skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>and how to handle format specifiers for it is part of those discussions, so we are considering some changes in this area.

Please, please, please pick short and descriptive format specifiers, like %[suf]\d+, ie

s64 v=somenumber;
printf("%s64\n", v);

_ExtInt(N) and PRIx64 etc look absolutely horrid. u?int\d+_t are also really bad, it would be great to have just [suf]\d+ as types, where \d+ is 8, 16, 32, 64 for [us] and 32 and 64 for f.

>what do you have in mind there?

Say like VLAs but structures with members that are dynamically defined and used.
VLAs are still present in C17 and have not been removed. They are, however, an optional feature with a truly weird (IMHO) feature testing macro. If '__STDC_NO_VLA__' is defined to 1, then the implementation does not support VLAs.

IIRC, this macro was added to C11 along with a batch of other "these are optional" macros for atomics, complex, threads, etc. However, I don't recall whether C99 adopted the features as optional features and missed the feature testing macro, or if they were required features in C99 that we made optional in C11.
prueba longitud
The reason I have submitted the migration document instead of official announcement is because there isn't any as of writing.

I received a mail few hours back informing[1] that the ARM64/C2 instances would be retired by Dec 1 and technical support will end on Jul 1. The reason for the retirement is vague, the email mentions 'several stability issues'.

I've personally been running one of my projects on ARM64[2] for nearly a year and haven't had any major issues except reboot require power cycling.

The announcement sounds fishy, it's not the first time Scaleway has retired its low tier instances[3], I suspect it do more with their Business than actual stability. I've recommended Scaleway's ARM instances several times, even here on HN; But now I'm reconsidering my options as I've been using ARM for my compute needs for a while now to align with my carbon goals.

Update: Official forum discussion[4], looks like others feel the same way.

[1] Someone else have posted the email content on Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/g11uuj/scaleway...

[2]https://needgap.com

[3]https://blog.scaleway.com/2018/introducing-scaleway-nextgen-...

[4]https://community.scaleway.com/t/c2-arm64-instances-end-of-l...
Terraform for a Highly Available VPN Between AWS and Azure
After reading through the comments, I'd like to approach from a different angle.

Summary: you better of learning more about human behavior, and how we operate on a daily basis then reading every book on economy.

When I heard in 2008 as a kid, that the world is in a financial crisis because the investors are scared, I had no idea what is going in. I was like, those people are grown man, how come they fear something they do all the time? And why does investors mood correlates to financials? How can a grown man have a fear of investing as an investor, it was odd at a time for me. Then I went ahead and played outside like nothing is happening.

I've read a lot of books just about everything, like on every topics i could get my hands on. Some of em are: Thinking, Fast and Slow, The power of habbit, Deep Simplicity, Intelligent Investor and much more, not exclusively from hackernewsbooks.com.[0]

I always arrived at the conclusion of the market is eventually run by people(no shit). At some point in time people come up with the idea of having a stock exchange or whatever you want to call it. Without people it would be non-functional, non-existent. So if you want to know about the working of market, you better of reading about humans, human mind. What drives us, why we do things, fears, and so much more. And the best thing about this is that you can see for yourself, it feels I am doing a research, but on myself.
There is not a single silver bullet in this topics of course, but one book I most often hear is Thinking, Fast and Slow, mentioned before, its really worth to read it!

Sometimes its driven by fear, like right now. In 2008 it was greed (yeah its usually not just one thing, but you get the idea). So at the why and how, I usually end up with human behavior. And since you cant determine what someone is going to do, feel or think, you cant really tell what is going to happened next, or in the future.
But after reading more and more about humans, it gets a little bit clearer as you read more books and connect the dots. And you are going to experience everything for yourself. You can be your own research subject. The past couple of years I've been doing that and I really enjoying it.

[0]: https://hackernewsbooks.com/book/thinking-fast-and-slow/8e66...
A generalist (a half decent you-tuber) would be able to set up something better than 'default microphone' at home - I seem to recall late night US talk show hosts doing monologues from their hallway.

But these guys relied upon a team that was 'just there'.

The corporation had done the work - the knowledge on how to make a TV programme was implicit in the whole organisation, not in one persons head.

I think this is the real 'reveal' - it is possible to have much smaller corporations, you just need much higher skilled (perhaps broader-skilled) employees.

In HN terms, very very few companies need vast Spark-enabled data centres replicated across multiple time zones. You can go a very long way with the data centre equivalent of pro-sumer.
Talk is cheap. It's easier, more lucrative, and less costly to build a media personality as a counter-cultural revolutionary than to actually be one.
It's not a matter of left and right.

The Italian government is allegedly markedly left, and locked a lot of people in their homes with two administrative acts (no action from the Parliament for many weeks), has made a government commission against fake news on the epidemic (with outside journalists, but it still smells like a Ministry of Truth), and is using quite a bit of pressure to keep people in their homes (nothing violent, but a presence and controls by the police far higher than normal). Regional governments of any sides are following up in the same manner up to threatening arrest if you are walking out if you don't have a documented reason.

Oh, and the Parliament is essentially shut down, and so the judicial system for the most part: everyone is too afraid of death.

Also the way they address Italians, like parents scolding children, is unbearable. The population is made up of citizens, not loyal subjects.

Simply put, as far as I can see the current pandemic has brought out the worst authoritarianism from all political sides.
Think what it could have done had it used PL/I-80, the immediately preceding listing in the magazine article, which benchmarked faster.

Or indeed, per the magazine benchmark test results, BASIC. (-:
> Your example is discontinuous. This is not physically realistic. Any "real" function, describing the response of a population with random individual exposures and differences, will be smoothed, and so be better behaved.

Eh. If you like. If you use a continuous analogue the argument doesn't change at all.

> It also misses the point that when you abandon LNT, you don't also get to say "and now we'll assume the function is even more favorable to my political agenda". Sure, it's possible the actual function makes it better for nuclear advocates. But it's also possible it makes it worse. Are the policy makers going to be on your side just because?

I actually do get to say that. There is no evidence that insignificant doses of radiation do any damage. In the absence of evidence of harm after 40 years of study, we can safely assume that the harm is undetectably small and can be ignored.

People can wave around numbers from a model, but the model is stupid and there is no reason to believe it. In the absence of a good model, I get to assume that we should make decisions based on the observed evidence.

> OF course it's making a sensible point.

As far as I've been able to determine, your mathematical argument is the gradient of a non-linear function is not constant. There is room for improvement in your explanation; unless that is your point in which case it is not a sensible point. The argument is that we should abandon the LNT model in favour of empirical evidence, ie, no harm done.
Where Do GIFs, Memes, and Other Digital Media Fit into Offline Marketing?
Just FYI -- there are macros for the fixed-length types, e.g.:

printf("U32: %" PRIu23 ", U64: " PRId64, (uint32_t)1, (int64_t)2);

Perhaps not as handy as %u32 or %s64, but it's here.
> This study tries to estimate Rt in several European countries from the death rates though there are issues with those statistics too: https://imperialcollegelondon.github.io/covid19estimates/

Most obviously that report used the reporting date of deaths as the death date, even though actual death date data was available. The results are dramatically different because of it.
When I first started learning to program. Every three months I switched languages/stacks, re-implemented a project in that language. Trying to learn the different approaches to development.

I also brought this on when I was a tech lead. Twice a month we would do code katas. Where we would do exercises together in a new language, or library. To continue learning, see if we could do things better.

I ended up in a similar place Functional(ocaml/ML) and multi platform (shared code for back end, mobile, web, and ops).

One of the problems I'm having right now, and is making me want to leave software. I can't find many roles that match that style. My brain hard locks when I try and go back to OOP at this point. I love programming, and working with the community. But right now I feel like I'm banging my head into a wall. Has any one else had this problem?
How about deferring until the surrounding block scope ends? In Go you can get around the limitation of defer only executing at the end of a function by wrapping any arbitrary section of code inside an immediately executed anonymous function. But in C I'm not sure that's possible so maybe one could declare a new block scope instead to control when defer kicks in.
No, it couldn't. Unless the rest of the western world is ready to roll the dice on whether China and Russia want to expand their empires - they aren't moving away from the dollar.

I have no doubt after the Trump administration they are all taking a long, hard look at building up their military power to be self-sufficient, but those timelines are measured in decades, not months. Anyone who thinks that moving away from the dollar is a simple matter of currency is naive, delusional, or both.
We certainly need more educational materials like this - especially in this time of social-distancing. I'm on the board of a small Christian high school and the teachers and students need materials that can be shared via Zoom/Teams/etc. A video like this starts the engagement for everyone and makes it easier to have the follow-on discussion. Plus it's entertaining but the message actually highlights the two mind-sets pretty well!
I haven't read most of that rant, but a thread-local setlocale() would be a godsend. Not sure if that's ISO C or POSIX though.
Could we have variadic macros with zero arguments in the standard? I'm not using any compiler that doesn't allow it.
The "cube" I had was a mega-cube with 6 people. Our group was spread among 2 adjacent mega cubes, so the divider was eventually removed, making a 12-person cube.

I had an end spot, and I had a portable whiteboard shoved between me and my neighbor to separate us, and I built a wall of empty Hint bottles around my desk to isolate me from the aisle. That removed a lot of visual distractions, but it was still quite noisy.

Speaking of this, one guy in a building across the street basically built himself a hut out of cardboard boxes glued together. It was amazing.
A credible guarantee is the law (as always): These apps must be removed and disable by law after a given time.

Beyond that, guarantees are the same as always: We elect the people who draft the law.
Have you considered adding multiplexing capability to the standard? It would be great to have a directly portable one.
By his ability to earn money, generally speaking. It's not a perfect translation, but it's the method we currently have.

Saving money is better than wasting it away on booze or whatever else the poor person would want to spend it on. Spending money on things you do not need or are expecting a return on is pissing money away.

How you spend money makes a big difference.
Most stringently disagree. There are numerous examples in history where do-good measures have later been abused in the most abhorrent manner possible. In fact, I'm living in a place whose history is influenced by one of these examples[1].

Our ideology, ideas and what we do and don't find acceptable in this world are what matters. We can't sacrifice our rights in the name of necessity because it just doesn't stop. ever. There will always be disease. There will always be terrorists. There will always be criminals, child pornography and drugs.

As an example of deaths that our system does find acceptable just look at the amount of deaths caused by drunk driving. It's technologically perfectly feasible to equip every car with a breathalyzer, but we don't. The number of deaths from the current disease is obviously higher, but that too will pass, the cars will still be there.

History is also littered with disaster and recovery. Doesn't mean every disaster has to happen, also doesn't mean things have to be sacrificed to stop one either. In the end that's my stance on this: rather face this current disaster, than the one we'd be constructing when we sacrifice our rights.

And that's just how it is, as far as I'm concerned.

[1] https://www.bitsoffreedom.nl/2015/04/30/during-world-war-ii-...
Latest EURO MOMO data shows excess all-cause mortality in some countries
I don't think it's all doom and gloom, there are plenty of instances where the people have nullified the state's intentions and this will be no different. Let me just list a few here:

Cuba: It doesn't matter how many land lines you lock down, people want to watch Game of Thrones.

United States: It doesn't matter how many distilleries/dispensaries you close down, people want to drink and smoke.

China: It doesn't matter how many children the state says you can have, people want to have children.

The dystopia always emerges from the extremes states take to quell people's wants/needs, and almost always nabs the weakest or most brazen "criminals". There is a inexplicable beauty to this dynamic, individual wit versus collective bueracracy, that I admittedly find romantic.

In this case, individuals might start putting their phones in the fridge overnight, putting their phones in RF blocking sleeves (or just plain aluminum foil as seen in HK), or like you said, just plain leaving their phones at home.

If the state forces phones to act as a form of identity or requires a phone in public, all it takes is one edge case of "Old man without phone brutalized by police" for concessions to the rule. Would you be arrested for not charging your phone? What about if you have an older model? How would the state respond to a hacked version of the identity app being propagated?

The fractal of side effects expands as you attempt to answer each one of these questions, and that's why people need to believe the requirements are just and appropriate, unless of course your response is so over the top and totalitarian that only the most viciously clever and brave step up and challenge it.
The application layer is the only place these changes can go anymore. IPv6 is a good example that protocol layer changes are really slow to roll out.

You may also be interested in SCTP, which is awesome on paper and works well across the internet. But since most firewalls only understand TCP, UDP, and ICMP other protocols get auto dropped.

SCTP could have been amazing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_...
> Eugenics had wide scientific support; it wasn't a horror when they proposed it.

But it is a horror now that we've seen a few genocides, which is why it shouldn't be compared to something of a completely different kind, like the minimum wage.

Instead, compare it to wars - which are far closer in terms of the harms they cause - and have also received moral support from economists.

> A seriously high minimum wage ($100,000/year for example; no other policy changes) would probably lead to a period of horror and mass unemployment.

This is reductio ad absurdum, since the min wage wouldn't go that high without major structural and contextual changes in the society and economy.

In the case of eugenics, we don't need to conjure such wild hypotheses about what would happen, because we've repeatedly seen what happens when that idea is carried to it's extreme by governments.
As a member of the development team for a C static analyzer, I use OCaml, which is also my favorite programming language, but that is because I'm from the generation in which it was the new thing (I learnt it when it had the same level of maturity as Rust, at a time when Rust didn't exist). It helps that it's perfect for writing compilers and static analyzers.

There are a lot of problems that seem a good match for Rust, and Rust is first in my list of programming languages I will never find the time to learn but wish I could.
> "If there was, why would you waste your time? Either it's not going to be free or it's going to disappear."

Because voting with your wallet works.
> My liberty to listening to music I like conflicts with my neighbour's liberty to sleep at night

Well use headphones or don’t crank the amp.
Just going to inject that this impacts a bunch of random optimizations and benchmarks. Just to fabricate an example:

for (int i = 0; i < N; i += 2) {
//
}

Reasonably common idea but the compiler is allowed to assume the loop terminates precisely because signed overflow is undefined.

I’m not trying to argue that signed overflow is the right tool for the job here for expressing ideas like “this loop will terminate”, but making signed overflow defined behavior will impact the performance of numerics libraries that are currently written in C.

From my personal experience, having numbers wrap around is not necessarily “better” than having the behavior undefined, and I’ve had to chase down all sorts of bugs with wraparound in the past. What I’d personally like is four different ways to use integers: wrap on overflow, undefined overflow, error on overflow, and saturating arithmetic. They all have their places and it’s unfortunate that it’s not really explicit which one you are using at a given site.
If they pick this up, they will likely use C++'s syntax/rules.
Yes, and if we work the same amount of hours, but I leave at 4PM, you will be perceived as doing more work.
I disagree, the cyber fighting is almost exactly how he described it. Tons of misinformation, requiring personal compute agents to sort through it for you. Attacking high-profile targets by buying zero-days, creating distractions, then pivoting to more obscure vulnerabilities in the corporate firewalls. Attack & parry, then riposte.

I find his descriptions more apt now than when his books were first published.
I don't think this is true, the first human right is the right to die, and secondly the right to live.
So you can only live a life that allows you to die.

For example, if my mother is in a hospital dying from corona, and the system forbids me to see her (despite me taking precautions that I deem fit), I must revolt.

This of course sounds like nonsense, and I am also conflicted, but this is my intuition.
Dogs help archaeologists by sniffing out 3k year old tombs (2019)
I experienced this while entering game jams.
>Hot air that will crash eventually.

If the Fed stops buying junk bonds, yes. Until then it looks like the current market prices this bailout in.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WALCL
> Please, please, please pick short and descriptive format specifiers, like %[su]\d+, ie

That's my personal preference as well. Using the PRI macros always makes me feel sad.

> Say like VLAs but structures with members that are dynamically defined and used.

Ah, no, I don't recall any proposals along those lines. It's an interesting idea, and I'd be curious what the runtime performance characteristics would be vs what kind of new coding patterns would emerge that you couldn't do previously though!
Buying stuff doesn't facilitate growth. Look at all the toilet paper people buy recently. Where's your growth?
It is not case that every org, smb, landlord and individual took on too much leverage. Quite a few among those who are laying people off run out of money because their customers are not buying services now or because they were flat out closed.

Which is something else then "my company took on way too much leverage".
In that care it seems like international coordination is called for
According to the page, it has bios roms.
That's the Keynesian view where you can move a lever (cause) and measure the changes (effect).

Unfortunately, there are way too many variables, interactions, etc, etc to have any real confidence in those measures. It's further complicated by the idea that the normal tools (primarily interest rate & money supply delivered via subsidies, etc) are beyond their "normal" operating ranges.

When the Fed rate was 5% and loans were 8%, lowering rates encouraged borrowing. When the Fed rate is 0.25% and loans are 3-5%, qualified people can get all the money they want.. now what? Do they give money to people who can't pay it back (mortgage crash) or spend it on "shovel ready projects" which take 12-18 months to get started?

Alternatively, when consumer spending makes up 70%+ of the economy, consumer confidence is probably the single most important metric.

This is less engineering and more psychology at scale.
Signed overflow being undefined behavior allows optimizations that wouldn't otherwise be possible

Quoting http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-...

> This behavior enables certain classes of optimizations that are important for some code. For example, knowing that INT_MAX+1 is undefined allows optimizing "X+1 > X" to "true". Knowing the multiplication "cannot" overflow (because doing so would be undefined) allows optimizing "X*2/2" to "X". While these may seem trivial, these sorts of things are commonly exposed by inlining and macro expansion. A more important optimization that this allows is for "<=" loops like this:

> for (i = 0; i <= N; ++i) { ... }

> In this loop, the compiler can assume that the loop will iterate exactly N+1 times if "i" is undefined on overflow, which allows a broad range of loop optimizations to kick in. On the other hand, if the variable is defined to wrap around on overflow, then the compiler must assume that the loop is possibly infinite (which happens if N is INT_MAX) - which then disables these important loop optimizations. This particularly affects 64-bit platforms since so much code uses "int" as induction variables.
Gore/GWB was the most important climate election
> There is no "bend on a totalitarian streak", that is the irrational fear.

This is wrong. Governments have a long history of opportunistically expanding their reach and power when it comes to matters concerning privacy. The PATRIOT Act, for instance, or everything Snowden has written about. Only rarely do they voluntarily give it up.

I can see where you're coming from with your other points, but there's a good reason people here tend to be very distrustful of governments when it comes to privacy matters.
I think this would have been in 1982. I was at school, he was visiting his parents and did a talk at Liverpool University.