skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have a dream that one day we'll get a language for typesetting that isn't a markup language.

Rather, this language would be designed to come after writing, in the same way that flagship Desktop Publishing software (InDesign, Publisher) make the assumption that layout happens after writing. (Sure, you can write inside the layout software, but you're not supposed to. They're assuming e.g. a journalist–editor–layout–typesetter pipeline.) You'd have a "layout file" (written in the typesetting DSL) that has separate "non-typeset rich-text" files linked to it via file/URI references (just like Desktop Publishing apps do.)

The person doing layout would never modify the linked source files; if they wanted to e.g. change certain character sequences into filligrees, that'd be something stored entirely as an annotation in the layout file, not as markup in the source file.

In that world, scientists just write the "non-typeset rich text" (for which Rmarkdown / Jupyter would be a great fit); and then it's the job of science journals to produce the "layout + typesetting annotations."

And hey, then journals would actually have a reason to exist! They would be to science as physical magazines are to journalism at this point: a place to find the articles you can already read online, but typeset much better.
Not to mention liability. What if you get injured in that office. Who is liable ?
E.U.’S Coronavirus Recovery Plan Also Aims to Fight Climate Change
Ask HN: Anyone using an iPad Pro as your daily driver?
I'm still not convinced its worth it to shell out $1500-$2000 for "less than a laptop" but perhaps I don't have all the facts. Are there any HN users that have seen the light? Is a 12.9" iPad Pro with keyboard/pen truly enough for power users?
Pocket and @Voice apps tts.
@Voice allows you to jump through text by double tapping and supports more sites and formats (PDF, etc.), but pocket manages your article list so much better so I use pocky 90% of the time.

Pockets uses a readermode view, so it's non tts UI is nicer, so if you don't care about tts just use pocket.

Firefox reader mode is also nice, Firefox preview is great.
`an honest day’s labor` never really existed, you were never going to get paid the amount of profit a practically unskilled repetitive job delivers to the person of company you work for.

At the same time, there are plenty of jobs (in the USA) you could do 16 hrs a day and still not make enough money to provide for your basic needs.

I don't think people have to be top ten or something like that to be useful, but being a meat-based robot is hardly compelling for either side anymore. You need to have at least some skill and you need to make sure you keep developing as the world around you also develops. With human expansion the rate of change itself has changed, and not even a luddite would be unaffected by that.
Resuming SameSite Cookie Changes in July
excited to see Crossplane being donated to the CNCF as well:
https://blog.upbound.io/upbound-and-leaders-from-the-cloud-n...
> DACA?

DACA wasn't an executive order by the President but a memo from the Director of Homeland Security, and didn't involve issuing “clarifying” regulation in an attempt to reinterpret the law, only a decision about how to apply the widely recognized executive prerogative of prosecutorial discretion.

> I mean if you think "left" means outright communism

You are badly mistaken if you think there is nothing to the left of pro-corporate neoliberalism besides “outright communism”. Every Democratic Presidential nominee since Clinton has been a center-right corporate neoliberal that, policy wise, would have fit reasonably well into the moderate wing of the Republican Party (which, to be fair, overlapped in the center-right with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, which wasn't dominant prior to that point) up until the rightward shift the Republican Party took to differentiate itself after Clinton was elected on a basically Republican economic platform.
Earliest ‘Chickens’ Were Pheasants
> IMO there's no difference between a trained domestic engineer and a trained foreign engineer. Foreign vs domestic isn't a meaningful difference.

This isn't supported by the research. American university graduates have much better knowledge of computer science than their Indian, Chinese and Russian counterparts.[1]

[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/116/14/6732
I sure hope you are right. It would be about time, too.
Using classes and objects for laziness is a hack to work around the limitations of OOP. In more functional languages, there are better ways to accomplish that. For example, in Scala, you can just use "lazy val", and in Haskell, everything's lazy by default.
These new metrics have a serious flaw. The iframe loophole is so bad, we even did a write-up on it: https://buzz.swarmify.com/how-to-get-a-100-score-on-lighthou.... See the article for the gory details, but the gist of it is, you can wrap the entire site in an iframe and always get a perfect score
> Yeah, but pip and venv don’t leave me impressed, so please elaborate why those are better.

Maybe you misspoke, but whether you are left impressed or not is your opinion. What is factual is that these tools are the ecosystem's default tools for their jobs, and have been for a long time. I have relied on them operating multiple production codebases over the course of a decade.

I think you need to elaborate on what about that doesn't suit your needs rather than that they don't impress you for some vague, unspecified and potentially arbitrary reason.

To answer your question, why do they impress me? They get out of my way, they work, and they don't require me to do anything but have a system version of Python installed. With them, I get reasonably sane package management and environment isolation without headaches. That's enough for me.
So are you saying you no longer think OO inherently makes things harder to test?

I feel like it's difficult to talk about this without examples.
The library I like thinking about when I think of passing around in a state variable is the lua C api.

https://www.lua.org/pil/24.1.html here is an example.

https://pgl.yoyo.org/luai/i/lua_State here are docs for the state variable's type.

This is pretty object oriented except that it's not using C++'s syntax sugar. You can't really do much with L except pass it into other lua "methods". The discussion up until your comment seems to be about the difference between using the syntax sugar and passing around a state variable yourself.

Information hiding and these other implementation details are kind of seperate. In my example you can't just configure L exactly how you want by messing around with it or inspecting its state directly. You have to go through accessor "methods".

I think if the argument is that OO promotes information hiding I can agree with that. I'm not sure about the point about the internal state becoming a part of the API though. APIs are contracts that can be met with different implementations right? If your implementation details are public then your contract is huge and inflexible.
Hey cool, then that page changed recently. I hadn't heard of duckduckbot, that's exciting!
Through a Gender Lens: Learning Usage Patterns of Emojis from
Large-Scale Android Users
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.05546.pdf

> Gender difference is always an important
research topic in sociological and psychological studies from which there are many interesting findings. For example, females are evidenced to show a greater number of facial activities than males [40, 41] and observers can identify emotional states more accurately from female faces than from male faces [39]. With the advancement of data science methods, these hypotheses and conjectures about gender differences are measured and tested quantitatively through analyzing online behaviors of users at scale. For example, when the “facial expressions" (emoticons) become popular in text, researchers investigated the relationship between gender and emoticon usage and found superiority of females in using emoticons [44, 48, 54], which verifies the sociological findings about non-verbal expressivity of females [2, 18, 29].

Not that this means YOU specifically need to like emoji, but it's probably important to recognize that preferences and usage patterns differ by gender (and neurotype). Male minds (for whatever reasons) are often less likely to use and rely on them.

Interpretation of any data is fraught (nature? nurture?), but it may be that emojis make documents more legible to certain minds, which perhaps have different optimal conditions in which they process information.

So "Emoji are an anti-pattern" perhaps only holds true for neurotypes that don't depend as much on non-verbal signals when processing information. The opposite may be true for others. E.g. Cultural norms aside, maybe emoji in a resume would actually help certain hiring managers select the best candidates. (heh that's probably a more dramatic claim that I'd actually stake my case on :) )
You can’t test everything. To believe we can is just hubris; even if we get every function to have coverage, we won’t have coverage of the full range of inputs unless all that’s being done is some very simple programming. The combinatorial explosion is fast.

Testing definitely has value, but when testing you always have to make the assumption that you can’t test everything, and then the trick is deciding what to test versus what not to. I think people forget this and focus on having every function tested, every interface having coverage, etc.
LuaLaTeX ?
Many threads on this. Some with comments: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

At this point we should probably wait until something actually happens, and then hopefully the discussion will have details to be grounded in.
More direct contact info:
https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials/
> The first is spam and abuse. The problem with a purely "open web" is that there's no solution to those, because of bad actors. The only solution we've found so far are centralized organizations which can run sophisticated machine learning and hire thousands of moderators.

Not true. It's the only solution when your focus is growth, and so you permit open signups from anywhere needing only something like an email address. This enables brigading, bots and abuse with fake and anonymous accounts.

If a web of trust were involved, you have an introduction chain for every user, and a bad actor revealing themselves casts suspicion on the whole chain. You can revoke the whole chain in one go which is far more effective than picking bad actors and bots off one by one. The investment needed to sneak in is also considerably higher.

So the status quo is not the only solution, it's the lazy solution focused on growing as fast as possible with no regard for the challenges that raises.
I always wondered the opposite: how do researchers can get any work done when they have to formalize it using LateX?

I've tried writting a book using LateX, and it's been nothing but a miserable experience. I'm been coding for 15 years, and tweaking my Linux machine for longer. I know what it means to face rought edges.

But LaTeX is another level of shenanigans.

I seem to understand that researchers use latex because of the seemingless formula integration and automation of references.

Well, why not use asciidoc (https://asciidoctor.org/docs/user-manual/#mathematical-expre...) or myst (https://myst-parser.readthedocs.io/en/latest/using/syntax.ht...) then? They are an order of magnitude easier to use, they can generate websites and pdf, use markdown but allow extensions, they support references, and accept latex formulas.

Is it a case of "everybody uses it so I have to"?
While it's possible to build a lot of things on top, maybe it'd be worth making some minor updates to the core TeX engine itself, to bring it into the world of Unicode and OpenType fonts...

Oh, there are a couple of such candidates, actually, built with very different philosophies: there's XeTeX, intended to graft Unicode and OpenType support onto TeX with as little disruption as possible, such that it "just works" with minimal effort; and there's LuaTeX, which "deconstructs" TeX to give you an infinitely-flexible typesetting toolkit that can do just about anything, if you can figure out how to wield it.
Fuck John Oliver.
The thing that put me off was the allowed inconsistent name formatting: snake_case, pascalCase, (and is it case-insensitive too). This makes it hard for text editors to find all references besides feeling like you're reading multiple codebases.

This feature is meant to make linking easier but it shouldn't have leaked into variability of a single module's sources.
If they're still running this business in the UK... why not ship them there? It's unbelievable that there isn't a better use of these than recycling them (but I do think that's mostly their mistake to make).
All of this has happened before: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2018/may/01/unexp...
Yes. I go to DC occasionally on business and the standard dress there is ridiculous for the swampy climate. It doesn't work most of the year in Southern California either, too hot. The thing that enables it is climate-killing air conditioning.

I don't care for anything tight around my neck. Shoes with no traction are another one of my pet peeves.

I think something like the traditional Asian suits would be the most practical.
> and even not satisfying the basic MIT license terms

That's what I don't get about people who don't think this is a big deal. That a license is open source does not mean it is without conditions.
Previously claimed memory boosting font “Sans Forgetica” does not boost memory
Are you looking for free help or are you willing to pay?
Devs have eaten the world (and still have room for dessert)
An essay on open-source, the future-of-work, and new interfaces between devs and the labour markets.
Capitalism, folks, its bad and dumb.
What are the chances that the Wyden-Daines amendment makes it into the conference committee negotiated bill?
Yes, especially where he goes completely overboard creating extremely small functions. Most of them are, like, 2 lines....

The general point that code should be clean is a good point to make. Writing a whole book about it seems a bit much.
>The unanimous agreement among experts is that it's no longer safe in almost all security contexts.

Except for the great many security contexts where chosen-prefix collisions are not problematic. NIST for example has suggested SHA-1 is acceptable for such applications ("Hash (B)") for "2019 - 2030 & beyond".

* https://www.keylength.com/en/4/
Sure, but it's a huge stretch to think that a VC-oriented echo chamber would start thinking the right things. The motives of the people that own and operate this forum are not necessarily aligned with the goals we're describing here, by definition.
Why not divide the payout? The companies paying will pay the same amount, just divided among all the reporters. They already do the work of identifying duplicate reports. Maybe it could be weighted to pay more to the first reporter.

As far as not doing it. At some point critical industries may be have to be regulated to force them to behave responsibly.
sounds like your trip was done very sub-optimally. I can't imagine a violent video game being something I would like to be involved while on psilocybin or similar.

read this before trying again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_and_setting
A better argument against the preposterous claim that DNSSEC is "government-controlled" (and one that doesn't rely on blockchains, which are controversial in their own right), is that with DNSSEC you can choose which government (i.e. ccTLD) your domain is under, or choose one of the many generic TLDs.

The web PKI, by contrast, requires users to trust a bunch of CAs, any one of which could have been compromised by a government and can issue a certificate for your domain. Also, if a government can compromise your DNS records, they can also be granted domain-validated certificates for those domains, so the web PKI is not an improvement.

Anyway, if your threat model is that every single country in the world is willing to subvert the security of their own DNS hierarchy specifically to attack you, then the limitations of DNSSEC are the least of your worries.
If what I'm looking for is an experienced developer to round out a team (e.g. if it has a bunch of junior devs already), then I'm gonna look pretty silly interviewing a freshly graduated 23-year old. I'm not going to assume any old dev is wise or experienced, but I'll use heuristics and basic logic to figure out who it even makes sense to interview.
You referred to it as "the single most cost effective way to speed up math and physics research". I don't think it's so surprising that people are interpreting that to mean you think LaTeX is a bottleneck in the research process.

I guess you intended emphasis on the "cost effective" part of the statement, but not everyone will read it like that (I didn't).
Most company geographic re-alignments happen through attrition - which averages around 10% per year (+/- 5% by industry).

A company could move a large chunk of its workforce to lower cost locations in only a couple of years without the need for layoffs.
Sweet, didn't think of this as one of the potential upgrades. I just installed Manjaro ARM (64-bit) on mine yesterday, along with SBCL. Sure enough, :SB-THREAD is there! Thanks for the tip.
Indeed, John Oliver tends to say what charity the comedy piece would go to.
Will Apple approve apps that use this?
Not necessarily - I would imagine many searches directly using Bing would return some form of "personalization" extending past the search terms itself. Duckduckgo claims not to consider this AFAIK. Although maybe the same supposed benefits of a search based purely on query could be achieved by a Bing or Google search without cookies.
Right, it was edited that way. Commenters shouldn't edit things in ways that undermine existing replies—that's discourteous and can even be passive-aggressive.

Words that imply 'deliberately' are probably best avoided in HN discussion because they're mostly a way of attacking the other person. Another common one is 'disingenuous'.
If you are a fan of switches, dials, chipped enamel paint, typed instruction sheets and a vague 50s aesthetic I can thoroughly recommend this Soviet themed space game (in VR): https://store.steampowered.com/app/579110/Interkosmos/
The waste is just staggering.
> PDF and TeX are broken beyond repair in terms of accessibility.

All that needs to be done is to have a accessible text section of the PDF--then Tex can just include the source of the document minus the Tex commands into the PDF, and PDF readers can have the screen reader work. The text could also just be stored per page, if the blind require to communicate where they found a particular item to a sighted person.
The bikes actually had very good performance, I would gladly buy one of them to be honest.
This site is going to hurt its interaction rate by doing this:

By filling out this form you agree to receive occasional emails from one or more sponsor organization. You may of course unsubscribe at any time.
You are mistaken in assessing the situation, this has nothing to do with results, but with query composition.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lexisnexis+35000+news+sources

You have trained Google to recognise Lexis as an alias for LexisNexis. DDG does not offer that, so one has to spell it out explicitly. You have to decide whether it's acceptable for you to change habits back to the common ground for Web searching.

The value provided by magic intent recognition (as opposed to traditional searching for keywords) differs from person to person. On the whole, it's likely for the better and that's why that feature was implemented at Google, but I have also read countless complaints about it on HN because situationally it pollutes results and can't be turned off.
That's cool, thanks! What is the pool of water in the final one?
I have an alternative view: The fastest way to speed up research would be to fund an open source Wolfram software suite with feature parity. For a lot of hard tech you need good multiphysics and CFD simulations, both of which suffer from a severe lack of open source tooling. Most of the proprietary engineering software can be cloned rapidly once a solid foundation is built. Even though Julia and Python are making progress, in terms of ergonomics and productivity it is still hard to beat the offerings by Wolfram.

(If somebody is looking for a project for Mozilla's "fixing the internet" incubator, maybe give this a shot.)
How to pitch a non-fiction book to a literary agent
I've done a 70 pages proposal on a computer vision study on Word once (plenty of images). I don't have nightmares with it anymore because I'll never open it again, and never make that stupid decision again (Even if the other side requires it!).

I've edited some ~100 pages regulations (so very few pictures and tables) on Word files too. It's not a nightmare because Open Office works quite well with those.
Probably different certification standards.
This might seem like lunacy, but I really like/recommend Ammonite instead of Python/Bash.

It's Scala, runs on the JVM, and is perfect for writing scripts. (It has a great built in dependency resolver, I mean it uses Ivy, but it downloads the dep by itself, you just import it via the "maven coordinate" - http://ammonite.io/#IvyDependencies )

It gives you a lot more safety/correctness than Python, and it's a bit simpler to install too. (No need to compile extensions, just get JDK8 and it'll run.)
I don't read much of anything online these days. Most "reading" environments treat you as a user, not a reader. Poor typography, endless scrolling, and an endless supply of content that isn't worth reading in the first place. So I mostly consume text on screen only so that I can accomplish tasks. In other words, "reading" online is a means to an end.

All that said, if I stumble on a long form piece of writing that looks interesting, I'll print it!
> So instead of doing objects, you're doing closures that act like objects?

No, I'm using using as-plain-as-possible data structures for my state, that I pass to functions that operate on it and return new state. Simple, composable, easy to test, easy to pass the state data elsewhere, serialize it or whatever else I might want to do. I'm not arguing against using classes or objects, but often its unnecessary and hiding mutable state in an implicit "this" variable is, in my opinion, something that often gets in the way of simplicity, as it often tends to imply mutable objects when in my opinion mutable data should be a careful decision rather than the default. Not necessarily of course, but even when you're operating on a constant "this", I feel that hiding the data that its acting on internally is still often not the right choice, especially if the object itself isn't constant/immutable: then its a coeffect instead of an effect, and if you're using truly immutable objects, then its really just a minor syntax difference to write obj.foo(bar) instead of obj(foo, bar). Object systems still carry around a whole bunch of other functionality that you may not want or need, but by using objects, a reader can't know if you are or not without reading the code or documentation. If its data and functions, it isolates the places things can happen somewhat. Classes and objects have their place, but I feel they shouldn't always be the default choice, just because.

That's my take at least, and a big reason I switched from Python and Java to Clojure, but to each their own :)
> Eventually, removeprefix() and removesuffix() seemed to gain the upper hand, which is what Sweeney eventually switched to.

Great naming...missed their chance to make the functionality of strip/lstrip/rstrip more clear by name the new methods stripword/lstripword/rstripword. Which would also had the benefit of consistence.
Indeed, I'm going to think about some of the suggestions you mentioned the next time I'm in there playing with it. Perhaps I'll hit a wall with delve that other language tools (like Clojure) handle better.