skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As long as some variant of the Game of Life isn’t one of the contenders…
I feel like that issue translation step is part of what HackerOne is actually there to do though - they serve as a collection and initial triaging point... if they are bad at doing a first pass of issue triaging and clarification then what are they even doing?

Additionally the person at hackerone did ask for some clarification around the issue, that's great as it is helping with identification but probably also needs to encompass expressing the problem to make it clearer to read.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Do you expect builtin to find your personal site for this writeup? Does your site have the same purpose and is it being consumed the same way as BH? Can builtin know that your site design is effectively for the consumers that visit the site?

Whereas with BH, they can be sure that this page gets used as BH has a wide net of consumers that'd need to leverage this site. If this design was a major blocked to business effectivity, BH has enough money to change it. The fact that they haven't suggests it's at least good enough.
You can actually get this as an item in the game and customizing it will give you the option to chose one of those backgrounds.

I'm not sure how you can acquire it by normal/elgit means, but if you are able to extract your save file from Animal Crossing New Horizons you can use a save editor (google kwsch/NHSE) to add this item to your inventory.

ps. Don't cheat, it's a nice game.
Not at the $0 price point they don't.
Also: whether you like it or not, this is pretty standard policy almost everywhere.
Nothing can possiblye go wrong.
I think the size of a test shouldn't be defined by the size of the functionality you're testing, but rather a unit of "user intent", as expressed at whatever layer you're testing.
Surely you mean Eric Weisstein
UK Biobank: DNA to unlock coronavirus secrets
Testing wouldn't really affect the sort of excess mortality numbers this site reports.
If they were walked out for gross misconduct then there’s a story for sure.

But if Amazon negotiated a deal with them by which both employer and employee bilaterally agreed to end the contract between them, then fair enough! Rest assured it was probably quite expensive for Amazon, or at least for that micro-pod’s balance sheet.

No one is entitled to be a hostile employee, just as no employee has to tolerate a hostile workplace. I think they’ll be happier working somewhere else (and I hope they continue the activism.)
Once you lose the expectation of being able to work with non-unicode filenames, those files will quickly get renamed and cease to be a problem.
Because we were loading all the models startup time was long which meant that server would return 5xx errors which created more instability. We would had to do some engineering around it with a mix of config and code changes.

The bigger issue was that he had to use bigger machine as we added more custom ML models for our customers. New architecture gives us huge $$ saving and more visibility into performance of each model.
Unfortunately the hospital ships are equipped to deal with wartime problems, i.e. trauma victims. They don't help too much in a pandemic.
I agree, we often overlook that media companies are private businesses just like any other private enterprise. And like it or not, private enterprises have agendas agendas that typically involve increasing profits.

There aren’t a ton of incentives within the media industry for those companies to not act like purely capitalistic enterprises even though we expect them to.
I don't think they have a good reputation.
Yeah, shockingly enough despite the economic situation. Business-wise, it's been the best quarter yet, outpacing even holiday gifting peaks.
It is consistently surprising to me how many people bikeshed this particular decision.

Zig has taken an aggressive stance on many things. For instance, it has no default allocator, no compiler warnings, variable shadowing is a compile error, no function overloading, no operator overloading, etc. And all of these decisions have pages and pages of discussion and justification.

But hey, let's keep talking about the one that is the most trivial.
Agreed. BiPaP to ventilator already seemed like a somewhat questionable transformation, and now we're going

CPAP ----questionable software hackery ----> BiPaP --- questionable hardware hacking ---> Ventilator

This is hubris. Ventilators are not iPhones circa 2010. It's irresponsible for non-medical researchers to not only pursue, but also disseminate, these jailbreaks. A significant portion of medical device RnD is related to creating technology that is hard to misuse and won't result in accidental death, and I just don't see that here.
Is it down to 50%? That's remarkable.
Is the following section a beginning of an attempt at that?

https://www.wolframphysics.org/technical-introduction/potent...
Respectfully, demand and supply are colloquial terms identifying two sides in an exchange.
Craigslist makes oodles of money.

But I still think the post you're responding to is too cynical (shocking on HN, I know). One author on one website praised Berkshire Hathaway's website. So what? Plenty of people on plenty of other websites praise mediocre things created by non-rich people all the time.
Basically the lesson is, if you’re providing a valuable service to your users, it doesn’t matter how your website looks.

If users leave your site because of how it looks, then you’re not serving them. If users go to your site in spite of not looking terribly good, then you’re providing a valuable service (and that service is not “web design”).
I agree it would be appropriate to solve roaming on a lower layer, so any application can roam.

However, the solution should not and cannot be a global routing table. Aside from privacy issues, routing tables are very expensive. It needs to be decentralized, done on or at least near the endpoints, similar to programs like mosh, wireguard etc. Though there are certain security and privacy trade-offs in mentioned protocols that may not be appropriate.
I appreciate the reply and the links. FWIW, I think trying to paint my views as anti-money and anti-profit is a straw man that is extreme and doesn't effectively respond to what I said. I believe that competition and profit does do what you're saying sometimes. I know there's evidence that it works sometimes. I may be perfectly comfortable saying it works most of the time. But there's also historical evidence that it fails sometimes. You're glossing over that by ignoring externalized health and environmental concerns, among other things. The market might be stronger if it's left unchecked, but that's not the same thing as slowing down the spread of a disease. Free Market theory simply does not guarantee that we'll have the safest outcome in the shortest time. Even if we assume it does work as advertised, the best we can say it economic inputs and outputs balance at some local optimum some time in the future.

> We can get closer to the correct amount when people are incentivized to calculate the correct amount

I think that's wishful thinking when you're talking about unforseen crises, and history has shown this over and over.

> Price caps paradoxically lead to higher prices.

Ah yes, you're right and it's true this can happen on the black market under price controls. In your thinking, why is that worse than unrestrained price gouging? What is the meaningful difference in outcome? Does it matter how much higher? Does it matter what the balance is between price-capped sales, and black-market overpriced sales?

Bigger picture, my more fundamental question is why free-market thinking is diametrically opposed to slowing down changes in pricing during spikes, if we were to assume that prices will be uncapped eventually?

Even under ideal conditions, the market takes time to respond to changes in demand. When spikes in supply are price-capped, let's assume not that it'll be price-capped forever and all time, but that either it will be price-capped during a time period that is too short for the market to respond to, or that changes in pricing will be rate limited rather than value limited.

If price changes are rate limited, instead of hard-capped, then in theory nothing changes in the limit, the market can still optimize eventually, right? What does it matter if a market takes a little longer to balance?
I think that's a great premise. A lot of these "alternative history" novels assume that changing just one thing would radically alter the outcome when really they're just changing one aspect of a much larger system.

I've occasionally thought that a good alternative history novel would be one where someone went back to 1930 and assassinated Hitler, only to find that with less insane leadership in the inevitable war (less resources wasted on superweapons and the occult, stalls Russia with diplomacy, doesn't waste resources in Africa) Germany wins the war and unites all of Europe under a fascist regime.
> Past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior.

Is it? Past behavior on the scale of decades, with leadership and org changes, market changes, culture changes in between?

I don't think that my behavior 10 or 20 years ago is a very good predictor for my behavior today.
I wouldn't agree. I'm a math professor, here's my own web site:

http://people.math.sc.edu/thornef/

Very simple static HTML. No stylesheet at all.

Although there are also a fair number of academics who invest more effort in web design than I do, this type of design is fairly common in math. I haven't heard anyone within the field criticize it as "bad" or "lazy".
I agree with you. Amazon, should though, be aware of the Streisand effect. They are amplifying their problem by firing people instead of, say...reprimanding them.
> Right now, we have very little idea if lots of people have had it already [...]

Q: Is there a reliable test that shows if someone has previously had Covid-19?

Q: If yes, is it in widespread use anywhere?
Afrikaans did this. We use "y" instead of "ij".
> Joining a large event full of people seems like the bigger issue.

Which is exactly what he did...in Chinatown.
That quote is straight up incorrect. Amazon doesn't restrict, and actually encourages employees to talk about their work conditions, as long as said employee makes sure to say "these opinions are my own and do not represent Amazon's official stance" and that anything you are saying is actually true. You certainly do not need "corporate justification and approval from executives". I am curious where Reuters pulled that from.

Both this and the WaPo article are extremely light on the details what exactly these employees said or did. WaPo says that these employees "violated company policy", which leads me to believe they must have been saying something that Amazon felt was untrue, because again, official policy is that you can speak as much as you want about working conditions at Amazon as long as they are factual. I would like to see what exactly these people said that apparently upset Amazon, but I can't find it anywhere.
When I used to do a lot of windows programming in the late 90s, I wish that I had a sensible guide like this for handling strings. TCHAR was always a source of subtle bugs.

I suppose, though, that the underlying problem was that Microsoft was so late to implement a compatibility solution for Windows 9x. Most software of the time ended up implementing on "ANSI" multibyte character set (MBCS) just because otherwise you would need to either deploy 2 executables or do your own thunking. This solution would be a double thunk on 9x because you'd be thunking your UTF-8 to unicode and then thunking that back to MBCS.
The substance a good dsl for implementing rewrite/string substitution systems, as well as (likely high-quality) implementations of algorithms causal invariants, knuth-bendix completion, graph isomorphism, etc. [1]. A lot of that pre-existed the Wolfram Physics Project. The new thing appears to be:

1. a rebranding with improved documentation / learning resources for using those features (hey, documentation is hard! discoverability matters!), and

2. a set of really impressive rendering algorithms for visualizing these sorts of systems. (hey, visualizing mathematical objects is quite substantive! I'll happily pay good money for "low-effort pretty charts"!)

I addressed in the companion thread why I don't think this is particularly likely to result in "a new type of physics": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22866284

Mathematica is good software. Pre-wolframengine I did shell out the $2K for Mathematica because it contains best-in-class implementations of some important algorithms. A high-quality reimplementation that matches Mathematica's performance would take me several years (in an area where I have a phd). Wolfram Research employs smart folks and lets them spend their time writing really high quality code, and the only way to access that code is by calling Mathematica's built-in functions.

But just because the goal is perhaps a bit grandois and the presentation definitely breathless doesn't mean there's "nothing of substance".

[1] https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/wolframphysics/Tools/guide-...
The book doesn't seem to be out yet? Do you have access to an advance copy?
The counterpoint to this is that you can't just wait forever before making a decision. At some point, you'll have to do with imprecise data, and for a pandemic that is developing very rapidly, you can't just sit back and do nothing (well you can, but then you have to make an argument for why this is a good option).

As to the point of whether utilitarianism is a good ethical framework... well, at least no non-consequentialist ethical framework has ever convinced me. A naïve reading of utilitarianism has its problems, of course, but those can be accounted for; but the classical Kantian conundrum of not being allowed to lie to a murderer seems silly to me. Plus saying "principles matter" has just as many problems as the utilitarian approach, as nobody will be able to agree on those principles.
Blog posts are projects, not action items
It probably would - however we built this out with a team of 1-2 engineers, so paying a bit more and dealing with maybe 20 seconds of extra latency a day is a price we are willing to pay for expedited/easier deployment.

Thanks for the suggestion though! I'm sure we will consider that in the future :)
I think it's a little silly to take an article that's critical of Amazon seriously when the paper is owned by Jeff Bezos. There are plenty of other sources on the topic including the Reuters article above, which is not behind a paywall.
It's super sad. I don't know much about Physics at all. But I suspect any huge breakthrough will come when 1000s of people, like Wolfram, spend their life's effort to solve an incredibly hard problem. Almost all will fail, but some will succeed, and at the start it won't be obvious who is on the right path vs. who is a 'crank.'

Imagine just sitting at home, constantly talking shit and disparaging someone who has dedicated themselves to solving an almost intractably hard problem. And I say that as someone with no particular interest or liking of Wolfram.
Since Pulumi extends to the k8s configuration world as well - i wonder what the Pulumi devs think of jsonnet and cue (previous discussion here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20362951 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20847943)
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868054
Or you can use Netlify connected to a private GitHub repo. I use it for my personal website (hugo blog) and it works flawlessly. CI/CD integrated, so it's just push to deploy.
The good joke! Most of them are refractory to the GPL! And you'd want them to get human rights???
I get downvoted whenever I make negative comments about cellular automata. It never fails. It’s the crowd.
But you can also run Gitlab on prem for free.
Demand at the old price from people who bought them to resell at the new price?
>the original homogeneous operations (__builtin_smull_overflow, etc) led to very substantial correctness bugs when users had to pick a single common type for the operation and add conversions.

Hi Stephen, thank you for bringing this to our attention. David Svoboda and I are now working to revise the proposal to add a supplemental proposal to support operations on heterogeneous types. We are leaning toward proposing a three-argument syntax, where the 3rd argument specifies the return type, like:

ckd_add(a, b, T)

where a and b are integer values and T is an integer type, in addition to the two-argument form

ckd_add(a, b)

(Or maybe the two-argument and three-argument forms should have different names, to make it easier to implement.)
I think one of the things it was easy to miss in 1984 when Neuromancer was published was how accessible the internet and computers is. I've watched two year olds interact with the modern internet.

If you have a system with a high barrier to entry -- like computers where in 1984 and as they are described in Neuromancer -- it's safe to assume that a lot of "boring" and "average" people wouldn't use it. At the time Microsoft's unofficial mission was "a computer on every [office] desk, and in every home, running Microsoft software". It sounded overly ambitious, even into the 90s.
Totally. We did not have a need for custom models initially. We could load all our models on one VM so there was no need. We were tempted to get on the bandwagon. ;-)
That was my move as well. I already had a decently sized NAS with Plex that was accessible anywhere. The music experience through GPM and Spotify is better, but at least I can manage the music myself and I never have to worry about it going away (or some weird licensing or exclusivity issue not allowing me to listen to something I want to listen to). And my bootlegs, b-sides, remixes, and rare tracks that you can't get on streaming services is preserved too.
Maybe a stupid question, but does it persist data on disk as well or is it a pure in-memory approach e.g. for analytical workloads?
My team stuck with Jenkins, Docker, and custom shell scripts to get the job done.
I think this is a sign that you are not designing maintainable systems in the first place. I work on reasonably complex systems where significant changes to a feature do not tend to cause huge structural changes like you describe, and where the vast majority of tests tend to remain unchanged and help detect regressions. It is entirely possible, with the right design. And in my experience, developing a comfort with TDD will help promote that kind of design.

(Edit: I want to clarify that this is not meant in any kind of a judgmental way about your work or your talents, I'm sincerely trying to help identify issues so that you can hopefully become more productive and more confident in the work you produce.)
My comment was a bit on the nose but the point is valid, there's no good reason to trust an article that's critical of Amazon when the paper is owned by Bezos.
If you really like Windows and/or MacOS, you will probably be disappointed in the desktops available on Linux and FreeBSD.

But the opposite is also true. After years running Xfce and GNOME in Linux, I went back to Windows 10.

First I had to replicate my workflow, which meant using a lot of programs that could be run on any system.

Then, aside from the Microsoft updates and all the problems they cause, the total lack of package management for applications makes even more work.

I had WSL, and that is great, but running a terminal in Linux (or MacOS, even) is just easier when everything can be accessed by any program in or out of the console.

Eventually I realized I was fighting Windows with little upside. I got an M.2 SSD, installed Debian Stable (after 2 years of Windows, I REALLY didn't want a lot of updates), and everything is running great.

If you depend on Microsoft Office and/or Adobe Creative Suite apps, that's a reason to prefer Windows or MacOS. Otherwise, you can do very well — and maybe even better — with the Linux desktop of your choice.

My current laptop is three years old. GNOME 3 runs great. It's extremely responsive, and I like the way it works with the "hot corner," super key and desktop search. I use a few GNOME Shell Extensions, but not too many.

I really don't understand why developers are so enamored with Apple. Unless you are developing for Mac or iPhone, a good Linux distro, or even Windows 10, seems to be a better if not equal choice.

I managed to get my hands on an iMac, and I set it up to see how I'd like MacOS. Getting it "right" was harder than Windows, and I was really surprised at how super slow Homebrew could be. It really made me appreciate Debian's apt — and even Fedora's dnf.

Mac's Finder doesn't compare well to Windows' File Explorer (is that what they call it?) or Nautilus/Files in GNOME.

One thing Windows 10 and MacOS do well is support HD and UHD screens without fiddling. Linux desktop developers need to finally realize that HD (1920x1080) is now the baseline, and 4K-ish resolutions are common and should be completely supported out of the box.

My comfort level with Linux is high, and when I spend most of my time in the same web browsers, in addition to the file manager and text editors, it made sense for me to switch back. Windows is too much work with too little upside.
What exactly does a UX designer know about the working conditions of an Amazon warehouse that they haven't simply read online like the rest of us anyway?
The idea is reuse. YAML (and probably Terraform, though I can't speak to it directly) doesn't give you many facilities for reusing blocks of config, especially if they vary subtly in some parameterized way. CloudFormation gives you some reusability in the way of nested-stacks and macros, but it's seriously heavy-handed.

We do use Troposphere in a handful of cases, and it has its own problems, mostly in that it makes it hard to write declarative Python code with it (which is generally what you want--declarative code but with more expressive power than YAML). I have a prototype of an improvement to Troposphere that I built for my own amusement, and I think I'm on to something:

https://github.com/weberc2/nimbus/blob/master/examples/src/n...

Note that this example is type-safe and declarative while Troposphere is not.

Basically I don't think Troposphere is a good representation of what infrastructure-as-code(-not-yaml) could look like. Not sure about Pulumi as I haven't tried it. But I know the answer isn't YAML, it's not hacking an AST on top of YAML a la CloudFormation, it's not a different static dialect with its own dynamic hacks a la HCL, and it's not generating YAML with text templates a la Helm.
I wonder what their recruiting team thinks about these moves by the company. I know I will not work for Amazon seeing how the manage dissent at the company and I’m sure there are many other people who feel the same.
Over 4,200 pages and 10,300 original illustrations on ancient history
Eeeh, I think that's a false assumption - it may in fact be the case but specialized first line teams like this don't need to be cheap, they can instead work the margins and be economical by being focused. Not every company is going to have a full security team, so it does make some sense to try and pool those resources into one specialist company that serves the first line triage needs of a bunch of other companies.
that's just a subset of the features you can develop with actions
One thing futurists always got wrong about the Internet was how much porn there would be.
Are you still providing services to people who put children in cages?