skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why use drones in this missle defense system your describing? Drones are incredibly slow and missiles are INCREDIBLY fast. If you have the trajectory of the missile enough to put some sort of drone or hard object on it, why not just shoot it. That's what the phalanx missile defense system does.
Isn’t this true for everything? If anything is normal, which is most of the times, it is not worth posting as it is common and won’t generate the buzz. So, only the extremes get posted and make everyone feel either good or bad and not just content. Maybe there needs to be a place where people can just post normal everyday stuff that speaks to everyone and neither provokes good nor bad feelings - just a feeling of content.
No that’s only the case if you mount the Docker socket into the container, which is not what Docker-in-Docker is.
I would also place as a requirement that the code be comprehensible to someone familiar with the domain - .i.e. a "peer".
You don't think parents make decisions based on what they believed to be in their child's best interest?
This comment is the top Google result for "stack overflow we are less than three people who code". It's not clear to me what you mean.
>>the argument about the death of the dogfight, or that there is no need for within visual range engagements anymore is a tired one. There was a pretty popular movie in the ‘80s about that very argument, so I am not going to rehash it here.

Regardless of the actual merits of whether dogfights are a thing any more, I feel like "because Top Gun" is not exactly a sound argument.
Tech Culture at S.E.A (Indonesia) Unicorn (Gojek,Grab,OVO etc.)
I found tech startups in SEA are slow on delivering new feature/value to there end customer. Tech Team specially at Green Colour companies are too focused on poker planning and counting jira points that they loose focus on actual business deliverables.
> You can learn so much going over basic Unity tutorials on Youtube and disassembling Unity games on Steam.

Well, that escalated quickly.
I can't wait to see more progress with p2p matrix. I hope there will be one flavor that will allow privacy/anonymity.

I mean I see the advantages of p2p for a more resilient network. Which is great when the internet is shut down but I also hope there will be some way to protect the people's identities.
The fact that there are still 3 main BSDs being developed in parallel seems odd to me. I imagine that they could accomplish much more if all that effort was focused on a single OS.
That’s an amazing viewpoint. Thanks for sharing. It inspired me to change my mindset.
This is the future of containers:

https://guix.gnu.org/

https://nixos.org/

You can build a Docker-compatible image from a Guix or Nix package. You never have to use Docker or Docker Hub.

The limitation of Docker is that the nice semi-reproducible sandbox you get exists on top of an operating system that was not designed for it, resulting in giant blobs to get it to work. It's inefficient and a band-aid stopgap until we get to the future where the operating system is a pure function (which can be versioned in a tree, diffed, reverted, etc. just like git). If you used NixOS, you wouldn't need Docker. Sure, it's available and you can use it, but you wouldn't need to.
Is an elevator an autonomous vehicle?
What it demonstrates is that people have already made up their mind on the topic and aren't genuinely interested in new perspectives. This helps explains the inflammatory nature of Internet debates in general.
There is nothing wrong with eugenics for Christ’s sake. People have such a knee jerk reaction to eugenics because of how it was used by Nazis, but before that the field had many noble goals.

If we provide the ability for people to select partners with some precision about what genes they carry and what might be passed to their offspring, we can ultimately create a world with stronger, smarter and healthier humans, and perhaps eliminate some genetic diseases along the way. Humans basically already practice eugenics anyway because of social structures, it’s just very inefficient.
At 34 I transitioned from a product manager to a deep learning researcher. No previous coding experience, and most of the math I learned in college (as a mechanical engineer) was long forgotten. I went the phd route, so it took me ~6 years, but with your background it would probably be faster. I really enjoyed my grad school experience, and I'm enjoying my current role.
Epic vs. Apple: Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion for TRO [pdf]
They have rather different goals.
I think you’re right and I wish they would have just said that.

It’s a good point.
Writing Node.js Programs with Streams Like a Pro
Looks pretty cool. Any other information on how this may be different to Notion?
> They only explode if they recognize you.

I’d go back and check with product on the requirements for that one. Sounds like the opposite of what I’d want.
From: Latest, an opinionated Dockerfile linter
What should I do if I know i have a low IQ?
Hacking the Tesla Model 3 – Security Overview
why KRUSTY wasn't launch to the space if test were successful?
I mean as an iOS developer I hope Apple is banning developers who steal/copy apps like in this case. Obviously they terminated the wrong dev, but they also fixed theor mistake quickly.
It doesn't even matter if they're good at it. Anyone who is even trying to "win" at twitter is just going to actively make your feed worse. It's not just that they spam you with low-value tweets, but also that following them helps ensure that you land in that awful filter bubble of people who see twitter as a competition.
Face+Mask+Market+To+Surpass+$31.83B+By+2027
Thank you for asking this question! The most relevant systems to Shard Manager (SM) are Google Slicer (GS), Azure Service Fabric (https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3190508.3190546), and open-source Apache Helix (helix.apache.org). Previously, we had in-person discussions with the developers of these systems based on public information.

SM started in 2011. To our knowledge, SM probably predated the other systems, but we were so excited in 2016 when noticing the publication of the GS paper. We learned a lot from that paper about both the similarity and difference, which will be further explained below. With SM’s hundreds of diverse applications running on hundreds of thousands of servers, we speculate that SM might be the largest deployment in the industry according to published numbers.

One advantage of GS is that it does not divide the key space into fixed “shards” ahead of time. In other words, the “shards” are transparent to applications. Internally, GS can dynamically merge or split “shards” and move “shards” around to balance the load as needed. This is more flexible than SM’s approach, which divides the key space into fixed shards. SM can move shards around to balance the load, but currently does not merge or split shards.

On the other hand, to enable shard merge or split, GS hashes application keys into its internal 64-bit random key space, which is then internally divided into “shards”. This approach means that it is hard to support certain constraints, e.g., preference for key locality, which are important for some of our user-facing global applications. In addition, to our knowledge, SM supports a wider range of load-balancing constraints by leveraging a generic constraint solver, which allows us to more easily introduce new constraints or change the load balancing algorithm.

Facebook infrastructure takes a layered but fully integrated approach, which enables SM, as one layer of an integrated stack, to offer more out-of-the-box functionalities. For example, SM is integrated with our cluster management system called Twine via TaskControl; see details in https://engineering.fb.com/data-center-engineering/twine/. This allows SM to better manage shard availability in the face of planned and unplanned infra churns, including container rolling upgrades, maintenance operations, and hardware failures.

There are certainly more similarities or differences among SM, GS, Azure Service Fabric, and Apache Helix, beyond what we can describe here. We hope to publish a paper in the future to dive more deeply into these topics.
Lognormal Priorities
> Micro quiz questions, one up on ‘are you human’ to ‘prove you read one key thing’

I have gotten good results from including these in my expository writing. Having the reader stop and go through actively using the material at even a basic level seems to really help them integrate and retain it. They're multiple choice questions embedded throughout the text.

There's no reason you can't force everyone to correctly answer them before being able to comment. That being said, writing good incremental questions like this is actually quite a bit of work.
What's interesting to me - I thought I was a pretty big fan of Top Gun, but now I'm not so sure.

I did not pick up there is an argument about whether or not dog fighting still was needed.

The only "argument" I recall was the recap of how pilot deaths increased after training stopped, and decreased after training started. But it was a one off history lesson as part of the Top Gun school intro.

But the rest or the movie seemed very clearly - yes, the US needs dog fighting to defend its interests across the globe. There seemed to be absolutely no challenging of that idea within Top Gun.
This seems very interesting. After a quick play I cannot find anything similar to 'less' which I use very frequently. Is there a nushell equivalent?
He collected classic Chevys. She collected Ginny dolls. The fires incinerated
Thank you for pointing us to Gizzard. Based on our understanding of Gizzard’s blog, we would like to highlight the key differences as follows.

The key advantage of Gizzard is that it divides the data into key ranges and treats it as a shard. If a shard is too hot, it can dynamically adjust the size of the range. Gizzard also acts as a traffic routing layer that sends requests to the right server and coordinates data replication.

Shard Manager (SM) uses fixed-size shards and uses shard migration to reduce load on hot servers. Unlike Gizzard, SM focuses on being a control plane service and client traffic does not flow through SM. That functionality is delegated to Facebook’s separate traffic routing framework. SM supports more generic sharding applications and uses add/drop shard protocol to coordinate state migration. Gizzard focuses on data store applications and requires write operations to be idempotent and commutative in order to support state migration.
The fact that 7.6 billion people live in parallel seems odd to me. I imagine humanity could achieve a lot more if every aspect of human identity was put into one individual.
Mastering Machine Learning? The best book for ML in a while
I get them wanting to kill the free plan, and adding storage limits, but adding storage limits AND doubling the price.
That's disappointing.
Huh? Mellanox (now part of Nvidia) has a massive data center presence, and it's growing their NICs are leaps and bounds above Intel's.
> Doesn't that qualify as some sort of fraud or false advertising?

Fraud typically requires some sort of mens rea. It sounds to me like Bridgefy is just really bad as making secure applications.

> If not, I wonder if we need further regulation to protect the public from developers that are either incompetent or straight malicious.

There is a long history of people trying to create liability for software bugs. It was a bad idea then and it's still a bad idea today.
First, understand that IQ tests can be biased and can shaft minorities. Second, they are tools and are only as good as the person making use of them.

Third, eat right, exercise, live right, etc. Performance is impacted by health and even supposedly high IQ people will perform worse if they are sick, short of sleep, etc.

IQ isn't a useless concept, but I'm somewhat well versed in the history of IQ tests, etc, and it's got a lot of issues with it.
Any "top nn%" rule asks for another form of toxic gaming of the system.

At least back around the turn of the century, in Arizona, the state universities gave a full tuition waiver for the top 25 or 33% of the graduating class. (Not sure if they still do) This seems at its face to be a very inclusive goal-- you'd make the program accessible to students regardless of finances.

But some schools were so aggressive on the AP and other 'weighted' programmes (A=5.0, B=4.0, etc.), that the valedictorian would have something like a 4.6 GPA, and even a standard 4.0 might not clear the top 25%. It would not be enough just to be an excellent student, you had to explicitly load up on weighted courses-- and of course, there were no weighted fine arts or vocational courses.

This leads to a bunch of toxic outcomes. A straight A student would rank below someone with an A/B record, because she chose the right courses to take. There was pressure to choose the courses which bumped the GPA as opposed to the ones which fit interests or potential commercial utility, which I suspect would lead to resource starvation and classes cancelled due to undersubscription.
The problem is people want their internet points. If you take the time to read, and then comment, your comment won't get enough visibility on all social media platforms, especially if dozens or hundreds of other comments quickly begin appearing. You have to 'show up early' to get visibility. Optimizing for that dopamine hit, users choose to maximize points over thoughtful discussion.
Thanks so much for bringing this to my attention. I took a quick look at the litigation docket for this case, which was consolidated with actions against a number of other defendants too. This was in the Eastern District of Texas, considered to be plaintiff friendly, which I’m quite familiar with.

The defendants used the USPTO’s relatively new (at that time) Inter Partes Review (IPR) procedure in order to try to invalidate the claims (alleged to be infringed) before the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). When the IPR was filed, as is customary, they requested a stay (temporary stop) of the court proceedings, in order to try the IPR before the PTAB. The strategy worked, because the claims alleged to be infringed were invalidated by the USPTO’s PTAB, but 2 claims (claims 21, 22) apparently survived the IPR. After the IPR, the case was continued in Texas, again as is customary.

Unfortunately for Uniloc and fortunately for the defendants, Uniloc hadn’t alleged infringement of these claims, so it tried to do so after the IPR. The court found this was too late, and dismissed with prejudice.
It does not look like Uniloc got any money from Laminar Research or a number of these other defendants.
However, I agree that it was apparently a waste of time for the parties involved, and likely cost Laminar some real legal fees.

The whole thing seems irrational to me because patent troll cases like this should settle early.

I will have to provide some guidelines here for startups dealing with patent trolls. That’s if you and others on HN are okay with it, i.e., to educate versus being promotional.
Now that AI assist is being openly discussed in the wider anglophone press, I wonder if we'll see a diminution in "unsafe unprofessional" air intercepts?

(I don't know what the search terms would be in chinese[1], but "искусственный интеллект су-35" gets plenty of older —at least by HN standards— hits.)

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-28905504 suggests china has bought while they learn to build. Someone who knows more chinese than I might wish to try "人工智能 苏35".
I may be off the mark but my immediate gut reaction to this question is that distribution/discovery is partly why. On desktop, web apps are more easily distributed, especially back in the Windows era. Downloading and installing a windows program was a lot of effort to casual users. But you send someone a link, or they click around the web, and they're in the web app immediately. On mobile, the app/play store makes distribution and discovery arguably even easier. Similarly after that, the macOS app store appears to drive a resurgence in desktop apps (for the Mac at least).
Interesting. Also, small world: One of the authors (Vasco) taught me computability at the University of Cape Town.

What I find quite interesting to think about is how the complexity (as a function of accuracy) of a “taken-for-granted” computational process works in the context of another process. For example, the eigensystem of its adjacency matrix provides powerful understanding of a graph — but how much accuracy do you need in order to trust that understanding? If you need arbitrary precision because of the pathological features of a particular family of graph (expander graphs, say), and the scaling of the needed precision links directly to aspects of that graph pathology, this is really telling you that the eigenvector computation is not the most natural “computation basis” to approach this phenomenon — and some explicitly discrete algorithm would make this latent complexity relationship manifest. Probably individual instances of this kind of phenomena are well known to those who study the relevant structures, but I’m not sure if the general phenomena is described or modeled anywhere.

In some weird sense you can link this to a kind of “computational curvature” — ala some of Wolfram’s metamathematical musings. If one’s prior is to distrust continuous mathematics and see only discrete computational processes as “real”, it’s exactly the kind of phenomena one will be on the lookout for. Anyway, the curvature analogy is that as you attempt to maintain a particular computational basis for computing a phenomena of interest as its complexity scales, other typically-uncorrelated complexity requirements that are normally treated as constants will explode. Needs to be made more concrete though.
Very well said, and insightful, truly.
The ideal social network in my opinion is instant messaging. Its the only major platform which hasn't been infested with algorithms, marketing, "influencers" and all the other crap. Its just you and close contacts. The downside is you won't see random updates from people you don't interact with regularly but honestly its not the biggest loss.
> You can choose a username, instead of a phone number

Unless this has changed recently -- and I can't find any indication that it has -- this is not true. You can choose a username in addition to a phone number, but you must have a phone number. Your username is effectively an alias for your number; your account is tied to the number, not the username.
Zoom just did it better.

Using zoom was frictionless, specially pre-Corona Times.

- Keyboard shortcuts for most common tasks (new meeting, copy meeting id)

- Just send a link to invite someone to a meeting (no need to wait for the "e-mail" to arrive, or to download an ics attachment with the meeting details).

- Just click on the link to join a meeting

- Just click share to share screen (no more "can you make me the presenter" conversations)

- Super easy way of asking remote control (no "click to take remote control" message)

- Easy to use audio testing feature

- Meeting ID on top of every meeting so it was easy to see and share (this was been deprecated though, after someone from the Uk gov't published their meeting id on social media)

- Added everyone on your domain name as a contact (this was disabled as a default setting after this happened with an European ISP e-mail addresses)

While competing solutions still required meeting id, meeting password, typing your name and e-mail, "taking the presenter role" before screen sharing, downloading a temporary executable file, showed weird gray boxes during screen sharing.

Other nice features where; Multiplatform Win/Mac/Linux/Browser based, Android, iOS, lots of dial-in phone numbers, even in my third world country (!), also audio/video quality was more stable even with our third world internet.

Did I also mention their executable clients where super responsive.
That would be impossible to enforce or prove. Bitcoin may not be anonymous but it is pseudonymous. The government could make a case that you own this or that public key hash, but that can be litigated till kingdom come since they have no physical evidence. This is assuming our standards of jurisprudence as we know it would still exist in the future where the government attempts to seize coins. I suppose the government could always torture you. Imagine a world where the government tortures citizens to extract Bitcoin because they are forced into a corner by the abandonment of inflationary currency and they have to resort to actually "earning" money. That seems a bit extreme though (just to collect taxes) even for warlord countries let alone the USA. Which is why it wouldn't happen--there wouldn't be a government at all in that scenario, it would just disappear, and humanity would finally be free as it once was.
I like the idea, but how is that different from a personal website/blog with private access?
Not exactly, but pretty close: "it's very telling when (nearly always white) officers leap to unnecessarily violent tactics on (nearly always Black) victims"

You got that distorted perspective from the media bias.

It's just not that way. Some statistics even point the other way.
It looks like OpenZFS still has xattr support which is the one Illumos ZFS feature I always wanted on my FreeBSD systems. Hype! :D
“Originally, removing the snow was just to be able to bring people and supplies to the Tateyama Kokusai Hotel,” says Tanikawa, “but then we realized that we have something fairly exceptional, and why not bring people to see the walls.”

Got to love the idea of taking a huge, but cool, expense and turning it into an attraction.
Ive never met a single one. I feel completely insulated from the top strata of society that looks down on me because of it - it’s really depressing what going to a state school has done to me.
This also goes the other way. Someone who people think of as a thought leader or a science communicator says something that seems reasonable, but is not actually based on any science gets amplified and soon if you even dare to ask for evidence you are painted as "the enemy" and "russian bot" for daring to think on your own and actually request papers on the matter.

Then people will start linking you papers that are only tangentially related to the question at hand and get offended when you actually go and read the paper and point out that the paper has (almost) nothing to do with the actual question at hand.
As mentioned in the article, firefox also limits what you can actually do with the visited selector so there is no way you can use css to change something which is detectable with js so the comments hidden thing won't work.
My main issue with it is that the movie is over 30 years old and the argument in the movie is based on data from a conflict that began 55 years ago.

Maybe I'm completely wrong (I'm not a pilot and have no military knowledge), but I feel like things have moved on since then in terms of both the technology and the types of wars fought.

Maybe someone more knowledgable than me can answer... when was the last time a US combat aircraft engaged in a real dogfight?
I know, i'm doing it. I was saying I would love for a list of tweaks of that nature. Things I don't know about that I could do to improve performance
OP you might be interested in the analytic philosophy of Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, etc. Part of the idea was that if you could reduce statements in philosophy to a type of formal logic, you could solve all these long standing questions just like solving a mathematical expression. Spoiler alert: the whole thing falls apart because of the way language is actually used, and because of Gödel’s incompleteness theorem.
I think CSS would benefit from having an opt-in system for sane defaults. You can’t do a real project without a reset stylesheet of some sort, but why? They should define CSS4 and provide a script type=module style method for telling the browser to use it.
While Intel delays, TSMC full speed ahead with 3nm
Which can be abused in fun ways! https://twitter.com/yafd/status/1294719274657787904