skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that would be worth doing, but more than the backward compat problem, the main complication I see would be in the syntax/grammar/macro expansion.

Like, say we wanted to make cxx or autocxx macros unsafe. We'd need to allow at item scope writing this:

mod foo {
unsafe { my_unsafe_macro!() }
}

and we'd "somehow" have to check that unsafe macros are only expanded within unsafe "scopes", rejecting the program otherwise (can't be a type error because we can't do type checking before macro expansion). Also, these unsafe scopes would need to export all the items, etc.

I don't know. Seems like a lot of contortion for something that could be solved with just a rename like other have proposed, e.g., unsafe_autocxx_include!(...);

Might be worth opening an internal threads about this. Maybe Centril could shed more like on how hard this would actually be.

Most (all?) macros that I regularly use are sound (the derives, println!, debug!, offset_of!, pin_mut!...). So it might also be worth looking into how common of a problem this is. I've seen soundness bugs in macros before (offset_of!), but these were always bugs. This is the first time I recall a macro that's unsound by design.
ADTPro[1] is a package for Apple II class machines that will bootstrap a diskless machine over cassette tape interface or serial port. If you have a disk but no usable media, it will let you image a boot disk.

[1] https://adtpro.com/
I'd like to mention the book "Missing Out: In Praise of the Unlived Life" by Adam Phillips which carries a similar sentiment. It might be worth checking out if anyone regularly feels anxiety or frustration about where they are in life when they could just as easily feel satisfaction instead.
Definitely makes you question it more. Does the paper not explain the contents of the MATLAB code? That's all that is usually needed for reproducibility. You should be able to get the same results no matter who writes the code to do what is explained in their methods.

Of course, I have no idea about the paper you're talking about and just want to say that reproducibility isn't dependent on releasing code. There could even be a case were it's better if someone reproduces a result without having been biased by someone else's code.
This is very possible.
America's First Regenerative Agriculture
I am the author. Please let me know if you have any questions.
I'm not seeing the problem with that picture...
> in about 3-5 years a lot of that knowledge will be outdated

Yup, and most of the points you mentioned will probably not be outdated for quite some while. Every package manager I'm aware of with lock files that are that old can still consume them today.
If you anticipate needing that image around in 4 years for a critical business case, you can either pull it once every 6 months from here on out, download the image and store it somewhere yourself, or make a fully reproducible Dockerfile for it so the image can be re-created later if it disappears from the registry.
Thanks dang! :-)
Airbnb Has Banned House Parties Indefinitely
Before making Yet Another Language, I'd like to see a good analysis of the options and trade-offs they offer: what does each design choice make easier and harder. There is probably no free lunch, but maybe we can find a better lunch by balancing things carefully.
Are there "kinds" that are not covered by the law and are more okay to have their rights abused?
Suppose someone two thousand years ago saw the plans for the Turing machine in the video. How might that have shaped history? Whether it was practical or not is not really the question, but rather how might it shape future technologies? Makes me think of da Vinci's notebook.
No, I meant they are part of the bulwark against countries like China/Russia taking over the world.
Sunlight could solve drinking water's biggest problem in 30 minutes
This is almost an argument for not publishing code. If you publish all the equations, then everybody has to write their own implementation from that.

Something like this is the norm in some more mathematical fields, where only the polished final version is published, as if done by pure thought. To build that, first you have to reproduce it, invariably by building your own code -- perhaps equally awful, but independent.
Always has been.

Whenever there's a public developer API for a service, there's a high chance you'll encounter a 'bot'.
Yup, cats will learn very quickly how to move while keeping the bell quiet
I think that's one side of the discussion, yes. But I think that it's impossible to force corporate citizenship without either

1. A voluntary international accord (that could be broken by any dissenting voices)

2. A single country setting the rules for corporate residency and enforcing them (i.e. the unilateral we don't need no diplomacy approach).

Instead I think the whole idea of primary residence for corporations is utterly unenforceable - I think what countries need to start doing is levying appropriate VAT taxes on added value to companies and possibly force all domestic activity to be executed by domestic labour only. I think, if we actually fixed the loopholes around international tax dodging, we'd be in a position where countries would be quite aware of how much value they have over a given company (i.e. Apple might derive 60% of their value from the US) and then use that proportionality to leverage political pressure on companies as needed.

And, just to clarify, this is essentially the road the CCP has taken and precisely why they seem to have such an outsized amount of control over companies - every country other than China is voluntarily declining to flex their muscles.
I have. Placing objects in an editor is obviously essential, I agree. I just expect to find code at the bottom driving it, loading the map etc, and it doesn't seem like any example projects or learning documentation for Unity is geared that way.
Basically I expect to follow code at the bottom until it loads some asset, which may create a bunch of objects, and register some scripts. Then I return to the code which can then get those objects if it wants.
The reason why it happens is somewhat irrelevant to my point. You feeling the need to justify why people do this actually just reinforces my point.

Tech is a means to an end, but whatever means you use, this issue right here is your single largest speed bump for this end goal and wrapping your goal up in shiny tech will not move that needle one tiny iota. That's just not how this works.
Not to mention IMGUI => UGUI => UIElements/UIToolkit, InputManager => Actions, Animation => Timeline, GameObject/Component => ECS/DOTS, ParticleSystem => VFXGraph, Legacy renderer => Scriptable Render pipeline, etc etc

edit: whoops didn't see you'd already mentioned VFX graph
Perhaps just a nitpick: software engineering runs the gamut from throwing together a GUI in a few hours, all the way up to avionics software where a bug could kill hundreds. There's no such thing as 'software engineering grade'.
Hmm, I might have used that, or at least something very similar. Don't know exactly why, but then, it was a while ago...
Leak AWS credentials onto a public repo and you’ll get a fast, and expensive, answer to that question.
I think it sometimes comes down to a matter of choice in working styles. Some people thrive on killing themselves at times. I've been there. I will still occasionally pull a late-nighter because I get in "the zone" and am actually enjoying the productivity and I still get the condescending comments about how if you planned properly, that wouldn't be necessary, but I think that some people just don't get that working like that can actually be very gratifying. I'm getting a bit old for doing it more than about once a quarter, though, whereas I used to do it a couple times a week.
I wonder why this zsh thing is such a huge change. Bash is just a chsh command away :)
I tracked down the source of the image and it seems to be here: https://c.m.163.com/news/a/EL1772BO05322C4C.html [1], dated july 26, 2019. If it's a photoshop, then it's a very long con.

[1] from https://www.jenniferzengblog.com/home/2020/8/5/bytedance-hea..., which also has archive links for the page in question and additional circumstantial evidence.
At the risk of just mirroring points which have already been made:

> you understand that the links in your post are the exact worry people have when it comes to releasing code: people claiming that their non-software engineering grade code invalidates the results of their study.

It's profoundly unscientific to suggest that researchers should be given the choice to withhold details of their experiments that they fear will not withstand peer review. That's much of the point of scientific publication.

Researchers who are too ashamed of their code to submit it for publication, should be denied the opportunity to publish. If that's the state of their code, their results aren't publishable. Unpublishable garbage in, unpublishable garbage out. Simple enough. Journals just shouldn't permit that kind of sloppiness. Neither should scientists be permitted to take steps to artificially make it difficult to reproduce (in some weak sense) an experiment. (Independently re-running code whose correctness is suspect, obviously isn't as good as comparing against a fully independent reimplementation, but it still counts for something.)

If a mathematician tried to publish the conclusion of a proof but refused to show the derivation, they'd be laughed out of the room. Why should we hold software-based experiments to such a pitifully low standard by comparison?

It's not as if this is a minor problem. Software bugs really can result in incorrect figures being published. In the case of C and C++ code in particular, a seemingly minor issue can result in undefined behaviour, meaning the output of the program is entirely unconstrained, with no assurance that the output will resemble what the programmer expects. This isn't just theoretical. Bizarre behaviour really can happen on modern systems, when undefined behaviour is present.

A computer scientist once told me a story of some students he was supervising. The students had built some kind of physics simulation engine. They seemed pretty confident in its correctness, but in truth it hadn't been given any kind of proper testing, it merely looked about right to them. The supervisor had a suggestion: Rotate the simulated world by 19 degrees about the Y axis, run the simulation again, and compare the results. They did so. Their program showed totally different results. Oh dear.

Needless to say, not all scientific code can so easily be shown to be incorrect. All the more reason to subject it to peer review.

> I'm an accelerator physicist and I wouldn't want my code to end up on acceleratorskeptics.com with people that don't understand the material making low effort critiques of minor technical points.

Why would you care? Science is about advancing the frontier of knowledge, not about avoiding invalid criticism from online communities of unqualified fools.

I sincerely hope vaccine researchers don't make publication decisions based on this sort of fear.
This happens all the time when planning social events, e.g. "Are you busy tomorrow?" instead of "Do you want to go watch a movie tomorrow?"
China blocked Facebook following the deadly 2009 Ürümqi terrorist attacks because Facebook was negligently allowing ETIM-backed groups to spread disinformation and hatred via their platform. Facebook subsequently refused to filter such content and the ban continues to this day.

Control over the Xinjiang/Uyghur narrative is paramount in the "New Cold War" declared against China by Pompeo this July, so Facebook's actions are not surprising.
that is linked at the bottom of the page
I posted a list of several bans up thread.
It looks like both of the authors are academics with no actual experience in intelligence work. Considering how much intelligence work is classified and non-public, their conclusion sounds like the equivalent of claiming that there is no proof IT people are necessary because your computer works.
Seems like the crush of schools starting this morning was related to this.

I guess Eternal September came early to Zoom this year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
Nice fix and nice write-up of the fix. A Canadian herough.
The problem I have is I tend to go to the opposite extreme. In anticipation of any question that someone may raise about the issue I'm asking about, I tend to give a lot of background (most of it probably irrelevant) and other details. No one wants to have to read through my whole life story, just to get to the meat of my query an answer it.
The JavaScript world changes so fast that no one is ever going to be very experienced in the the they are using. I imagine that is partially to blame for all the crap we see in the front end.
Thank you, but so this doesn't answer my original question: how does Uber then continue to exist, given all the news I see seems to suggest that those fixed costs you're describing are leading to Uber not actually being profitable.
Food business is laborious, hard work that needs to be done at undesirable times (when others are out enjoying themselves). It’s hard enough to find quality workers via humans, I find it hilarious that one would be able to do it via software.

It’s also a high liability business, especially when dealing with animal products.

Not to mention prepared food is barely affordable for the vast majority even with the tiny margins that exist today, so the only people who would be able to afford such an on demand personalized chef service surely could just afford their own chef?
Pfff. Does my 3 month old code still run? Uh, nope. And I don't remember what it was supposed to do!
Actually, I was making good headway with this last attempt. I just burned out on programming (generally), not specific to the text. And since I don't want to program right now, there's no point in trying to progress through the book. An earlier attempt failed entirely because of that (reading and not doing), other times I stalled out because I just didn't understand it.

Generally I've found more advanced material requires a lot of "steeping" in my mind before it clicks. I was literally in my 4th year of college before Calculus finally actually clicked in my brain, this book seems to have the same issue. My first couple times I just didn't understand what I was reading, and I put it down (for many years actually, time flies). When I picked it up this time I honestly don't know what my issue was with comprehending it before. In the intervening years I did a much deeper dive into using Common Lisp as my hobby language, and I think that's helped a lot. What I'm reading connects better with the practice I've had in using a Lisp. Similar to calculus, I had spent a couple years applying it (not just studying it) and when I went back and reexamined some basic materials everything just fell into place in my mind.
Before listing those two anecdotes, did you check that there's not also a large amount of similar incidents victimizing whites? And then compared the amounts? Or did you simply see it on the news, and assumed it was representative of a larger trend, just like someone watching Fox would assume blacks are more likely to be criminal, because (I'm assuming) the crimes Fox chooses to report on feature black perpetrators?

Wouldn't it be better to rely on statistics, rather than cherry-picked anecdotes? For example, the number killed by police, normalized to some difficult to fudge measure of crime incidence, such as the homicide rate?

How do those two examples measure up against the 406 whites and 259 blacks killed by police in 2019 [1]?

[1] https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends
The overwhelming probability is that none of us will see AGI in the span of our lives. The economic disruption is another thing - that can happen without AGI.
> their job is not coding

But it often is. For most non-CS papers (mostly biosciences) I've read, there are specific authors whose contribution to a large degree was mainly "coding".
Could you describe how you got rid of tearing?

It's an issue I've wanted to get rid of for a while now.
COPY CON FILE.TXT is a "text editor" that got me by a number of times.

It takes text input from the terminal quite literally. No backspacing, no editing. You'll just get control characters in the resulting file.

Type it right the first time or start over. Brutal.

But it works from a disk that has only IO.SYS, MSDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM.
It's not - they didn't deprecate the 'built in' render pipeline, and said they don't plan to until the new one has feature parity.
They have odd marketing for their new features - where they want developers to use them so they call them production ready - but they do that so they can get feedback and continue to fix them
The former, mainly. I'm thinking big companies like TSMC, Asus, etc, that likely have presence and operations in both.
I wholeheartedly agree with your last paragraph.

My experience is that I have yet to work with a company where this level of failure-proofing makes financial sense. Purchasing more hardware than needed is relatively cheap for most medium-sized companies, and it provides a fair level of protection against outlier accidents.

I'm aware that many people using cloud also ascribe to the 100% uptime mentality, but for most companies that is simply not needed. I mean even for Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, I wonder if 2 hours of unexpected downtime per year would really be enough to make anyone cancel their service. I myself at least have spent much more time than that trying to get HDCP graphics cards drivers, HDMI cables, and the stars to align so that the Netflix app will work with 4K HDR playback on my TV.

So yes, (your 2nd paragraph) I would knowingly accept that there are critical bottlenecks that are unknown and that could be triggered by severe traffic spikes. And most of my customers would be happy to accept that risk in exchange for the cost savings of not proactively fixing the issue.

And if you look at the overall state of software, it looks like pretty much every company is happy to trade reliability/resilience for cost savings these days. That's why I applaud the efforts in the original article, but the pragmatic way seems to be to just skip the whole thing.
Before I moved to a Zettelkasten style of "second brain", I used to dump interesting things I've done or learned into my personal wiki page at work. Stuff like "awk that extracts this from that" or "3 different ways of doing X in Puppet and Ansible".

The problems I had with that was that it was located at work, so I couldn't access it easily off-line. Nor could I search and location a particular nugget of information particularly quickly. It was also separate from my daily journal.

In my current setup, my "3 different ways of doing X in Puppet and Ansible" has links to an Ansible page, a Puppet page, and more. Each of those Ansible and Puppet pages have a list of backlinks, so I now have a list of all the tickets that used Puppet or Ansible, and all the daily notes that involved those tickets. So I can spider through my second brain fairly quickly without searching. Which doesn't sound that important but if you don't know quite what you are looking for, then you can remind yourself by walking through the stuff associated with it.

Not the greatest example, sorry. But my "second brain" is still evolving and getting more useful. I'm excited to see what researchers come up with in this problem space!
(The Reply-To of the Dispatches goes to my inbox!)

Nice! Both 1 and 2 should provide the security properties. Now I do wonder how the WebAuthn spec reflects the ecosystem of tokens compatible with OpenSSH. Honestly, I don't even know if OpenSSH implements WebAuthn or there's a different umbrella spec?
Perhaps you could leverage the power of the platform to have people come to you?
>Flexbox won't work because you don't have a fixed height

Are you saying the issue is that flexbox will force everything to have the same height? I am relatively sure that `flex: 0 0 fit-content;` on the children and `flex-wrap: wrap; flex-direction: column;` on the parent will do what you want
Kodable is hiring a Game Designer to help us teach millions of kids to code
This is a seriously nutty belief, that you claim to have. This year the increase in our military spending was bigger than Russia's entire military spending. We could cut our military budget in half and still dwarf China's.
Microsoft backs Epic in court filing
Physicians might know. Quacks don’t. If you simply google for vitamin D, you find so many quack websites as the top result. So your idea of keeping it a supplement is a bit questionable, if it is actually medication and is easily dismissed as harmless by quacks.
Square-footage-cram is a lot like feature-cram in software. We don't like to do it, but it's unfortunately how we have to market to unsophisticated "checkbox buyers" of product.

I would personally love a half-sized well-designed home with character and a unique architecture that uses its area well. But, you have to pay an arm an a leg for it. Unfortunately the budget market caters to buyers who limit their home criteria to "price per square foot". So instead we get giant borg cube houses built right up to the lot line.
It's up to them! They are (hopefully) independent of the State Department and can make their own choices. The basketball community in China is larger than that of America.
Platforms let in more misinformation than they allow corrections.

Reply to multiple misinformed threads with the same link to corrections and Reddit will rate limit you or Twitter will hide your tweets as spam.
If you (i.e. anyone) really wants to be helpful about things like this, email us at hn@ycombinator.com. Downweighting off-topic subthreads that get upvoted to the top is one of the best interventions we can do for discussion quality. We do that whenever we see them, but we don't see them all.

There are a couple of users who email us regularly when they see things like that. This is one of the highest-leverage contributions anybody can make to HN, so we'd certainly appreciate hearing from more such users. Actually I only found out about this subthread because of such an email.

Supercilious complaints, on the other hand, just make the thread even worse. Please don't do that. The thing where some HN commenters use HN to posture over the rest of HN is tedious, and in poor taste. Let's just work together to make it better, to the extent possible.
If you jump on the waiting list you'll be first to know when Songwhip Pro is available for beta access :)

https://songwhip.com/pro
This is exactly it. I was able to see it because I deal with this every day. I am not more holistic than other doctors; I just know how to look at calcium and Vitamin D levels.
Any unofficial details on the business requirements Shopify looks for before approving apps? I'm working on an app and would like to avoid being blindsided.
Politics provides value and if you don't recognize that you can't begin to try and 'solve' for it.
> the full anti-covid benefits

The alleged anti-covid benefits.

There's been no causal relation established so far.
https://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi

India is no benchmark. There are far worse countries, but if someone cites India's actions as an example, it falls flat.
Sure. I’m not saying you’re a bad person or anything. It’s just that having a productive conversation requires assuming a baseline of knowledge on the topic, so not all discussions on the 1619 project can be expected to provide citations for basic facts like “the project aims to reframe history” or “they’re not claiming a position of academic neutrality”.
Mmmh, so it seems one would be stuck on win 8.0 (for 64bit) with an original implementation of amd64. Could probably still run a lot of new software.
I, too, share this struggle.