skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> while ignoring far worse behavior by Google's competitors.

That’s because whataboutism ia rarely an excuse, if ever. At best it could offer some context. But given the sheer scale of Google’s operations there's not much context to add. They have both the power to do everything on a massive scale: both the violations and the subsequent “opinion shaping”.

The only reason mentioning a competitor would be relevant in many Google related topics is as a distraction. I don’t have to care about the competitors to be 100% correct when attacking Google.

On the other hand I got downvoted into oblivion even when comparing Google to competitors with undisputed data. My subjective experience is that the pro-Google camp is doing more overtime on the interwebs. And it makes sense that they would be more organized since they are working under one umbrella with more or less one voice. I find it hard to believe that all anti-Google parties would manage to reach anything close to the same level of organization and alignment of goals.
Doesn't seem particularly OT to me - it's an interesting idea!

I'm not totally convinved that the language needs to be designed specifically for voice coding though - I can see how having an IDE designed for it would be a huge bonus though... damn, another interesting side project to add to the list!
This is surprising for a couple reasons. It's easy to imagine the invention of cheese or yogurt if you assume people were already consuming milk. Wine and malting were invented under similar circumstances - fermentation of something already consumed. If humans weren't drinking milk, why'd they have it sitting around in containers?

Second, modern lactose-intolerant humans can drink on average about a cup of milk without major issues - so even before widespread lactose tolerance, some amount of milk would still be useful. Further, wouldn't children have been tolerant of lactose even before adults gained that ability? Human milk is more lactose dense than that of any dairy animal (especially the sheep and goats we probably domesticated first).

On Food And Cooking (my source for everything here) puts domestication of sheep and goats between 9000 and 8000 BCE, milk consumption known to exist between 5000 and 4000 BCE, and cheese production around 2500.
Pixar Animation Studios | Emeryville, California | Full time | Onsite | https://tinyurl.com/y6ha6s7r

Yippee! My team (Post Production Software Engineering) is a bunch of silly/smart people who get things done.

Technologies and skills we each use (honestly, all these things almost every day) in no particular order:

Unix / Linux | Python / Django / Tornado | Golang | Javascript / AngularJS / Protractor
OpenShift / Docker / Kubernetes | Kafka / RabbitMQ | Massive parallel computing
Distributed processing / Render farms | FFmpeg / OpenImageIO / OpenTimelineIO / Nuke | Git / Gitlab-CI
Test Driven Development / Continuous Integration / Continuous Deployment

It's a ridiculous(ly awesome) place to work. Our team functions where Systems/Infrastructure and Production intersect. Here's the posting again: https://tinyurl.com/y6ha6s7r
> I haven't personally seen squash merges and rebasing pull requests being used on pull requests of large multi-person branches very commonly, are you saying that's common?

I have. Github makes it quite easy to fall into this.

> Why is history considered more sacred than clarity of semantic intent? People make mistakes and noise, a lot, why shouldn't the tooling allowing fixing mistakes and cleaning up irrelevant noise after the fact, as long as it doesn't affect others?

I've got a concrete example of where it causes problems: code reviews. If you've reviewed a branch at a specific commit, and standard practice is to squash merge into master, or to otherwise allow rebases after the review point, you lose the confidence that what's on master is actually what was reviewed. I've seen cases where people got into the habit of getting reviews done, then doing a squash rebase locally, and including tidy-up commits which had never been seen by anyone else before merging straight into master.

If you're in an environment where the rule is that Everything Must Be Reviewed, that's a problem: it's far too easy for an accidental bug to end up on master despite the code reviews and the automated tests on the preceding branch being green.

With the example above, I never would have seen the problem unless I'd been trying to use the git history to measure some statistics about how long it was taking us to get code reviews done. It was only because I was looking at the history commit by commit that it jumped out.
Why Don't We Just Call Agile What It Is: Feminist
Frankly I have no idea what religion has to do with DRM. This seems a bit ranty to me.
PDF without registration: https://www.filedropper.com/oldtechnologiesneverdie
Gut health startup uBiome files for bankruptcy five months after FBI raid
Most studies probably use much less than 8 hours of a respondent's time, I believe. The greater issue is the use of only 77 test subjects to begin with.
Yep. It's insane to use tools/languages susceptible to problems like these in 2019.
Our new head of platform and newest portfolio company
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20877309 and marked it off-topic.
> Taking `int` is risky even without the comparison bug:

That's the whole point of the article. Risky, but not wrong. A subtle way to introduce a backdoor.
This isn't true. 8 hours says something about an 8 hour activity or event. Which can hint at a possible connection to an annual activity or event.

Scientists do not have unlimited resources or sample sizes that are unlimited. They make do with what they can and an 8 hour study does produce results worth looking at. No logic says otherwise.
> Revenue and business impact are ALL that matter.

You might want to look up b-corporations if you haven't. They take into account employees, communities, and the environment as parts of their charters.

I'd heard about them for a while but didn't realize the difference they made until speaking to Lorna Davis, who was instrumental in the largest conversion to a b-corp yet.

I don't claim it's the best introductions to them, but the conversation was on my podcast, so you can hear her personal inside account: http://joshuaspodek.com/guests/lorna-davis.
> When you pass operands of different types, the language usually converts one of the operands to the other's type. (Sometimes it converts both operands to a different type instead.)

Indeed. The pathological example where both operands get converted to a different type is like this: Assume that ‹int› is 32 bits and ‹long› is 32 bits. Then ‹unsigned int› + ‹long› becomes ‹unsigned long›. This is because ‹long› has a higher rank than ‹int›, so the result must have the rank of long. But because ‹long› cannot hold all values of ‹unsigned int›, we must use ‹unsigned long›.
This is not Godel's incompleteness theorem(s). This deals with a completely different notion of completeness.

Godel's completeness theorem is the theoretical justification for why first-order logic occupies such an important position in mathematical logic. It basically establishes that two different methods of proving a logical statement happen to coincide for first-order logic.

Let's say that I come up with a long list of axioms that define what it means for an object to be a "cow" and what it means to have a "spot." Then I state "all cows have spots."

There are two ways of proving this. One way, the "semantic" way, is to take every example of cow and prove that it has a spot. This is hard; I not only have to examine every cow that exists, I have to examine every possible imaginary entity that satisfies the definition of "cow" and prove that it has a spot.

The second way, the "syntactic" way, is to play the string manipulation game that people often associate with the notion of a "logical proof." I start out with the axioms of a "cow," and I'm given some rules for how I can manipulate these axioms. Example of this include the string "A and B" allows me to immediately substitute "A" instead. Given "A implies C" I can substitute all instances of "A" with "C" and so on and so forth. Hopefully I can work out a series of string manipulation steps that eventually end with the statement "All cows have spots."

It is not obvious that these two methods should coincide in what they are able to prove. The rule set that I get to manipulate my strings by could be a really wacky set of rules. Maybe it says something like if you see "A implies B," you get to substitute any arbitrary string "C." It's also not apparent how you might choose to interpret the axioms that define a "cow." One of the axioms might say "a cow has four legs" and you might say, in my world, I've decided the string "four" corresponds to the natural number 5, and I'm going to look at all entities with 5 legs.

Godel's completeness theorem states that for first-order logic these two proof techniques coincide: every statement you can prove or disprove the first way can also be proved or disproved the second way. More specifically, if you stipulate that rules of string manipulation are exactly the rules of deduction in first-order logic, and that you interpret your axioms when constructing semantic entities according to the standard semantics of first-order logic (e.g. you don't get to arbitrarily stipulate that the string "and" actually means logical disjunction, i.e. or, in your world), then any property that is true of every entity you can conjure up that satisfies your axioms has a "string manipulation" proof that proves that property. Conversely, every statement you can prove with your string manipulation game also holds true of every entity you can conjure up that satisfies your axioms (this isn't strictly speaking part of the completeness theorem, but is also true and usually stated hand-in-hand with it).
Nothing repels my engagement more than a video on a news site, following my scrolling while I'm reading.
A New Policy for Mozilla Location Service
But the irony is that the [immediate] bug in this case was adding an explicit cast, which is also exactly what people would have done in languages that didn't implicitly promote to unsigned.

The cleverness of this implicit backdoor hypothetical is that it would have worked substantially the same way in most other low-level languages, including Rust. Modern C compilers literally complain in the same way as stricter languages, which had the effect of inducing a poorly considered cast.
Are there any examples of significant fines/penalties to notable CEOs for "Breach of Fiduciary Duty"?
@temporal

Have you seen the prices for VGA cables, cat5, etc. at Walmart, best buy, etc.? They absolutely will jack the price up because they know the only people who buy that stuff there are ignorant or too desperate to wait for shipping.
Scientists Develop Liquid Fuel That Can Store Solar Power for Up to 18 Years
The slow acceptance of flow chemistry
https://gist.github.com/courthead/3d41cc03edda1e596051129b44...
I was asking about the 3rd and 4th to last items on the list...
SpaceX| Los Angeles, CA |Full Time | Onsite

SpaceX is looking for world-class Software Engineering talent ready to tackle challenging projects that will ultimately enable life on other planets. Aerospace experience is not required to be successful here - rather we look for smart, motivated, collaborative engineers who love solving problems and want to make an impact on an inspiring mission.

Looking for: Experience designing, building, and managing substantial software applications. Strong communication skills, interface effectively with stakeholders. Experience with and understanding of full-stack software principles;

Location: Los Angeles, CA (no remote work)

· Software Engineer (Full Stack) : https://grnh.se/6b08c1f42
· Senior Software Engineer (Starlink Mobile) : https://grnh.se/5d8973812
· Senior Software Engineer (Full Stack): https://grnh.se/c013f1b02
· Software Operations Engineer : https://grnh.se/8a5217922
Senior Software Engineer (Solutions Architect) : https://grnh.se/083ac3a52
Daring scientists extract ice from Earth's highest tropical glacier
Yeah, it's so annoying. WHAT PERSONAL DATA? The entire article is basically a rant about "personal data can be leaked" without any examples. Names? Browser Habits? What is it?
The only real features that i see on display here are Option and Sum types. Which are great, but far from unique to Rust.

F# and it's ML ancestors are great for this also.
sample size please - how is this even publishable?
HydroBot – open source hydroponic farming
The compiler (or linker I guess) should have visibility of this conversion. I guess to rephrase, why is this conversion being necessary not a compile warning by default, you are changing the range the type can store possibly leading to truncation or misinterpretation.
And when someone asks you for proof that some check that you happen to have automated was run, you get to ask "and how many reams of paper's worth of proof would you like?" instead of saying "umm, uhhh..." and rummaging around trying to figure out what you can send.
Being as close as possible to JS for transpilation is a design goal of Typescript, but the compiler still does more than just strip away the types if you use certain language features.

If it was just about stripping away types, then there wouldn't be a need for a compiler and the type checker could be a separate program.
Solving Apple Music UX Issues – A Challenge in Music Streaming App
Survival skills ensure that cancer spreads
Until you find out WebAssembly can't call any native functions (for example: to create a GUI, to call a .so / .dll export, etc.)

There was discussion to add `dl_open` + `dl_sym` to WASI but it got shot down. WebAssembly seems to be in a weird state of "look, I can run in and out of the browser, but I can't actually do anything useful out of the browser, and I can't access the DOM without going through JavaScript in the browser"
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20877072.
Crispr platform identifies Toxoplasma gondii virulence factors in mice
Can you rotate the cursor in CSS?
"And now passive investing has removed price discovery from the [cookie] markets. The simple theses and the models that get people into [cookie baskets] -- these do not require the [cookie]-level analysis that is required for true price discovery."
Contacting reporters is basically free, and they're usually happy to get stories from corporations. I doubt they had to spend much of anything.

Besides, there's little point in spending more than you'd lose in a settlement on a PR campaign to avoid the settlement.
At the limit of 100% passive, everyone agrees the system would break down. But that’s not a realistic endpoint. There are studies to suggest that as little as 1% active is enough to keep the markets functioning and we’re nowhere near that point.
Quantum Simulation Logic, Oracles, and the Quantum Advantage
I hear ya. I find the "unlimited data" plans are just far too expensive to justify paying for. My current carrier (Verizon[0]) offers 4(!) different "unlimited" plans starting at $70/mo and going up from there. My Wife and I only have 2GB/mo plans which itself is $35/mo. Our two cellphones have a higher bill than our entire household electric/gas bill and we have a modest sized house with central air/heating and lots of TVs/games/etc.

[0] https://www.verizonwireless.com/plans/
Passive cooling with no rent costs is hard to beat. Just gotta get to the bottom of the ocean first.
Of course. Most every employer wants you to do the job you're paid to do, aka stay in your lane.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/21/facebook-...
I wrote a TypeScript implementation of this algorithm https://www.khrapov.org/sudoku/solver.html
Kind of like the decline of Craigslist. It never really died out, but it also never really updated itself for the mobile era. In the end it didn't have the cultural impact that it could have.
yes, and with years of experience watching so many startups go out too early to tell their story fully and with all their ducks lined up.Good job
People are fleeing to index funds, which is what is spurring posts like this.

There are all of these complaints from people who run actively managed funds, never once mentioning that the fees might be why so much capital is going to passively managed funds.

People like myself who invest exclusively in index funds do so because the fees charged by actively managed funds are not supported by performance.
can you add a feature to explain the logo using nonsensical, pretentious language? this is a major factor for most people
I think the title on this would be more clear if it was the full article title, "Debugging WebAssembly Outside of the Browser."
Valve should make longer games.
It increases your "hours spent listening to J.K. Simmons rant" count, and that's way more important than poorly sourced "neuroplasticity" training.
> but largely preserved their political, economic, and social structures and organized leadership

TIL we coronated King George Washington I and established yet another divine monarchy.

I mean sure, the colonies ended up directly translating to states, and (some of) those colonies happened to have bicameral legislatures with a lower house consisting of elected representatives, but that's about where the similarities between the colonies and resulting states end. Any existing leadership that continued to lead during/after the revolution did so by democratic rather than autocratic means.

> it was a rebellion rather than a revolution.

Those terms are not mutually exclusive. It was a revolution implemented by rebelling against the British Crown.
A suggestion -- you can buy survival guides to edible plants, specific to regions. If you're unsure, the boy scouts or wilderness orgs will have recommendations.

If you're going backpacking, tossing one of them in your pack seems like you can shortcut a bunch of the above.
I tried loading Wired in a stock Chromium, and it's hard to believe how poor of an experience it is. You have to dismiss multiple overlays. The actual article is only readable in a tiny window formed by sticky elements and ads. Every page or so there is a big ad in the middle of the article. Hundreds of requests flying by in the background.

In my "daily driver" browser (a customised Firefox), nothing loads by default but the HTML. No JS, no CSS, no web fonts, etc. No overlays. The text fills the page, rendered in the font I prefer, in the size that I find easiest to read. No ads. Only a handful of requests. People tell me I'm crazy for rejecting the modern web, but the experience is often superior.
> In response, Google said Wednesday it doesn't serve "personalized ads or send bid requests to bidders without user consent."

Two things:

- The thing that seems to be most companies idea of "user consent" is laughable.

- Also it seems they are dodging the real question: nobody is asking if Google has something written about consent somewhere in a document that we were forced or tricked to accept. The question here IIRC is if they are going beyond even that and are sending personally identifiable information directly to shady companies.
> I think that line of reasoning might take us to a realm where plundering is always the smart option, offering certainty where the alternative is risky.

In a business with very risky long-term fundamentals, yes.

If you are trying to run a factory that makes widgets, or a store that sells widgets, or even a social network where people discuss widgets... There are obvious ways to build a successful business around these things. Just do what your competitors do, but better. It's very clear that a viable business can be made of this sort of thing, and that being a corporate pirate is just one of multiple ways of enriching yourself.

When your business consists of giving away a dollar for ninety cents, personal plunder is the only smart maneuver. Your shares aren't going to be worth the paper they are printed on, once the music stops, regardless of the heroic efforts you might, or might not undertake.
When a human looks at another person, are they "collecting data without consent"? Most would say no.

But if that human follows and looks at that other person 24 hours a day, would you still say that no consent is required?

So then CCTV should be illegal too then

It is, in many cases.
I didn't know Craigslist declined - what replaced it?
Yes, that's why targeted ads shouldn't be a thing unless it's opt-in (not necessarily my opinion but it seems to be the point the parent was making). At that point, to opt-in you can create a google account. Currently though, Google will attempt targeted ads on people without a Google account by trying to identify and track them through other means.

Ideally you would have site-specific or content-specific ads normally and personalized ads if you created an account and chose to opt-in.
Obligatory post:

https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

It's just as valid a technique for large organizations as it is for governments.

Active Perception Management is most definitely a thing. Of course it only works because most people aren't aware it is a thing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception_management
I love the quote near the bottom: "Sudoku is a denial of service attack on human intellect."

You could substitute "Sudoku" with most social media platforms and it would be equally true. ;)
How long until the industry doesn't get bigger by the day, and frontend devs + backend devs alike get automated away when AI can generate maintainable + readable code for 95% of the "API + UI plumbing" that is out there?
We refer you to https://xkcd.com/1656/#now-it-begins

and https://xkcd.com/1022/#so-it-has-come-to-this
I lurked around when The Legacy of Totalitarianism in a Tundra was written. It was absolute chaos, but very entertaining. The collaborative environment was extremely hostile though still productive. The open google docs text was repeatedly vandalized and deleted. With version control handled ad hoc by the authors. Even the (self)publication process ended up running in parallel with multiple different covers and prints (and lot of accusations of people profiting from printed copies).

I don't know if you can call the book a novel, or even readable. But there is an attempt at a plot somewhere in the mess of Tao Lin flavoured chan-style prose.
You spammed an HN thread with these comments before, which amply explains why you were downvoted.

We've been over this topic a gazillion times on this site: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... Astroturfing exists, but imagined projections of astroturfing are far more common, and whatever the effects of the former may be, the latter has an extremely degrading effect on discussion. In fact it eats up everything if you let it. We don't want that here.

I've personally banned several accounts over the years for propagandizing for Google (for whatever reason—it's impossible to distinguish between a paid agent and an overzealous fan, nor does it particularly matter). But this has been rare, and we don't do it without evidence.
It's also heavily reliant on everyone owning an iPhone while turning on public sharing
Ask HN: Where else do developers congregate?
Hi HN,

We're building a developer focused tool and are always on the lookout for sites/communities where we can interact with developers.

Obviously HackerNews is great for that purpose, but I wanted to see if you all had other public communities you'd recommend i.e. (discord, slack, facebook groups, subreddits, etc)

Thanks again for your help!
The point is that enemy can launch a "slower" hypersonic cruise missile from a surfacing missile sub or a disguised freighter 100 miles off the US coast.

The point of hypersonic cruise missiles is NOT to replace ICBMs in land-based silos a hemisphere away. It's to replace "normal" supersonic cruise missiles carried on subs, missile boats, etc.