skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
H.264's complexity increase mainly comes from the large number of prediction modes and macroblock types, which are essentially attempts to encode more efficiently the differences between successive frames.

The maths has actually gotten simpler; the predecessors are all traditional DCT-based (JPEG-like) codecs while H.264 uses a simple integer approximation. Regardless, from a decoder implementation perspective, the theory behind it all is not that important; the spec tells you exactly what you need to do, and the increase in complexity is mainly reflected in needing to write more code to handle the larger number of cases.

H.261 is simple because it has a choice of only two resolutions, one framerate, two frame types (I and P), and 10 macroblock types.

H.262/MPEG-2 is already a significant increase in complexity since it supports a varying set of resolutions, framerates, interlacing, and chroma subsampling, has 3 frame types (I, P, B), 20 macroblock types (dependent on frame type), and more complex motion compensation.

H.263 has no interlacing but adds optional intra prediction, more advanced motion vector encoding, and a few other features.

H.264 has about 50 macroblock types, even more complex intra prediction, and motion compensation has a larger choice of which frames to predict from.
umm, people who move millions of dollars are quite sophisticated. I am sure the retail investors like me don't dissect the report, but we hardly move the market. Institutional investors aren't as sloppy as me.
Learn Security Engineering
Screw-lathes were vital to that. Having a lathe capable of making more accurate screws can be used to make more accurate lathes. Then rulers can be made using screws. More detail here: https://www.plethora.com/insights/the-evolution-of-precision...
Couldn’t it be that I realize that JS has some problems and is undeniably useful and is eating the world, and I therefore conclude “JS rules!!!”

In my view, it lacks nuance to suggest that saying something is awesome must mean that it has no problems. :)
Can you create a hypothesis and then falsify it? Then it's science.

Polls are really useful + accurate and are one of my favorite examples of stuff that came from social science research.
It's worth mentioning that even though it's Electron, it's fairly well optimized Electron.

Idle, it takes up a third of a gig of RAM on my laptop. Language server extensions are responsible for the majority of the load users encounter. That's certainly a good 2-3 times more than Sublime Text, but it's not going to be a deal breaker for a majority of people.
Out of interest, what spec are your servers?
If this work is important to the US, they should tax recreational use of helium to drive demand down.
Indexing a N-element array (a O(log N) operation frequently approximated as O(1)) inside a homomorphic enclave requires O(N) operations. Constant factors exacerbate the problem, but any usefully large database is wholely unsuitable for homomorphic use.
Xs: a concatenative array language inspired by kdb+ and FORTH
That my friend is exactly is the difference made by who is leads the company. This is exactly why what kind of a person a leader is so important. Be it for a company or a nation.

We get what we tolerate.
Programming language design and compilers: where to start?
You might be living in a bubble.

I think the relative sizes of the 'Most programmers have at least some minimal familiarity with Javascript' bubble and the 'Emacs is not moribund' bubble speak for themselves and offer sufficient retort :)
EDIT: turns out I'm wrong about the nuance of this error so adjusting the below text...

That's because this error isn't an error due to some analyst doing something wrong. What is happening is that people are being asked questions about their employment status and are answering in a way that gets them classified as "absent" instead of "unemployed". It's not really clear from the report if this is due to interviewer training or the way questions are being answers. Regardless, we call this kind of misattribution a `misclassification error`. To avoid introducing even worse errors into the data (namely, selection bias), the analyst has to just assume that the people who answered wrong, in fact answered correctly (this is called Intention to Treat Analysis [0]. What the BLS report is stating is that if they did treat those who said "absent" as "unemployed" you would see an extra 3% unemployed.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention-to-treat_analysis
Speaking as someone who regularly uses private chats, what capability?
Intellectual diversity lends itself to a diversity of editors as well.
This is really practical advice.

The classic Really Bad Powerpoint by Seth Godin has some conflicting points but is still worth a read if you've never come across it.

http://www.wendelberger.com/downloads/ReallyBadPowerpoint.pd...
Classical engineering? Architectural? Electrical? Et. al?
Numerous Brazilian judges and politicians had their Telegrams hacked via SIM hijacking.
> [...] it took until 2009 for something (really) interesting to happen, a program called ‘pocket Fritz’ achieved parity with Deep Blue in terms of strength while running on a mobile phone and evaluating only a small fraction of the number of positions evaluated by Deep Blue. In terms of power efficiency that’s an absolutely enormous leap and it brought - in my view at least - for the first time the game on a level footing. Humans and Chess computers were now competing at approximately the same level of energy consumption.

-- https://jacquesmattheij.com/another-way-of-looking-at-lee-se...

> In 2009, a chess engine running on slower hardware, a 528 MHz HTC Touch HD mobile phone, reached the grandmaster level. The mobile phone won a category 6 tournament with a performance rating of 2898. The chess engine Hiarcs 13 runs inside Pocket Fritz 4 on the mobile phone HTC Touch HD. Pocket Fritz 4 won the Copa Mercosur tournament in Buenos Aires, Argentina with 9 wins and 1 draw on 4–14 August 2009.[33] Pocket Fritz 4 searches fewer than 20,000 positions per second.[34] This is in contrast to supercomputers such as Deep Blue that searched 200 million positions per second. Pocket Fritz 4 achieves a higher performance level than Deep Blue.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E2%80%93computer_chess_m...
Sometimes they are. But there are definitely companies that analyse the shit out of every piece of data they can get their hands on. I think part of the problem is that getting things "right" is just really really hard.
Ubuntu keeps making the setup work to go from install to a clean and usable linux system more and more work.

I've got to disable global keybinds that shadow shortcuts for fucking readline and basic text editors.

Fix their broken themes to shut up warnings that will drown out logs of applications that couldn't care less about themes.

Fix XDG settings to remove turd directories in home directories that nobody on earth has ever used and applications ignore.

Search the three or four different places they put configuration to fix whatever new setting has screwed things up, whether that be to move the close window button back where it always should have stayed, remove hot corners, or something new.

And yes, remove snap so I have usable output from mount and similar.

Not to mention how broken their LTS and distro upgrade process is. I shouldn't need to edit files to upgrade distros, and it shouldn't break basic applications or drivers.
I’m sure they’ll hold on to all the Cad Data, the issue is making sure all the suppliers have the Cad data for tooling and parts, it’s unlikely coming back after going away.
Articles and generally ideas like this always seem too dismissive. CPUs are nothing like brains because: intricacies. Algorithms can't be applied to literature because: intricacies. It is almost an appeal to emotions to say that rather than saying "ok well we tried to apply these electric constructs and algorithms in order to understand ideas and literature better, we got nowhere and here's exactly why", they are like "it can't be applied oh no it can't our humanity is so distinct and precious there are some lines not to be crossed and here's a million contrived examples as to why".

And to this approach I say, ignorant and cowardly.
Different article about the same event: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23422469
vi itself is just a natural progression from ed, the standard editor.
Still super expensive though! I guess at least it's available again. I remember doing some liquid helium experiments in class in college just as the helium crunch started. The department didn't seem very happy suddenly having to spend hundreds of dollars extra just to let some undergrads play with it. I wonder if they discontinued that particular experiment.
Sort of a tangent, but the committee asking Apple why they don’t support a specific web API is such a stark contrast from that senate panel with Zuckerberg. The Judiciary Committee seems so much more technically informed.
>I am completely against this movement that's currently for some reason trying to demonize cops.

I think you could dismiss systemic police brutality against minorities a little less frivolously.
Just asking, is there any concrete evidence ? Like some politicians asking for the planes to have more passengers or length then some other airplane? I am wondering that maybe if Boeing is using super old design then maybe that explain why the american airplanes are less efficient.

I don't deny pride exists everywhere, including in me.
Maybe, but the laws as we know them do. People create and change them.
The quote:

>”I don't know how much contact was made.”

Is such a bullshit quote too

Why don’t you ask or look at the video?

Or say the officer’s name and let the press ask them.

BPD won’t even name the officer. But if a civilian had done the same thing there would be a public mugshot now.
While a “market trader” may not, the large banks have an army of analysts who spend all their time far beyond 40 hours of work reading everything they can about particular industries or market drivers. They know more about this stuff than you or I and that is why they make money ahead of anyone you know. A bunch of MBAs read that report cover to cover and delivered a summary to the trading exec before any of us even had time to flip to the first page.
The only thing what makes modal editing bearable (from UX PoV) is the unlimited undo.

e.g. Would anyone take a plane that has modal cockpit buttons?
No, they've got to meddle and mess with every damn thing to create unnecessary headaches for users.
The relevant section from the actual report is arguably clearer than the WaPo article:

| However, there was also a large number of workers who were classified as employed but |
| absent from work. As was the case in March and April, household survey interviewers |
| were instructed to classify employed persons absent from work due to coronavirus- |
| related business closures as unemployed on temporary layoff. However, it is apparent |
| that not all such workers were so classified. BLS and the Census Bureau are |
| investigating why this misclassification error continues to occur and are taking |
| additional steps to address the issue. |
| |
| If the workers who were recorded as employed but absent from work due to "other |
| reasons" (over and above the number absent for other reasons in a typical May) had |
| been classified as unemployed on temporary layoff, the overall unemployment rate |
| would have been about 3 percentage points higher than reported (on a not seasonally |
| adjusted basis). However, according to usual practice, the data from the household |
| survey are accepted as recorded. To maintain data integrity, no ad hoc actions are |
| taken to reclassify survey responses.

Link found in that WaPo article, so credit due for that: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
It’s an interesting claim but not really factual or able to be proven/disproven unless we were to complete the project ourselves :).

My own opinion is we could (in this situation let’s just pretend to bureaucracy) build the entirety of the NYC subway.

My main reasoning is a) we have repeatedly demonstrated the ability to build underground [1] and b) we have repeatedly demonstrated the ability to build trains [2].

Now a subway is probably harder because you need to combine the two things and there are probably complications to figure out how to build under a city, but I don’t know any further knowledge on the topic.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_and_Reservoir_Plan

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail
No impact anybody could measure or otherwise determine for me at the time, but if you keep going and it does get too high you get too much calcium in various places which can cause a series of problems.
anecdote time:

My 6 year old son just discovered the augmented-reality tricks in the LINE app (adding a mustache, hair, glasses, sound effects etc). He got my mother (68) to install it and now they use it pretty much for all their video conversations. This replaced FaceTime, despite FaceTime having better sound and picture quality (edit: and even some effects).

He's in the age (and COVID-19 environment) where he starts speaking to cousins and friends online. So I imagine LINE spreading pretty quickly in similar circles based on those features alone. That's the stuff that drives adoption, as silly as it might be.

That said, yes, the plumbing needs to be in working order, or no silly feature can cover over the leaks (or smell, if we're going with the metaphor).
There has never been a "true" OO language. And if it there was, Smalltalk was not it. Alan Kay did coin the term, but Simula existed long before Smalltalk. The tree of languages that include C++, Java, and C# can be traced back to Simula while Smalltalk inspired Ruby. There is a distinct camp of "statically typed OO" (Simula and its children) and "dynamically typed OO" (Smalltalk and its children).

Yet none of this is the one true OO. All of it remains a way of describing a human mode of expression, and so is rightly subjective.
Straight out of Google's anti-competitive playbook. [1]

Something I've noticed as well is that logging in on Firefox to Google websites causes extremely regular logouts to occur, and re-prompting for password. On Chrome, this virtually never happens.

[1] https://www.computerworld.com/article/3389882/former-mozilla...
You are absolutely right.
I have written Scheme interpreters in both languages.
Compare
https://github.com/nukata/little-scheme-in-ruby/blob/v0.3.0/...

# Cons cell
class Cell
include Enumerable
attr_reader :car
attr_accessor :cdr

def initialize(car, cdr)
@car = car
@cdr = cdr
end

# Yield car, cadr, caddr and so on, à la for-each in Scheme.
def each
j = self
begin
yield j.car
j = j.cdr
end while Cell === j
j.nil? or raise ImproperListException, j
end
end # Cell

and
https://github.com/nukata/little-scheme-in-crystal/blob/v0.2...

# Cons cell
class Cell < Obj
include Enumerable(Val)

getter car : Val # Head part of the cell
property cdr : Val # Tail part of the cell

def initialize(@car : Val, @cdr : Val)
end

# Yield car, cadr, caddr and so on, à la for-each in Scheme.
def each
j = self
loop {
yield j.as(Cell).car
j = j.as(Cell).cdr
break unless Cell === j
}
raise ImproperListException.new(j) unless j.nil?
end
end # Cell

and they will make the point clear.
Ruby and Crystal are different languages, but you can translate your code from Ruby to Crystal line by line fairly easily.

For the performance boost, see
https://github.com/nukata/little-scheme/tree/v1.3.0#performa...
which shows times to solve 6-Queens on a meta-circular Scheme as follows:

* Crystal 0.34.0: crystal build --release scm.cr: 2.15 sec.

* Crystal 0.34.0: crystal scm.cr: 9.88 sec.

* Ruby 2.3.7: ruby scm.rb: 84.80 sec.

Compiled (and complex enough) Crystal code runs 39 times faster than the equivalent Ruby code in this case.
Why are unions being blamed here?

Is there a special law that provides immunity for union members ?
Hey this looks nice. I will try it out and congrats on shipping. I am building an open source product which has on boarding as a use case, but it will probably be less featured.

Cheers!
I spend a lot of time in tmux and I frequently open and close terminal sessions so I made this

https://github.com/cboppert/motd

It’s message of the day but with ViM tips. It worked fantastically for getting small tips throughout my day that allowed me to consume and learn without necessarily dedicating any tangible amount of time to it.
> If I wasn't using vim I'd probably just leave that code as it was because it would have been so much effort.

Most modern editors, Visual Studio Code included, have powerful refactoring abilities. Not only that, but they're usable without needing to be an editor expert - just right-clicking and selecting "Change all occurrences" (or pressing F2) does the trick.
There has never been a helium shortage. It’s just more costly than scientists would prefer. If they were willing to pay even more, massive more amounts would be available.
I know for a fact this is occurring. Employers need employees to book at least X hours to get the loan/grant.

But there isn’t nearly that amount of work needed. So they are asking employees to report the high numbers anyway.

This effectively shifted unemployment insurance benefits to business benefits that are still sponsoring (at least in part) zero utility.

It’s a great smokescreen. And fwiw, it is probably a better Posture to have workers “ready to go” should there be something for them to do.

But make no mistake this is not business as usual. It is more like a shell game for stats and monetary distribution.
https://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/Published/kf-pr...

Programming Paradigms and Beyond, Shriram Krishnamurthi and Kathi Fisler:

OO is a widely-used term chock-full of ambiguity. At its foundation, OO depends on objects, which are values that combine data and procedures. The data are usually hidden (“encapsulated”) from the outside world and accessible only to those procedures. These procedures have one special argument, whose hidden data they can access, and are hence called methods, which are invoked through dynamic dispatch. This muchseems to be common to all OO languages, but beyond this they differ widely:

* Most OO languages have one distinguished object that methods depend on, but some instead have multimethods, which can dispatch on many objects at a time.

* Some OO languages have a notion of a class, which is a template for making objects. In these languages, it is vital for programmers to understand the class-object distinction, and many students struggle with it (Eckerdal & Thune, 2005). However, many languages considered OO do nothave classes. The presence or absence of classes leads to very different programming patterns.

* Most OO languages have a notion of inheritance, wherein an object can refer to some other entity to provide default behavior. However, there are huge variationsin inheritance: is the other entity a class or another (prototypical) object? Can it refer to only one entity (single-inheritance) or to many (multiple-inheritance), and if the latter, how are ambiguities resolved? Is what it refers to fixed or can it change as the program runs?

* Some OO languages have types, and the role of types in determining program behavior can be subtle and can vary quite a bit across languages.

* Even though many OO aficionados take it as a given that objects should be built atop imperative state, it is not clear that one of the creators of OO, Alan Kay, intended that: “the small scale [motivation for OOP] was to find a more flexible version of assignment, and then to try to eliminate it altogether”; “[g]enerally, we don’t want the programmer to be messing around with state” (Kay, 1993).

In general, all these variations in behavior tend to get grouped together as OO, even though they lead to significantly different language designs and corresponding behaviors, and are not even exclusive to it (e.g., functional closures also encapsulate data). Thus, a phrase like “objects-first” (sec. 6.1)can in principle mean dozens of wildly different curricular structures, though in practice it seems to refers to curricula built around objects as found in Java.
There's a solution you're not seeing https://ubuntu-mate.community/t/how-to-completely-remove-sna...
Ask HN: Where is our HN dark theme?
I don't think its physically possible to read this in the time since its been posted, but since people are commenting anyways I might as well join in.

I've been using JS since the JScript days, and let me tell you it was horrible. Awful. I would rather use VBA, Perl, early PHP, really anything I've touched besides COBOL. It was buggy, horrifically slow, had an even worse standard library than it does now, didn't work the same way between anything. I remember testing performance and getting 1000 integer increments a second in an empty for loop. Even back then an alarm clock running C was orders of magnitude faster.

But the massive popularity of the web has made it decent. Its a good example of the (overused) axiom that you can pour enough money into anything and make it good. With JS, this actually happened. Probably because the other choice was transitioning the web to Flash, Silverlight, and Java Applets. The proprietary solutions lost the battle thankfully, even though admittedly they were better than JS for a long time after they died.

There's still lingering problems, some which may prove un-fixable. The standard library is a joke. The 1 million line ancient Java monolith at work pulls in less libraries, by count and space then create-react-app. And not having threads is just terrible. People that don't know better ape over async, not knowing that most languages have async, threads, sometimes fibers, and fast shared memory between them. And NPM works decently but putting 5 million files into my node_modules folder is absurd. NPM is the only reason I know that most OS'es still have a path length limit. You would think the world could standardize on putting libraries into a zip or something like even ancient crufty languages like Java do. If it wasn't for SSD's modern JS wouldn't even be usable. And can we just compile JS already? Minification seems so normal that everyone's forgotten its a shitty hack. If you're going to minify to the point that JS resembles bytecode why not just standardize a format. People say "JS runs right away because its not compiled"... Well... How long does your WebPack take to transmogrify 150MB of spaghettified JS into a pile of chunks you can actually feed a web browser in prod? Probably longer than it takes most languages to compile. If we just compiled to a reasonable format like other VM languages, we wouldn't waste so much time parsing and keeping these tools working with every semantics update.

Here's to the hope that money poured into JS will finally fix the remaining issues. I give it another ten years and I'll finally enjoy most of my time in JS land.
There’s a large spectrum between monopoly and perfect competition. Duopoly isn’t the only other option.
Not all economics is macroeconomics...
This is such a horrible article. Many have already mentioned the conflation of humanities and social sciences. Then by using the example of books (because most would agree books would loose their essence if we just describe them by numbers) it constructs a straw man that somehow we loose something (the beauty?) by using quantitative measures.

Sure many studies have flaws (not just in the social sciences), but what is the alternative that we simply use theories because of their "beauty" (whatever that means)? Shall we start psychological therapies just because someone thought it sounded good, instead of measuring if it works?