skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
(Re)posted as I'd just run across an issue with Yet Another Online Book Reader that wastes 25-50% or more of screen space with unnecessary screen elements.

I'd reported the issue to the institution in question. In this case, the default viewer is embedded in a web page with no "maximise" functionality. There's a partial workaround of going directly to the viewer page, but that has a persistent header which, when added to the browser and Android elements that are then persisted (status bar, tabs, nav bar) chew up fully 25% of the vertical real estate of the screen.

Which is only just usable (9" Android tablet) for viewing scanned-in books when those are fully maximised, though in portrait mode that works pretty well.

The point being that even a very small persistent element can result in a large reduction in useful screen space, and in many cases makes the difference between a useful/usable and entirely useless interface.

The crap being rendered on most websites is ... just plain bad.

Reader mode, where that's available, is great. I'm a frequent user of https://outline.com/ There are others (one recently linked heavily in HN comments).
As much as I like embracing the statement "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" I think we really need to solve tax havens before we can make more places that can serve as them.
It wasn't mentioned specifically, but I assume this post was written as a general response to "Working for Microsoft cost me $200 million" [1], which has been at the top of HN for most of the day.

[1] https://blog.garrytan.com/working-for-microsoft-cost-me-200-...
On my xr it's much quicker to get to either of them through control center than holding the button for two seconds. And the way that they are placed, about 15% of the time when I pick up my phone gripping it front-back rather than side-side I activate one of those two things unintentionally.

Plus the trailing edge triggered nature of them is annoying.

It's also anti-user that they can't be disabled/removed per the user's preference.
Very true. While I'm skeptical of things like the blockchain as "the main course" in financial innovation, I noticed there's some general strive towards getting things right and up to date on the tech side of the equation. IEX and Alpaca for example. Whatever it may be, I see Rust on the forefront as its principles make handling things like instrument pricing and managing orders a real pleasure.
Totok is spying on us for UAE? – News Tech. futur is magic
Startups aren't remotely transgressive. They're heavily promoted, financed and supported by virtually every state government and have been for decades (centuries if you count the startups behind colonial enterprises).

Settling the solarsystem would be neat. It won't do anything to fix climate changes or overpopulation. It's not even possible in principle, let alone practice to remove significant quantities of people from the gravity well.

Creating lawless zones for the specific purpose of fiefdom isn't new, entrepreneurial or even particularly imaginative. Unless you count the villains of Connery era James Bond as novel entrepreneurs.

Just where do you think these marvelously useful, livable but mysteriously uninhabited "vacant tracts of land in developing countries" will come from.
> ...if they want access to the iOS customer base, then they'll need to support their users' desire for privacy.

It's not strictly required. Devs can use first party logins, newsletter signups and so forth. It's not protecting me from any of the big players that deal in my information. Nefarious actors will work around it if they really want your actual email address.

It's a minor speed-bump for the organizations that we're allegedly being protected against, but one which amounts to a huge excuse for Apple to get their hooks more into your life, getting between you and whomever else you're trying to deal with, all while locking you in more and charging a premium for it without giving you much choice about anything.

But the larger issue IMO, is that depending on your industry, you can't NOT have an iOS app if you're going to have an app at all. Does it really matter what percentage of the market they have at this point? Once you can affect entire industries surrounding your product, you're certainly a monopoly. That's why you don't need a majority market share to be prosecuted as one.

> Whereas I see it as one of their best decisions.

Perhaps the ends justify the means for you. Maybe you haven't thought about the larger issue or you don't care about it. I don't know, but to be completely honest Apple runs their platform like a bunch of tyrannical assholes and I just can't support that.

I value technical freedom higher than comfort. I like a good balance at least. So, I'm going to continue hoping that global anti-trust laws will make this kind of thing harder for them to do. There's already one antitrust suit pending against them. They also got caught price fixing. The higher ups at Apple certainly don't work just to "protect the users". They do it to get control of you themselves.
My theory (I could be wrong) is that both Google and Facebook and startups trying to emulate them are trying to exclusively hire from the same dozen elite universities. That would explain the salaries.
I think you need to reform employee stock options - in the UK there are far less possibilities to screw employees over stock options.
> I was making a joke about Google eating all of the world's revenue, but it didn't land. Sorry about that.

Honestly, I found it slightly offensive.
I am surprised by the amount of Hackernews users who keep bringing up simulator sickness as something that is still relevant to VR. Anyone who’s tried any headset since the first consumer Oculus and Vive should realise that it’s essentially a solved problem: the headsets have low enough latency and good enough tracking, and you simply have to avoid smooth locomotion (moving the player’s viewpoint without him moving his head).
Is this all you ? Or you have some friends with you ?

It's really nice for 1 person.
I've seen some games downloading assets after the application is started. Did you consider implementing it like that?
> what you're describing sounds more like a multi-dimensional (above the ones we're aware of) universe rather than a multiverse.

We’re aware of the possibility that we might do something, or could have done something. Does that count as an awareness of higher dimensions?

I don’t know enough about physics to understand how a multi-dimensional (above 4D) universe is different than a multiverse. I assumed they were one and the same concept.
Go support is awesome, IMO. Personally I have favored Bazel over “go build” for a while, except for pure Go projects with no generated sources.

Gazelle is wonderful and it doesn’t belong in Bazel core. Bazel is a build system for every language, and Gazelle is for a subset of Go developers. Since it’s not part of Bazel core, you can always replace it with something else.
Or included as copyright traps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
> The world is full of capital, and it's not going to the right people who can solve problems.

Hmmmm, isn't being a VC kind of exacerbating this problem? The business model of being a VC is entirely based around moonshots, which means that you are pigeonholed into only making bets on certain types of founders that either (a) already have extremely high risk tolerance or (b) can be pushed by VCs to take risks beyond their personal risk tolerance.

Which makes your "right people" statement come off slightly disingenuous, since the VC strategy seems to disproportionately attract more Mark Zuckerbergs than Matt Mullenwegs (for category (a)) and often exploits founder naivety for the benefit of the VC (for category (b)). I'd argue that many if not most of the "right people" who can solve problems are in general not a good fit for seeking VC investment.

Do you have suggestions for other investments strategies that may be more compatible for potential founders that don't fall within these two categories? Have you thought about branching into those investment circles?
Wait, seriously? I sign all my commits as habit and I `--amend` regularly. If this means my signature histories are broken…
> 2) impress him enough that he’s willing to offer you $200 million when you’re 23

I think the answer to that is "Go to Stanford". For literally 99.999% of people that is never possible.
>> Google and FB were paying less when they were founded than most startups I see today, adjusted for inflation.

You'd have to adjust quite a bit for inflation. The average rent has skyrocketed 300% since the time Google was a pre-IPO company. I would not mind a "low" Google 2004 salary if I could somehow also lock down a Mountain View 2004 mortgage. Also, tuition and student loans have risen. So while im at it, i'd love to lock down a 2004 student loan burden.
Do you have an example?

If it is single threaded, and we are talking about shared variables, I thought I can assume the runtime is not going to pause my code execution, switch context, and run other code midway through my call back handler.

If we are talking about shared external resources (e.g. who can update a cloud blob) then we could have a proxy for that as a variable. You might need retry logic, and it could get tricky in that respect.
To summarize the linked post (which I completely agree with), just provide officially recommended sane defaults and then get out of the user's way. In my view, that's how nearly all software ought to be written.
Getting Started with Python Right
> More playing

More playing? How will this prepare them for the real world where they’re expected to work 16 hour days.

I cannot shake the moment my Japanese acquaintances expressed incredulity that kids would actually play after school (or rather, that there was such a thing as after school play).
> China would no doubt take legal action to insist that other organizations and countries respect their intellectual property, license it, and pay royalties.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA.

Sorry, let me re-group and be serious......

HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAA WHAT A JOKE.

HAHJAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA
If I want to do OpenCL on Linux with a new AMD GPU do I need to now separately install a Radeon Open Compute package before I install normal Open CL stuff?
Every move you make, I’ll be watching you: Privacy implications of U1 chips/UWB
You've moved the goalposts IMO, from the idea of being able to simultaneously gain muscle and lose fat with any particular diet and exercise regimen, to being able to simultaneously gain muscle and lose fat at any particular point in time. The former being what everyone means when they say they lost fat and gained muscle, the latter being a mostly useless concept.

But that study does implicitly contradict even the latter. The subjects were fed hypocalorically and had a net negative change in weight, yet gained lean body mass, implying at least some of the lean mass gain was fueled by metabolizing stored fatty tissue.
Ah, good catch. So it's even likelier than I anticipate that some errors of improbable cause were observed.
This is explored in the novel The Forever War. Since the war had multiple battlefront (with vast distances between them) an attacker never knew if the particular branch of enemy was already ahead with their technology.
Do people torture themselves over mistakes that only prove to be so after the fact?

I thought I was a master of this art but this form of it escaped me.
I love how the article ranked right above this one is titled "Downsides to working at a tech giant".
I’m not predicting support until there’s a server oriented model available. So 2020 with Navi 20 and the new Radeon Instinct cards. They do have a single Radeon Pro W card (Navi 10), but I think they’re waiting for their Tesla competitor to be ready.

It’ll be interesting to see how these cards and ROCm perform in comparison to NVIDIA’s offering and CUDA.
It was cool how WSL1 allowed named pipes to be shared between Windows and Linux apps, giving the possibility to have a shared SSH agent, efficient X11 support, etc. Does WSL2 support that? I'm not sure but I don't think so.
> right kind of independent thinkers and doers who do not need hand holding and tend to have good understanding of large systems

lucky you. i’m in a startup where the very large majority of the eng team is here with their first job out of school. and they have the same latitude you are describing. i’ve found that to be typical these days.
> That's just my experience, YMMV.

The vast majority of people like that aren't (and don't) getting into Stanford, period, because impressive-to-admissions-committee folks are usually children of other impressive people (not always, usually). I don't think it's possible to interpret this as anything but "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps".
The Sidewalks Labs Toronto waterfront project. There’s a plethora of articles and a wealth of information on the subject...

Edit: it’s one of the first items returned in a search of the subject— https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-sidewalk-la...
I forgot about this thing. I wonder if the images it captures could be viewed in full on the looking-glass display. https://lookingglassfactory.com/
That's why I also looked at the percentage of people that were older than 65. It's 3x higher now.
> There's also HIP, which converts CUDA to something that can run on AMD GPUs.

Kinda making your point, HIP is actually an (open source) one-to-one replacement for the CUDA API. While there are tools (https://github.com/ROCm-Developer-Tools/HIP/tree/master/hipi... and https://github.com/ROCm-Developer-Tools/HIP/blob/master/bin/...) that convert CUDA to HIP, these are meant to be run once and perhaps touched up manually. HIP source can then be compiled (no human interaction) for AMD (ROCm) devices and NVIDIA (CUDA) devices.

The CUDA brand refers to both the API and the device. AMD certainly could have done a better job, but wanted to distinguish these, presumably in hopes that existing users of the CUDA API would consider porting their code to HIP even when targeting CUDA devices.
Sometimes people think of evolution as a binary thing - you reproduce or you don't. But a few generations on, some people leave huge numbers of descendants and some don't. There isn't a huge variance in the number of children people have, but that gets multiplied for grandchildren, and again for great-grandchildren...so the scale is not 0 to 1 (or 2 or 3), but 0 to <big number>. I wouldn't make any sweeping statements a priori about how economic inequality affects that, but if some people have all their resources vacuumed up and some don't, it's going to affect their lives on average somehow.
Thats true. But it learns pretty quick. It will become the top result if you choose the rigth (LibreOffice Draw) once or twice.
Most of the plants I know about are green, and rely on chlorophyll electrochemistry.
Some people claim the real goals of fusion power research have always been in support of fusion weapons development - specifically, by providing an experimental system for studying controlled fusion reactions (since uncontrolled fusion reactions are banned by treaty), and by providing a jobs program for fusion experts. I do not know enough about the practical obstacles to fusion power to judge the accuracy of this claim for myself, but there's no doubt that it's a dual-use technology, and some projects seem suspiciously like dead ends if commercial electricity generation is the real goal.
Thanks for the comment - this was more in response to the recent article as mentioned by seattle_spring but thanks for sharing Dan’s writing, will take a read. In terms of the similar design, I actually optimized for the least amount of HTML / CSS necessary to put readable text on a page, I guess resulting in a similar look.
Last I checked (maybe 6 months ago), it definitely _didn't_ support py3, although it was advertised. I thought I was doing something wrong, but there were half a dozen issues in the tracker that indicated it was critically broken.

I understand that "it should be simpler" is a pretty lazy criticism. It's been a while since I audited Bazel and friends, and I've forgotten which issues apply to which tool. Moreover, because of the awful state of the documentation and the messiness of the code base (or perhaps this is just standard quality for Java projects?), it's really difficult to tell whether any given issue is actually a fundamental shortcoming in the application or whether it's simply a knowledge gap.

As far as what I want, keep the starlark configuration file format; implement all rules as starlark libraries (such that no one needs to write Java to extend, and if you must write Java then for goodness' sake fix the plugin interface or document it better or something such that one doesn't need to be a core contributor to implement a plugin--perhaps this is fine for an enterprise audience, but it's not fine for my use case). The rules should call into a base `mktarget()` or similar that takes args like the target's ID (the package:target_name pair), a target type that identifies the code used to build the target, and a dict of args/params that are passed into the aforementioned code. The args/params can be an arbitrarily nested JSON-like type so long as the leaves are primitives (int, string, etc), references to source files, or other targets and all leaves (and transitively, the whole structure) must be hashable such that we can identify a given execution of the build.

Beyond that core operating model, the code and the user interface should be clean and well documented. Ideally, small and medium-sized projects shouldn't need to run it in daemon mode to get reasonable performance. This is important because a daemon running on local development machines introduces a larger maintenance burden (there's just more that can go wrong). Language-specific plugins (custom rules, whatever you want to call them) should adhere pretty closely to the conventions of the target language. Lastly, there should be good support for building toplevel artifacts--this means I should be able to build a whole CloudFormation package including lambdas, Docker images, etc just like I would build a JAR or a C++ binary.

I realize that those things are easy enough to say, but the devil is in the details. I've actually gone so far as to prototype the implementation, so I'm confident that those goals are achievable. Unfortunately, it's a pretty significant effort (mostly due to the breadth of project types/languages to support and the nuance/expertise required to support any of them), so I'm bound by free time. If anyone is interested in collaborating or discussing more in-depth, hit me up on Twitter @weberc2 or email me (username at gmail.com).
This is/was Yet Another Arch Distro, right? So I highly doubt that they have the personpower to continue with this project. Even Devuan (Debian w/o Lennart-ware) had more people behind them, this would be closer to Mastodon, the Linux distro that wouldn't switch to ELF.

Not that I'm entirely against the general idea, I think it's scary how common corporate-ware is getting these days compared to early Linux. For example, I'd much prefer a language that's not controlled by a commercial entity (and without a "BDFL", while we're at it), preferably with several implementations for example.
> The reason why is the math changed. The gap between startup and tech giant is much larger now than it was in 2010.

This is true but also kind of depressing. With the means of software production cheaply available to everybody is that stable job at a tech giant really the pinnacle of the software engineering career? I understand that everybody's got the bills to pay, kids to raise etc. and maybe I'm a bit naive but it just feels... wrong. And yes, working at BigCo can provide some interesting technical challenges, opportunities to impact millions of users and shield you from unpleasant interactions with the outside world. But it still feels like you are being paid premium to sit on the sidelines.
In my experience it learns - after you pick libre a couple times it will move to the top.
Google makes so much money that it makes sense to overpay? I mean that keeps people from leaving and starting their own thing that might be competition to Google. Plus give them the resources inside Google and they might build something there.
There are a bunch of things that “good” startups can do (and ARE doing in my experience) to make early stage equity worth it. For example, instead of a 90 day limit after leaving the company to choose to exercise options, many good startups are now offering ten years.
Most startups solve boring problems in boring ways, require you to work too much and deal with a wild west environment without proper procedures of coexistence.

Even with compensation equal, I'd take the tech giant.
Lytro’s demise and the future of light field cameras
Plants need reptiles?
Or their face looks different from faces that you are used to seeing (since all people are different) and the person is in fact not smiling.
The US was a brazen pirate right up until the point when it became profitable to abide by international patent and copyright treaties. We don't like it when other countries do what we did, but I personally can't fault them.
This is secondary, the real issue is employees don't get enough equity to even sell it on a secondary market.
The Economist had an article in 2017 that argued that US airlines are worse, more expensive, and more profitable due to less competition than European (and I'd add Asian) airlines.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2017/04/22/a-lack-of-compe...
LOL, I noticed as well.

As I was reading "Downsides to working at a tech giant" it occurred to me that the alternative to working for a tech giant is not necessarily a start-up: I would probably work for myself — freelance.

So, in fact the two articles can both be right. ;-)
I am saddened by this, since the “shipping to customers quickly (and iterating on the product based on feedback)” is the foundation of a successful growth economy.

There are so many gross inefficiencies in my market (US) that could be successfully addressed if more people has this type of orientation.
Sure, but why not take advantage of a 3-5 years head start?

If China were close to a surplus-energy generating Tokamak, the smart thing to do would be vague about it while pumping out a lot of disinformation to confuse Western intelligence agencies about the most productive path forward for research.
Absolutely, stock options in the US are super strange, they can be performance tied and for non-qualified shares. The thing I'd actually like to see is a better default governance for companies - companies are wholly owned by founders and I think there is just something fundamentally wrong with treating all employees as contractors by default until it's decided to grant them options or actual ownership.

A bunch of people gather together and build a thing - why is the first person to the table the person who takes home all the profit? Sure employees are technically signing away their rights by agreeing to work without being compensated with a portion of their work, but it'd be really hard to actually pursue proportional ownership in the current labour market.