skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My point of view is:

- make it easy to write and to read at the expense of having complexity in the parser / implementation. Programs (or documents) are written and read a lot of times, it's worth optimizing, as long as it does not make the implementation unmaintainable. I'm saying that as a writer of several manually crafted parsers.

- avoid ambiguities in the grammar at all cost. They just suck for every party involved.

As for indentation vs braces to delimit blocks, I practice both and don't really have any preference.
> yet 50% of the time (I have no reference for this statistic but I'm gonna be bold and use it anyway) it is a her.

It's not btw. Cardiac arrest is not 50/50, it's more like 70/30. You're much more likely to have to perform CPR on a man (unless you're primarily surrounded by very old people, I suppose). Women are more likely to not receive proper CPR though, likely because bystanders are afraid to be accused of improper conduct and/or afraid to hurt them (as women are generally significantly older then men when they get their first cardiac arrest).

Also, in general: before you start CPR, remove their cloths from the upper body. There a chance they may suffer from ventricular fibrillation which can be solved with an AED. If you start CPR without having removed their (upper body) cloths, you can't use the AED without a long pause - at which point you've lost a lot of time.
Huh, this is like saying "who needs parsers?" Well, they've been invented for a reason. So after the NoSQL movement, we now have NoParser. I fear we might end up back at assembly or even microcode. Sure it will make life simpler, but it's the wrong kind of simple.
Their parent's generation for sure, and the liberal educators at the time.
Are you guys disinfecting?

If so, which method are you using?

If not, why not?
That helps explain Gates talking to IBM. It doesn’t explain IBM’s taking the contract, or their massive blunder in allowing Gates’ non-exclusivity clause on the OS.

Lots of companies contracted with IBM without IBM signing off their whole business to them.

Bill Gates clearly was very fortunate in his life, but it’s a mistake to chalk the IBM blunder up to 100% luck.
It is your business, but I personally would not do this. When wearing a business hat you need to respond to rudeness with polite firmness.

"fix it!" -- "please give more details" or "sorry, this feature is not a near term deliverable" (which is a polite request to get lost). "I am going to a competitor" -- "we think our product is better, but encourage users to try alternatives", etc. My 2c.
Some things a hobbyist might use one for:

* Experimental processor design. If you want to make a processor with its own custom instruction set, or modify an existing processor design, you need an FPGA to actually see it in action.

* Synthesizers and audio filters. You can do a lot of low latency signal processing compared to even a beefy microcontroller with an FPGA, so if you want to make your own synth sounds in hardware, an FPGA might make sense.

* Computer vision stuff. If you want to make some gadget that does some kind of image processing that is streaming from a camera, and FPGA would work, especially if you wanted it to be small/portable.

* High bandwidth or low latency SDR applications.
It wasn't always the exclusive focus, but I think it was always the primary focus. After all, it came out of Fog Creek Software (now Glitch); given their product history, Trello would stand out as the only consumer-focused product they'd ever released, had they actually released it as one.

As I recall the original marketing (imperfectly, I'm sure, as it's been quite a while ago now), the pitch was focused around the concept of a project management tool without the usual overheads and complexities such tools tend to bring along, something you could just jump into and start using. "And you can even use it for stuff outside of work!" might've been there also, I don't doubt it, but I have to think it would've been secondary at best.
There's nothing technically stopping it from being used in other countries though, Hong Kong has implemented the same system with same level of success as Japan.

> You can't use it internationally, unlike contactless EMV.

Technically it's incorrect. Visa/Mastercard works internationally, I have a RuPay card from India and it didn't work internationally until recently. So it depends on the reciprocal agreement between networks - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Card_reciprocal_agreements
> There exist many type inference algorithms, the best known one is the so-called Algorithm W.

Is this correct? I dug out Milner's paper [1] where he states that Algorithm J is more efficient (which was what I had been led to believe), but that Algorithm W is more suited to functional (as opposed to imperative) implementations.

Edit: Actually I think I'm parsing this sentence incorrectly, "best known" means literally that as opposed to "most efficient known".

[1] https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/papers/papers-we-love/...
You Could Download Video Games from the Radio in the 1980s
The backend is Bandwidth. Since JMP uses an actual carrier instead of a reseller like Twilio, it is easier to fix issues and get questions answered, as there is one less level of tech support indirection.

It also means JMP's costs are lower (Twilio is extremely expensive) and gets more features (Twilio doesn't do group texting or messages to short codes).

While SIP does support messaging, it is extremely limited: text-only and single recipient (no picture messaging or group texts). So XMPP is a much better fit, as all the texting features people expect can be implemented over XMPP.
I live in a major city and the state doesn't seem to take care of anyone here, millennial or not.
GP is just restating the last sentence of the "Significance" section of the paper in harsher words:

"However, given the high energy costs for artificial lighting and capital costs, it is unlikely to be economically competitive with current market prices."

There is a limited amount of sunlight hitting an area. That means to scale crop yields by going vertical, you need artificial light.

At the moment energy is not harvested in a (sustainably) scalable manner, so vertical farming is infeasible except to boost local production in rich countries.

Saying it's a "pipe dream" is a bit too harsh imo, I think as energy demand ramps up, and oil keeps going down eventually we will be forced to produce unlimited amounts of cheap energy through nuclear power plants, but that's just my vision for the future..
He Built a $4B Business by Simplifying Payments for Other Companies
There are historical resonances throughout, to an extent that shocks me, given that the author was coming from a milieu that on the face of it -- the industrial computing industry in early-'70s Soviet Union? -- is so alien to my own experience. He seems to have grasped some essential truths that continue to apply even as the world of programming and the world at large have changed in many profound ways.
> I'd have rolled my eyes and got to work, knowing they'll probably behave better (and regret their silly outburst) once they know I'm taking them seriously.

This is where I think you're mistaken. Customers and clients like this, once they see they've gotten you under their thumb, will be more than happy to continue exploiting you.

Remember Stavros was charging a small lifetime fee. Clients from hell will twist this and try to make you their personal developer for as long as possible.

You seem to think that Stav should be thankful for the opportunity to fix the particular bug, but who's to say he wouldn't have discovered and fixed it on his own time?

Customers can and should be held to the same standard. Otherwise you end up with shit customers.
Improving Haskell with Javascript syntax is like improving a Mark Rothko painting by sprinkling glitter all over it.
My organization got a seat on the advisory committee of the local University's CS department and steers their curriculum to meet our business needs. Then we hire their graduates.
I love Karabiner, though I only remapped a couple of keys and did the rest with HammerSpoon. I think I remapped the rock cmd to backspace and caps lock to hyper. The rest was HammerSpoon.

HammerSpoon: https://www.hammerspoon.org/
I've noticed editors auto fixing Python indentation while copy-pasting. I think VSCode does it, so it's definitively a solvable problem :-)

(I've disabled this feature in my main editor for a long time though, so I'm used to hit Tab/Shift+Tab as many times as needed when pasting)
ReversingHero
Does that do AoT-compiling-on-install, or is it still just JIT? I thought the JVM ecosystem was ahead on purely static binaries with Graal, but I might be mistaken.
While I admit, the OP/author didn't choose the best examples and could have researched more. And also, there are still plenty of crappy business apps out there. (To the troll comments, neither Oracle nor SAP are modern by any account. Oracle predates the internet).

I will also say that the OP is right about this trend. If I had to pick between two equals, with equivalent SLAs/privacy/other business considerations, I'd pick the tool that's easier to use and onboard. An easier to use tool means my team spends less time struggling and more time being productive and happy!

Think AWS vs GCP. AWS is older, clunkier with a terrible UX and GCP is modern , aesthetically pleasing, gets out of your way and innovative (cloud console FTW).

JIRA is from a time before this trend started, but ClickUp is a JIRA/Confluence/Trello alternative that faster, modern and easier to use.

Notion is another great example. It's a business tool diguised in consumer clothings. It's so well designed, easy to use and massively customizable that it serves both use-cases equally well (at least for me).

While Dropbox started out as a consumer app, Box was business centric from the get go and has a really good UX. Same goes for Quip, that's an alternative to Google docs for business that was eventually acquired by Salesforce. It's UX was way ahead of it's time.

And there's Shopify! It's a dream to use for setting up an online store, compared to any of its predecessors.

So in spirit, the OP is right.
It is trivial to find (most) of the datasets HIBP uses
Packing a whole game into a QR code
>Chrome has a million and one alternatives

I think after MS gave up on Edge, we're down to one - Firefox.
You can early access to Screpy via Betalist
About two weeks ago, we applied to be on the Betalist.com

Our sales started to accelerate from yesterday.

Because, as of yesterday, we were launched on betalist.com/startups/screpy

You can now a membership of Screpy with 20% discount on Betalist.com
This is not an accurate description of notation as it is used in mathematics. All types of brackets (round, curly, square, angled, ...) are used in mathematics for grouping things. Typically parens for innermost small groups and other brackets for larger “outer” groups.

Curly brackets may be used for sets but they are also used for different cases of functions, or as a more succinct and precise way of expressing sentences about multiple things than writing “foo, respectively bar” all over the place, or for Stirling numbers of the second kind, or for whatever other things an author might want.

Other “structure making” notations like group presentations use angle brackets. Ideals are sometimes written with their generators in angle brackets, sometimes with round brackets. Similarly tuples or sequences may be written with either.

Matrices are sometimes written with square brackets and sometimes round, and never with commas. Vectors typically are written with round brackets but may be square. Row vectors sometimes have commas.

Function application is sometimes written with round brackets. Arguments are sometimes separated by commas, sometimes by semicolons, sometimes with one argument as a subscript or implicit. Application often omits brackets altogether. Sometimes the function goes on the left, sometimes it goes on the right.

Now consider the few features which I find are relatively common to different mathematics notations are context, alignment and structure in 2 dimensions, juxtaposition, implicitness, and terseness. I think I see basically none of these in the common C/Rust style syntax you claim to be so rooted in mathematical notation, and indeed I would guess that you would oppose them.

I don’t buy your arguments at all.
Reminds me a bit of Interceptor from the Amiga: https://youtu.be/oHsUbGTIXyE
There is a TED video about this that changed my life. I've been doing it all wrong for a long time.

https://www.ted.com/talks/terry_moore_how_to_tie_your_shoes?...
> five of eight systematic reviews found no evidence that the use of masks would provide any benefit in controlling sources of infection or protecting healthy persons from exposure to respiratory infections

Unfortunately, that news article does not contain the links to those reviews. Maybe they are part of the full report, but I can't read Finnish.
Using someone else's voice assistant is also a legitimate use case, especially if it's used to control music, lights, blinds, AC, car functionality ... that absolutely requires solid SIR.
Makes me wonder, ho does one start to build a serious flight simulator? Is there any publicly available resources about implementation techniques and pitfalls specific to flight simulators, like there are for so many other topics, so you don't have to learn everything the hard way, make all the obvious mistakes, etc? Or is this a topic where you can really work from first principles, using just basic physics and incrementally adding simulation of more advanced effects?
I agree with thorough review. As I've been initiated recently into a new company I've felt it's a great time to get a deep review - potentially from an expert - of ingrained/embedded systems. In theory you have someone, you deem as competent, taking a fresh view of all your systems to a deep level.

Things that seem wrong might be because they are wrong - people learning will be inclined to think they are the problem. Thorough review might reveal systemic faults.
You and me, both :) All the best.
Yes HK has its own stored value card, but you can't use Octopus in Japan, can you?

Also I'm sure you'd agree it's easier to trust something issued internationally if there was some element of online verification to it (admittedly probably not much of an issue for transit applications).
Falcon BMS is great!

Imo it's the best FS out there for a few reasons. I think what really sets it apart is it's dynamic campaign and large scale multiplayer wars that run over the course of weeks or even months.

It's incredibly fun participating in an air battle with 60 other online pilots (with human AWACS) working together or scrambling defensive flights as an enemy strike package comes in.

The high barrier of entry, both in terms of difficulty (you probably need at least 10h of tutored instruction to be remotely good at the game) and hardware investment (you need a joystick and trackir) is a feature not a bug. It keeps the toxic players out and indeed the community has barely any problems with toxic players.

Here's my view of a mission from a large scale PvP campaign. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TXqYky97auQ&t=9m51s
"ultimate"?

Then the runner-up is the penultimate.
Link to the QR code game (recommended to check out after watching the video) -- https://itsmattkc.com/etc/snakeqr/
Just download the base, the models can be autodownloader from the launcher and the terrain is automatically fetch too.
> Open source business models couldn't work without copyright, and there is a minor rebellion underway in OSS against highly permissive licenses due to rampant corporate exploitation (e.g. "SaaSification" and rebranding and commercialization that robs the authors of even credit).

Here is a counter example. Up until a few decades ago, standards organisations like the ISO carefully guarded their standards with copyright law, and funded themselves off the proceeds of selling them. I'm sure they shared you're "standard organisations could not exist with the proceeds" outlook, right up until the IETF came along with there completely free RFC's, and won the networking standards war. One of the reasons ISO lost is it turns out a standard that can be read by everyone is implemented a lot more, and that in turn makes it worth more, which amazingly is actually recognised so people fund the development of more of those standards even though they know their hard work will be given away for free. The W3 works exactly that way, yet is funded by hard nosed corporates.

In some cases, the value of letting every one use the thing you spent millions on developing simply outweighs the cost of charging for it. Today's classic example is AV1, the video Codec. It's competitor, MPEG was does rely on copyright to fund it's development. The initially hidden cost of doing it that way, was if you can force everyone to pay a little bit, why not a little bit more, and perhaps a fair bit more on top of that. It took 20 years or something, but is exactly how it has panned out. And surprise, surprise, a few hard headed capitalist companies (like Microsoft / Facebook and Google) got the shits with this and funded the development of AV1, and gave it away for free.

Yes, the Patreon distribution model could a counter example. But understand that is an attribute of that particular method of distribution. If we removed copyright we may well lose that Patreon, it's unlikely we would lose what is being distributed by it. Music made it's way around the world long before copyright came along, the fashion design industry does perfectly well without copyright to this day.

In fact music is the most glaring example. Music distribution was heavily dependent on copyright for most of my life. Now, that is gone. Almost any song can be downloaded legally for free, and if not trivially pirated for free. The methods of distribution dependent on copyright right has indeed succommed to the petty avarice of humanity as you put it, the avarice being piracy in this case. But notice while that method of distribution has died, music lives on, and methods of distribution that are so cheap piracy isn't worth it risen to replace the old methods.

That's not to say copyright doesn't have it's virtues, but it very doubtful the world would stop if it died tomorrow.
Static typing takes the burden of verifying certain forms of program correctness off the programmer and puts it in the compiler where it belongs, thus expanding the space of correct code the same programmer can write per unit cognitive load. The more kinds of things you check for in the type system (static lifetimes in Rust, for instance), the more benefits you get. It doesn't serve as a substitute for good taste, because while a mediocre programmer's reach is extended, a great programmer's reach is even further extended. Mediocre programmers can thus meaningfully contribute to embedded and kernel-level code under the tutelage of a good programmer without risking blowing the whole thing up, and increase their skill.
Frances Elizabeth Allen (August 4, 1932 – August 4, 2020)
Interesting, did she have to get another mortgage for the down payment on it?
True. But why is Google the only Big tech company that saw revenue declines? How has FB major acquisitions fared compared to Google’s?

Youtube is popularly believed to be break even at best and it came out in the Oracle trial during discovery that Android had only made Google $23 billion in profit from 2010-2015. At the same time Google is giving Apple billions (reportedly up to $8-$12 billion now) to be the default search engine on iOS.
> I suspect justifying eating farmed meat is going to seriously dwindle in a few generations once the 'that's how its always been' mentality has softened.

It will start more seriously once lab/vat grown-meat becomes a viable competitor. Suddenly it won't be "necessary" anymore to eat animals and ethics will rapidly shift.

I don't think it's a coincidence societies view on slavery shifted at the same time as the industrial revolution made pure mechanical human labor less valuable, and that opinions on the legality in the US states roughly was determined whether that state's economics was dependent on slave labor or not.
Show HN: Scite Reference Check: check the reliability of your references
Edit: this hasn’t been well received. To sum up: you can’t just say “Monarchy bad. Destruction of monarchy good”. You have to look at consequences and actual effects in the world. All of the countries listed had abjectly horrific 20th centuries. Britain and the western European countries which kept their monarchies objectively had much gentler centuries.

————————-

That did not end very well for virtually any of the countries involved. Only the former Ottoman Empire really escaped any kind of widespread hell.

The former Russian Empire was under a totalitarian system for 70 years. The Austro-Hungarian empire first had to deal with the holocaust and Nazi conquest and then Soviet conquest. The Chinese had to deal with the Great Leap forward and Maoism. And the Germans had Nazism, the Holocaust, and years of turmoil in between the end of the war and the end of WWII. They also had their country split in half and the eastern part made poorer.

The British and Japanese now have a token monarchy. The same applies to most countries that still have one: the monarch is not the source of power.

What exactly was gained? Monarchical power was already on the way out. The French Revolution had clearly undercut the power of monarchs and they did not hold real power by the start of WWI. And abrupt lack of monarchy rather than gradual evolution seems to have led at minimum decades of torment in most of the places you name.

You could make an argument about ending colonialsim but WWII and Japanese conquest Of European colonies did a lot more on that front. WWI expanded several empires.
Or put another way
"Businesses give up on thinking they are special snowflakes and show their true colors by ripping off consumer ideas for their still quite clunky and chunky bloatware.
Drives me nuts. "Hey Siri, Pause" shouldn't require an internet connection. I often have bad or no connection (eg podcasts while hiking). Voice commands must be ubiquitous. If I have to fail-revert back to touch, what's the point?
Why would that be a mistake?
Mainstream languages probably look very verbose, clunky and ugly to many people who like Haskell-like syntaxes more. I feel this way when looking at a Pascal code.

But they have to keep in mind that this verbosity is a feature and they should not act surprised that many people like it. This verbosity makes many things explicit, and I'll not be the first to think that "Explicit is better than implicit".

Conciseness is also a feature, though.
> I'm just saying that if you had thicker skin you would probably make more money

In this case, I'd pay money to not deal with a customer like that.
Decoding Apple’s Statement to Business Insider Regarding Xbox Game Pass
Manjaro Phosh Impressions on Pinephone
> blaming of such a huge action on a few Westerners

You're looking at this as if it was a literal tug-of-war game where "a few" can't beat the many due to the laws of physics. Yet the reality we live in thoroughly contradicts you at every step. If the "few" can apply pressure at precise points and in precise ways then a lot can be achieved.

Look no further than lobbying where "a few" people have far more power than a country's worth of citizens. For example they may de-prioritize education because a population with close to total zero understanding of the world is far easier to steer whichever way the "few" want.

> This kind of emotionally charged approach

You're free to make it as emotional as you want. I gave it as an objective example that destroyed the foundation of your line of argumentation. So call it what you may but you still haven't come up with anything that can stand up to even cursory scrutiny. Personal opinions and interpretations are not that.