skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You mean like Amazon that doesn't make a profit, and passes on their vast, amazing operational efficiency basically for free?

Or Walmart that makes very thin margins and uses their power to force profits out of the value chain (they sit down with suppliers and require them to reduce margin) and has a policy of keeping margins extremely low themselves, thereby creating massive surpluses and helping people with little financial means more than any other program?

People focus so much in 'profit' when that's usually a narrow slice of what's going on.

When people are paying you for stuff or services, most of what is happening is value creation of some kind.

If people are not willing to pay you, it might be a sign that what you are doing is not useful to them.

The amount of 'surplus' generated for the customer is usually not even measured, particularly for consumers (it's called 'consumer surplus' and it's their version of profit).

If you are creating a ton of consumer surplus, then worrying about your narrow slice of profit doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

If you're an NGO not creating a ton of consumer surplus then you are a value destroyer not a value creator and you're basically burning money, truly wasteful. (I'm not saying NGOs are that, but they can be).

There's no such thing as 'Capitalism 2.0' - build a company, create surpluses, be a good actor, and take some margin as profit, or not, whatever you want, it's a side show.
> Google doesn't monetize developing Blink/Chromium.

I disagree here. Of course they do. They could not monetize Chrome successfully without:

a) Having huge amounts of control over the direction of the web

b) Having a best-in-class browser that people want to use

If IE had every feature of Chrome with regards to management and monetization it would still not matter, people do not want IE. If IE were a drastically better browser than Chrome, they would.

Choosing Servo gives them an opportunity to leap ahead of Chrome in areas they care about.
This got me curious when I saw the news item on national Swedish news (!) a few hours ago, so I did some wikipedia reading.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel#Etymology

> The word pixel is a portmanteau of pix (from "pictures", shortened to "pics") and el (for "element"); similar formations with 'el' include the words voxel and texel. The word pix appeared in Variety magazine headlines in 1932, as an abbreviation for the word pictures, in reference to movies. By 1938, "pix" was being used in reference to still pictures by photojournalists.

> The word "pixel" was first published in 1965 by Frederic C. Billingsley of JPL, to describe the picture elements of scanned images from space probes to the Moon and Mars. Billingsley had learned the word from Keith E. McFarland, at the Link Division of General Precision in Palo Alto, who in turn said he did not know where it originated. McFarland said simply it was "in use at the time" (circa 1963).
Short Domain Names
What cruft did py3 remove from py2?
Isn't epub kind of this?
Sibling explains the difference. To explain why prefix is better—first let's look at the base case where argument shapes match. Let's assume that addition is defined on scalars; we don't have to explain that 11=5+6. Then let's consider vectors: there are two forms of scalar broadcasting for vectors. The first is addition of two equal-length vectors, for which each item of the left argument will be broadcast to the corresponding item of the right argument: 10 14=3 5+7 9. The second is the addition of a scalar to a vector (or vice versa), where the scalar is matched up with each item of the vector: 10 14=6 10+4.

For the first case, we can say that:

R[i] = x[i] + y[i] (when x and y are vectors)

(Where i is any valid array subscript; and R, x, and y are the names conventionally given to the result, left argument, and right argument of some function, respectively.)

Assume that we extend our scalar rule to arbitrary dimensions (that is, scalar+n-dimensional array will do what we expect)—there is actually a good reason for this, but we'll just assume it for now; it's a pretty intuitive rule.

Then the simple recursive rule I gave above gives you prefix agreement for any two argument shapes; just replace 'vector' with 'nonscalar'. Here are the rules for suffix agreement:

R[i] = x[i] + y[i] (when x and y have the same rank)
R[i] = x + y[i] (when y has bigger rank)
R[i] = x[i] + y (when x has bigger rank)

The prefix agreement rule is simple: add each element of x to its corresponding element in y. The suffix agreement rule is much more complex (3 rules, as opposed to just 1), and with higher-ranked arrays it gets harder to reason about which elements go together.

There's an even deeper synergy, though, which goes between prefix agreement and forks. Forks are a generalisation of a convention from calculus. There's a convention that, given functions f and g, (f+g) is a legal function such that (f+g)(x) <=> f(x)+g(x). (And ditto for other arithmetic operators.) Apl does not distinguish between user-defined functions (like f) and infix builtins (like +); x f y denotes the calling of function f with arguments x and y, same as x + y denotes the calling of function + with arguments x and y. So the f+g rule is generalised: we say that, given any functions f, g, and h, (f g h) x is equivalent to (f x) g (h x).

What does this have to do with prefix agreement? Well, all we have to do is remember that an array, as a relation of indices to elements, is very close to a function. In fact, I think that it's appropriate to say that an array is semantically a function, though its syntactic role is different. So saying x[i] is like saying 'apply function x to argument i'. Which leads very nicely—right into prefix agreement:

(f g h) x <=> (f x) g (h x)
. . .
(x + y)[i] <=> (x[i]) + (y[i])
> Healthcare costs are up, but you don’t have to worry about dying from a scraped knee.

As an American, you just need to worry about dying from incredibly common and treatable diseases like cancer, heart disease or diabetes due to lack of treatment. If you show up to an emergency room without insurance or ability to pay and expect chemo or a supply of insulin or blood pressure medication, you're out of luck.

My grandfather who fought in foxholes in South Pacific jungles didn't have to worry about dying from a scraped knee, either.
I’ve found the opposite. I don’t buy meat or dairy groceries so the high majority of my meals are vegan, but if I’m out at a place that doesn’t have a vegan option I’m fine ordering a meat or vegetarian option.

I think going majority meat and dairy less without committing 100% would make a much bigger effect in aggregate. We don’t need everyone becoming vegan, actually we can’t even support that. But if having meat and dairy at every single meal wasn’t a requirement, then we’d make a lot of change.

Vegetarians and vegans who have meat/dairy rarely shouldn’t be shunned or considered “failed”.
Interesting opinion.

Any evidence (anecdotal or data-driven) to support this?
ntfs-3g is entirely implemented in userspace, and is far more trivial to hack on and test if anyone wanted to improve its file allocation strategies than an in-kernel driver would be.

Years ago when working on a commercial virtualization product I had to support initializing sparsely populated ntfs filesystems where only the filesystem metadata was written out, with allocated file extent ranges logged externally and not actually populated in the sparse ntfs filesystem in a file. I ended up deriving a small library for doing this from the libntfs-3g code, I don't think it took more than a weekend to do, the code was quite sane.

What I recall from that experience was that the file extent allocations on an empty filesystem was perfectly efficient, since you'd have to go out of your way to make it bad.

The real trouble was when the filesystem was used enough for its free space to become fragmented. At that point the allocation strategy was quite poor and you would end up with extremely fragmented large files. IIRC it was really just a naive sequential find first free blocks kind of thing. This aspect is consistent with your memory.

I think if we wanted to improve that aspect of linux ntfs support we're better off working from ntfs-3g.

Not to mention there are some significant down sides to in-kernel filesystem drivers, they are rather problematic when it comes to containers/namespaces and the security story is a total shit show.
The Importance of Developer Experience Off the Happy Path
The challenge with standards is feature creep. Example: amd64

One day Intel goes and implements instructions which support video decoding. And then Microsoft takes advantage of them, and now users have a better experience. Now open source compilers have to implement them and AMD has to implement them and the cost of competing with the giants goes up.

Same thing with browser DRM. Either Firefox implements it, or Netflix tells all of their users that chrome is a requirement.

I don't know how to stop this type of creep.
“There are millions of reasons to sell stock, there is only one reason to buy it.”
Companies are not corporations. The latter have personhood. It's in the name. It is a unitary "body".
Right, it's a huge issue. Some really cool exclusive content would have to be found on this Web.

But, what's the alternative? Giving up the Web and giving it away to Google?
You sell stock any time you need money. People need money for lots of things.
> I would highly encourage you to reassess where you are getting your information about the world if you genuinely believe this.

I have traveled extensively throughout the world and my assessment was based on my personal experience. But...

> If you look at the data, almost any data which compares the US to other countries, you’ll see that the US is at or near the top.

Not so.

The U.S. is a peer to Serbia in infant mortality [1]. It is behind India and Lithuania in terms political freedom and civil liberties (as rated by freedomhouse [2] [3]) and a peer to Chile in terms of economic freedom [4] and government corruption [5]. The U.S. ranks 38th in math and 24th in science education.

And an anecdotal but IMHO significant data point: I have lived in the U.S. for fifty years. I have NEVER had a piece of U.S. mail go missing, until this year, when I have had THREE checks vanish into the cosmic void. (The fact that paper checks are even still a thing here is a testament to how far behind we have fallen.)

---

[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/infant-mo...

[2] https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores?sort...

[3] https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores?sort...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_economic_...

[5] https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/corruption-rank

[6] https://parentology.com/stem-education-statistics-2019-how-t...
I think "the first language to" is the operative bit.

Yes, the mathematics predates it, but in context I think "only appeared" clearly means "only appeared in a programming context".

(I guess whether you accept this depends on how you're rank ordering different types of pedantry, and exercise I am happy to leave to the discretion of the reader)
Sometimes it’s not possible to buy your way out of the problem with better hardware. If the issue is locking, or inefficient data structures, or interpreter overhead then there will be a floor to your gains. That floor might be quite high, and throwing hardware $$$ at it might not lower the floor by much. Web browsers can be pigs on core i5’s and monster Threadrippers.
Seven Reasons Why You Need to Create an Online Course, Now
Apparently you can still buy these new.
Congrats, you just reinvented XHTML :)
Hollywood is of a different point of view.

https://home.otoy.com/

https://www.disneyanimation.com/technology/innovations/hyper...

Also a standard feature of PS 5 and XBox Series X.
I mean, you might be able to get away with implementing a WASM VM and a small subset of JavaScript APIs, which might be significantly simpler than implementing all of JavaScript itself.
Most HTML is generated by frameworks now, isn't it? Is there a lot of non-matching HTML in the wild anymore?
> The butterfly effect only works when a physical system is on the knife's edge, that it is prone to unstable/chaotic behavior.

I am not sure exactly what you mean, but that does not sound right to me.

The weather, for example, is a chaotic system that is affected by the butterfly effect. Yet it is not on a knife's edge, I think? We will never ever, no matter the technological advancements, be able to predict the weather two months in the future. That could very well, as far as I know, require the temperature in every square foot of the atmosphere with five significant digits.
While the oldest shoes discovered are 7-8kya, the evolution of foot bone structure points to shoe-wearing as long ago as 40kya [1], predating the Neolithic.

It is very likely that shoes predate floors and were worn for easier travel over rough terrain.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe#History
When I read about AMP for the first time I thought that's what it was going to be.
> It’s also on the public suffix list

A bit of a tangent, but: how and why?
This was my take as well, the author immediately attacks people and not the arguments and classifies them as lesser. Frankly, I don't know what this person has contributed to software engineering that merits them speaking this way.
Yes I think so. I have been using the blockdiag series of programs (nwdiag, seqdiag, rackdiag, etc) to keep it programmatic and version controlled, etc, so a json import/export feature would be great.
HN wants the rest of the world to be as angry and frustrated at the modern web as they are, but the rest of the world, for the most part does not care.
The limiting factor on making a new browser isn’t specs, it’s existing websites. Very few people want to use a browser that doesn’t work with existing websites, which actually use all the existing complexity.
I agree that his biggest fault was the way he handled that relationship.

1. Starting it so soon after he was officially off the hook looks really suspicious. This shouldn’t matter in a legal sense, but it does in a professional sense. He should have waited at least a year, or better yet just not do it. It was inviting trouble.

2. Regarding recommendations, imo he has to tell her that he can no longer vouch for her professionally if they get involved (professional recusal). Anything else would appear unethical if not actually be unethical. If the (former) student was not ok with that, then no relationship. I think that this holds true in non-academic situations as well.

3. I think that there is no doubt he was railroaded. He was put in a situation in which he could not be professionally responsible —- he couldn’t talk to anyone at the school for over a year. He ultimately had to leave a job over something that should have at worst been an official warning. The only way that this outcome was possibly reasonable is if he had been warned before and conveniently forgot to mention that fact. If someone follows the letter of the rules and then ends up jobless because of it (from a tenured position no less), then the issue is with the rules rather than the faculty member. If they want to prevent imbalanced professional power relationships, then they can simply ban relationships with current or former students. If that type of ban is not legal, then he should not be able to have his tenure rescinded.

The changes to Title IX had good intentions, but the implementation has had way too much collateral damage for it to be considered an unconditional win.
Wind and solar are both very predictable on a day-ahead basis. Though both offer a lower capacity value than fuel-based generation and energy storage (pumped hydro and batteries).

The Duck Curve convinced me of something different -- that flat-rate power prices don't send the appropriate price signal to the market. Supply and demand should be balanced through price signals like most everything else in the economy. And then let the free market figure it out.
You comment was downvoted but I upvoted it because you bring up a valid point. I've noticed first hand the free-rider problem and I have mixed feelings.

I thought it was interesting that all students with the free-rider symptoms did not feel good about free-riding. They tried to help out and feel bad when we meet for 1-1 and they haven't done much.

Sometimes, I feel like I'm actually fighting against FAANG because these companies are spending billions trying to capture as much of my students' attention as possible and I have to spend more time helping manage my students out of these distractions.

I'm actually starting to wonder if the free-rider problem exists because of FAANG creating addictive content and the media glorifying a certain lifestyle. If students were not exposed to these distractions, would they still be free-riding? I honestly don't think so and my next year's plan is to try and simulate this.
No, skepticalscience.com is a website created by a web dev cartoonist with absolutely no climatology background[1]. I'm also well aware that Greenland's ice sheet is a remnant of the Quaternary Glaciation[2]. What word would you prefer other than "receded" to say that the extent of the ice sheet was less in the 11th century than it was in the 9th or the 20th?

Also, in the opposite spirit of your opening sentence, let me advise you that "It really seems like you're just trolling" is a very weaselly way to insinuate bad faith, and you should try to do better. If you want to call me a liar or a fool just do it. I don't think you could support that accusation based on my use of sources like wikipedia because I am acting in good faith and a spirit of intellectual curiosity, but hey you do you.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptical_Science

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation
Seems similar to a japanese futon, though they are usually filled with cotton rather than wool.

Sleeping on a wool blanket seems dreadful in hot temperatures, though. Does it ever get to high 70s or more where you live?
Embedding in Go: Part 1 – structs in structs
>Firefox unseated IE because of how much better it was.

Nitpick, but Firefox never had the majority of the market or a bigger piece than IE. Firefox was on the way to reaching that but they peaked around 33% share before Chrome came along and ate everyone's lunch.
Those buying P5 and XBox Series X games will.
+1. It seems to sneak in on the weekends.
The development team might all agree to leave the company en masse, foto Firefox and start working on the Firefox fork.

In six months to one year the fork will be in advantage over the original Firefox, and the new management will be able to focus on Firefox fork development.
> This isn’t blind patriotism.

Maybe it's just ignorance then. Quality of life in Northern Europe is far better than it ever was in California, which in retrospect looks like a joke.
Google Calendar regularly breaks on Firefox. Switch to chrome? Nope not a bad deploy. Switch the user agent? Works fine.

Hard to say if incidents like that are intentional, passive aggressive, or accidental, but they happen pretty frequently.

Same with Youtube. Firebase console. GCP.
I think you saying it’s too much effort to replace beef is really just covering for you liking beef. Which is totally fine, but it’s really not much effort to replace beef out of your diet
Imagine a building is on fire and one side firemen are spraying water on it and on the other side someone is spraying gasoline on it.
This seems to me to be a parody of queer theory or the idea of socially-constructed gender from critical social justice theory. Those theories shouldn't be off limits from parody or criticism.
This is awesome! That selling peak two weeks ago is massive, makes you wonder. Do you have any idea what the most prominent tickers were back then?
The issue with this kind of reasoning is that without any kind of archeological proof to back your hypothesis what you end up with is informed guessing based more on ones knowledge and experience than on scientific facts.

For example, I could formulate a completely different hypothesis about how footwear appeared:

- doing any kind of activity on rough terrain while barefoot increases the risk of injury, like cuts or punctures

- any kind of wound could easily infect and lead to death

- the easiest would be to try and protect my feet wrapping something like leaves, animal skins, etc around my feet

- this is a good solution but this footwear isn't very resilient, hmm, maybe tree bark would work better, it's still flexible but should be more resilient.

- hmm, what else could I do that is better than tree bark, maybe some dried animal skin would be even better

- and so on...

Is this hypothesis better than yours? I don't know without proof, and the interesting part is that they could both easily be true in completely different contexts: different parts of the world, different cultures, different climatic conditions, etc.

So yeah deduction and induction can get you very far but when we're missing so many facts on which to base our hypothesis you can easily get very far in a very wrong direction. This is why I think archeology is fun.

EDIT:
The wikipedia page on footwear also contains a few lines that add another interesting dimension:

> Some ancient civilizations, such as Egypt and Greece however saw no practical need for footwear due to convenient climatic and landscape situations and used shoes primarily as ornaments and insignia of power.
https://www.salon.com/2011/04/19/scott_adams_sock_puppetry_s...

(Link courtesy of Pxtl¹)

This was nine years ago, though. If he hasn’t done anything comparable since, I think he ought to get some slack by now.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21667728
I've been to several DevOps conference, and I was particularly struck speaking with people in the audience saying such things as:

• "I work in DevOps managing a pipeline. I don't know how to program, but I was thinking of learning a language."

• "I write Python as a senior engineer and work closely with my company's devops systems. You write C? Wow, that's supposed to be really hardcore isn't it."

There clearly is more diversity in these lines of work than I would have guessed before attending.
Ad-hoc widgets can be equally easily created in React Native.
Hands on Windows Container Internals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_imaging#History

> The first digital image was produced in 1920, by the Bartlane cable picture transmission system. British inventors, Harry G. Bartholomew and Maynard D. McFarlane, developed this method. The process consisted of “a series of negatives on zinc plates that were exposed for varying lengths of time, thus producing varying densities,”. The Bartlane cable picture transmission system generated at both its transmitter and its receiver end a punched data card or tape that was recreated as an image.

> In 1957, Russell A. Kirsch produced a device that generated digital data that could be stored in a computer; this used a drum scanner and photomultiplier tube.

So Kirsch was a pioneer in creating a device that could store images in a computer. That is something he should be remembered for.

This "inventor of the pixel" thing is just weird, though. Pixels can clearly exist outside of computers, and did so before 1957. Not to mention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic#History .
The atmosphere can warm much faster than that, but even "very quick" melting would take forever, because it's hard-packed ice that's over a mile thick. At a melting rate of two meters per summer (which is a lot, that's the equivalent of melting ~800 inches of snow), it would take over a thousand years to get to the bottom.
Someone looks at a piece of "art" and says, "I could do that."

Sure, but could you convince someone to pay you $100k for it?