skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's the relevant part of building a search engine that's affected by network effects?

Is it the index itself? There's already a fairly decent open-source equivalent to that in the form of Common Crawl, which has been out since 2011. People (including me) have tried to build search engines off of it, but it never seems to work quite as well as Google.

Is it the computing infrastructure? That's already been commoditized and offered as a service by multiple providers - AWS, Azure, GCP, SoftLayer, etc.

Is it the serving infrastructure? Commoditized by ElasticSearch, which uses many of the same techniques as Mustang and in many ways does it better.

Is it the ranking algorithm? It used to be that Google would agree with you. However, the ranking algorithm changes basically continuously - the one in use now is very different from the one that was used when I left in 2014, which was different from the one where I learned how it worked in 2011. I've heard the new one is heavily machine-learning based: given a suitable training set and some learning-to-rank papers you could construct something similar.

Is it the log & clickthrough data? Imagine the privacy advocate conniptions if that were open-sourced. AOL got in huge trouble when they open-sourced their click-logs circa 2002.

Is it the evaluation system? Mechanical Turk exists, and Google's rater guidelines are public.

I'd argue that the real competitive advantage of Google now is the brand and associated consumer habits, and it's really hard to break up a brand. Same reason Coca-Cola remains dominant 150 years after they started selling cocaine-laced sugar water. This is a recurrent problem in the economy today - brands fuel not just Google, but also other giant monopolies like Coke, Nike, J&J, P&G, DeBeers, McDonalds, Wells Fargo, and so on, and in many cases the companies that own them get to practice some exceptionally bad behavior. But short of reaching into each consumer's head and getting them to consider each purchase on purely rational factors, I don't see how to fix this.
Show HN: Inlets-operator 0.5.4 gains free exit-node with GCE provisioner
Indeed. I'm happy to forego Google and then (in cases like this) click once more to figure it out myself.
As many people point out, breaking up is a reductive measure. The whole legal and technical process of breaking Google up would be 10 years? Maybe longer? I heard some tech journalists give those numbers; don't quote me on that.

If you really want to change the landscape and make it actually feasible, force companies to expose APIs or impose standards on them. Both of these are very hard things to do in practice but at least they give a hope of a better future - increasing competition.

Breaking up big tech, depending on the specifics, will cause either worse productivity or (in the best case) change nothing.
So do I now have to boycott palm oil? Why can't people just produce things sustainably?
> It mostly feels like you're just typing text like in any regular text editor, but your inputs are actually manipulating the AST directly, and the editor itself ensures that your inputs can never result in an invalid program (i.e. there's no such thing as making a syntax error in Dark).

The basic idea has been around for a while.

Here's something from the 80's: Alice Pascal https://www.templetons.com/brad/alice.html

> One of the first projects I did after forming Looking Glass Software Limited was a syntax-directed programming environment called Alice: The Personal Pascal.

> Syntax-directed editors are somewhat controversial, however I think they are quite good for people learning programming, and Alice was written first to be used in education in the school systems of Ontario. Our first sale was a contract to develop it for the Ministry of Education there.
>There are even custom words for common terms.

I think this is like half the problem
It is not anti success. Tons of us got good value and watched Google do great things.

Now that they have that success, lacking threats, the value is evaporating.

Lots of people do not care how much others make. If the value is there, world better, game on!

But, getting very large amounts of money and those things aren't really happening and lots of people will definitely express negatives about it.

As they should.

I see links are back in my search results now. But my trust is not back with those links. I have found all the other search tools I need and am using them, encouraging greater success.

These companies with almost impossible to think about type large amounts of money can be doing better by people. Expecting that makes great sense.

And where that is not effective, seeking various remedies does too.

Competition, use of the State, protest, all on the table.

Anyone concerned about the potential impact of those things is completely free to avoid them. Just make sure the value to people is there and they won't really care about the money.

Knee jerk, break them up helped create this net we are seeing consolidated and increasingly devoid of value.

People calling for that again is understandable.

Finally, breakups are super expensive. A real, material threat of that happening makes for a real, material cost and risk assessment, which can justify hedging all of that with better value to the people too.
I agree with this in cases of legitimate, friendly companies that are proud of what they do and want to provide a good service.

This breaks down when dealing with monopolies and companies that are too big to fail. Customer service in their case is always monkeys (from my experience) - they aren’t paid enough to care, they don’t know anything about their company’s product/service (because a skilled person wouldn’t put up with the low pay and working conditions) and have very limited power in actually fixing your problem even when they understand it.

In that case scaring them into escalating the call might be a better strategy than just running around in circles trying to make a monkey understand what you’re after.
Uhh, most products can offer plenty enough defense against opportunistic blanket surveillance (but broadcasting your keystrokes is probably not going to help there). Protection against targeted attacks is a whole different story.
Practically they're selected by existing economics committee members.
is it just me or the site can't be reached?
> Specifically, MuZero uses MCTS and MCTS needs to have at the very least a move generator in order to produce actions that can then be evaluated for their results.

You are confusing the two phases. The MuZero training does not use MCTS, it merely observes sequences of moves/states/rewards. This can be done using observations from anywhere: human games, AG games, A0 games, random games. This is where it does the actual learning of what moves are valid and what makes moves good (because invalid moves will not be represented in the dataset of valid games). It does not need MCTS or any access to an oracle about move validity, which is Marcus's complaint. This is no more cheating than observing the real world to infer its physics.

The second phase, where new games are generated, may use MCTS. But it doesn't have to. So it can learn by simply training on a game corpus, and then generating a new game corpus by self-play using only its internal implicit tree search and something like illegal moves = instant loss. It will rapidly learn to not make illegal moves and play just as validly as a MCTS-structured tree search, and then its implicit learned tree search achieves the same or greater playing strength.
Alloys of various elemental metals are also metals, but aren't elemental.
I know other people who know Virgil (surprised how many), and they talk about him getting "rat-pilled" - getting into LessWrong Rationalism, neoreaction, race and IQ theories.

There's lots of LWers in Ethereum, but (of course) most are much more on the ball than to get into scientific racism.
If you are in the Internet you have access to the math sectiom of Stack Exchange and Reddit, both loaded with volunteer math tutors.
> I don't care about winning or losing. But I don't know how to say, "whatever, moving on" in a way that itself doesn't get interpreted as further pettiness.

I struggled with this for years. In the end I just settled on saying "Respectfully, I think we will need to just agree to disagree. No hard feelings." A few times I've had to drop the "This conversation is going nowhere good. Let's talk about something else."

Being direct is under-rated. I find people aren't offended when you do it, as long as you are maintaining some basic amount of social decorum / grace.
Interesting description about the life of a pianist - actually any soloist, be it violin, cello, flute - you name it. Talented or not you have to spend 8 hours a day practising - every day. Which for a student makes it impossible to self fund your education if you have to attend other courses during college as well.
Don't even consider a social life.
I work with Yocto at my day job too. I hate it. I have 20 years of experience with Linux, and my favorite disto is Fedora. Fedora on arm is working much better than Yocto (except for DNF: 40,000 of available packages is too much for an embedded system, so at least 1GB of memory is required to run DNF).
We all get a vote on this. I moved to firefox, duckduckgo and protonmail, but still use youtube (with ad blocker).
Or just configure your router to block everything coming from your TV except whatever you want, like Netflix. Everyone should have a firewall at their gateway.
That is an old joke, so some context may be in order: the name is a reference to the then-common “CU-SeeMe” videoconferencing software: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CU-SeeMe
>Turn the relevant parts of it (the ones which are affected by network effects, or other barriers to entry) into an open platform that can be accessed on an equal basis.

Doesn't this run counter to private property though? Or what would you have happen when Google says "no"?
Sunrise calendar app alternative – DuskCalendar
I think people would be better off tracking Solid. It's not moving super fast, but has good momentum, and is based on web and decentralized standards including Linked Data.
Maybe the solution is not in the free market, but by taking the background of pubmed and create a search.gov.

No ads, no algorithms, no bullshit ranking and metrics, no tracking, just pure boolean search with a heavy handed spam filter and jam packed with features for the sake of utility and not engagement.
Electrical conductivity is electron motion, and if you have electrons to carry charge, you also get thermal conductivity. So metals (in the general sense) are good electrical and thermal conductors.

If you have very hard materials, with high phonon conduction, you can get thermal transport via phonons. But, these are almost all poor electrical conductors, as you need very tight binding to get hard materials with high phonon velocity.

The prototypical example of the second case is diamond.
The examples show that the headers are printed by default, so writing them to stderr is the correct behavior.
How would breaking up a company help censorship? Surely it's easier to censor one entity than many.
May I ask a bit more details of what you didn’t like about development teams? I am feeling very similarly to you in the sense that I see Uber drivers and grocery store clerks and feel truly envious of them and am considering taking one of those jobs once I reach a certain level of financials (disclaimer: I have done plenty of blue collar jobs in my youth so I know what it feels to do manual labor).
Are we comparing it to Canada or something? Then you're right, it's not that close. Or are we comparing it to the lands of triumphant Salvador Allendes, like Venezuela? No successful coup took place there, and I hear the transit is downright free in Caracas these days.
IDK, that is one of the things that annoys me to be honest, because sometimes headers get written after the body into the output (idk why, but guess some buffering and/or parsing+formating lag).

I almost forked it to get both outputs into stdout haha
So instead of "share code and save money", like normal distro, they use "split code and make profit" model.
Right: fingerprinting is the general term for using something other than client-side storage (cookies, local storage) to determine identity. Incognito mode and other private sessions intentionally don't preserve client-side storage.
> Shockingly, Hodges is not the only person to have been hit by a meteorite

... Some insurance company oughtta be paying these people to stay home and never, ever go anywhere. It'd be worth it for the ad campaign.
I think it's strange that companies like France (and Germany, UK, Japan, etc) don't pass a law saying "Only French companies may service web search requests originating in France". Web search is basically going to be a monopoly, so they might as well try to ensure that the vast economic rents created by the monopoly go to one of their one companies.

There is a very strong national security argument here: you don't want your citizens' web searches to be controlled by a foreign company, even if you're nominally allied with the country, because of the immense political power that control of web search entails.

This kind of policy would unite the populists on both the left and the right. The left would like the idea of redistributing money away from big American technobillionaires to local businesses, while the right would appreciate putting the interests of the nation first.
For spam / bot / fraud detection, yes. For ad targeting, no.
First, downvoted as requested, you're welcome.

Second, consider that Google, Apple, and "dozens more" effectively stole billions of dollars from their own devs?

https://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon-valle...

https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage...

Their jobs are cushy, yes, but they were actually exploited.
[disclaimer I work at Cliqz]

We are all ears on ideas on how to beat Google :-)

But on a serious note; i do not think that the aim is to beat Google because of Google but because on the monopoly they have on the access to the information. And that's why we are building a potential alternative there.

Attacking from a different domain, might beat Google on that area, or let's go wild here, perhaps even on revenue, but would not fix the problem we wanted to fix to the begin with.

"Replicating" 99% of the functionality with a quality to be good enough is a very valid option IMHO. Otherwise if one decides to leave Google, where do they go? If they do not want to advertise on Google, where do they go? There are too few alternatives, there are many names, but most of them are aggregators (full or partial). That said, if besides Bing, there would be 4 or 5 like them (or better), then yes, I concede that Cliqz as is, would make no sense.
"Search" isn't a problem. Monetization ecosystem is.
> All of this teaches one lesson: be more like Apple. Treat your customers poorly and massively overcharge them. Make sure you are never the biggest in your field. Essentially, don't offer products that are too good for the price.

Or just don't abuse your customers by hiding the ball on what you do with their data. Don't buy up all your competitors, so you can squeeze more and more money out of small businesses who have to buy impressions because the organic ways (which the same companies own) don't work any more. The products aren't too good for the price - we don't even fully know what the price is.

> I'd also like to point out that if those companies have to be spun off on their own, then the only way for some of them to make money is to sell your data to third parties. Right now Google doesn't seem to do that, but how else would Analytics monetize itself, if it cannot offer ads?

The same way Mixpanel, KissMetrics, Adobe and dozens of other web analytics vendors monetize (including Google's own 360 Suite). Or make it clear, up front, how the data will be used on free accounts, and give the user a way to monitor and revoke that agreement at any time. As an independent business, they will be free to find the best path.
There needs to be a new search engine focused on the niche of people who hate the current ad spam/SEO results that Google currently returns. A query like "best headphones" returns results like "The Best Headphones for 2019 | PCMag.com".

They've clearly optimized for the mass user base, since the average person is probably fine with a result like that. But I'm willing to bet no one on HN would ever click a link like that, just because of how "spammy" it feels.

When I search for something like "best headphones", my ideal results would be forum/discussion posts (eg. like "Ask HN") where I can read what other programmers/hackers are using, their experience with it, etc. And that's the problem with trying to make a one-size-fits-all search engine - it isn't possible to make everyone happy.

I've actually been working on a product to solve this exact problem. The best comparison would be the old "discussions" filter that Google used to have until they removed it. I'd love to show more people and get feedback. If this is something you'd be interested in trying, drop your email here ( https://degoogle.typeform.com/to/QzVy7c ) and I'll send you the beta
> The KataGo paper (the paper you linked) is one exception to this.

And my point is that KataGo shows that if you make the relatively minor architectural changes necessary to do this at all, it works just fine. None of the other tweaks it makes, useful as they may be, have anything to do with fixing transfer learning, because there's nothing to fix. It's a pretty absurd claim to claim that a CNN which works fine on 19x19 will suddenly collapse and show no transfer on, say, 17x17, and KataGo demonstrates that this does not happen.

> Also, if something is obvious but never seems to make it to publication the chances are someone has tried and it didn't work as expected so they shelved the paper.

'What if Go but rectangular boards' is pretty dumb when you have chess and shogi and other domains showing that A0 works, so I feel confident that no one like DM seriously tried and simply buried their failures. (Publication bias requires there to be a literature that can be differentially published, and competition presumes the existence of >0 entities competing; there is no active field of 'rectangular Go'.)
No, it is not, it will just work most of the time in low level MCUs because compilers support this abuse for lack of clearly better options. C and C++ have no support whatsoever for dealing with interrupts: volatile does not introduce any memory fences, atomics are for sharing data between threads which you do not have in many embedded systems, and sig_atomic_t is only defined for situations where you have a posix-like runtime environment. So sharing data between an ISR and the main program is undefined in C, and the compilers are free to compile „volatile“ the way most people expect, but the language does not guarantee that it works.

It can be argued that the only kind of variable that can be shared safely between an ISR and the rest of the code is a volatile sig_atomic_t, but that is an argument from analogy and not from first principles, as the C abstract machine has no concept of ISR.
The same goes for the argument that you should use atomic intrinsics, plausible, but still just an analogy.

(Just in case anyone was wondering if C as a language is close to the metal: no, it is not.)
Of course, both of those came over from the Americas, like the potato.
You have a problem with your site certificate:

> The website’s security certificate is not yet valid or has expired.

> Error Code: DLG_FLAGS_SEC_CERT_DATE_INVALID
It is not a zero sum situation - you don't get high violent crime due to low property crime and vice versa. It's entirely possible to live in an area with low property and low violent crime. Besides, doing a quick search shows [e.g. 1] that the NYC has both violent and property crimes rates much lower than SF, this could explain why people are not saying it's a hell hole.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...
You've nailed it. Back when tech was the underdog, it was trying to make things more open, accessible, free-as-in-speech. I remember when the internet was very pro Ron Paul, and against government regulating technology (remember the losing battle against DMCA and DRM and the PATRIOT act?). Now that tech has become successful, the losers (those who want the control) are trying their hardest to create new narratives about tech companies' abuse / monopoly. Can tech be improved? Or course, but with small iterations, not complete overhauls.
Well, that goes both ways. My wife is a social media editor and former web editor, so she is not a technician but she knows browsers more than her average colleague. Whenever some internal application has issues, she has to go through the same 10 minutes of explanations that it must be Firefox's fault, every time she calls tech support, after which they agree that it is usually what she suspected the issue to be; or if she had no clue and all she could tell them is "I have tried both Firefox and Chrome" guess what, it's not Firefox vs. Chrome.
To prove that the owner of the car or at least the person registered to it really was driving the car at the time.

Now full disclosure, I don’t drive, but of my buddies that do, one received a ticket last year here in California in the mail that had a picture which clearly identified her (and me, I was in the passenger seat). If she fought the ticket, presumably they could pull this photo out and show that yes, she was in fact driving her own car. She didn’t fight the ticket.
I don't think that if Google vanished tomorrow, a new crop of superior search engines would suddenly pop out of the ether to replace it.

Is Google somehow suppressing the creation of a good search engine? No, on the contrary it has created the best web search engine we've ever seen. I would personally be sad if you took it away from me, and I suspect that 99% or more of its users would be in the same boat (don't judge the zeitgeist by web forum echo chambers). You break up monopolies when they are harming users, not in order to cause harm to users.
Just type reddit after every query and you've got the same function
O ya, you want alot:)

links in my stack: https://github.com/jakeogh/gpgmda-client
Divide and conquer. They can push for one of the companies that is pro-censorship.
'It will be called Americanism': US writers who imagined a fascist future (2017)
For one, Mercury's orbit was pretty confusing, and needed a fudge factor when calculated with existing Newtonian methods. This is why some were so convinced that there had to be a tiny planet Vulcan between it and the sun. When you use Relativistic equations rather than Newtonian, the math just works out clean without a fudge factor.