skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Python programs that do close to nothing still use way more CPU than you would if you were running in the JVM, or Go, C, whatever.

Yeah but that's not exactly shocking news to anyone, is it? People generally choose Python for other reasons (productivity, library ecosystem, etc.) because the performance is "good enough" for most web apps, and if you reach a traffic level where performance becomes an issue that's a good problem that you can optimize for later. (Like Facebook did with PHP, Twitter did with Ruby, etc.)

> But yes, most importantly, Python's asyncio system is completely impacted by these same issues and I would have preferred she address that, as asyncio is part of the standard library now and is way more popular than gevent.

Right, the blog post gave me the impression she was calling out the combination of Python/Gunicorn/Gevent specifically for some reason. But if the underlying goal was to just point out that Python is slow then I am curious what people think the right solution is? Just switch out of Python and use Go or something else?
> Hoarded? Jeff Bezo’s billions are tied up in Amazon. That’s providing no value?

Yes, hoarded. You're really bringing up Amazon?

You're talking about the same Amazon that paid no federal taxes last year? I paid more taxes than Amazon did.
The same Amazon that encourages a work environment where their warehouse employees wear diapers [0]?
The same Amazon that forces its employees to work around a dead body [1]?

Amazon itself started by exploiting USPS.

Amazon is a leach on society. Amazon gets tax breaks to build warehouses where their employees face horrendous working conditions. Tax money that could be used to provide better services not only to their workers, but to the rest of us.. You know, real value.

[0]: https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/16/17243026/amazon-warehouse...

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/17/amazon-wa...
A few cool specific things that OpenShift does that others don't:

1. ships a built-in Ingress controller that has smarts like blocking subdomain/path hijacking across namespaces. Someone's dev namespace can't start adding its Pods to a production API's ingress path

2. the oc cli has first class support for switching namespaces without bash aliases

3. RBAC logic is implemented such that as a unprivileged user you can list only the namespaces you have access to with `kubectl get ns` vs "not allowed to list all namespaces" error.

4. first class representation of an "image stream" which given a container location will cache it locally, emit events like "do a rolling deployment when this changes" and a few other very simple but logical helpers

Plus all the other top-level features like Operators and over the air updates. I think seeing some very specific wins can help folks understand that the little things matter just as much as the big ones.

disclosure: work at Red Hat
> Because what else you're going to do?

I’m pretty sure if a country were to do this now, they would also have plans to sabotage the effort
I think the difference between forcing people to "buy" a product (or select a house product instead of "buying" a third party option) and forcing people to comply with a platform standard is in fact going to be material in an anti-trust case.

I'm not sure I see the "pro-Apple-profits" angle here. Generally, customers are better off with IdP-assisted login than with one-off password login, and if that feature needs to exist for UX and safety reasons, it seems understandable that Apple wouldn't want Facebook locking everyone into Facebook's extremely intrusive IdP.
" And I will never understand why some people choose to attack them for it."

Because it's possibly anti-competitive.
RELU training is basically the same as active sets. You call it nonlinearity. I call it a constrained sub-problem. The point is that it is always linear for the active variables. If you’re talking only about gradients, you’re not doing anything non-linear.
Judicial oversight requirements should be strict, but it should absolutely be a police investigation tool. Calling it "dragnet" to imply dystopian surveillance is silly. Oversight is the crux of the issue, not the tool itself.
The thing you're missing: I wasn't suggesting that you remove the license plate from your car. I was suggesting that a car, with a license plate attached, is a tracking device which you should avoid.

Most cars these days also have GSM modems in them, letting the manufacturer, the cell tower, and by extension the entire military intelligence community and federal investigators know exactly where they are at all times (they receive all GSM HLR data in realtime from the carriers). It really is that bad. We know for a fact that domestic federal law enforcement is using parallel construction to conceal the fact that they are receiving tips from the military's mass surveillance systems:

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/09/dark-side-fbi-dea-illega...

Furthermore, millions of Americans that don't own or drive cars stand in direct evidence contrary to your claim that giving up driving is impractical. Driving is actively harmful to our society, our safety, our cities, and our future well-being. Everyone should be avoiding it as much as possible, including but not limited to moving to places where it's not necessary, or only very rarely necessary.
Interactive chart of Coronavirus cases, recoveries and deaths around the world
What GM argues is reasonable could be many millions of dollars -- they could be liable for hundreds of millions of dollars depending on the severity. A judge isn't going to make them work with just 2 associates.

Your first question ("Should someone be able to...") is a false dichotomy. The real question is whether we show a preference for being able to sue easily, versus adding more downside.

In America, consumer protection is done through lawsuits, especially since the current leadership is underfunding these groups. In general, companies have less approvals before launching a product under the assumption that negligence will cost them a ton of money in class action. That is why class action amounts can be so high - it's the dis-incentive for cutting corners.

Yes, patent trolls are an issue. I think there are better ways to reduce that impact (such as a sensible patent system) without harming consumers.
"Considering that 40% of Americans can't even afford a $400 unexpected expense"

That's based on the idea that people who put a random $400 expense on a credit card that they pay off next month "can't afford" it.
Awesome list. Thank you for sharing!
> didn't buy thanks to HN saying it was a scam/bubble

This is a good lesson about the oft-repeated wisdom of crowds. It's just not there. (Please don't link me to the thing about how crowds converge on the number of jellybeans in the jar and suchlike due to the law of large numbers.)

"If "everybody knows" such-and-such, then it ain't so, by at least ten thousand to one." —Heinlein
I've thought about this for different reasons lately and concluded that companies that operate internally as a market would be vulnerable to second system syndrome, ie just becoming a poor imitation of the actual market. You could argue that some (rare) companies that act like markets are those with a safe income stream that insulate them from financial pressures enough to create a market of a second sort. The only sort I can think of is any sort of market of ideas where employees are reasonably free to invest their time as they see fit. Something like Google's 20% time (at least in the old days when that was apparently still a thing) or Valve, where they say the reason desks are on wheels is so you can move to join the team you think is doing the most important work. Whether that's how it works out is another matter...
Yeah but I think it's reasonable to assume no one using Python in production actually does this.
I'm not sure whether the person I was replying to is The One to whom all these things are too obvious to be worth mentioning, or if these were too implicit for them to notice, or a combination. Either way, no, thank you for writing it.
Few notes there:

* The parent comment didn't caveat "large airline".

* Porter is the third-largest airline in Canada. Canada has 10% of the population of the US, so our airlines will be accordingly smaller.

* American Airlines is the largest airline in North America [1], serves the entire country + international. Really not a reasonable comparison to a regional domestic airline.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_airlines_in_No...
Who needs all that pesky oxygen anyway
To anyone coming to the comments, the title is misleading. The health department is pressuring her "to stop her speaking out about the Medicare and PBS history of over 2.5 million Australians being re-identifiable online due to a government bungle."
Cool. I noticed the client service methods seem to repeat a lot of the same code / pattern, there is probably a way to simplify it.
William Gibson’s New Book Imagines a Trump-Free Alternate Reality
I suspect the previous owner had a knife she didn't know how to sharpen and wanted to supplement the iron in the soil for the nasturtiums.
If you're going to start using logic and reason with this issue then that government will simply outlaw those as well. This government has already set a precedent of having overridden the basic limits of mathematics before. See also: anything to do with encryption.
And now fixed, moved to SHA512.
If AI Has Human Rights, Some Worry That Self-Driving Cars Might Turn on Us
I wouldn't have an issue committing to those benefits you've listed. Agreed, app is a gimmick although I'm not too sure the other two are quite as far into the gimmick category.

It seems like you've taken it as either/or rather than 'and'. I want to offer all of the above things AND offer any specific benefits that also offer sleep enhancement.
How would this qualify as “antitrust abuse” exactly? You are free to use your own sign on system without adding this.
This is interesting. If you can deliver on this, I'm guessing you can deliver on a lot more. Figuring out what warrants an alert is a non-trivial problem, and it's in the same problem space as answering other business questions like "what is our true organic traffic".

Also, on metric drops I'm interested not just in the alerts but also in the narrowing down of what is causing the drop. For example, the first question we always ask is "could marketing blend be causing this". I imagine your ML can figure that out. You could also point out where to look, like "iOS 13 is fine, but there is a severe drop in conversion for iOS 12" or "Conversion dropped for app version 13.2 on Android".

Great stuff! I'd love to see if it works!
The underlying goal was to show that python gets CPU bound very easily, this is not at all the same as saying "python is slow". If I want slow I'd use Ruby.
>The claim you are making that the merger changed culture which changed their safety outcomes is as non-falsifiable as the dot-com crash killed their morale which changed safety culture.

It is most assuredly not unfalsifiable when you have executive leadership on record as intending to shift the focus of Boeing away from "over thinking the box" and revolutionizing it as a shareholder value creator.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-05-09/former-bo...

Which cascaded to:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/boeing-737-m...

Further, have you read

https://www.msn.com/en-za/money/news/how-the-mcdonnell-dougl...

I mean there were other contributors, sure, but the McD merger is provably connected if you pay attention. Example of other factors:

When confronting a bunch of Wall Street analysts, an engineer gets shouted down for daring to entertain the foolish idea that making safety critical machines was an altogether different in nature from a company that make consumer widgets.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/11/18/the-case-again...

Unless you have just entered the workforce, and therefore are completely ignorant as to how executives propagate culture shift through what they decide to prioritize, in which case, this outburst can be forgiven.

Honestly, I'd accept many alternative theories but you're striking me as being contrarian and disingenuous by just throwing the history that is there.

And no, trying to only focus the current engineering culture as the main focus of what's wrong is the exact kind of thinking that leads to one repeating the history they should be learning from.
The timeline doesn't work for that read. They were pushing their privacy credentials before launching iAds, and iAds failed as many predicted precisely because they wouldn't compromise their privacy stance.
"In computing, we mostly stand on each other's feet."

-Richard Hamming
> Tech is IMPROVING our lives

Sadly, it’s also improving the police state
Sign in With Apple is OpenID, which is an open standard. See https://openid.net/2019/09/30/apple-successfully-implements-...

A fellow comment downthread encapsulates the benefit of this change perfectly:

“There was some app I downloaded last year which only had facebook or google sign on. You couldn't register with an email. I ended up deleting the app.”
This is really exaggerated. You can get a current-gen Mac mini for $800 if you don’t want to buy used or a previous gen, you don’t need a $4000 computer to run Xcode. Also approval times on Apple are a few hours these days, when was the last time you published an app on the App Store? It used to be 7-14 days but it’s not like that anymore.
Geofencing in this case directly led to the proper murder suspect. It was the technique that caught the right guy. The right guy was driving his relative's car and using the relative's old phone that he didn't sign out of, which led police to (entirely 100% legitimately) suspect the actual owner of both the car and the Google account. That was cleared up quite quickly, the right guy was arrested, all thanks to Good Guy Geofencing.

Where it went wrong is a completely orthogonal matter. He was kept in jail for days after it was crystal clear he's not the murderer, and his name was dragged through the mud also after that point. He's completely legitimately suing for that, and hopefully wins. But what does that have to do with a legitimate and effective use of his geolocation data? Again, a murderer is caught because of it. And then the same police department fucked up and ruined a legitimate and justified but innocent suspect's life.
United States has only 3 Class 3 Airports (same number as Poland), only one of them on official IATA list. Unless you fly to/from/through NYC or D.C., your domestic flight doesn't touch any slot, and thus avoids the reason for flying empty.
They're certainly a source of selection pressure. One of many.
It's not rare for envelope protection systems on commercial aircraft to have some sort of override. That it's required to be present in normal operation to pass certification does not mean that the plane is suddenly illegal if it's switched off under abnormal conditions. Pilots do not typically override safety systems that are functioning properly because they don't want to die. Airlines do not order them to do so because they don't like fines, plane crashes, or being ordered to shut down.

It's not like turning MCAS off makes the plane go faster or burn less fuel. Nobody would turn it off unless it was malfunctioning.
Seems like abstractions will bite you there, most will just do cool_library.unmarshall(request) in some variant, those libraries will not have the same method for yielding as you have.
iOS, the Future of macOS, Freedom, Security and Privacy (2017)
It's not just about Boeing though. It is kind of expected that companies will try to cut corners. That's why there are regulators like the FAA.

And in this case, there are non-US regulators in play too. They used to just blindly trust the FAA and approve anything the FAA approved, but that has likely changed now - the FAA (rightfully) lost a lot of trust due to this. Pressuring the FAA into approving another unsafe design isn't enough anymore.

I suspect that if the FAA approves but EASA doesn't, many other authorities will be heavily inclined to trust EASA on this one. Which could make the plane a "US only" plane. Maybe some close allies could be pressured into allowing it but I doubt any airline outside of North America could meaningfully integrate them into their fleet with a different type rating and a small set of countries that allow them.
That makes a lot of sense actually; it wasn't a deliberate decision, just the path of least resistance.
Not is it a choice if a neighbour pointed him out. Or any other of the countless ways in which a completely innocent person can become a completely legitimate person of interest in a police investigation.
Why couldn't it work like credit cards? Physically touch the car with the key like a normal key hole if the battery dies. The car can provide whatever small current it needs, and the key can be as complex as we want.
Well, on the positive side, at least all the 737 Max planes being grounded isn't a factor anymore... /s
What does that have to do with the lottery ticket hypothesis?
Under what definition of antitrust is this?

You can still sign in with one of those social providers. You can always put your money somewhere other than Apple.
It might be a big deal, but the author wants to convince us that it's bigger than other forms of therapy. I take it as a possibility, but it has a low degree of certainty until I see more evidence.
All very true.

The partition used in quicksort has a textbook example of a result--the possibly swapped elements--not used in the next iteration. (The conditional increment is used immediately, though.) But replacing the innards of partition's loop with

bool c = *left <= pivot
T v[2] = { std::move(*left), std::move(*right) };
*right = std::move(v[1-c]), *left = std::move(v[c]);
left += c;

almost doubles the speed. Persuade the compiler to substitute cmov instructions, and you get more than double.

Gcc cannot be persuaded, under any circumstances, to put more than one cmov in a basic block. Clang can be persuaded, with a bit of subterfuge:

*right = (v[0] & -c) | (v[1] & c-1);
*left = (v[1] & -c) | (v[0] & c-1);

or (less fun) with ?: expressions. Probably the optimizers should recognize the array index trick, which is formally correct for all types.

Pressure on the cache of predicted branches is hard to quantify. They don't tell us how many branch prediction slots we get. But you definitely can blow that cache.

We don't know what all dodgy gimcracks are in modern CPU cores. I do know that loops with FILE getc/putc and streambuf sgetc/sputc are faster than they have any business being. If you can get your loops to look enough like those, they will be improbably faster.
And then you need ANOTHER more expensive lawyer, so you get a second chance at not being able to afford both lawyers.
Another day, another new outrage.

“I would think the majority of citizens in the world would love the fact that we are putting violent offenders in jail,” Armbruster said.

Remind me to bust that one out the next time anyone disagrees with me. "I would think the majority of citizens in the world would want us to watch another UFC fight, honey, instead of Stranger Things."
I am old (I have seen things). I still have my first program from college, in FORTRAN, on a card deck. I also worked as a "computer operator" (an extinct species) while going to college, putting card decks in the readers, running decks that were output from the punches through "interpreters" (which printed the characters across the top of cards), and remembering that you always (ALWAYS) drew a diagonal line across the top of a deck of cards with a pen, in case you dropped them (colloquially known as a "floor sort"). If you wanted to be really fancy, you'd use different colored cards for different sections of a program, but that was rarely worth the effort. Good times.

Besides card punches, readers and interpreters, other quaint machines I dealt with on a daily basis were chain printers (with carriage tapes - look it up), reel-to-reel tapes (which required cleaning the heads with isopropyl alcohol and cotton swabs once a shift), and the most evil of all, decollators (again, look it up). All controlled via consoles that didn't have cursor keys, so to this day I have the TERRIBLE habit of backspacing to nuke and fix typing mistakes rather than cursoring and surgically correcting them. I bet the Backspace key on my keyboard is probably in the top 10 keys in my usage profile. :)
pro-Apple-profits option to their own separate offerings quacks like antitrust tying.

No, it doesn't.

First, there’s been no ruling that Apple is a monopoly, which by the way, isn’t illegal. With their 20% global market share [1], they clearly aren't a monopoly.

Do they have a monopoly in the iOS app market? Absolutely, but that's to be expected. It’s their platform that developers have agreed to their terms of service. Nobody is being forced to develop on their platform, especially since they aren't the market leader.

This is nothing like the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft back in the day, after a federal decent decree forbidding Microsoft from using their 95% market share that was obviously a monopoly from tying Internet Explorer to Windows.

Of course, they went ahead anyway, declaring that Internet Explorer was so integrated into Windows that it could not be removed, which proved to be false.

Microsoft threatened to cancel the Windows licenses of various PC manufacturers if they continued to ship Netscape Navigator instead of IE, clearly abusing their monopoly power.

Apple doesn’t have a smartphone monopoly; there hasn't been any ruling to the contrary. They are only requiring Sign in with Apple if a developer already provides social logins.

Apple gives developers 2FA, verification of the login being a real person and not a bot. Users get to be anonymous by using a proxy email address if they choose. And there's no tracking by companies who make the vast majority of their revenue by monetizing user information. And it works on macOS, iOS, watchOS, the web, and Android devices.

It would be hard to argue users don't benefit from this.

[1]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/216459/global-market-sha...
It's also a common practice in any department that has their budget determined this way, e.g. https://vimeo.com/27060669
thanks! very helpful feedback
I think the culture is improving despite of cashing it out in the 90's and 2000's during the Ballmer / Jack Welsch era. Semiconductor industry hasn't done a good job of cultivating a good, positive company culture and making it less regimented. We need to make it cool to work in a semiconductor company. I can assure you that there are so many incredible challenges that exist - with good definition/funding to tackle them from materials to marketing (direly needs to revamped). Imagine running a portion of the world's most advanced manufacturing processes. Ultra high volume (thousands of wafer starts per week), mind you.

Perhaps videos such as these are shining a positive light on the entire semiconductor goodwill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0gMdGrVteI
Without a doubt.

If we have a modest app and it’s thing much of a struggle to cross all the t’s and dot the i’s... I highly doubt there is a lot of malware getting through.
Sometimes it is, it depends on the virus causing it.
I'm not sure if I have ever heard of any budgeting that didn't have exactly that problem. Perhaps budgeting on specific problems? That still might require separating budget for headcount....
The amount of support of Israel in the US is nothing but stunning. The political and events that have lead to this situation are just incredible.
> COVID-19 is the showing of symptoms

It is the infection. If it were literally just the showing of symptoms, then anyone with the symptoms would have COVID-19, but a variety of diseases cause these symptoms.
It was eminently feasible to run a home ISP from a garage back in the day.