skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You appear to have reinterpreted my questions and translated them into terms that were different than I intended, so I guess I have to take care to go back to the start and restate my original question in a way that uses the appropriate magic words correctly.

I don't intend to ask whether AMPs (hard to resist calling them 'AMP pages') exist somewhere on non Google servers. Obviously third party content that Google is presenting exists somewhere off Google. And obviously it has to be formatted in a way that's compatible with AMP, and it makes sense that that is going to be done off Google domains. I at least knew the gist of that already, and I regard the detour into that explanation to have been a non sequitur. The point is that Google presents AMPs and it serves it's cached version of them from Google servers, on a Google domain. The beginning, middle, and end of the experience of searching for finding and consuming that news never has to involve leaving a Google domain. It's not open in the sense of involving interaction between servers that aren't controlled by Google, until you make that extra click to go from a cached Google version of an AMP to the version that sits on the domain controlled by a third party, at which point going to the third party has been rendered optional and largely unnecessary from the point of view of the user.

This next part is super important: the fact that I'm asking about openness and interoperability, or the lack thereof, in this sense doesn't mean that I'm failing understand the technical advantages with caching and optimization. I regard those as derails that don't wrestle with the issue of openness that's being raised. The point is that the connection between consumers of content who start on Google, and the third party content provider, increasingly depends on Google in a way that shifts nearly the entire experience of consuming content onto Google's infrastructure.

>All of them (100%) are delivered by non-Google domains to Google, Bing, and other caches.

This is the starkest example of a question not being answered but replaced with a different question. I asked 'what percentage of total amps are delivered by non Google domains' and you replied by answering a different question, what percent of non-Google amps were delivered TO Google and other caches, noting that it was 100%. Which of course it is, but that's because that's a tautology.

By contrast, it is helpful to note that there are caches other than Google, like Bing and 'others', which, in contrast to much of the rest of your comment, I feel actually is a pertinent and fair response to the question I'm actually asking. But those aren't content providers, so unless Bing or Google are content creators that were delivering content to themselves, it's tautologically true that 100% of that is going to be delivered to them by third parties, which has absolutely nothing to do with openness. If I'm using magic words correctly, I guess what I want to ask is what percentage of AMP traffic to cached pages is served to users by Bing and others that aren't Google.
Because Lexis has a massive database of news stories and the rights to share it.
your argument is not valid because a file can expose many functions in javascript context. Another files depending on these functions need to be rebuilt as well.
I remember years ago there was a desktop application for Windows called Copernic Agent. It was a meta search tool that combined results from multiple search engines. It had free and paid versions. It's not exactly the same as paying for a search engine, but it's close enough. It looks like it's abandoned now and the company moved on to desktop and enterprise file searching.

Also, there are people who pay for API calls to a search engine, for example Bing Search. Again, it's not the same as users paying a monthly subscription for unlimited access, but someone is paying in the end.
Sure, but the comment I replied to did not talk about a "niche" search engine. If you find a specific area of search that there is no good search engine for, or if existing products are really bad, of course you may succeed in that space, probably because you're at that point targeting the enterprise market -- but expecting normal consumers to pay for a search engine is naive at best.
They are not immune. As someone who has been supportive of Microsoft getting their act together, and who recently spoke at a Microsoft-sponsored conference, this stuff makes me hesitant to give any Microsoft-owned properties money and discourages me from trying new Microsoft products.
This brings up some interesting ideas about improving a CLI by improving the record keeping making it more deterministic, and enabling undo.

Thinking about these 3 features together would essentially give a computer system a version control or tool assisted speed run kind of feel.

Every command changes the state, and the system can be rolled back, and experimented with.

I really like where this line of thinking could lead.
I'm not advocating for eradicating stupid ideas to protect fools; but sometimes fools do very stupid things, and they don't just hurt themselves. See: the 5G arsons in the UK.
I really like playing around with combinatorial parsers. I feel like it's almost a natural development in any software engineer's life:

* Very Early Days: Basic string manipulation.

* Early Days: Regular expressions; perhaps including misguided efforts to parse HTML/e-mail addresses, only abandoned due to what seems like never ending complexity, rather than realising it's not possible.

* Not Long After: Overusing/abusing regular expressions; perhaps with the understanding that they can't solve all parsing problems, but will get you most/some of the way there; you know about parsers, but they feel too mystical ("something that a compiler does").

* Pre-Enlightenment: Writing very simple, recursive descent parsers; perhaps reading up/playing with things like Yacc, Bison, ANTLR, etc.

* Enlightenment: Abstracting your earlier recursive descent parsers with combinator primitives that maybe mimic the quantifiers used in regular expressions. Now you can parse (almost?) anything! (n.b., This step often only happens if you've first delved into functional programming.)

* Post-Enlightenment: Overusing/abusing parser combinators -- DSL all the things!! -- but all the while, perhaps realising their limits/complexity class.

I'm being somewhat facetious, rather than giving myself a backhanded compliment, but you get the idea :) The more powerful tools you discover, the more you want to use them until you inevitably outgrow them. Besides realising that "lesser" tools have their place, I'm curious what happens next...
Astronomers find 'missing matter', solving decades-long mystery of outer space
A paid search engine could work once it proves itself. This means they need to put a significant amount of work and server resources into it first, get a critical mass of users and then they can make it paid.
Nah, you're looking for an old-fashioned official-science battery. It charges a bio-quantum spiritual battery.
As I wrote in my other reply, there was no mention of a "niche" search engine in the comment I replied to. Yes, there are future business opportunities and past examples of search succeeding in areas where Google is lacking: but when people think of a general "search engine" they think of a competitor to Google for regular Internet users, and there is no way that would be a viable business model.
While the lottery factor is concerning, also many corporate-driven languages have a similar risk: the company can drop the language or bend it out of shape to satisfy business needs. It happened many times.
One company is changing the way people get jobs
I have an anecdote too - I used to work for SAP and lead their FMCG practice in EMEA. We did many ERP projects for large grocery chains and we could see that a lot of their material waste was down to damaged good and expired goods. Two of the largest chains had a field in the their system to track items that had expired due to being left to rot on the shelves, the amount of fruit and veg that expired was large and it was mostly oddly shaped veg. We introduced a business process where the suppliers could only send produce that met a certain 'grade', this radically changed the amount of wastage on the store side but increased the wastage on the supply side.

Programmes like 'the odd bunch' where produce that looks funny is sold cheaper has gone some way to addressing the issue for certain grocery chains.

I don't believe there are any public studies on individual store wastage over this issue.
Why not just continue to use the 2015 13" rMBP? It outclasses a Raspi + Nexdoc in every way I can think of, and if you still have it it's free :D

Since 2015s doesn't have the T2 nonsense and you were fine with linux on the rpi and there's no T2 stopping you, then you can just wipe it and install what you want.
And the solution to piracy turned out to be "make legitimate stores more convenient than pirated ones". It's not that DRM got so good that I can't find a game on the Pirate Bay, it's that Steam is so convenient that I don't bother to.

Given that, DRM is entirely useless, and I prefer to buy things from GOG.com whenever I can.
> That someone blatantly bullies people and lies on such a platform, would get anyone else banned or at least posts moderated

Exactly. So Twitter should have shown it has the balls and banned Trump "just like everyone else". It had the policy backing it up. It wouldn't have caused Twitter to be dragged into this controversy of becoming a biased publisher instead of a neutral platform.

> Lying/deception, defamation and "hate" speech is not protected speech. Some of it may even be punishable by Law.

Yes it is. But Twitter is not the Judge, Jury or Executioner. You have the courts for it.

> Twitter still has the option to ban the president. This is not censorship either. Prudent moderation is being performed daily on many social platforms.

Nope. That doesn't cut it. Your hatred for Trump cannot be a justification for misuse of power by Twitter. If Twitter tries to be an arbiter then it loses the ability to call itself a platform. It can either allow/disallow posts. It cannot decide to add to/edit/remove the post in question. This makes it an editorial/publisher and no longer a platform.

You may think both are the same thing. Both are "moderation". Nope. Imagine you are in a debate and you are the "moderator" of the debate. You have these rights: allow the speakers to speak when their turn comes, disallow speakers from speaking about certain topics. If the debate goes South you have every option to stop the debate. You can kick out a speaker if you feel the speaker is not adhering to the rules. All this is valid and is part of "moderation" as the speakers have come on your "platform".

But just because they are on your "platform" does not mean you have acquired rights over them. They are still individual entities. Now imagine if you are a "biased" moderator. You do not like a speakers point and you decide to add to/edit/change it. But you do not want the speaker to stop talking (lest you be accused of bias) so you instead take a sticky note, write down your counter opinion and attach it to the speakers forehead. Would the speaker be okay with that? Now that is invading that speaker's personal space. Just because you are a moderator you do not get to own the speaker or add to/edit/change his words. You can ask the speaker to leave (or ban) which is perfectly within your right. But you cannot have a notice stuck to his opinion. Then you are not a platform. An editorial does precisely that: edits out the bad parts, fixes the language, makes it better for consumption, fact checks, ensures that it isn't held liable for any wrong doings and then and only then will it allow the content to be published.
I've been seeing DDG billboards all over, which seems weird.
It's a warning in pylint by default: "Too few public methods (1/2)"
JS is a tool. It's not intrinsically evil, but it cannot easily be constrained to be good. I'll come back to that.

Your book-search idea is interesting. Another way is simply to display the list on the web page, minimally marked up, and let the user search using the text search in all browsers - no JS needed. Might be a sizeable page though.

There may be better ways that don't involve sucking bandwidth to deliver a huge list. Bloom filters? I dunno, needs thought and I'm busy - what do you reckon?

But your idea still needs JS. I'm fine with JS if I knew it was doing something minimal and it was highly constrained. That's the problem, not so much running JS as trusting it when it comes from somewhere unknown.

Keep up the good thinking though!
I agree there. Browsers started to have this issue to, but to fix it they actually got more aggressive about deprecating prefixed stuff. Now if you use -moz-foo, they guarantee that it will break at some point in the future.
>Reminder: China flagrantly violates human rights

USA too (Guantanamo)

>and supporting an alternate head of state

Like 'Russia' with your head of state?

I'm no Fan of china, but saying that the USA is so much different is just ignorant.
Ironically, they fear the logical explanations they don't understand. But with "quantum" they can wave off everything as if its magic.

These people distrust sciency explanations because they think its harmful manmade stuff. They only trust things that sound like they're part of the "natural order" of things.
> As you know we are big fans of package managers on Windows and we are looking to do more in that space.

that part looked wrong
What ‘AI’ is to B2B, ‘quantum’ is to B2C.
Reminds me adapter plugs that filter out electricity generated by nuclear power plants.
One could argue that those preferences make the world a worst place. If we just accepted the first carrot we see rather than overlooking the crooked ones, there would be less waste.

We are so picky and so fussy that extra waste and energy is expended just to make fussy people happy.

I like to get what I want too but I can't help think that if we were all a little more relaxed in this area that the world might be a better place.
I'm new to C++, what are lines 11-12 for? I see that it doesn't compile without it. It doesn't seem to be the new 'arrow return type' syntax because there's no auto keyword.

Edit: I found it - it's a 'template deduction guide' https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40951697/what-are-templa...
Feel free to link to the supreme court ruling that has a precedent which proves that creating new derivative works does not result in the author becoming an information content provider.

To take an fictional twitter example, blocking a user from a website is unlikely to create a derivative work. Removing a post in the middle of a twitter chain that makes up a story could change the narrative and content of that story, and if done intentionally would create a derivative work. The user could then sue twitter for copyright infringement, and if the new story is defamatory, under liability laws. We could for example imagine a rape story where the post that includeded the word "Stop" was removed, where the author would then have a legit legal claim against the moderation.

It all depend on context, intent, and the details of a specific case. The tools of moderation does not define what is legal and what is not.
There's no string matching that I can see in the linked article?
I think much of the usefulness is tied up into the sound arriving substantially before the plane itself.
https://www.cairographics.org/manual/cairo-cairo-t.html

All operations on `cairo_t` have prefix `cairo_`
Sure, the "only" thing you need to do is

1) Build a better/equal search engine to that of Google

2) Convince people it's better enough that it's worth paying for, or that their privacy matters enough that they should pay to not use Google.

3) Maintain your costs of operation and make a profit

There is no way I would invest in a company that attempted this, but as I said, I admire someone that would try.
The 25 vs 15 dollars issue means their business sucks unless they have a value add on top?

If you were getting 15 lemons per week, maybe contract the vendor and try to address the issue?
Two identical price charts, but one of these cryptocurrencies stopped working
Many of modern aircraft is supersonic so acoustic detection would be useless, even if it technically works.
> No, the moment you embedd the discoverabilty of GUI it stops being a CLI. TUI exist, and they do offer the same elements as GUI, just with less flexibility because text and so. But TUI serves a different purpose. You can't automate spatial interfaces as you can automate a cli. You need a dedicated way for allowing this, which is the main reason why CLI is so popular.

A command line interface can do with very little screen real estate. There's no reason GUI and command line can't coexist, with everything you do in the GUI immediately being reflected in the command line, and vice versa. This combines the context visibility and flexibility of a GUI with automatability and composability of a CLI. And you learn both at the same time.
I like the approach Wouter van Oortmerssen uses in Lobster:

class Animal:
alive = true

class Cat : Animal
def hello(): print "meow"

class Dog : Animal
barked = 0

def hello(d::Dog):
print "bark!"
barked++

let d = Dog {}
d.hello()

let a:Animal = d
a.hello()

In other words, A.B(C) is just syntactic sugar for B(A, C), and class definitions are just syntactic on top of that. The relation between OO and regular functions and stateful objects is completely transparent (the only real gotcha I can see is that a.hello() still works here because it was assigned a subclass where this method is defined). This makes it easy to store B for later usage, like you wanted to do in your example, and reason about its behavior.

[0] http://strlen.com/lobster/
Point is, it uses JS and how do I know I can trust it? Not this site but in general. As I say elsewhere, JS is not bad, it's an issue of trust that the JS delivered will not abuse your permission to run on your machine.
your tax £££ hard at work:

Report and Recommendations from Glastonbury Town Council’s 5G Advisory Committee

PDF: https://stop5g.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/FinalReporta...

Toby Hall's comments are gold.

> Surveillance, IOT- Internet of Things, and 5G.
Crowd control, mind control, ‘voice to skull’, and the ability to manipulate individuals or groups of people emotionally, even to self-harm are achieved via RFR programming. This patented technology is being used worldwide. 5G is the vehicle for total control and the ‘surveillance state’, this is pernicious and dangerous.

> Medical/Health damage.
RFR damage can be slow and accumulative. With higher levels it can be lethal and dramatic. Such as flocks of birds falling out of the sky dead when 5G is turned on. People get nose bleeds and suicide rates increase.
"Running" a "server" is exceedingly simple (at first). Grab some old desktop/laptop, turn it on, open a port. Just do that. Skip the bullshit "cloud providers".
What is it like to auto complete in a functional language?

In OO if I have an instance of a file

f = new File(...)

Then in my editor I type `f.` and I get Close/Read/Write as possible completions.

In some functional language I have a `f` an instance of a File, what do I press to get all the list of common things I can do with with a file?

Is that better or worse or what?
"The Theory of Concatenative Combinators" (http://tunes.org/~iepos/joy.html) connects combinatorial logic with Joy.
> inheritance is bad

That depends. Inheritance makes it easy to break encapsulation (which is bad -- agreed). It can be hard to model "Is-A"-Relationships properly, but I wouldn't call it inherently bad. A circle isn't an ellipsis; but a chair is furniture. The quality of code stems from your quality of thought.

> this means tight coupling between them, rather often unwanted.

That depends on your design. Coupling is the whole point, you do objects because you want to couple. Fraction.reduce, Fraction.add, Fraction.subtract, Fraction.multiply. Why not have them as as a cohesive unit, all these functions must understand the details of fraction anyway. Why not couple them?

> Not having mutable state is the point.

I agree. But objects never force you to publish their state; that's bad education. Getters and setters should be avoided. The Fraction above can be made immutable easily, Fraction(1, 2).add(Fraction(1,4)) --> <Fraction: 3/4>, leaving the old ones intact.

But then, it depends on how you communicate state.

I believe `Connection.Open()` should return an Object of Type `OpenConnection`. I believe that state changes should be communicated by changes of identity (either a new instance or a new Type), but ideas like this are most often answered by waving torches and pitchforks in front of my house at night (figuratively).
It reminds me even more of Stac Electronics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#Microsoft_law...

In 1990, they put out Stacker, which did transparent disk compression, effectively giving people twice as much disk space. It was a huge hit, so Microsoft called them up about an acquisition, entered discussion, and as part of the due dilligence process, even looked at the source code.

In 1993, Microsoft released their own version of Stacker as part of the OS. No thank you, no money for Stac, just a giant middle finger. Stac sued and eventually won some money, but it was never the same.

Everybody keeps telling me that Microsoft is different these days. About how they love open source now. And it's true that after decades of erosion of their primary monopolies, they can't get away with being as lazy and awful as they were in, say, the early IE era. But this suggests to me that deep down they haven't really changed.
> table salt, sand, and food-grade white pigment

But it's often not in dangerous quantities, because homeopathy believes that the less of something is present somewhere it works better, and it's called "dynamization" or "potentization" by the producers, diluting the material sometimes to the point that in thousands of sold pills, counted together, there can't be more than one single molecule! The process then practically guarantees that there aren't dangerous substances in the pill or "solution". Heh.

The "less potent" pills or solutions can actually have some amounts of the stuff named on them, beware of those.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathic_dilutions

"24X 12C 10−24 Has a 60% probability of containing one molecule of original material if one mole of the original substance was used."

"26X 13C 10−26 If pure water were used as the diluent, no molecules of the original solution remain in the water."

Edit: regarding the 5G issue, an article where about Glastonbury Town Council report, where the 5G USB "solution" was mentioned by "Non-Councillor Advisory Committee Member" (I have no idea what that means):

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/health/5g-coronavirus-bi...
Tyler Glamorous Wash, Diva, #907g
But it's YouTube controlling and profiting off the platform that they created and continue to actively put out there.

If it turns out to be "a really hard problem" to control, that they just can't quite manage, then it's not okay to say "well at least you tried your best" (but you still get to profit off it).

What if we had our current state of self-driving cars on the road already, with all the problems that would entail, and people would say "well, to be fair, it is a really hard problem".

The point is, we don't care whether it's "their best" or if they're even barely trying, what matters is that it's good enough.
I assume it only applies in the cases where the project is being produced by a company, and the lottery winner would then retire. For a hobby project, Key Person winning the lottery and quitting their day job would be a good thing.
Yeah this is Larry's version of the MAGA hat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2oLFKYNInQ