skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> While the core product is LGPLv3+Commercial, most of their extensions are GPLv3+Commercial which makes them not suitable for a lot of apps.

this is FUD - the immense majority of Qt is under LGPL. You can build literally entire OSes out of the LGPL parts.

The only strictly GPL parts are (from this page https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtmodules.html) :
- Qt Charts
- Qt Data Visualization
- Qt Network Authorization
- Qt Virtual Keyboard
- Qt for WebAssembly
- Qt Quick WebGL

All the widgets, qt quick, etc... stuff is available under LGPL.
Japan hasn't seen any economic growth in a decade, and by no means would we want our economy to suffer the same date as theirs. Also, the reason we haven't seen anything like the 1930s (the worst economic downtown ever in the developed world) is because it isn't too difficult for a savvy government to stop.
Using the product while making a closed source application and contributing nothing (money or patches) back can hardly be construed as promoting open source. The "big money" that won't play ball is why they instead have the commercial licensing options.
>That said, like C#, it is strongly associated with Apple as a “private” language (despite being open-source).

You can't use Swift on Windows. You can target practically target most operating systems with C#.
C# is not only open source, but an international standard. Ecma (ECMA-334) and ISO (ISO/IEC 23270:2018)

Although both started as proprietary languages, both are open source now, both are developed mainly by one big company, the difference is that Microsoft is interested seeing C# on many platforms, while Apple doesn't have that interest.

I think Kotlin, Go, Rust have greater potential to rise in popularity than Swift.
> it's now slowly backfilling the missing features bit by bit

This isn't slow.

Java went three years, from December 1998 to February 2002, without any language changes. And to be honest, even that wasn't that slow!

> Every addition to the language is bikeshedded to death

Not to death, because many of them don't die!

What i find annoying about Rust's changes is that some of them are so trivial - they change the language for such small improvements. async/await is not in that category, for sure. But Ok-wrapping actually is. The need to Ok-wrap results is a minor annoyance at most. Ditto a bunch of the problems solved by match ergonomics changes.

I think the root of the problem is that the changes are driven by a small core of Rust programmers - many working on Rust itself or some of its flagship projects - who are actively involved in the discussions around Rust. They tend to view change as natural, and the cost of change as low. I believe there is a larger group of Rust programmers who are not actively involved in these discussions, and are maybe not spending 100% of their time on Rust, for who the cost is higher. But we don't hear as much from them.
The article gives specific and reasonable motivations for why you might want a new language for machine learning. There are already new tools. Like Pytorch. If you have never used Jupyter notebooks instead of an IDE, give it a try for a few weeks. It was the biggest boost I've seen to my coding productivity in literally decades. A new Git? I don't quite get that one. But considering the author arguably already got three out of his four claims right, maybe there is some reasoning behind that Git claim too.
Most New York Coronavirus Cases Came from Europe, Genomes Show
if you load archive.<x> it will load a cache-busting specific-to-you dns name

your.ip.address.foo.lots.of.stuff.pixel.archive.<x>/pixel.gif

that gets by most blacklists including umatrix and others

and they have a new domain name dujour so that too.
How much Dubai loves A.I
Not really, unless it provides generics, JEE and Spring like frameworks, supports all embedded CPUs, Oracle/SQL Server/DB2, mainframes, has an OS of its own, a GUI half as good as Swing,....
JavaFX for example. Its documentation is not up to the mark, but otherwise it is almost fully offers all gui functionality provided by QT.
Yes - then you all follow a conductor. And you _don't_ listen for cues, so there's no reason to worry about not hearing everyone at the same time...
Wow, this is inspiring work that I wish I’d seen earlier.

Here’s my ipython notebook that I used to extract LUTs from an eInk dev panel [1] which eInk support declined to give us the LUTs for.

I’d stopped after I managed to display some images but I now I have a reason to revisit and play with the PocketBook Linux. Thank you!

[1] https://github.com/prashnts/betty-epd/blob/master/notebooks/...
'?' is an almost completely useless language feature IMO.

The second block is much clearer and uniform. When reading the first you implicitly read it as the second, which introduces mental overhead.

The only upside of having '?' is to write less code, which is the worst kind of syntactic sugar: It makes the writer type less for a couple of seconds, but the result is harder to read.

Now even if one doesn't agree with the above it is still a bad feature. Why? Because the upside of it just doesn't outweigh the cost of having any syntactic language feature like this.

And I don't just mean the energy invested in introducing it into Rust, but also the continuous cost of having to deal and respect it in future changes.

This is a bad case of hyper-optimization within a very narrow scope combined with bikeshedding.
* Listen to some instrumentals, if you like

* Read

* Write

* Avoid: News, Twitter

* Breath, exercise
And yet Microsoft Office is available via the macOS App Store, alongside venerable packages like Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop, Logic and Final Cut (Apple-owned software), the Omni suite of software, Autodesk software, Pixelmator, etc.

The App Store has problems, but all apps there being "loser apps" is not one of them.
Just use an object with keys as the parameter names, this pattern is actually very common so I don't see the issue.

doStuff({ foo: 3, bar: 7 })
I don't think this works in a market economy - some people are able to "use a starship with only 5 seconds of looking at the user interface". So they will always be incredibly more advantaged that people who aren't able to.
> There are days I take a break from it all, but overall I feel like I want to bear witness to the events as much as possible.

I've been an information junkie for most of my life, and over time I've taken the approach of taken (at most) a few topics that I 'stay on top of', and do my best to restrict going down too many other rabbit holes.

In the past I've tried to ration all my information intake, but I've come to the conclusion that there's definitely a value to 'experiencing' things as they happen, even if it's mostly the online information firehose. The coronavirus being possibly (and hopefully) a once-in-a-lifetime kind of thing, makes it one of those topics.

The one reason why I sometimes shy away from the 'full experience' is when I notice the topic depresses me or causes anxiety. With the coronavirus, for some reason, I don't feel any of that (yet).
And in that case you can use the web app. The grandparent talked about a "dark pattern" and it's really hard to see one if the native client is better than the web version.
It's sad that efficient complete formulas for Weierstrass curves were found only after Curve25519 was well established. Now we are stuck with all these cofactor issues. Ristretto is nice but so terribly complex: https://ristretto.group/details/isogenies.html
Show HN: Risk Assessment Tool (Rat)
Data Augmentation in NLP Using GPT2
sars-cov2 has actually infected some people’s brains, making this title a bit... awkward
Symbolic differentiation is a fairly common exercise but it is inefficient (the size of the derivative grows exponentially in the size of the original expression). "Automatic differentiation" is the term for the class of algorithms usually used in practice, which are more efficient while still being exact (for whatever "exact" means when you're using floating point :-)
> having that escape hatch becomes a sanity-saver, does it not?

No, it does not. There is no difference between static languages and dynamic languages when parsing data at runtime.
Software Freedom Podcast #5 about Regulation with Professor Lawrence Lessig
As Julia illustrates, you do not need to do the vectorization and GPU part within the differentiation.

You can have a code using a GPU array library and just differentiate it (which ends up being more flexible / composable).
Is it very different from probabilistic programming (a term that is both older and easier to understand)?

Erik Meijer gave two great talks on the concept.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NKeHrApPWlo

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=13eYMhuvmXE
Two Minute Papers made a fascinating video on Taichi: https://youtube.com/watch?v=T7w7QuYa4SQ (“Finally, Differentiable Physics is Here!”)
Nokia’s acquisition was a boost but nowhere near “developed and popularized the platform” - I would bet good money that the amount of licensed customers didn’t change that significantly, under Nokia, outside of the mobile world they tried (and failed) to push it into. In fact, the most significant advancements happened before and after the Nokia period, if i remember correctly. Nokia concentrated on porting it to its doomed OSes and building a cloud infrastructure nobody really wanted to use.

The real value of Qt is not $4m, Trolltech made a decent living out of it. The world has changed a bit since then, but I’m sure there is still plenty of space for Qt in the market.
I made sure to take the dual monitors, dock and office chair home with me when we were sent to work from home and I suspect my colleagues, who didn't do the same, regret that decision now.

Seeing them hunched over their laptop screens makes me cringe for their backs. My setup isn't ideal (I didn't get the monitor brackets!) but it's a lot better than it could have been.
Yes to CPAP and BIPAP, for a couple of reasons:

1) Because corona is like altitude sickness, even a little more oxygen in the bloodstream may be sufficient.

Chinese doctors recommend and have been using cannulas, CPAPs and BIPAPs.

2) Because ventilator intubation and required anesthetics for out to 21 days is basically a death sentence with 66& to 90% mortality, cannulas, CPAPs and BIPAPs are much better.

There are many health problems with ventilators, but forcing air under high pressure into your lungs turns them to mush.

The issue with cannulas, CPAPs an BIPAPs is that a breathing corona patient infects bystanders, so in your bedroom you'd want to avoid using AC/heating vents (use a window or quartz heater) and tell your housemates to wear a mask.

Good Lancet summary from a Chinese hospital:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2...

The patients on ventilators might be sicker, but they definitely have extremely high mortality.

Doctors are looking at how to interpret blood gases to better understand which kind of breathing assistance is actually needed, rather than automatically reaching for a ventilator.
When companies like F-Secure use it to write bare metal security firmware, CoreBoot uses it for UEFI firmware, or Google creates an hypervisor, TCP/IP stack and GPGPU debugger with it.
Over the last 10 years, the FED has more then doubled the amount of money they have out in the market. Other central banks have done the same.

Despite popular belief, the value of money decreased by about 50% during this time. It is not easy to say if this is a coincidence. But it looks a lot like there is causality at play.

The reason why inflation "officially" is lower then what one would expect given the amount of money printed lies in the way it is calculated.

The calculation includes mostly goods and services bought by people who live from hand to mouth. Not the goods and services bought by people with savings and high income.

Rent and real estate in desireable areas, gold, bitcoin, equities - all of these now require significantly more money to buy then they did in 2010. People who saved money lost about 50% of their buying power to inflation.
Please allow me to share my view of the conversation up to this point:

Boats: Here is an approach I use in my personal projects that has proven to be ergonomic, consistent with other language features, and could possibly even unlock future optimization opportunities long down the road.

OP: That's it, I'm DONE. The language moves too quickly and I can't keep up.

You: More breaking changes are on the way. They never learn.

-----

Would you agree that this escalated way, way too quickly?

Boats didn't "move" the language with a blog post, it's not even a pre-RFC. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the language hasn't been moving at all since 1.0 - you could say the frontier has been inching forward, but that's what frontiers do; nobody's forced to fight on the front lines all the time. And then the cherry on top - "more breaking changes on the way", when 1) prior changes weren't breaking; 2) it's not clear there will be any new ones; 3) if there will, those won't be breaking either.
How did water ended up on moon?
Watch out Silicon Valley: European Union gets into the venture capital game
It's not Prolog/SQL-style declarative programming; the part about setting the objective and calculating the gradient is an example use case, not the whole thing.

You'd like to be able to write your functions using the language's standard function syntax, but have access to both the function and its differentiated form. You can achieve it with macros (in an ad-hoc way) or as a custom language feature (what's being done here, again kinda ad-hoc), or you can use an algebra+interpreter style but at the cost of having to use a less natural syntax (Haskell do notation or similar). The thing that I'd say is closest to the ideal solution is something like stage polymorphism (which is genuinely an exciting new paradigm in my book: it squares the circle of macros versus strong typing), where you can write a function definition in natural function syntax and have access both to the function itself and the AST of the function in a much richer form than what a macro gets (which can be interpreted to produce a differentiated version of the function).
Help medical science by playing a new Borderlands mini-game
Yeah basically the extreme correlation of mortality with age makes it hard to state a mortality rate. Small changes in the population age distribution create big changes in mortality.
You can always write `fn foo() -> impl Future` and mangle your code manually, using future combinators, though.
> PV and Wind fell because they were above the market costs of energy. Once they are below, they will stop falling further

As PV and wind fall in cost, they will end up dictating the market price. So, you are technically correct, but otherwise wrong: the current market price is no floor for the cost of PV and wind, any more than (at any point) the cost per unit of computation or storage was the floor on the cost of computers.

I expect PV to drive the levelized cost of power below $0.01/kWh, possibly much below (recent utility scale bids in some places have the power not far above this, and extrapolating the experience curve for PV has costs falling another factor of 4 or so by the time PV becomes a globally dominant energy source.) At these costs, resistive heat from PV is cheaper than any fossil fuel heat source, per unit of thermal energy. And thermal energy is very cheap to store, compared to batteries.
Swift 5.3 (i.e. the next minor version) will support Windows: https://swift.org/blog/5-3-release-process/
Actually, yes, news reports have doctors on record saying that.

And from their perspective they have a point - if patients are sitting around mouth-breathing, everybody in the hospital will get infected. Then where do you get ICU staff?
The de facto standard for this is Sparkle.framework, and it's excellent.
>What do other think is the reason for the slow backend adoption of Swift?

For web related work some other languages with their frameworks might yield better productivity: C#, PHP, Python, Java, Ruby.

In latest web framework benchmarks by Techempower, Java, C#, Kotlin beat it by a large margin.

It doesn't do very good against Java even in The Computer Language
Benchmarks Game, where each wins in 5 tests.
Yeah, can't find another cross-platform UI library with Qt's selection of (permissive license-compatible) widgets. Other UI libraries tend to look like crap (at least on macOS), too.
The Botched Response to Coronavirus Is an Historic Disgrace
For some reason it didn't even occur to me that the title might've been taken literally, but in hindsight that seems odd. I suppose if this is odd, the title can be considered clickbait.
That level of anxiety the author feels is what a poor person feels daily about how the next rent and food money gonna come from. That stuff takes a toll.
Quick Domain-Specific Languages in Python with TextX
> C# and Kotlin both have nice features but they are more conservative Java-likes than Swift. Swift had enough modern features and syntax to feel like it would be reward the effort learning.

What does it have that Kotlin doesn't?

(As a Scala programmer, Swift and Kotlin look pretty much the same to me; as far as I can see they're both polished but conservative languages that don't fundamentally offer anything that wasn't in OCaml)
I would love to see a cleaned-up implementation of that (and I do have notes on the subject but no time to try and implement them).

Note that to be useful you need backward differentiation (a function with one output but several outputs) and compatibility with tests and loops.

See the Zygote.jl library (Julia) for a working example in a different language (their whitepaper is a great starting point if you want to implement something like that).
Thank you. Just as a meme is a non-physical analog of a gene, this "infection" is a non-physical analog of a virus. We talk about ideas going "viral" all the time and very few seem to mind. The metaphor is apt. This anxiety is contagious in the way that matters. Apparently some work it out by going online and dumping all over other people for no reason. I've seen it in other forums too, but nowhere as much as here.
The combination of working from home and having kids out of school is particularly rough. Either on its own would be enjoyable. Both at the same time is less so!
As I understand it, Buspirone might be worth asking your doctor about — it’s not an SSRI or a benzo, and appears in some studies to lower serotonin levels in animal brains. Anyway, worth bringing up with your doc if SSRIs are out.
I can understand the possibility to unmute someone ONCE at the beginning of the call when you see them speaking.

Then if I CHOOSE to mute myself out is nobody's business to unmute me.
I do this for specific reasons and know hiw and when to unmute whrn needed.
Please let us know how async/await is not going to be a breaking change, when even Fuchsia just decided to create their own async runtime, because surely we still don't have enough of them.

So I wonder how std will incorporate a runtime implementation that happens to be compatible with all ongoing runtime flavours, so that those breaking changes don't happen.
Is there any kind of framework for backend use? I think that is a major factor in deciding what language to use.
Darn, wish I knew the name of it. I'm in your former camp you describe.
How the Brains of ‘Super-Multitaskers’ Are Different (2015)
> If you're going to change the compiler, it's pretty compelling to opt for the language that one of your team designed.

It might be compelling if that person sticks around. But given Chris Lattner already moved on, it doesn't seem all that compelling after all.
> In the last years more than 50% were open source contributions. At Nokia times they were only 10 to 20%.

Oh, okay, that's grown! I was still thinking of Nokia-era figures :).
The usual ones that people name are Venezuela and Zimbabwe, and in those the hyperinflation isn't just a monetary phenomenon that the states decided to self-destruct with; it's a symptom of a whole cascade of failures, including economic sanctions on the country!

Hyperinflation in those cases is effectively a forex phenomenon. The country stops producing any useful export goods (or is banned from exporting, or in the case of Weimar Germany forced to export gold at gunpoint), so the value of its currency collapses. Because the country still requires imports, especially oil, the value of those goods shoots up - but you can't save the economy from this by printing local currency.

(Can someone name a 20th century country with hyperinflation that wasn't under sanctions or involved in a war?)
Ali Hamed Explains Private Credit Markets and How the Crisis Is Affecting Them
Do you ever "fully" trust any software before it's been released to its final environment and run under load? I don't.

The idea isn't that you release less-tested software because you have the canary as a safety net. The idea is that you put in place all of the other practices you would anyway to minimise the likelihood of bugs and mistakes, and then you add a canary rollout as one extra layer of protection to mitigate the damage of anything you missed.

I would look at it as 98% of the users getting an even more reliable experience than they would otherwise (per release; everyone benefits over time), rather than 2% being given a worse experience. The alternative is just that everyone is in the "canary" release and everyone has to immediately use the release you "don't fully trust".
Show HN: Recreation of Shrek's DVD menu as an SPA with routes (desktop only)
You don't get to control output if you own your own hens. If you buy eggs and you have too many eggs, just stop buying eggs. If you own hens and you don't sell/give away eggs, there's no equivalent solution, thus preservation.
>C# and Kotlin both have nice features but they are more conservative Java-likes than Swift. Swift had enough modern features and syntax to feel like it would be reward the effort learning.

What necessary modern features do you feel Swift has and C# doesn't?
It isn't meant to be, but it is written by the author with the understanding that it will be misconstrued until reading the article. As such it is written to bait the reader into clicking. Even if it also works as a metaphor, it seems bad taste.
Thanks - I didn't think it was literally doing symbolic differentiation (I don't work in the area so literally had no idea) - but the basic idea that you apply some process to your code to get some other code doesn't sound that surprising to anyone who has used lisp (and I used to write tools in lisp to write numerical engineering simulations - admittedly a long time ago)
While true, there can be a possibility to bend your thinking to treat it as if it is voluntary. Maybe difficult or impossible for some, but it's worked for me, at times.

I was in semi-voluntary seclusion since the end of last year, and it's been odd to notice how much worse it feels now that it is 'strongly suggested' or even enforced to a degree.

So I don't disagree with you. But after a week or two, the realization kicked in that it shouldn't feel that different for me personally, and that in an odd way I'm lucky that the thing I was already doing is now not just me being a 'sad hermit freak'. While I'm still less happy than when it was more voluntary, it's helped me a ton to reframe it like that. YMMV, of course.