skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, I am including both interactive and non-interactive use cases in my argument. You are assuming Zdog is limited and can only be used interactively in practice. I do disagree with your assumption.

> Hours is really misrepresenting things. It's not ray tracing. It takes milliseconds. You can do it hundreds of times per second, with scenes that are vastly more rich and complicated than this can do.

This is still irrelevant, and just not true in general, you're making assumptions and overstating ray-marching's generality. The time depends completely on what you choose to do, in all cases: with ray marching, with ray tracing, and with SVG rendering. Ray marching is usually fast and commonly used in interactive renderers, but plenty of ShaderToy shaders run much slower than hundreds of times per second. And while there are some very rich scenes, ray marching doesn't do meshes, and it isn't all that fast to render a large hand-drawn set of 2d curves (I and others have tried.)

> Huh? [...] rasterizing and rendering are essentially the same thing. You have data and you need to convert it into pixels or blotches of ink.

In the case of Zdog generating SVG, rendering and rasterizing are not the same thing. It is confusing me that you're refusing to acknowledge the utility of vector graphics, when I know you know the difference and the benefits.

Let's try saying it another way. A ray-marching shader turns an SDF in to pixels directly in one step. Zdog turns the scene description into SVG. Later, the browser or printer turns the SVG into pixels, not Zdog.

If you don't want to call it rendering vs rasterizing, then we can call it two-pass rendering. Ray marching is one pass, and there's no intermediate representation. Zdog & SVG is two-pass and there's an intermediate 2d resolution independent representation.

On the contrary to your claim that this distinction is somehow weird, the one and only singular benefit to the 2d intermediate representation is that you can change the resolution without having to re-generate the 2d description. This is the whole reason why formats like SVG and PDF even exist.

> I don't know why you're pushing back so hard on my suggestion that, specifically, if you want a 3d scene in a browser that has fewer limitations you can do that in an alternative way.

It seems like you've made some assumptions and/or misunderstood me, because I don't believe I did any such thing. I stated that ray marching (rendering to pixels) is incompatible with rendering to a vector representation. I still stand by that. To be clear, I'm not saying anything about the validity of using SDFs in a different context. I love ray marching and use it all the time. It's still not compatible with vector rendering, and I don't use ray marching for the same things I would use Zdog for.
Well maybe we don't really need DRM? I mean, there are other sources of entertainment which do not threaten the FOSS
> He's saying that at one point they went to Paris

Right, but that's not clear. He listed it as a lesson/subject. It can be read as an actual trip, or a virtual trip.
I'm still working out the details, but when I get to the point where I'm selling software on my site, I plan to offer small discounts (maybe a dollar) to anyone I detect on a Firefox browser. I'm considering doing the same thing for Ad Blockers.

I know I can't convince normal people to care about the web ecosystem, and yelling at users about behavior is just another way to annoy them. I like the idea of having a small (likely secret) list of browser behaviors that reward users, rather than punishing them. It makes it feel more like a game or a cheat code or easter egg to me than a heavy handed lecture.

If someone is visiting on an unconfigured browser, or something I don't recognize, they won't get an error message or performance hit or any notification at all. But if someone visits and they're doing the right thing, maybe they get a "good job" and a discount or extra download. And then hopefully if they recommend my software to a friend they'll also let them know about the "secret."
In principle I agree; if I were to hypothetically verbally abuse my drivers, ought I not eventually be banned? If I walk into a local bar and am an asshole to the staff, eventually my photo will be put up next to the bouncer’s table on the “do not admit” list.

Unfortunately pretty much any system Uber is going to create here will be prone to some abuse, and subject to a lot of criticism.
Not LaTeX; didn't read.
Or don't consume DRMed content?
Considering Google's data retention policies are GDPR compliant, things will be really deleted within a small N number of days from when they're "deleted." At least for European users, and I doubt they are maintaining separate policies on this front for other users.

Even in the extremely unlikely event Google was grossly out of compliance, the successor company would still need to obey the law or risk hefty fines, so it shouldn't really matter to you.
But someone could read that and think "the one and only". By stating the first shows there's more potential.
That is a bold claim, for which you will need some pretty solid evidence.

An election is basically a popularity contest. Winning a popularity contests does not guarantee competence, reliability or even correctness of opinion.

We've got a couple of centuries of evidence that private individuals who stand to feel the effects of their choices are much better at conserving and rationing resources than elected officials.

If you make a list of the horrors of history and rank them from worst to mildest, you'll find that public officials (even in democracies) are much scarier than rich people operating private concerns.
The first Firefox Quantum version broke on my work laptop and I never managed to work out what it was. It probably interacted badly with some corporateware, I don't know, but it would just crash on start.
The morality of the largest economies (generally backed by the largest military) has always been pushed onto others. Isn't this the way the world has worked since the dawn of the first civilizations?

Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach.
Not sure how I missed that, thanks.
I'm not a professional UI/UX designer but here's a guess. It should not be the prominent thing on your page. Prominent search bars like the one on Google's home page convey to users the idea that this is the primary way to navigate and use this website, and therefore be loaded with higher expectations. So don't make the search bar look prominent.

Next, make it context-specific. Don't put a search bar at the top of the page suggesting that this bar can search for everything. If you use a simple implementation like a SQL LIKE to implement search, put the search bar right next to the thing that is displaying results from the table. Make it look like it's filtering the table.

Finally, label the search bar using words like "Keywords," which also suggest to users that they should be typing keywords instead of a more complicated natural language phrase.
I wasn't being charitable; but I completely missed that he said "one of my earlier businesses" and read "one of my earlier experiences (in this business)".
Ask HN: What is expected from a 12 years experienced Dev/Architect at FAANG?
Most 10+ year experienced devs probably won't be able to invert a binary tree quickly. It could be attributed to many of them doing architecture level work, or programming within frameworks or mentoring teams.

If I were interested in FAANG, what I, a 12+ years experienced Dev/Architect/Tech Lead do to be a potential candidate for any of these companies?
New Zealand's 'Wellbeing' Budget
Not that I have any interest in launching an exchange, but I do see what you mean by the possibility of an exchange becoming quite abstract. If housing deeds are traded then a housing marketplace is an exchange. If cars ownership is traded then a car marketplace is an exchange. If in-game items are traded, it's an exchange.

Could one think of stores as one-sided exchanges, where resale is just not natively possible? Does Google operate an ad exchange? Is iTunes an exchange? If digital goods ownership were on a blockchain then resale would be possible... What about physical goods?
Agree.

The whole idea of 'challenging tailgating' falls apart because someone walking in after you is not performing a strange act.

You would have to actively close the door _on_ people, including your colleagues, which goes against social norms to such an extreme extent that it's just not happening.
Thank goodness I just use skype and email to communicate with my dealer. Oh, hang on, they're applications too :S
These companies were built on the shoulders of giants in silicon valley which had a ton of cold war era science foundation grants helping to prime the emerging industry.
Some do, but some like Square will pay you out next business day free of charge or instantly for a small surcharge. To your point they’re floating that during settlement. It’s instant in the sense that the transaction is approved instantly and the settlement is a formality.
While we are capable of (human) space travel, it's currently only really for science. On the other hand, people travel by air all the time for practical reasons.
While we're on the topic of this kind of thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synopsis_of_Pure_Mathematics
"On average, the companies that raised As had 30 coffee meetings with individual investors. 50% of these meetings led to pitches to individual partners. About 30% of partner pitches led to full partnership pitches. On average, 1 of every 5 partnership meetings produced a term sheet."

Based on the above, it seems the average number of term sheets received by a company that successfully raised a Series A was 1.

This surprises me because (i) it's often suggested you need more than one term sheet to have a decent negotiating position, and (ii) a YC-backed company should be better placed than most to get multiple, so if they're not getting them, then who is?
This book has "war stories," where he describes the problem he was faced with and his different approaches before finding his awesome solution, so that's probably what gives me that feeling. But additionally, maybe I'm a freak.
> if the problem is excess planetary heat, you can use thermosynthesis to accelerate novel thermogenesis in pseudo-living species - imagine endothermic sea sponges cooling the oceans

Uh,

Thermodynamics.

You can’t destroy heat, just pump it around.

A heater does not need to expel cold. A cooler needs to expel heat.

Stuff can feed on heat gradients. Things cannot feed on uniform heat.
Bankruptcy is a hell of a thing.

Radioshack sold off consumer information when they went bankrupt, even though that was against what customers agreed to. It wouldn't be a surprise of Google was able to do the same.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2901028/radioshack-puts-cust...
Also an effective strategy to get uncontested rides, I assume.

Of course, occasionally you’re going to get low rated passengers who are just straight up assholes. So there’s some risk.
most folks aren't in peoples' posting history trying to prove a point
Yeah, I have seen this... Still pretty mind boggling though :P
First of all, the technology industry itself is not just exclusive to the US. Samsung is south Korean, Nintendo is from Japan, Siemens is from Germany, ASML is from the Netherlands. All of these are highly technological companies, with Nintendo having been at the frontiers of technology since decades. But of course, Silicon Valley is unique with its high concentration of hightech companies. This has multiple reasons:

* The US federal government provided massive amounts of funding, especially in earlier years. Oracle for example was jumpstarted by the CIA, an US federal agency.

* Economically, the US is highly developed, and has a gigantic market with over 200 million people who all speak one language. The EU didn't even have the unified market since a few years ago, and there is still inconsistency regarding the language. China does have both a more or less consistent legal regime as well as a consistent language due to their past efforts to teach their population a common language (this is non-zero effort as Chinese dialects are so different to each other, probably if it weren't for political influence you'd classify them as several languages).

* California in specific has at-will employment laws meaning a start up can be wrapped up quickly without having to pay large sums of money to employees.

* The US federal government maintains a large spying apparatus which has been increased massively after the 2001 terror attacks. They don't just use it for evil terrorists. It has been confirmed multiple times that they perform industrial espionage against companies in western countries, supposed allies of the US. The US government then gives the results of the espionage to industrial partners.

* Nowadays there are of course massive network effects.
> Android and iOS are separate markets.

To federal antitrust law, they are not. This is a fundamental misunderstanding that is leading you to all sorts of other misunderstandings.
Thank you for your work in helping profile FF's issues.

The first issue was really enjoyable to read. A high quality bug report and the devs giving feedback.

Why did you reference that last issue? I haven't had that CPU usage issue since Quantum was released.
The comment is pretty clearly sarcasm.
>
Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach.

That doesn't make it right.
I'm not an apple user, so sorry if this is way off but...

... isn't the direction Google's taking here the same as what Apple already did with Safari? Is Safari actually any better in this particular regard?
Well, this is in my city, I don't know if drivers elsewhere have this kind of informal rule too. This means, more or less, that for 1 ride with 4 stars you need 3 rides with 5 stars.

Or, even worst, that you'll need 13 5-stars to compensate for 1 ride with 1 star...
"We only do so when ordered..."

This is still a problem and to mince words over the difference between "voluntarily" versus "when ordered" is dodging the crux of the complaint: Protonmail is not unconditionally private to law enforcement, and so, it is not actually private at all.

It's not impossible to make Protonmail less private, provided there are extenuating circumstances, therefore we know there are controls in place to selectively reduce the supposed privacy that may exist under certain typical use cases.

The primary dishonesty here (in this blog post) is to imagine that the reader would think it would be probable for Protonmail to "volunteer" user data to law enforcement. Volunteer in the sense that they eagerly fetch all open cases, and actively push relevant matches to authorities (doing their work for them, not unlike one of Best Buy's Geek Squad informants locating hard drives for FBI compensation in cash awards of $500 per). Such a premise would be egregious and beyond the pale.

Meanwhile, what they really mean is that user data is not just available for the asking. Written warrants must justify and force the request.

Is that any better? No. Not by much. Not in a world of gag orders and warrant canaries. Those in search of services advertised as "truly private" expect more.

So what is expected? That user activity is rendered largely inaccessible even Protonmail employees, no matter how badly they'd like to crack the security encapsulating user information. Even under duress and threat of hostility.

Otherwise, what does that little "decrypting..." prompt even mean? Not much, evidently.

Now that we know this is not the reality (which they do purportedly profess) Protonmail is just another webmail service. There is no real novelty to their claims of privacy. It's just theater.
Good lord, you make it sound like dealing with highly radioactive plutonium. This is a site called hacker news, if you're a web developer and you can't figure out how to pull an html page without executing the scripts involved (a TRIVIAL thing to do) you shouldn't have a job. And honestly if your network is so insecure that someone running a wget on a domain poses a risk then your network has almost assuredly already been hacked.
Its pretty much culture. The US is open to ambitious people from across the world unlike a lot of countries, the US is big un deregulation unlike Europe which stifles a lot of their companies, there's one language, there's a culture of acceptable failure, willingness to try despite lacking experience, and slow-moving governments.

Its probably more but this is what I've seen.
I really do appreciate the kind of symmetry behind the idea of "Google ads for Google Chrome users, freedom from ads for free software users"
Do you say that because most people on HN live in the USA and other developed countries?

Just curious.
Is this a chrome API or chromium API? For the later case we have Chromium Edge(https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com), which is just as good!
If it's chromium API then Microsoft may actually end up taking a fork off chromium codebase right away and decide to keep that alive.
Big national banks and credit card providers now openly take and store payments for marijuana dispensaries. Companies happily provide them with insurance and mortgages. There are mutual funds and ETFs on national exchanges that invest in such businesses (and you can buy into them as well, from anywhere in the country).

Somehow I don't think Google is scared of getting into trouble for allowing an app that has a web browser with a reference to marijuana. It is a moral stance, nothing else.
I get mediocre ratings from drivers when I take a shared ride and don't tip. Rating passengers poorly for not tipping is broken functionality, we really need self-driving cars and no drivers.

Historically I've always given drivers 5 stars, but now whenever I see my rating dip I one star all my recent rides since Uber won't tell me which driver did it. The less meaningful the broken rating system is the better.
> The US federal government maintains a large spying apparatus which has been increased massively after the 2001 terror attacks. They don't just use it for evil terrorists. It has been confirmed multiple times that they perform industrial espionage against companies in western countries, supposed to be allies of the US. The US government then gives the results of the espionage to industrial partners.

Specifically which company has benefited from industrial espionage in a way that can even begin to answer the question posed by the OP?
You bring up an interesting point in that I can’t think of another technology out there quite as polarizing as crypto. It’s almost fanatical devotion from both sides. I disagree that the points are debunked, I think the current thinking from the pro side is that those are “today’s problems” and the future will be different. I think the anti camp like myself are frustrated by the religious devotion to something that in our opinion represents regression from the status quo as a north-star, driven in part by uninformed debaters assuring us crypto will solve problems they themselves don’t understand. I think it’s like how my dad used to hate medical shows because they were to him a parody of his profession but to the less informed of us, just kinda fun and cool.

I know bitcoin isn’t the only crypto, I also know proof of work isn’t the only algorithm out there. Bitcoin is the best known and most successful, and proof of work is the only algorithm so far proven to work as specified. I was giving more credibility to the space than I usually do with those simplifications, if I wanted to make fun I’d call on our boys Tether (a fraud [1] run by a fraud who tried to start a Ponzi scheme [2] and whose connection to Bitfinex eventually got revealed in the Paradise papers [3] - in which most crypto prices are denominated), IOTA (it’s ternary for no reason, isn’t decentralized, and tried to write their own hashing algorithm and when that failed they called it a DRM scheme [4]) and Dentacoin (your dental records on the blockchain for no discernible reason [5]). Even a team trying to start a BTC ETF concedes 95% of all volume is fraudulent [6]. That’s a bad place to start no matter how you slice it.

Apologies for offending you, though, that wasn’t the intent.

[1] https://amycastor.com/2019/04/26/new-york-attorney-general-b...

[2] https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@binyamin/bitfinex-s-founder-see...

[3] https://gizmodo.com/new-york-ags-report-untethers-bizarre-cr...

[4] https://hackernoon.com/why-i-find-iota-deeply-alarming-934f1...

[5] https://www.dentacoin.com

[6] https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitwise-tells-us-sec-that-95-...
This got me thinking, this is kind of encouraged from an engineering perspective. It's a lot easier to not have to maintain all these different versions, and just have one. Not necessarily the reason they're doing it because google already has this working at scale for search, but still intriguing at least for smaller companies that operate globally.
>- and current model cars are probably just about there-

Very true, in order to get more progress, one would have to develop systems that are sufficiently different and more efficient at some level which may be odds with how we currently allocate resources.
Strawman much?
I used this for some time and it's great; built atop ublock origin and does exactly what it purports to. The only downside is that it is used by such a comparatively small market-share that it's harder to blend in, but I imagine modern browser fingerprinting negates this concern anyway. Also it's (tellingly) banned from the Chrome store last I used Chrome, and you had to install it via a zip file. There is (or at least was) a user-hostile nag each time you start Chrome (or Chromium) about allowing an unidentified extension but I guess that's now moot if Chrome now doesn't permit sanctioned ad-blockers.
It turns out that Wikipedia is a really bad organization to piss off.
that's probably why he's saying that, yes
> I like the idea of having a small (likely secret) list of browser behaviors that reward users, rather than punishing them. It makes it feel more like a game or a cheat code or easter egg to me than a heavy handed lecture.

While that is nice, you run the risk of nobody noticing.

For some strange reason, I wanted to comment to your post and you didn't have a reply button initially. I had to refresh and then is showed up. Huh, never seen that behavior on HN.
> If it’s production or goods, there’s obviously an upper limit.

Is there? I have a difficult time imagining any meaningful inherent upper limit to the value of creative works. Perhaps you intend a narrower point?
The explicit goal of TypeScript is to be JavaScript, with types — i.e. not introduce any features not likely to land in an ECMAScript spec.
Unless you plan on killing the top 90% GHG emitters over the next fifteen years or so, reducing population levels is not an option. Slowing population growth is important, but it's not a solution.
North face is two companies under one logo.

One is a hardcore mountaineering company, who makes equipment where the owner dies if it fails. Their tents and sleeping bags can be found in the most inhospitable places on earth, including Everest.

The other makes fleece for college students.
I like the three strikes rule. Sometimes it just slips through.

I got caught by a phishing link once because I had just gotten off the phone with a co-worker John and got an email 5 minutes later that said "hey James, it's John". Didn't even think twice about clicking it.
That isn't an effective solution on a corporate network that depends on internal name resolution.

And FWIW I run into the same DNS-like issues with Firefox on my home network, which uses Cloudflare's 1.1.1.1 DNS. Perhaps it is something to do with the way my company provisions my machine, I don't know. All I know is that Chrome has no issues. I've made efforts to track down the issue but it's ultimately not worth my time.