skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Presumably this would be classes in whatever sense the ABI would define them. Which could be defined in such a way that they can be mapped straightforwardly to Rust structs and traits.

Which would then not map straightforwardly to C++ classes, because the vtable pointer would be in the wrong spot.

You can't have an ABI that makes two things that represent things in concretely different ways somehow resolve that inherent contradiction.
Great insight. How can we use something similar to Interface Builder to create React Native apps?
I think this could also be a good idea for phasing out public APIs -- instead of just taking an API offline, start to fail requests early at low probability, ramping the probability up to 100% over the course of a month or so.
This is the kind of HN response I was expecting (along with the downvotes); everyone who isn't a dev or engineer is wrong/irrational in their choices and experiences.

I had some useful extensions that worked with old Firefox. Then new Firefox came along and killed off some of them, so I had even fewer useful extensions. Meanwhile, Chrome has many more useful extensions and hasn't killed off any of them. Chrome fits my workflow, Firefox doesn't/can't. Yet this is somehow understood as me wanting 'less'. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'd find a HN post about this project and it's results very interesting
I agree that the OO hype at the time was crazy, and I was extremely guilty of that mania at the time. But from my POV (as a Pink/Taligent employee) the failures of Taligent had little to do with that. It was much more a problem of constantly moving goalposts (we're an OS! Now we're an OS and a layer on top of AIX! Now we're going to be an optional window manager for AIX!) and vicious politics.
Big News: Know Your Company Is Now Know Your Team
I don't agree with "unusable" but "academic" probably has some justification.

The fact that it has a "let" keyword does make it "academic" to me. I'm fairly sure we can now have compilers that don't need such hints to be explicitly provided. Rust enjoys its let keyword so much they have a "If let" syntax.

Languages that use random punctuation without providing real benefit could also use a cleanup. Lua with ~= is a good example: Tilde in mathematics means "approximate". In C != means "not equal". So lua's designers can be accused of either never seeing C or deliberately choosing something different. Given that Lua is implemented in C they can't easily claim ignorance.

Archaic and awkward ways of expressing code shouldn't be propagated into new languages unless here is a clear benefit. Have a look at Erlang. Excellent overall but has lots of old warts from yesteryear you wouldn't want in a modern language. Eg look at its string syntax / naming rules. Now compare it to Elixir. Modern. Same VM.

Moving with the times is useful. Future languages shouldn't be adding debris everywhere just to be different.
Any more food products you know of which use leftovers? I’ve always suspected jam and juice to be high in leftover content.
Because Zero was not trained on human games and Master was? Do we have any model which was trained only from self-play that can beat humans? I don't think so.
Same here. The only real work I had to do was removing some unnecessary imports because of the new improvements to mod namespaces.
How does it benefit the public to allow this kind of competition? Corporate competition exist to serve the public, and when it doesn't, we may as well make rules to force it to. Competition isn't an intrinsic good.
Wealth is attainable by anyone.
SG20 Education and Recommended Videos for Teaching C++
> It looks like this doubling happened in ~2000 so it wouldnt show up in your chart.

Since 2000 many new satellite measurements were done and the values improved. As I've quoted your page Planck in 2013 ultimately made the most precise CMB measurements that most conclusively fit the "dark matter" model and provably don't fit the "MOND" model. And for that proof there were no "factor 2" corrections, as you also confirm, at least since 2000. The way you wanted to believe, and how you quoted some other parts of the same document, was that that had to be done for that 2013 proof, and it obviously haven't had. BTW the nature of the measurements, especially those made decades ago, is such that when we started with some value and then later measured something only 2 times smaller or bigger (but then all repeated measurements remain closer to one another), it's still OK. It's not the absolute values that prove this or that, it's the measured shapes that match or not the very complex calculations. And that's what happened in 2013 with Planck: what was measured for more than a decade with other satellites, and finally most precisely with Planck, shows the shape that in practice can't match the MOND predictions but nicely matches what the "dark matter" model predicts.
My point was that that is the official source for all the games they released so you can see for yourself. If they aren't there, they aren't there. You can download the earlier games (http://www.alphago-games.com/) but apparently not these new ones.
I think it's a lot better than not having a process, for sure! The hearts of most of the people involved are in the right place, as far as I can tell, and they do listen to feedback some of the time. That said, they feel that if they think something is a good idea then that means they should do it even if others disagree. Which is understandable, of course.
That's why the only time I ever use Safari on my MBP is when I'm away from a power source. Which isn't very often.
There’s a plugin for colorful tabs.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/containers-th...
Very early in the morning here in Shenzhen.

Can say this, a bro from Huawei said that the talk is about Liu Changming, or, talking precisely, his Children detained in China.
The 80-character limit may have come from punchcards, but it's still important in 2018. It allows me to have three side-by-side columns of code, and I know I'm not alone. Even 100-character limit would break similar setups.

Furthermore, I personally find a lot easier to read code that is not too spread horizontally. I do not have extensive experience with Lisp or Clojure, but all languages I've worked with will handle a "small" line width of 80 character just fine most of the time.

I do recognize this is a matter of personal preference, but please don't dismiss the 80-character limit because it's old. It may be, but it is still relevant.

Other than that, I wholeheartedly agree with the post. I started toying around with clojurescript for the past few months, and the one thing I can't wrap my head around is its formatting. Sometimes one space, sometimes two. Sometimes block spacing. It's very confusing.
Well... that’s great. But also doesn’t really require much in terms of advances in AI? Unless you’re saying this is coming from advances in face recognition?
It's worth noting that the major recent failures of the grid across south-eastern Australia have been due to 1) tornados taking down the interconnector between Victoria and SA (a failure which the conservative government blamed on renewables), and 2) regular failures from the decrepit old coal power plants.

While the transition to renewables has indeed been rapid and jarring, that's not what has caused problems.
To add on to what jamesmunns has already said, we're an excited group, us embedded Rust users. I recently built one of our in-house products using Rust as a proof-of-concept, and the process convinced me that Rust is the future of embedded devices. Feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions. I'd love to keep working with embedded Rust!
I do not know about macos, but in Linux you could achieve this by running your process in a cgroup.
The Chrome additional profile feature has also become a lot more confusing and less useful with the auto-sign-in-change debacle, alas.

Which may actually be what pushes me to FF. Not out of spite, just that I was counting on Chrome profiles for this purpose, but they've gotten a lot harder for me to use for that (and were never as good as FF's multi-container thing, it sounds like).
It's also a good reminder that monopolies in the tech industry are fleeting. The concerns that people have today over Facebook becoming a monopoly will seem a bit silly in 20 years after they miss a disruptive change and lose out to a new competitor.
You just need to unlock Xiaomis and install Lineage OS. The unlocking process is the most ridiculous I have seen, requiring a windows tool that works only after you've tried their Android version a week. And the tool requires some black magic to even work. The Xiaomi OS talks to many Chinese tracking servers all the time regarding to Blokada reports.

I have a Mi Mix 2 and I love the phone. Just be aware of the unlocking procedure before buying one of their phones.
Wow, easy there.

I'm guessing this is a stressful day around the Mozilla watercooler. This is bad news for Mozilla. Web authors will target the behavior supported by a majority of user browsers. With many independent browsers, there is no implementation majority, just a plurality. Majority behavior only comes from a standard and all implementers are incentivized to work with that standard.

When there's only a few, it's possible for a single one to become the de facto "standard". The web is effectively moving to a first-past-the-post election. Because Microsoft is adopting Chromium, Mozilla's engine and Safari may very quickly become minority ones.

This might suck for users, but that's not entirely clear. Obviously, in a perfect world, there would be infinite engineers building infinite implementations of every platform. In reality, every engineer-hour spent working on, say, a new implementation of COBOL is an hour not spent on software that might impact more users' lives in more important ways.

Maybe a couple of commodity web browsers and engineers working on other more important stuff is better for society? How many implementations of CSS does the world really need? <shrug>

Either way, I'm not advocating anything. I'm more interested in understanding what are the causes and effects — both bad and good — of a platform going from three implementations to two. I'm approaching this as sociology, not as someone who has skin in the game.

I do work for Google and did work as part of the Chrome org, but I don't have enough expertise to make any claims about whether this is an overall good or bad thing for the world. I'm just interested in all of the consequences.
Fix cryptography.
It isn't fair to blame Taligent for that hype. Several of these systems existed before Pink/Taligent project was ever discussed publicly. Heck, we used to talk about how our stuff was better than COM and CORBA all the time.

And OpenDoc was developed more or less simultaneously with Pink IIRC. But its been a long time and I never worked on OpenDoc so I might have the timing off a bit on this one.
Really excited that non-lexical lifetimes landed! This was the most confusing part of the borrow checker: NLLs were the main class of "this should work but it doesn't" that I encountered in Rust. This should make Rust feel easier to pick up.
In 1996 Mac users were far more familiar with BeOS than NeXTSTEP. Even though it was a developer release, Be was marketing heavily to Mac users (like giving away free CDs) and BeOS could run on Macs so Mac users could try it side-by-side with MacOS and form firsthand impressions. (I was triple-booting MacOS, BeOS, and Linux on my Power Mac with a bunch of Jaz carts.) Meanwhile NeXTSTEP was expensive and ran on expensive non-Mac hardware.

BeOS was also optimized (probably over-optimized) for first impressions; the immaturity and architectural mistakes were hidden behind a facade of "OMG it's so fast and pretty". The BeOS GUI with its cartoony 32x32 icons was also a lot closer to MacOS than NeXTSTEP with it's huge high-DPI GUI, so BeOS looked like "Mac done right" while NeXT was a foreign culture.

So yeah, NeXT was better but most Mac users had no way of knowing that at the time.
It took some warming to, but I have come round to appreciate letsencrypt's short certificate lifetimes. Monthly renewal should be maximum for any system, but ideally you'd want to go weekly. Assuming your renewal is automated, I don't see any downside, only benefits. It properly internalises cert renewal as part of standard system operations, bringing it into your daily ops instead of having it as some scary gray undocumented box for the next guy to tick.

Much like writing tests, it initially hurt my ego a bit, but I've come to like and proselytise it.
The Edge code base is probably so tightly coupled to the Windows API that it could never practically be ported to another platform.
https://www.google.com/search?q=fb+price&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&c...

If you look at the stock charts alone, your friend is probably correct. The date, specifically, seems to be Thursday July 26th.
Rust as a language was significantly less mature a few years ago; I think that's the bigger factor here.

It certainly doesn't hurt to do compelling things in Rust in a browser engine, but doing compelling things in Rust in some other project entirely would also be motivating.

To look at it from another angle, Mozilla itself had a reason to try to tackle some problems with Rust. It didn't need a competing browser engine using Rust in order to move forward with that plan. And the plan wasn't "well, we'll try this because we can somehow fall back on a competing engine if this doesn't work". So if your argument were true, I don't see how Mozilla could have moved on this either.

In the end people do things because the potential benefit justifies the costs and risks, and having a competitor do something is not the only way of determining potential benefit.
True. I don't expect them to give us or others the same courtesy in response.
can't connect, doesn't use TLSv1.2
How did AlphaZero lose 6 games? Do we have an analysis of those? I'd love to see what happened.
Multi-Cloud and Kubernetes: Cloud Academy Data Report
How DEC developed Alpha (1992)
Did some research internally, this is being tracked but still no root cause AFAIK :(
If it ever got to the point where Google had achieved complete domination of the web, do we just leave?

I'm curious as to what point we say screw it and create a new web. Is that even an option? Is it even plausible or desirable?
I think that's exactly it. The problem is when these articles come out and everybody try to learn Go and use VS Code so they think can become smarter or at least being perceive as such :-P
Arduino has the benefit of several years of refinement and an all-in-one, multi-target library. Embedded Rust is still in its infancy, though it's absolutely usable and (imo) practical for experienced users. I think as the embedded abstractions get polished and there is more convergence of HALs, something like an all-inclusive solution may come about. As it stands, it's very easy to combine a chip HAL and device drivers, but you have to know what building blocks to grab (if they're there - there's lots to be done!).
A couple little things I won't turn into literal ETA3, just in case you've already been reading the long post above. :)

(2) below is also mostly for me, I think.

1. Thanks, Michael Weiss.
This is essentially the same argument I'm making, only terser.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/expandin...

2. One important thing about the expansion of the universe is that people hear "expansion of space" and reasonably think space has physical properties. https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.0380 is a good rant about that, and https://arxiv.org/abs/0809.4573 is another interesting take. There's a sort of Betteridge effect going on, in that none of the authors think that the concept of expanding space is awful, but they're instead capturing the "gotchas" that befall even working relativists stray into what philosophers call manifold substantivalism. (I hope that doesn't attract house philosophers, no offence. I don't think my text is all honey!)
Because it is not about edge being worse or too expensive, is in good part about having electron apps run better and with more battery efficiency. so the choice is to either implement the whole v8 API on their engine or use v8.
That can be achieved by having multiple carts issued with slightly different expiries. Without weakening enforcement of all other certs (incl. those belonging to companies that manage them properly).

This is immediately results in the “it took us more than 24 hours to work out everything was failing, it needs to be 72 hours”. The best thing about that is that it results in a self extending policy - the longer it takes to age out an expired cert, the longer it takes for the failure volume to become noticeable, and then the longer to work out that the problem is cert expiry, and so the more likely they’ll need an extension (again).

The correct solution for this problem is for people to correctly manage their certs, which they should be doing anyway because the private keys are sufficiently important you should know exactly which are in use and where they are in use.
Yes, making a poor financial decision is strange when it's so easy (on the face of it) to make a better choice.
How Artificial Intelligence Is Helping Financial Institutions
Breathing life into IoT devices with an innovative algorithmic approach
> Either there will eventually be a privacy/creepiness fiasco, or Google will attempt to use Chrome as leverage to squeeze a competitor out of a market.

Perhaps if it ever comes to that, people will look to an alternative means (than the web) of accessing documents and code.
There's some interesting politics going on wrt lithium in Chile. Seems like the regulators don't want to increase output as lithium extraction uses a ton of water, and the Atacama is one of the driest places on Earth.

Presumably that is why the same company is trying to kick off in Australia as well, even though we have higher regulatory and labour costs here.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-chile-albemarle-exclusive...
What editor do Go devs use??? Their numbers for Go only add up to 12%!
https://d25hn4jiqx5f7l.cloudfront.net/file_attachments/files...
From your quoted article.

This work offers a new understanding of global particle
formation as based almost entirely on ternary rather than
binary nucleation, with ions playing a major but subdominant
role. Our results suggest that about 43% of cloud-forming
aerosol particles in the present-day atmosphere originate
from nucleation

This is a major effect, confirmed by your own article. I'm not certain why you linked it, since you are arguing against cosmic rays effecting cloud formation.
Actors – The Past and Present of Software Engineering (2017, Video)
The question is, does that justify working on that kind of technology? Dual use is a bit to friendly of a wording here. This is a step into a dystopia we have taken a while back.
Is anyone genuinely surprised by this? I grew up with the early days of Facebook and everyone around understood the company must be doing _something_ to provide some service to people for free. I've accepted the fact long time ago that we are the product that they have to sell to make money to give us something for free. Am I the only one feeling this way?
I don't think that is anti-competitive under the legal[1] interpretation, but I could be wrong. My understanding of the legal precedent here is that a company is allowed to disallow service for any reason whatsoever as long as there is no contract in place. The only time it becomes anticompetitive is if a product prevents users or customers from being able to access the competing product.

The example I'm thinking of is Microsoft with Internet Explorer, where users were unable to use a browser of their choice. Here a company is not being allowed to use an API, but users are not prevented from using the product if they'd like. They just won't get all the functionality of Facebook within that company's product.

Facebook's behavior seems more comparable to Apple disallowing use of privileged iOS APIs in competing mobile browsers rather than Microsoft not allowing users to install competing browsers. But I'm not an expert on monopolies, so I'm happy to be corrected here.

__________________________

1. NB - I'm not making a claim or observation about ethics or what ought to be, I'm asking about what is, legally.
That's not what I meant by raising this incident. The top-level reply spoke about marketing something as better than a competitor, then switching to that competitor, and the cognitive dissonance involved. The PowerPC to Intel switch is another example of that pattern: marketing your option as superior to a competitor up until the moment you discard your current path for the competitor.

It's meant to illustrate that this is hardly the only time this has happened, and that one should think carefully about not only whether marketing is accurate but whether it's comprehensively addressing everything you might care about.
While I'm no FB fan I actually don't think these stories are anywhere near as important as the non-stop media brigading would suggest.

* Cambridge Analytica: A company accessed friends lists via an api and sold them to another company. Friends lists are pretty much public on every other service. Very low quality data. Happened years ago. Original company accessed the data legitimately via api.

* Soros: Billionaire investor in FB starts publicly bad mouthing FB. FB hires team to find out why. Non-story.

* This story (strategic use of data with various partners): Literally every company that sells data does this. Some shady user practices, yes, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Altogether these are pretty minor things but the media coverage would have you think FB is causing the world economy to collapse.

My theory is that this is happening for two reasons:

1. Old media business models continue to deteriorate. FB is the new gatekeeper so the old gatekeepers are attacking it.

2. Extreme left-wing political bias in major media companies is still looking for a scapegoat for the 2016 election results and trying to to stop platforms that can circumvent their narrative.

Again, FB has a lot wrong with it, but to not view this as a coordinated attack from a handful of centralized mainstream media players is to miss the real story here.
Backwards-compatibly changing existing features feels qualitatively the same to me as adding new features. In either case you can ignore them until you need to work on a codebase that uses them.
Firefox 3 was much better. No Pocket. No article/news recommendations. Panorama view. Firefox used to be my favorite until it started to get bloated. Prioritizes privacy? Then let me turn recommendations and Pocket permanently off.
> fails on a certain date

Or just write a test that checks the date on the cert and conditionally fails.

If it's within 4 weeks, send email to x,y,z.

If it's within 2 weeks, send it to VP of x, y, z.

combination of failing test and email should lessen chance of it going unnoticed(email could possibly fail for whatever reason).
I feel like what we’re seeing is less of a focus based around the 2016 election and more just general societal scrutiny of what they are actually doing. These are powerful tools for bad actors in general - It’s not Facebook vs society, it’s social media/ad-driven personal information vacuuming vs society. It just so happens that Facebook is by far and away the most used.
But that is not the point. Chromium is a very very nice browser and it is better for everyone (Chromium included) is it is not the only one.
Sidecar was the first mover :) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidecar_(company)
> If it's there (the response code is 2xx or 3xx), the password manager can cause the user's browser to navigate there when the user indicates they'd like to change their password.

The primary issue I see here is that there are a lot of websites that do 301 redirects from either non-www to www subdomain or non-https to https, would this not confuse the password managers in assuming there is a .well-known even though it’s just a benign redirect?