skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's not what cafe badging is about. It wouldn't catch that anyway; you're just badging into the cafe. There's no way to know how much you actually ate.
Just because more people want one doesn’t change the difficulty of getting one.

So yes, it will still be worth something.

I suspect the question you’re asking is really something along the lines of “will a CS degree guarantee a high paying job in 15 years”, and that’s a bit harder to answer. It really doesn’t guarantee anything today, but people who can think logically and do things to create value will generally be able to find employment. I doubt that will change any time in the future.
Giving me an example of decentralisation set in the 1600s? Dude... The best way to finish this convo is the way Satoshi replied once: "If you don't believe it or don't get it, I don't have the time to try to convince you, sorry"
>To each their own, but I personally learned to hate this approach. In my experience, it leads to a CSS spaghetti full of overrides and `!important` just to get all the utility classes to play nicely across a site. And of course the markup becomes less readable.

The entire point of utility CSS frameworks is that you barely mess with the css, the css is already baked in, you just pick from it within html.

>What I describe becomes even more practical if you separate your CSS concerns into concepts like "layout" and "component" or "design". That way the styles that handle your page layout and responsiveness don't get tangled with the styles that handle the appearance of elements.

Frameworks like tachyons or tailwind have basically inverted the specificity/explicity/reach pyramid that is known from soft CSS frameworks like ITCSS. Their css file is quite similar.
Thanks for the info, will try this when I get around to it. But this sounds like scaling a low res image to fit the pixels instead of native HiDPI support, is that right? Then it will probably be blurry?

Edit: Maybe you meant using a native 2x scale paired with downscaling. Interesting, sounds promising.
> It’s surprising to me that Go made unused imports an error, and yet missed this far more critical one. So close!

The most egregious to me has always been that unused imports are an error but variable shadowing is not.

Even in languages with dynamic side-effecting imports (like Ruby or Python) I've never seen a bug caused by an unused import. Not so for shadowing (don't get me wrong, it's a convenient feature, but if you're going to remove this sort of things because reasons it's a much bigger pitfall than unused imports).
I absolutely love Archlinux and still downvoted you. The rich ecosystem of Linux distributions is not something I'd like to get rid of. There's also nothing archaic about Debian.
My guess is there's more to it than that. I think that they have less confidence in the financial prospects of those projects as well.
Secure Boot doesn't inherently prevent other OSes from running. The user retains ultimate control on the vast majority of Secure Boot x86/x64 machines which allow adding your own signing keys, removing Microsoft's and/or the OEM's, and disabling Secure Boot. In these cases, it is a positive anti-malware system without removing user freedom.

Additionally, Microsoft cooperates with the Linux community to sign their keys. Most Linux distros these days can install with Secure Boot enabled, and still offer ways for users who need to do things like compile kernel modules to do that without having to disable Secure Boot.

The situation is different for some devices like (I think) Windows RT devices based on ARM, and maybe cheaper x86/x64 netbooks now that the Secure Boot certification requirements have changed. In these cases they often do restrict you to only what MS is willing to sign, with no opt-out. I won't defend that in the slightest, but it's not true for much of and probably most of the PC market.
Why Nostalgia Appeals to Younger Audiences
You then can skip playing the lottery too, at each update you will get possible fixes for bugs that don't affect you and new bugs that will affect you, plus some designer with a giant ego would change years old workflows and you will be forced to change to match the software and not configure the software to match you.

There are many people that run both stable and rolling and the reason is the best tool for the job, you are making a big disservice to the community at the same time contributing to the horible image of the Arch community. Btw Arch people, you need to learn from Rust and publicly shame this fanboys if is not already too late.
Go is what (CRUD) programming should be. Boring, dumb and safe.

All my Go code is exceedingly boring, lots of plumbing, lots of dumb stuff. It is easy to write too, so I get done quickly.

Then again, it's rock solid and performance is off the charts (compared to abominations like RoR or django).

It makes me feel like a plumber and I hate that, but it's better to acknowledge reality than fight it: 90% of programmers are fancy plumbers and that is OK. The worlds needs plumbers.
The GPU has nothing to do with what the OS on the CPU is doing - it's an entirely separate architecture anyway (VideoCore 6 on RPi4).

The reason their /opt/vc stuff doesn't support 64bit is because there are proprietary binaries directly from Broadcom. Also, they use interfaces provided only by the downstream RPi kernel.

There is a blog post from the RPi foundation about support for VC6 in Mesa.
It occurred to me that the configuration hell is a consequence of Microservice-heavy approach: we have reduced complexity of cross-component interactions by compartmentalizing each component behind a hard boundary, and now we’re paying the price for this free lunch by trying to put those things back together and keeping them that way.

Turns out the complexity didn’t go anywhere, it was just biding it’s time, waiting for the right moment to strike back.

Damn you, entropy!
That's more or less what I was trying to convey. Responsible engineers will look around for mature solutions to their problems. Sometimes there aren't any and sometimes it will be the most economically-defensible decision to roll your own.

Of course, we notoriously underestimate the costs of roll your own. So a fair and common question is: why did you roll your own? What cost was so compelling?

What sometimes happens though is that the roll-your-own decision, made at time A, is later critiqued based on the options available at time B. If the decision was being made at time B, then the roll-your-own decision might be a symptom of "Not Invented Here Syndrome". But accusing someone of NIHS without accounting for when the original decision was made is unfair.

Hence my joke name, "Not Invented Yet Syndrome". Why didn't you use the alternative? Because it didn't exist or wasn't applicable.
There are middle men in bitcoin. In fact, there are a million middle men. But you trust those million men, rather than the 10 who run the bank.

Anyways, it's about how much money you're willing to spend for trust/safety/risk-mitigation/speed.

Cost of item - $100

$100.05 - pay via Bitcoin. In case of fraud, suck it up.

$102 - pay via Bank. In case of fraud, complain to bank, who are slow to resolve it.

$105 - pay via CC, (and pay them via Bank). In case of fraud, complain to CC company, who are faster in resolving it.

Both Bank and CC are basically an escrow service. One provides a bit more security than other, and correspondingly charges more for it.

If you're OK with not needing that security, cut out the middle men.

Going along your analogy lines, cut out even the Bitcoin middle man, or any kind of currency, and directly barter/trade goods.
The real issue with the security "protocol" was that directors and up were exempt from it, creating a two-class system. That's supposedly since been rescinded.
So is BF... that does not mean it not complex to use.
When I used to work on PHP, we had a similar appreciation for this, and called it “the joyless programming language” (as a complement)
What’s a site they’ve manually boosted?
I've shifted toward the latter as I've embraced type systems that can substitute for having the entire language in my head.

At the end of the day, I rarely care about the language. I usually just care about my data morphisms. And a good type system helps me immensely in that regard.
Tiny water droplets reveal minimum number of molecules to make ice
It doesn't even need to be government ID. As soon as you pay for something, like starting a Google One subscription or buying an app on the Play Store, your billing information should establish your identity. Later when you need to get your account back, you may need to present some sort of government ID and/or proof of address that matches your billing information. It's not bulletproof but it's better than losing access to a paid account forever.
Should you explicitly define APIs when using Microservices?
A seamless account recovery was absolutely not the experience some people I knew had with paid Google Apps or other paid Google products accounts.

(Not to mentioned the unexplained account locking)

So, no, it's not merely an issue of "just paying".
MS didn't use their OS to get word processing and compilers. There was plenty of competition in the 80s and early 90s. MS by almost every measure had the best products in those categories.
Exactly this, and if looks good from a social perspective that's just an added bonus.
Why Pausing a Subscription Can Be a Powerful Retention Tactic
Is Big Tech too big?
This is a fight over whether Oracle can get existing Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent overturned to make clean room reimplementation no longer legal.
That's a hard problem.

Think of it the opposite way. You just changed your recovery e-mail and password because your recovery e-mail was compromised, and you also used the same password. In other words, you secured your account. Maybe you setup 2FA and a bunch of other things... good.

Now take the place of the attacker. You look at the compromised inbox, see a confirmation email from Google. Nice, you now have an account login, the creation date, and a good password candidate. If you could simply call Google, give the info you already got by reading the compromised mail, and get access, no amount of securing done by the victim could work.

There are two contradicting goals here: keeping your data secure from hackers, and allow some mistakes to be made on your side without you getting screwed (using a weak password is a mistake). Google is constantly juggling between the two and sometimes, the outcome is not what you want it to be.

The solution is not to hold on your personal data too much. Google doesn't ask for it only so that they can target you with ads, even though it is a very important reason to them. It is also used to secure your account.

If you don't want to use Google, good, however, there is no perfect solution, especially if you are not flawless yourself. Keep data on your own machine? Do you have offsite backups? End-to-end encrypted, privacy focused services provide no form of password recovery whatsoever. And services that are a bit too loose may give anyone access with a bit of social engineering. Pick your poison.
I think a lot of creativity (or lack of) can come down to routine. If you follow the same routine every day, doing the same things, you get in a rut. Breaking your routine can help to get your mind into a different frame which can unlock some creativity.
I didn't get a discount on my stadia preorder, purchased in July. Of course, it hasn't shipped yet either and the originals release/delivery date was supposed to be the 19th iirc.
To be fear, that needs to happen in movies. Otherwise it would be a boring movie if everything goes right.
There is a saying from Zen Buddhism: "In the beginner's mind, there are many possibilities. In the expert's mind, there are few".

Granted, the beginner is also going to go down a lot of dead-ends, but sometimes the expert won't get started on something which they have mistakenly ruled out as impossible.

The question is, what (mental) exercises could you do to get into the practicality equivalent of "beginner's mind"?
As an engineer, the thing I always prided myself on was always asking my customers/stakeholders ”Ok but what’s the problem you’re solving? Why do you need this?” before jumping to a solution to their initial ask.

Often they ask for a solution to the 3rd step in their process where they got stuck and it turns out the underlying problem is easier/faster to solve
I think constraints and pragmatism are requires aspects of creativity and imagination. You can’t have one without the other.
I don't think being practical hinders one's imagination (I would consider myself both imaginativ and very practical).

I know of two school of thought regarding the origin of original ideas :

- Original ideas stem from ignorance of the existing idea and being an outsider in the domain.
I don't think this is sustainable as, at some point, you have to become familiar with the domain to which you want to contribute.

- Original ideas comme from a deep knowlege of the domain and its history which lets you understand how new concepts you meet might fit in the overall puzzle.

Overall, if you have problems coming out with outrageous new ideas, I would recommend practice : whenever you enconter a problem, try to design a solution for it (it doesn't matter if you never implement it) and only then research what kind of solution is used to solve this problem.
With time you should become familiar with your own creativ process.
For openSUSE there's an aarch64 image as well: https://en.opensuse.org/HCL:Raspberry_Pi4

It uses mainline Linux, so no USB 3 (only USB 2 OTG/Gadget/Host on USB-C), but Ethernet is supposed to be working meanwhile.
Very likely (I work for a payments co and many of our rules are pass throughs from Visa)
good idea. however, the moment you get people on staff buying in to that, you should probably have some mechanisms to listen to their ideas too.

Every time I buy in to some sort of corporate mission statement and believe it, I want to actually help get there.

If I'm being told to do something which obviously/patently won't get there - because I've done XYZ for 25 years and I know the ramifications/impact of these decisions, and I know they don't get us closer to "mission statement" - I want my input and direction to be heard/heeded. Not always 100% "do what he says", but... when you simply ignore my warnings, and my outcome happens... I lose interest in your "mission statement".
One categorial difference is that the Paypal case is discrimination against individuals.
Wasm itself doesn’t have any environment functions that would allow things like managing page tables or networking. I think that what you might see is a RISC-V JIT with a ring-0 Wasm runtime compiled to native. Kind of like https://github.com/nebulet/nebulet, probably
"Think about all those classical functional LISP exercises to recursively manipulate lists such as reverse a list, return the nth element, flatten lists, combine lists in various ways, and so on. I doubt you can write good Scheme code without having done those exercises at least once in your life. And at least for complete beginners these exercises are not easy."

In practice, you'd just use a library function for pretty much all of those.

Nobody writes those from scratch in Lisp or Scheme except as an exercise.

Also, once you do get the hang of it, recursion is a much simpler and more natural way of expressing many algorithms. But it too is not necessary in Lisp or Scheme, and you're welcome to write the iterative equivalent, if that's what floats your boat.

As for writing in an imperative vs functional style, I personally find the latter simpler and more reliable. But nobody forces you to write in a functional style in Lisp or Scheme. They're both multi-paradigm languages, and you can write in an imperative style in either, if you prefer.
Do you not consider G1 a low latency GC?
Not at all.

A few months ago I started being extremely pragmatic in everyday life (even against my will which is usually not like that). Things like, say no if you want to say no, answer emails immediately with a sentence at most, find the fastest way to get something done etc...

Now I have a lot of time on my hands to do whatever I want, that includes spending the day studying or pondering things which I believe greatly increased the potential of my imagination.

Find things that you like and do them, weed out everything else. If you can't shake some of those away, find the most practical way to get rid of them.
I've experienced this (generally over decades, occasionally a few years) with brick-and-mortar and/or mail-order retailers (I virtually never shop Amazon). So yes, the phenomenon happens.

And it's insidious. I've flat stopped patronizing those retailers. Shopping is not an enjoyable experience. I'm wiling to pay modest premiums for quality (bargain-hunting is sifting through tons of junk for exceptionally rare gems), but I won't pay premium for junk.

The long-term cost has to be considerable, I would think.
A bold idea to replace politicians – César Hidalgo
Why is this single solitary shithead being allowed to shit up the entire comment section with his paid shilling for Boeing? He has replied to literally every fucking comment and subcomment here. He’s treating the comment section like it’s his own personal Q&A. I’m rate limited to posting like 2 comments per day on this site, why is he allowed to post so much? Shadowban this moron already. Useless mods.
Normally 25% but since there are 2 answers with 25% this cant be correct. There is only one answer with 50% but if that is the correct one there would be only 25% chance.

Therefore it must be C) 60%
I would argue that Terrence Tao is overrated. He has solved tons of problems in mathematics, but none groundbreaking.
Knightscope is worth a close study. If they were a consumer facing startup, PR blunders would have forced them to close years ago. Yes, one of their machines ran over a small child[1]. Yes, they had a disastrous “mini-ipo”[2]. Yes, they’re frequently a “look how dumb AI is” counter point to the Boston Dynamics machines[3].

But they’re not consumer facing. They found a market niche as a punching bag for municipal and local spaces (malls, libraries, subways) who treat the users of public space as hostile adversaries.

If dunking on Knightscope worked, they would have been done in already. If one is anti this kind of approach to civic management it’s important to name the community “leaders” advocating for them, the social economics that render $7/hour Knightscope rental more viable than more empathetic solutions, and the investors supporting these dark patterns.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2016/7/13/12170640/mall-security-ro...
[2] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1600983/000114420417...
[3] https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/17/20697540/boston-dynamics-...
Bitcoin exchange Binance’s rise to power
Sure, I'll bite.

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
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=/tkj
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
Somewhat related - how my brain kept me from founding YouTube

https://prog21.dadgum.com/39.html
A TOTP-based phishing attack can start entirely from a false origin. The user can enter the offline-generated secret into that false origin and never realize the phishing even happened.

SMS MITM is harder to pull off, as the normal UX flow assumes the origin knows the user's phone number, which is a weak measure of authenticity on the part of the origin. If a user is taken to a false origin to begin with, then it must somehow either prompt the user for a phone number (which is likely to signal to the user that something is amiss), or else have an actual communication conduit to the true origin so that it can trick it into initiating the SMS challenge.

By the way, we're misusing the term MITM here, but I went with it to keep the conversation going. I believe OP meant phishing.

Edit, since we're in a reply war that HN code is properly stifling: of course we're talking about the TOTP generated secret (what you're calling the six-digit PIN), not the shared secret that's transmitted from the origin once at setup time. SMS and TOTP are both atrociously susceptible to social engineering, and SMS has the additional feature that the engineering can happen without any involvement of the user. Your downvoting suggests there's a significant difference between the two, but phishing studies show that all of us, even those of us who consider ourselves experts, are vulnerable to phishing.
Best piece of reporting I've ever read.
I am working with one of these dilution refrigerators of Oxford Instruments in my PhD thesis (not directly quantum computing, but a related topic in the direction of quantum computing). They are an incredible piece of machinery, with the push of a button they cool down your sample from room temperature to about 20 mK (admittedly, it takes ~30 Hours). That's 0.002 degrees above absolute zero.

I wonder how much of the 500k$ is really the material cost. As it was said in the article, the Helium-3 gas is already 40k$. And there is a lot of high-purity metals used: gold-plated oxygen-free copper for the main parts, silver wire for thermal anchoring and heat exchangers, indium wire for vacuum seals etc.

And thats just for the cryostat. To really use the cryostat for quantum computing experiments, you need to buy all of the cryogenic high-frequency electronic stuff. The cryogenic cables mentioned in the article by Coax, Ltd. are indeed really really expensive. Our last batch of NbTi-NbTi cables (i.e. superconducting inner + outer conductor) were about 1500$ per meter. Cryogenic microwave amplifiers (they operate at ~3.5 K to reduce microwave noise) cost about 5000$ per piece. Microwave circulators run at about 1500$ per piece. (According to the google paper, they used 9 cryogenic amps and 45 cryogenic circulators).

It's really very fascinating. But on the other side, I guess there is just not enough demand to justify founding another company building these fridges or superconducting cables. Unless of course at some point you manage to build these systems in large scale. But right now, that is just not feasible because it's no plug-and-play system. You have to constantly adjust and recalibrate the electronics to make the chip work.
It’s possible that censoring them drives more attention to them. I’m not sure it’s actually helping Hilary to hide that content.

“Check out what they won’t let you see or talk about!” is one of their main marketing draws.

And if Google was just a cold representation of human behavior (not bots though) then it might help people develop their own editorial voice.

I don’t know. It’s their call at the end of the day.
A half decent article on the subject: https://effectiviology.com/curse-of-knowledge/

I constantly perceive that this is a major problem in modern UI designs, whereas in the past people thought really hard about usability, because they didn't grow up using computers, everything was new.
The World’s Biggest YouTube Channel