do I want to stop him? Heck no, giddy up. I hope he makes big breakthroughs.
Gaming can be a useful appetizer for young folks looking to get into programming. Starcraft wasn't a waste for me. Granted, learning tons of specific build orders doesn't help now. However, Starcraft taught me to touch-type, it taught me finger-speed, and taught me some of the basics of programming when I created some custom maps with internal logic and triggers. Another friend was a map-hacker on WC3 dota, used to play Riki (permanently invis char) and use map hacks. He started coding for that purpose, for hacks and bots in WC3.
> Honest question. If I write some code and release it on Github with an MIT license, do I need permission from OSI to call my project "Open Source"?

MIT is an approved license, so yes.

> is a legal requirement?

No.
>> So how will this business generate billions of dollars in profit?

It doesn't. At least, not from people paying for rides. I suspect Uber will have to start leveraging their passengers. Either they are going to start hitting them with ads, as taxis have done for years, or become yet another source of consumer data.

I imagine a possible nightmare scenario whereby Uber starts charging people other than passengers. Venues such as nightclubs could be asked to contribute else their customer base not get rides home.
Wow, this could be really useful for my team. We've built a ton of customized workflows on top of github. We use a modified git-flow process, and have bespoke solutions for automatically tagging branches when branches w/ name "hotfix" get into master, when long-living releases get merged, tons of logic for getting commits on a "release-*" branch into dev and other branches.

We ended up building a custom github worker that listens to all of this, but it's opaque and our Bus factor is 1 for that tool. Putting it on Github where anyone can change the rules and see them cleanly is fantastic!
> Neglecting it WILL lead to injury

I would love to see some evidence of this. Here's Brian Shaw's workout routine. Without question one of the strongest men in the world, I see no dedicated core work:

http://deadliftworkouts.com/train-strongman-series-brian-sha...

Core work is not a bad thing, but it's not required.
But then you need to add each new contact to a group that rings. I use an app that blocks anybody not in my contact list. That's the single feature I use for that app. They probably mine all of my all history. Why can't this feature be a simple checkbox in the phone or contacts app?
Big difference between a "party" and a strategy session. So it wasn't literally defined at a party. And, even if it were, I guess it doesn't matter. The OSI owns the OSD which is what defines what Open Source is.
When you've got hundreds or thousands of drives to destroy it's not worth the man hours or consumables to cut them or drill holes in them. Even shooting them gets old quickly.

When I worked for a defense contractor we started one of our daily infosec briefings with a video of one of our shipyards destroying a few hundred hard drives. They put them all in a shipyard size press brake. The end result was very long line of C shaped hard drives.

Anyone who deals with enough drives and doesn't have other business (like a shipyard) that they can borrow suitable equipment from will likely wind up buying an industrial shredder.[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQYPCPB1g3o
Ontario funds a Catholic school board with public money. Separation of church and state is not at all universal.
I learned to embrace platform languages, regardless how I might feel about them.

Not having to deal with extra debugging layers, lesser debugging tools and additional manual FFI is much more productive than whatever I might gain in syntax/semantics of the "compile-to" language.
there will be a new interface for controlling your phones and future devices that doesn't require typing. I would hold out for that :D

Look at Neuralink
Fair question :-) And the answer is no, you would not need OSI's permission to call your project open source -- because you'd be using the MIT license which has been reviewed and approved by the OSI.

You can find the list of approved licenses, along with information about the review and approval process, over at https://opensource.org/licenses
>In what way is the FSF any more political than the OSI, beyond trying to protect the defined freedoms of free software?

The OSI only concerns itself with defining open source and publishing a list of open source licenses. The FSF unquestionably concerns itself with much more.

>The right to take my code, profit from it and not share back is essentially what the OSI stands for and is thus not respected by me.

No, this is what open source stands for. If you don't want to write open source software, then don't. That's your choice. But the right to do exactly this is protected by both the OSI and the FSF, and I doubt you can find another authority which disagrees.
And then repeat that in a number of jurisdictions!
It'll be interesting to see how the new "ride sharing" economy of scooters and bikes impacts their bottom line. The scooters are very popular in SF so far and Uber recently launched in Santa Monica. Seems like a more scalable way to get into cities and not rely on a driver infrastructure.

Anyone have any idea of the ROI of a scooter so far?
No, of course I'm not proposing anything like that. On the contrary, I was saying that it seemed impossible. Can't you see we actually agree about that!

I pointed out other possible problems with the original suggestion that news agencies should use blockchains. But you seem to completely misunderstand those words as being an attempt to support that original suggestion. Why?

I'm amazed that your reply to me repeats almost exactly what I had just said: "[blockchain could] store a hash of published revisions ... [but] copies of the original articles would be much too expensive to store on today's typical blockchains."

I hope this won't sound rude, but I've got to suggest that you read what people are actually saying, instead of assuming you know what they're going to say.
Okay, pedantic... totally pedantic. It is derived from the open DFSG, so NO Debian does not own it. Don't be such a pedant - it doesn't help the conversation.
The Outrageous Cost of Skipping TDD
I think OP meant in the spiritual sense, free software is the original "open-source". A better one, I'd argue, but that's a different discussion.
> I'm not sure 1 line in a 3,000-word article is a fair amount?

Assuming this is a misplaced reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18231623 —

there is more than one line of editorializing in the article; virtually every sentence in the article contains either editorializing or fact claims that don't seem grounded in the few cited sources, and some contain both.
for the most part I think that OnePlus fits this gap, although they are maybe a little too expensive still to truly fit the same role
A few I like on top of what has already been mentioned:

http://rachelbythebay.com/w/

http://highscalability.com/

https://medium.com/@NetflixTechBlog
Yev from Backblaze here -> yes but no ETAs at the moment!
As I've mentioned elsewhere: this is why you audit the apk, not the claimed source.
Android is considered a “monopoly” in Europe [1], hence they should adhere to other rules. So yes, good job Europe!

[1] http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/europe
Another two factors in the '00s re-rise of Lisp were Steve Yegge's Drunken Blog Rants (https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/blog-rants) & Practical Common Lisp (http://gigamonkeys.com/book).

The former was, at the time, very influential (and deservedly so); the latter was and remains the best reference for actually using Common Lisp to write real software (Edi Weitz's Common Lisp Recipes is an excellent companion volume).
This is not right. The EU only outlaws monopolies which do illegal things, just like the US:

"Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position ... shall be prohibited...."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_t...

There is a difference in terms of how you go about proving "abuse," but it's a difference of degree, not of kind; in the US, there is more weight placed on "effects" analysis where you see if you can prove something bad actually happened, while in the EU it is often sufficient to show that the actions are the kind that are likely to result in bad things. But this is a generalization and both kinds of proof are considered in both places.
The server _is_ free. As long as you don't modify the server, you don't have any obligations.

Well, that isn't true any more. If you start selling MongoDB functionality as a service, you now have obligations, even if you didn't modify it.
Ah I hadn't seen that, I was quite surprised when I used goapp111 and it deployed successfully. It's great to be able to take a normal Go application and run it on Google Cloud. Thanks!
AGPL requires you to share the changes to the licensed software you make available, that is, changes to the MongoDB itself.

It was like LGPL in the local case: you alter the library and make it available through the software you link with it, so you have to share the changes you've made to the library, but not the rest of the linked code.

With SSPL, it's like the full GPL in the local case: if you take the licensed software, and link it (via rpc / network) to your other software, you must share not only any changes you've made to the licensed part, but the whole thing that uses it.

Another tricky question is where the border line is. If I write a wrapper that interfaces with MongoDB and repackages its data, then makes them remotely available to the rest of my service, do I only need to share the wrapper? If not, and any network connection that substantially uses an SSPL piece counts, then do I have to share my internal monitoring system? Am I even allowed to connect closed-source data analysis tools to an SSPL database? Etc.
Not to mention a situation where a huge megacorp has basically driven every other smartphone OS out of the market by dumping[0] its software on the market and then insidiously making it less free and open with every release.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
But the OSD is maintained by the OSI, so an appeal to "authority" is a great way to make this argument. The OSI gets to decide what fits their OSD (which you quote) so it's really a non-issue.
My version of this - OS (Linux) crashes due to overclock stability testing filled EFI NVRAM, and I had to manually delete the crash dumps after running into puzzling issues later on. Apparently it was possible (on some hardware, at least) for the automatic dumps to brick your computer: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919485
AGPL: 'if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.'

Some companies are illegally running a modified version of MongoDB while keeping their changes closed source.

As I understand, the new licence will allow them to do that if they pay a commercial licence (contributing to the project by financing instead of coding).
Yes, they will have the choice of also selling Android handsets without Play Services, which before they couldn't do.
People definitely fetishize complexity. I often mention that I like an intellectual challenge at interviews, and the interviewers often mention 'oh, but this project is very complex' like they are saying something naughty. (Once, the interviewer followed up with "we're using algorithms). I suspect they are usually right, and the codebase is a pile of unnecessary design patterns (because those are what educated developers use, right?).

Where I currently work we're using Azure to do a shitload of computations. At the same time, many modules don't even bother to throw away intermediate calculations. They literally have a giant array of them, and save every result, for each step, even if it's not necessary.

But hey, the project is seen as a huge success, because it's so complex.
> Sad you see it that way. For obvious reasons our Github code for Bittorrent-based token economy is separated from passport-grade identity system with experimental zero-knowledge proof system.

I really don't know what those obvious reasons would be. I can understand that "the details of this biometric system will remain proprietary", but I don't see why the rest of it wouldn't be developed out in the open. That's the one thing I do think is quite commendable about the Tribler project and the courses you give: everything is very open for everyone to see. Are you in this case afraid the results will not stand up to scrutiny?

I'm quite skeptical, especially in light of your past conduct. If the system you are presenting is really so "ready for deployment", there would be no reason to include those irrelevant student projects as part of the paper. Instead, they form the main portion of the results.

The title of the paper is "Deployment of a Blockchain-Based Self-Sovereign Identity", but instead, it's about juggling some performance tests of student projects along with the IPv8 library, and never about that supposed deployment.

> These pilots are indeed not moving fast enough for us, we're now using a notary-based approach. Governments don't innovate as fast as they themselves want. -Tribler founder.

Well, I can really understand that those municipalities are not innovating fast enough. That must be frustrating. That doesn't give you a license to simply make up things as you go along.

There is no "self-sovereign identity solution which is in production in the Netherlands for use by citizens in the latter half of 2018", as you claim there is. There would only be two municipal pilots. There is no "new Dutch digital passport solution ready for global adoption". Not yet. If it was in production, I would be able to use it.

Stop making things up.
> China is miles ahead of Saudi in equality

That really has nothing to do with the issue of totalitarianism. Some people are treated equal, some people are eliminated, so you get more equality? I think China is just as immoral as SA.
Thanks, I was hoping someone would be able to point me towards a similar file manager!
I know! I wish the non-touchbar models got 8th gen processor upgrades, now I'm stuck with the touchbar but it's not that bad I guess......
Google play earned $6.2B in 2018Q3
Yeah. In practice I think the AGPL was already preventing AWS / Google / Azure from selling Mongo-as-a-service, and this license will go even further.
> Perhaps it is paid for by things like Maps and YouTube.

This is why monopoly rules exist, and why it's not quite so simple. Leveraging strong market position in one market, say search/advertising, to undercut prices in a completely different market is clear-cut anti-competitive behavior.

My retort to your argument would be: why even do hardware / Android at all? Because it's a distribution mechanism for _their_ services. If you leverage market dominance to expand that distribution network with fewer / no alternatives for consumers, that's like anti-trust 101.
Is is very similar to Lisp, Clipper or Perl, also known in CS circles as dynamic scope variables.
Hmm, I wonder if that's somewhat what Fuchsia and the push to ChromeOS might be about.

I guess looking forward the writing is on the wall that Samsung will eventually move to its own OS. An the 'anti-fork' attempts will eventually get beaten down by litigation.

So really a proprietary OS on your own hardware like Apple would be the way to go. No surprise that Android apps will work on ChromeOS going forward, I'm sure they'd work seamlessly on Fuchsia too (don't they already?).

Maybe in a few years this comment will look quite prescient. Or I'll look like a dumbass. I'd say 25/75
Police can’t systematically give tickets for things that aren’t illegal. Mistakes happen and the courts sort it out - but if that was the policy there would be huge problems.
Some can and are decontaminated and sunk for creating reefs. I dont think old oil tankers are used for obvious reasons.
React Native: Adding Push Notifications to Your App with Expo
Given the massive 30% cut the Play Store takes on all app sales and in-app purchases, it's likely the Play Store is wildly profitable on it's own.

That being said, this announcement actually revealed the real moneymakers: Everything else Google offers is just what they feel they need to keep you locked into Search and Chrome, which drive Google's real market dominance. The only real reason they're making it hard to get the Play Store (despite it being self-sustainable) is to provide an incentive to let them put Chrome and Search on the phone, and that carries through with this announcement.

They'll charge for the Play Store, but they'll happily pay you more or less the same amount to install Chrome and Search.
And again, you've completely caricatured anyone with a more conservative view point.

The vast majority of people who criticize BLM or any other leftist issue are not racists. They are people who see problems with a movement that has good intentions and terrible execution. Thats pretty much the standard conservative criticism of liberal politics: Good intentions, horrible execution that lots of times backfires.

You need to realize that for the most part everyone wants the same things. We just disagree about how to get there.
That does happen, but I think it's only done with fixed platform structures[0], rather than the mobile platforms like in the article. Apparently 532 rigs have been turned into reefs in the Gulf of Mexico[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_platform
[1] https://www.bsee.gov/what-we-do/environmental-focuses/rigs-t...
Belgium charges Iranian diplomat with planning jihad bomb attack in Paris