skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They have definitely messed up in many ways, but having a must-include operator was not one of the ways.

It allows (allowed?) you to tell the search that the other words can be used for ranking and are nice-to-have words, while the must-include words are treated differently and must be present and match exactly.

If all search terms were automatically must-include with no override, search results would be garbage because as a user you aren’t going to predict the perfect inflected forms of words used in documents every time.

Being dumbfounded should not lead you to think other people are wrong. It should lead you to wonder what you are missing.
Yeah, I used to have verbatim mode as a separate and default search provider in Firefox, but I had to stop using it as my default -- I find sometimes it's just too verbatim and it's like using Altavista in 1996 all over again.

I feel like Google a few years ago had struck a decent balance between trying to be smart (sometimes automatically including synonyms to your search terms, etc.) while still respecting your actual search terms. Now it's way too far gone in the "assume user is a total idiot and doesn't know what he wants" direction.
Well... Trees in the streets have an economic value attached, as any other public property. Damaged trees have to be replaced again and again.

People picking oranges carelessly lead easily to crashed stems, ugly patches of dry foliage and damaged trunks. Fruit in the streets works great for some locations, not so for other ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I have encountered this with YouTube which prefers to offer me garbage results back rather than searching all my keywords. E.g I was searching on a react topic and all I got back was 'x reacts to this'. It looks like it weighed the word 'react' much heavier than the others even though the other words were essential to getting a useful result..
I commented on a different post a few days ago with my thoughts about why this is happening, in my opinion it is a problem that has evolved over several years:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19111306

A Search Quality engineer at Google responded to me but I didn't find their arguments very convincing (nor did a number of repliers).

I have switched over completely to Searx on most of my devices, and by telling it to weight results from Bing, DDG and Google I feel I get better results than from any of those search engines alone.
From DevOps to DevSecOps
Yes, but even Java standard libraries throw UnsupportedOperationExceptions. It is so sad.

Edit: This is exactly the point where a type system betrayes its promises.
I search for "suicide" (for my work) very often. It _fucking sucks_ that Google seems to think "death", "died", "murdered" etc are all valid synonyms. It means that for every single search I do I need to do extra work.

I miss the days of +forced +terms.
Technically Digicert picked up Symantec’s PKI business/customers. I’d say it’s very dead but only in the root CA sense, the business still lives on with plenty of enterprise customers paying laughable amounts for all kinds of certificates.
I'm not saying it's totally equivalent but the story told in "Confessions on an economic hitman" suggest that it's common for government agencies to use private firms in order to allow for plausible deniability, amongst other things.

Now, that book has been denounced by some but large parts of it seem plausible.
May or may not be the case.

> “When I first heard that Huawei’s new flagship device was going to have three rear-facing cameras I was sceptical,” said Ben Wood, chief of research at CCS Insight. “But it feels like the company has added meaningful features rather than gimmicks, including the five-times telephoto zoom, excellent low light, long exposure performance and crisp black and white pictures the dedicated monochrome lens offers.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/27/huawei-p2...

> Huawei’s traditional setup of combining the data from a monochrome and a color sensor is still in place, but this time, the color sensor weighs in at a whopping 40 megapixels. You’ll have the option to use that entire resolution to take photos, though the default setting will be to combine the data from four adjacent pixels into one and thus generate clearer, brighter 10-megapixel shots. One of these quad-pixel pixels inside the P20 Pro measures in at 2µm, which is huge for a smartphone sensor. Google’s Pixel 2, for comparison, has 1.4µm pixels, while the regular P20, which has a 12-megapixel main sensor, comes with 1.55µm pixels.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17165822/huawei-p20-pro-s...
Have a look at the Miao Miao. It does exactly what you’ve described and is waterproof and rechargeable.

I’ve found it VERY reliable.
The problem described by the OP largely goes away when you stop charging by the hour.
Freelancer here. This does not ring true for me. I can see a causation between freelancing and vacation. Vacations "seem" more expensive as they are both a cost and a period of lost income.

But all those existential worries looks like an underlying issue with the person itself, more than freelancing in general. Freelancing may enhance it. But if you are more angry, less social and hence less happy, then no matter what job you are in - you should probably consider a change.
I've seen some very lucrative offers. Like $500 credit, upgrade to first class tomorrow, AND a 4-star hotel room. That might not be the norm, but that's a pretty amazing deal.
I suspect it's rarer in Europe because the mandatory compensation costs of failing to put a passenger on a flight close to the originally scheduled time are so high.

That said, I've had a gate agent try very hard to bump me off an intra-EU flight which I assume was due to overbooking (I was on business, so I expect they bumped a later arrival with a more expensive ticket instead...)
Intel is under threat, not only from AMD, but from the end of the x86 era. Of course they need to protect their current bread and butter, but AMD isn't their only worry. Far from it.
Endangered languages are considered to be dying out in a meaningful way, by losing their speakers.

All languages are equally "endangered", if you mean dying in the sense that Latin did, where it was and still is one of the most successful languages of all time.
What kind of performance can we expect, for example compared to the intel ncs2?
On the other hand, I could easily see how consistent exposure to books under 5 might build the interest and drive for them to learn and keep reading.

I think they are important all the way through.
> The difference between a planetary and space settlement is then just the (reinforced) floor, and you gain having 0 delta-v launch costs.

Anywhere intended for long-term habitation needs to be surrounded by 5m of metal or 10m of dirt (or a proper magnetosphere), and even a small amount of gravity can make life a lot more convenient in terms of having an up and down direction, not having to sleep next to a fan etc.

To my mind somewhere like Phobos makes the most sense for the first space colonies - enough dirt available to build things, not enough delta-v cost to matter.
75 / 150 usd. usb module / full soc board
> if you have an entirely brand new system, why not pick something more modern that has smaller keys and good CPU performance?

What do you suggest here, and will it work with X.509 certificates?
The point is that people never stopped speaking Latin (although in some places like North Africa nad the Balkans they did) There is a clear continuity between Latin and various Romance languages. Some time during the early middle ages, people started complaining they couldn't understand such and such person's Latin and the different dialects eventually became to be called different langauges and had their own writing systems created.

Langauges slowly change over time. It's kind of like the Canterbury tales' English is different from Shakespeare's English and even Lovecraft's English is clearly more oldfashioned compared to modern English.
> Note, the source here might be a biased here

That’s putting it mildly: I’m entirely aware that there’s a concerted campaign in the UK to smear Corbyn by fabricating a story from out-of-context quotes and, despite not being a fan of Corbyn, I’m entirely on board with the idea that he’s being unjustly targeted and probably isn’t actually antisemitic. But so far there’s no evidence that Israel is behind this effort. A more likely explanation is that he’s a thorn in the side of the Tories and the conservative-leaning establishment media, and the campaign successfully undermined Labour’s (and specifically Corbyn’s) public support (which the polls clearly reflect: they’re losing out agains the most incompetent and least-liked UK government this generation has seen).

There’s no need for Israeli operatives to get involved, and considering the potential fallout if this got out, it would seem to be a risky undertaking. Much easier to publicly denounce Corbyn, as both Netanyahu and the Israeli ambassador to the UK have done (along with the Foreign Ministry, if I remember correctly).
Your statement is just a tiny bit too general and that's where you're missing.

"What about their input and output is" => "what type their input/output is"

The next question is what does the type of the input/output actually tell you about the input/output? In the most popular languages (using interfaces), it basically tells you that the input/output might have a, b and c set (or they might be null), and it could also have anything else set.

So the actual information you have is that you might or might not have (a,b,c) and also might or might not have (anything). Not as foolproof as you think. The natural objection is that aha! I defined this class to require (a,b,c) in the constructor and do a nullity check, so I know much more than this! But this is back to having "types in your head", that constructor signature and nullity check isn't compiler enforced (as in if you change it, nothing will fail in the typesystem at the point of the function that we're checking, as long as those fields remain on the class). So the useful part of the static typing is actually living in your head either way.
In my opinion it is one thing to compare Israels policies to Apartheid, it is another to equate and judge them.
It's OK. It works well for me for common things that are easy to find. Restaurants, wiki entries, etc. But for example a new paper published today in Nature? Even searching for the whole title in quotes with DDG will not return it. Gotta go to Google for that.
What I don't get: Either you go full SPA or SSR. And If you go for latter then you can choose any stack, e.g. Rails, express with pug, Django, PHP, etc. Why do people take React's constraints to the backend? No bashing, really wondering what's so much better then. I know why a React SPA can be better than a SSR. But what is better about a React SSR vs the typical SSR?
You can't call something simple, if you can't to determine how it's working at each step. In JS all you can say is just "with that sort of data looks like it works well, but with others it can throw error or has undefined behavior". With types it works or not works. There is no type issues, only algorithm issues. Of course it's simpler.
There’s a video that suggests it emulates a keyboard to control the computer it’s attached to.
I always assumed it was to account for the non-paying listeners (i would rather this was done through a budget - e.g. 20% of listeners are not paying so upfront take 20% of my money to pay for them - then do a fair calc on splitting users revenue by their listens).

I think effectively record labels can say something like this to spotify: hey 70% of music listened to is the charts by non paying members, what are you doing to protect our investment?

i dont know if its a simple as that but i can imagine there are very particular shapes to listening behaviours/
> Thirdly, it has no support for navigating deep comments into dedicated subthreads like Reddit has

You mean like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19129671 which directly links to the 'parent' of your comment and is formatted almost exactly like a 'Ask HN' post?
I think you mistook the ancestry of my comment.
This question has been on my mind too and I'm glad someone thought of asking on HN.

Google has been returning really obvious results that one expects to get based on search history, other internet usage, etc (much like Netflix's matching). So much so that in order to find really unexpected gems of info I need to really spend a great amount of time searching a lot of different websites (hacker news, reddit, linkedin, corporate affairs data, marketplaces, truecaller, etc etc).

I feel like we need a new search engine now that there are so many different types of search results (blogs / media, aggregators / marketplaces, directories, social profiles, company websites, etc). One that lets us take more control over the type of results one can expect and more importantly one that doesn't show you what you expect to see (after being heavily influenced by your previous activities).

Also, Google may have millions of results for every keyword, but the quality of those links deteriorates quite fast, post 3rd page results are just crap.

I genuinely believe that Google worked and innovated when other search cos were wasting users' time by not rendering results quickly, but today we need something that better suits the complexity of the web and doesn't heavily rely on usage histories, etc.
Search engines - Google amongst them - are moving from using the search term as (possibly stemmed) literal words to search for to attempting to interpret the 'meaning' of the term. This interpretation can be somewhat... lacking, with the observed result of nonsensical answers.
There is really no point in carrying on this conversation. I have made a number of argument and you are the one who have accused me of things. First I was contradicting myself, then making shit up and now of hiding behind sockpuppets. I haven't denied anything, you singled out a single sentence of my comments where you could snipe at me. The overall point, the discussion, and the repeated arguments I have made still stands.

I am not hiding anymore than any other anonymous account and for no other reason than time management and privacy. I shouldn't frequent hacker news for reasons previously stated, but sometimes I tell myself that the decent thing is to reply. Especially as many people won't. Now it is clear that this discussion isn't going anywhere so I won't be creating any other accounts or comments. To prevent any ambiguity this won't change.
SPA? SSR?
Not very useful comment, just wanted to write this... anything that can be done for the betterment of children's lives, anywhere on this planet, it a winning point for humanity. I didn't even know that Dolly Parton had started something like that, I never appreciated her music (byt hey, I bet not many people appreciate the early Sepultura albums either), but she now has my utmost respect.
It appears to me that the issue was not being confortable with the .NET eco-system.

Roslyn and RyuJIT aren't the same thing. Roslyn is the new compiler infrastructure for MSIL generation, where the original C++ compiler got replaced by bootstraped VB.NET and C# compilers.

RyuJIT is the new JIT compiler introduced in .NET 4.6, replacing the former JIT64.

I don't disagree that Julia is better suited for data science given the eco-system, as proven by my other posts in this thread, just that the performace is also there when one wants it.
Kiper Dengan Clean Sheets Terbanyak Dalam Sejarah Liga Inggris
Scaling a Tech Newsletter to 700k Subscribers in 300 Cities
Everyone spies on everyone. It's a fact of life nowadays.
Did they learn this from Egypt?

"Autocratic governments often limit phone and Internet access in tense times. But the Internet has never faced anything like what happened in Egypt on Friday, when the government of a country with 80 million people and a modernizing economy cut off nearly all access to the network and shut down cellphone service."

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/technology/internet/29cut...
> You can see from Linus Torvald's backtracking on decades of abrasive behavior that it was never an important part of Linux after all

It's ten years too soon to conclude that Torvalds backing away from abrasive behaviour didn't kill Linux.
This completely ignores the fact that bugs which make it into production erode the reputation of the company in the eyes of their customers.

Lost reputation is much, much worse than being wasteful with dev hours.
For me I think it was more about making the process of learning explicit, and the corollary that there is no such thing as 'complete knowledge'.

Where I think for a lot of people they learn about a thing, or a group of things, until they come to accept something as absolutely and definitely true - "what I know IS reality". Then the learning process just kind of stops there because they think they know, when really they just know slightly more.

I see it all the time, people with the illusion of knowledge when there is a ton more to the story.
Google search superiority is a myth IMHO. If you're a SW engineer, you're better of searching StackOverflow and using an old-school curated list of links for on-topic sites. Basic thinking tells you that Google Search are incentivized to show you pages with the most ads, rather than relevancy. There aren't that many good resources for any given topic anyway; creating a simple search index over those isn't rocket science. Certainly, "searched 130.000.000 sites in 0.13 ms" style info isn't helpful, unless you find Google giving you random crap sites entertaining.
> There is no security proof for PKCS#1 v1.5, it's probably safe

As long as you avoid the known problems, it probably is safe for signatures and the main problem now is that PSS is not included in lots of standards which thus require PKCS1_1v5. This prevents major implementation due to those standards not being updated fast enough.

As an example of slow adoption: The HSMs i'm currently using only started native support for PSS last year, about 20 years after it's introduction.

Please note that pkcs1_1v5 is never secure for encryption/decryption schemes.
I had a similar experience with youtube lately:
I was looking for a song that I knew the tune and a related artist and for the love of god could not find it with the current youtube recommendations. Most of the videos I'd get recommended when searching related songs, were not even music-related.
So I went to archive.org and within a couple of results found what I was looking for.

Youtube's recommendation has really changed for the worse.
Honestly, you're both kind of right.

It's totally correct that often we want search results that don't include the exact word which was specified in the search request. We often want close synonyms, stems, elimination of redundant words etc. and flexibility on this helps to retrieve much better search results.

On the other hand, Google has a particularly frustrating habit of dropping words which are absolutely key to a particular search. You know, those cases where you are searching for details about a very specific set of explicit keywords, and 90% of the results exclude one of them, making them totally useless.

It's like an "uncanny valley" in some ways. When it says "You probably don't need the word 'and' in your search, and also 'video games' is the same as 'computer games' so I'll just include both" then the process makes sense, feels helpful, and indeed you probably don't notice. When you search for two explicit technologies and one of them is ignored, it feels like you're fighting a system that's trying to second-guess what you mean.

Ultimately the search engine is tuned for common queries, and the majority of users aren't likely to have the required technical skill to express exactly what they want to find without some help. This results in mismatch between the expectations of different users.

Verbatim search helps with this, in that it allows advanced users to better control their results. I'd be super happy if I could just toggle this "on" all the time.
It can be a tricky one, but fundamentally the _reason_ why change isn't happening needs to be understood. A company full of smart people is unlikely to _never_ want change for any reason - especially if that change would clearly make everyone's life easier. But maybe everyone is overloaded with work and a bit burnt out, so 'big' change is scary to them? Or perhaps the 'important change' really isn't that important? I've worked with devs before who have spoken for hours a day on the need to change x, y and z, when in reality it wasn't fully needed (and/or their suggestions stemmed from misunderstandings).

I guess my latter point there relates to the fact that there's not always a single "right way" of doing something.

Now I know that this might sound like I'm the same as the people shooting down your suggestions in your linked 'Ask HN' thread. Trust me, I'm not like that: I left my previous job a few months ago for the exact same reasons that you have outlined (i.e. there was clear change that was needed, but the 'powers that be' weren't willing to make those changes).

But to circle back to your question: assuming there aren't massive organizational problems at a company, change usually needs to be made slowly-but-surely with the buy-in of any previous 'change blockers' (where possible). Anyone trying to force through lots of change in a short period of time will usually struggle.

If even minor change is not possible, there's two main possibilities:

1) You're wrong about the change, and you might be the problem.
2) You're right about the change, the company is dysfunctional, and moving to a new job is the answer.

From your linked thread, (2) does sound like the situation in your case (fortunately/unfortunately).
potatoes are vegetables.

The drive to eat a special kind of food sometimes is common to many mammals. Not much different to being thirsty when you are dehydrated. Everybody experience sometimes a "thirst" for salt (in hot areas), sugar, or (in very cold areas) fat. Is a survival mechanism wired in our brain and not uncommon at all.

I bet that we would intuitively seek for foods rich in vitamin C if getting short of it.
I don't think it's any better or worse, it's just an additional way of writing SSR sites where React is a templating language.

React is just another option for a stack - similar to express with pug, you can have express with React, without having to learn a new templating language if you already know React. And with things like TypeScript, you can have type checking into the mix too
It really seems publicly shaming corporations is the only way to get justice in this new digital world. That's not the way justice is supposed to work.
Ng-sq-UI 1.1.0 release
We are excited to present the new version of ng-sq-ui which includes the following major changes:

Separated all standalone modules as packages. You can now install only what you need - @sq-ui/ng-sq-common, @sq-ui/ng-datatable, @sq-ui/ng-datetime-picker, @sq-ui/ng-modal.

NEW feature @sq-ui/ng-datatable!
The datatable you need,readily available as a standalone package, no other stuff required!

Take a look at our new examples app: https://ng-sq-ui.xyz/ and our new docs: https://sq-ui.github.io/ng-sq-ui/#/
Exactly. All you need to do is charge on 'per project basis'. But it's fare to say that not all freelancer can do this. There isn't really such thing as a 'freelancer'. A coder, a writer, a designer, a virtual assistant - these are entirely different lines of work.