skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Duplicating the core 80% of Asana's features as a one-off product wouldn't be extraordinarily difficult

Not to mention that they didn't have the advantage of duplicating features. Developing an application from scratch requires significant experimentation, false starts, deprecated features, associated tech debt, reinvention, etc.

Just because you can drive across the US in four days, it doesn't mean the first explorers to make the journey were lazy.
What is stopping from using existing remote pilot drone technology and using it for dog fights and other missions that fighter pilots do?
Thanks. Agreed.
For all we know this kind of AI is much more advanced than we think, even up to AGI. All that needs to be true is that the AI has brain implanted us to make it look like nothing is happening.
>you get to see the TRUE version of the people who post

It is a great idea, no doubt, given how tiny is a step from free speech to public outrage with personal consequences today. Real values are important, as are discussions on these. But sadly you get to see true version of not all people, but mostly people who constitute a core mindset of those who prefer to be anonymous. And that attracts a much more specific population and mood than in general.

Maybe you're sure you know what you're doing, and I wish vigyaa good luck not turning into a version of altchan, dickroulette and many other sites with initially nice ideas of usage.
Simple Google search returns this: "TikTok May Lose Up To $6 Billion As Result Of India Ban"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2020/07/04/tiktok-lo...
How to Deliver Meaningful Software
> we need those people as much or more than we need engineers

I don't know about "more than". Eloquent yappers who can't code are a dime a dozen, and largely fungible. Jaron IS an engineer. And also an artist, and a musician.

Scientific American invited him to illustrate the cover of their 1984 issue on Computer Software, showing a visual music program.

>Jaron designed the musical visual program (which Scott Kim cited in his thesis) on the cover of the September 1984 Scientific American on Computer Software (a wonderful issue, with many articles about programming languages and software by some amazing people).

https://www.scientificamerican.com/magazine/sa/1984/09-01/

For more concrete examples of the kind of software development and visual programming and hardware research and development that Jaron has done, see my post below with all the links:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24266722
Why does everybody think going to the Ivyies is such a good thing? I suspect they are now a net loss for all but the uppermost tier.

If you want to do research as an undergrad, the big name schools are a detriment. They have plenty of good grad students. Pick a university outside the top 20 but still top 50 (still quite a good university) and be an amazing undergrad and you'll have professors fawning over you to do research for them. You'll have multiple publications and recommendations coming out the wazoo as you head into grad school.

If you're a mediocre student at an Ivy, this isn't going to open that many doors as most people are better or better connected than you. Dubya didn't get where he was due to Yale; he got where he was because he was a Bush.

I don't get this obsession with the Ivies unless you're on very particular tracks.
SBook Is Simson Garfinkel's Address Book
I think it’s a crazy story. Which doctor on earth would prescribe a 5000 IU vitamin D dosage daily without a specific treatment length? Because the recommended dosage is just 400 IU daily and almost all medical sites warn about high dosage above 4000 IU Vitamin D daily, I think the doctor who prescribed a 5000 IU daily dosage without a specific treatment length was plainly irresponsible or the patient was not followed the doctor's instruction correctly, which is equally bad and irresponsible for one’s health.
Yeah, was a bit too much. Edited.
A fully loaded F-22 in air-to-air role has eight missiles.

No one's using tactical nukes against a drone swarm.
My Tetris, first "serious" game I made, written in 1996, can play just as well in DosBox.
No, I meant 10. The same way you might say that the McLaren F1 is the pinnacle of car engineering, despite higher performing cars being subsequently released.

The delta between what you could get between Solaris 10 and
most anything else at the time (free or otherwise) was very impressive. Zones/containers had little equal (maybe FreeBSD jails, but so much nicer to manage), ZFS made me almost cry that I’d never have to deal with veritas again, and DTrace allowed safe, live debugging whenever I felt like it. I’d add SMF there somewhere if it wasn’t configured via XML.

Sure, IPS is technically superior to apt or yum (well, anything is better than yum), but it’s not ground breaking better than what you have elsewhere. 11’s security is indeed improved as they took what was already done of crossbow, and implemented it, then cancelled the rest.

I was using hyperbole, but the general feeling to those of us that were customers was of a large cutback in work. And that was before oracle jacked up the prices.

I miss Solaris, but there is no reason I would recommend it to anybody today, even if you had to manage your own hardware and not be on a major cloud vendor.
Take a look at the links.

Apple has done a lot of good for users and has amazing products, and they have yet to annoy me as much as Microsoft did and Google do, so I will continue to be a user and a developer for their platforms.
It certainly seems like an interesting and somewhat practical idea, assuming that it is indeed impossible to counterfeit. How does one go about turning this back into gold? Will burning it work?
They're trying to fix that with the Missile Truck concept using a drone or something like the B-1.
I wouldn't argue for it, but I would be extremely reluctant to argue against the assertion that the state of the social 'sciences' today is about the same as it was in the Dark Ages. To the extent that any "good science" gets done in the social 'sciences', it is entirely in spite of the entire (social-'science'-specific) underlying foundation thereof. If your results aren't reproducible with (the overwhelming majority of[0]) other samples collected based on the same criteria, your results aren't.

0: specifically, for results claiming a 95% confidence level (p<0.05), if nineteen replications are attempted, you should encounter a replication failure exactly once. I would accept perhaps four or five out of nineteen (or one out of two or three) under the reasoning that the law of large numbers hasn't kicked in yet, but anything with zero successful replications is not science, it's evidence (in this, against the entire field of study).
So proponents of hundreds of cheap drones theory tend to forget that kinetic energy is 1/2mv^2. So Energy required to catch up with a fighter in increases with square of velocity and modern fighters can all supercruise. That energy has to be stored on the drone to be expended which increases mass which increases energy require8d (linearly) and so on. If you need to add loiter time and manoeuvrability, again you need more energy and so mass.

So just like the famous rocket equation, you'll find that the design space narrows down to drones that are no longer cheap or casually expendable - essentially supersonic capable cruise missiles with loiter times
that tend to cost millions of dollars a piece. Certainly cheaper than manned aircraft but not something that can be used in the hundreds casually per engagement.

The other option is of course what's done today - strapping a relatively cheaper air to air missile to an even more expensive but fast and survivable aircraft which brings it to the war zone and gives it kinetic energy at launch.
I'd be really curious to see numbers on the net profitibality of the S&P500 and Nasdaq indexes.

Like, as a casual observer, it seems more common to hear of companies losing money than making money these days, especially outside of FAANG.
Synology uses a combination of btrfs and md to avoid btrfs's flaws
Move to Houston where they are extremely lacks on zoning. I visited there and you can tell that its all intertwined.
That's literally what they do.

Theoretical Physicists (literal conversation I had):

>Yeah, this looked like it simplifies to 1-ish and Smart John said it's probably right.

Experimental physicists (another literal conversation):

>Yeah, we build it with duck-tape and there's hot glue holding the important bits that kept falling off. Don't put anything metal in that, we use it as a tea heater, but there's 1000A running through it so it's shoots spoons out when we turn the main machine on.
Me too. I looked into electronic typewriters that export to rtf or something but never pulled the trigger. Would be interested in hearing if people do use specialist devices like that.
MIT released open source autonomous drone software that could fly through dense forest at ridiculously fast speeds.

In 2015.
Likely because it's the end of the second quarter and they all have high numbers because of Coronavirus and such. For some companies their Q3 ends inside of just after November.

And we all know what happens in the U.S. in November every four years. So there's going to be great concern about the market dipping or taking a dive.
25-50% acceptance seems extremely high acceptance rate for businesses accepting them. I bet if I asked 100 businesses in my town, less than 5 would even know what this is. I didn’t know what this is until 5 minutes ago and I buy actual gold.
You never know. Remember rule 34!
> This would be administrative overhead

I didn't say it was easy--I just said it struck a balance relative to trying to openly publish the whole dataset. Yes. Obviously comes with administrative overhead. So did dealing with the initial researcher. If the institution can manage the one, it can manage the other.

> As for the synthetic datasets that's basically just having tests

An appropriate synthetic dataset would inevitably be part of a great test suite, but it's also pretty simple to write narrow unit-tests that embed rather than stretch the same assumptions and biases that are also in the code (i.e., simple enough that even people who feed themselves with code do it).

An independent project/practice for synthesizing sample datasets from the real dataset lowers the bar and clarifies the best-practice for releasing a dataset that a verifier could actually use to spot simple bugs, edge-cases, and algorithm issues. Ideally, yes, this practice nudges the researchers to bother running their program over generated sample datasets as well, and to pay attention to whether the results make sense.
Really no surprise here. Facebook wants to maintain its presence in the Thai market and thus has to comply with the Thai lèse-majesté law.

Much as I dislike Facebook I find it hard to criticise it for this action. The obvious takeaway is that you don't rely on a corporate platform for political free speech. A point that has been made and illustrated many times before.
The limit for unauthenticated users is by IP address. I could imagine a smallish business that has a consistent on-ramp IP for their users that could breach the limit not on any single user but in aggregate.

I do sympathize with Docker though: Storage and bandwidth at that scale isn’t cheap and they need to monetize somehow.
You are right that Charges patronales and charges sociales are not really "taxes" , in fact some politicians (LFI and EELV come to mind) insist on calling it "socialized portion of the employee salary", which is a better description.

However doing this would cause a mind shift where the employees would realize how large a fraction of their compensation package is in fact retained by the government either in the form of taxes or in the form of charges. A positive outcome of this is that it would force this realization, since so many people think healthcare/education/pension are free...

Another aspect to this is that different corporations have been allowed to charge these Charges patronales and charges sociales at different rates (for instance nurses pay 14% for retirement, whereas the rest of the population pays 28%...). Worse an entire half of the workforce, namely all the civil servants, have no
Charges patronales and charges sociales at all (in other words, the French state is a special employer that gets away with not paying for these, paying for the actual pensions out of its general budget rather than its stowed-away-for-later funds.... and when the French state goes bankrupt, it just needs to raise more taxes on the private sector employees to make payroll on its pensions!).
No, the reproducibility crisis is that when 10 people write the same library you all get different results.

This is just complaining that science is too hard because you can't be bother to replicate an experiment.
I wouldn't be shocked if the Navy's eventual counter tactic to that is a bunch of drones on every ship.
The linked post is explicitly about that:

> Looking at Nu today, you can see some common parts of languages like `if` or `open`, but it doesn’t yet feel like there’s enough syntax to build up full programs. You can’t define your own commands, your own variables, and you can’t build out a project across multiple files. We’re working to address all of these limitations so that Nu can function not only for one-liners, but also for much more.
All these breathless reviews can’t come cheap.
Ciphey - Fully automated decryption tool using some common sense, NLP and AI
I'm there with ya - one of the images in the article had me immediately think of that part of the level.
Can this be done near real time? or is it always going to be a few minutes / hours behind because it takes time to process from a video file?
I can only speak to Spack in particular, but the main issue that I found with it was balancing researcher expectations for package installation speed with compile times. For most packages, compile times aren't a huge problem, but compilers themselves can take days to build, and it isn't unheard of for researchers to want a recent version of gcc for some of their environments.

In theory this isn't an issue with Spack (assuming that you have a largely homogeneous set of hardware or don't use CPU family-specific instruction sets), since you can set up cached, pre-compiled binaries on a mirror server (similar to a yum repo) and have people install from there.

Spack, however, has a lot of power/complexity. A lot of untamed power that means that bugs can sometimes be more likely than in other, more mature (or mature-ish) package managers. Namely, Spack allows you to not only specify the version number of a package, but also the compiler that you use to make that package, specific versions of dependencies that you want to use, which implementation of an API you want to use (i.e., MPICH or OpenMPI for MPI), and compiler flags for that package. When you run an install command / specify what you want to install, Spack then performs dependency resolution and "concretizes" a DAG that fulfills all of the constraints.

The issue that I ran into was that if you don't specify everything, Spack makes decisions for you about which version of a dependency, which compiler, etc to use (i.e., it fills in free variables in a space with a lot of dimensions). This would be great and dandy normally, although the version of Spack that I used occasionally constructed totally different graphs for the same "spack install gcc" command (if I recall correctly; take all of this with a grain of salt b/c I might be misremembering). This meant that it wouldn't use cached versions of gcc that had already been built, and ended up rebuilding minor variants of gcc with options I didn't care about.

At National Labs and larger outfits, the trade-offs between this kind of complexity/power and the accompanying bugginess (Spack has yet to hit 1.0) seem to favor complexity/power while accepting these sorts of bugs, but I don't work at a larger outfit and my group didn't need that level of power/control over dependencies and rather needed something that "just worked" and would allow researchers to be able to install packages independently of us (IT people). conda (mostly) fit the bill for this. I still think that Spack is the future and it has a special place in my heart, but it will have to be more stable for me to want to use it in production.
Yep, I'd say Google's closer to doing the right thing here comparatively, having at least a non-terrible path to running unsigned APKs.

I would put Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo in the same bucket of "makes hardware that can run software, but only software they approve." Whether this is something we as a society should allow, I won't comment on, but I will say that Epic should either have a grievance with all of them or none of them. Microsoft and Epic are strange bedfellows and I can't see this headline as anything other than a nervous preemption on Microsoft's part.
In many fields industry pays noticeably better than academia, but the difference is not that meaningful for the actual scientists; a principal investigator gets a reasonable amount of money but also significant degree of freedom and influence which helps job satisfaction even if the pay itself is lower.

The big issue with hiring software developers is that the 'payscale' is set according to the academic criteria, and an external developer coming from the industry - no matter how experienced or skilled - can usually be offered only a junior position with pay appropriate for that because they do not meet the criteria required for non-junior positions (no PhD, often not even a masters', no relevant publications, etc). From that perspective the only difference between a grad student who just started and a seasoned software developer is that the grad student can be employed as a part-time research assistant while a 'pure' developer could be full-time; but the hourly rate and conditions would be pretty much the same, targeted at less experienced employees. We can hire skilled mid-level individual contributors with reasonable pay for post-doc positions, but post-doc positions are limited to candidates who have a PhD. And it's not a that big limitation, since it's expected that everybody who's working "in the field" will get a PhD during their first few years of practical work experience as a grad student, the concept of "experienced/skilled but no degree" is not considered by the system as such people are rare in academia, and they stay rare due to the existing system.

So the disparity in evaluation criteria means that it's tricky to transfer between the different "career paths" - if you come from an environment where degrees mostly don't matter to an environment where a PhD is almost table stakes (to be a "hiring scientist", PhD is mandatory but nowhere near sufficient), then "getting your worth" is possible only if you are willing to put in quite some time and effort to fit the criteria used to evaluate scientists, even if you're there just to do software development.
Just in Time for the Election: An Asteroid?
Nothing like figuring out a new branch of physics in seconds rather than decades.
Over the last 40 years coding has become a toxic. The fact that the number of women in the field continues to fall tells you everything. And why you are unhappy.

I would suggest not working at places where there is a critical mass of CS types. Find an engineering company where the product isn't software or worse adware.
Show HN: Parity Bar – Not everyone earns a US salary
So I face two realities. Either the people involved don't know what they are doing or where they are at, how brutal of a fight it really is often with the co-worker right next to you and are in for a very rude awakening. Or they do. They are fully aware life's a giant Final Destination movie, and go running to it among cheers and celebration.

There are some people still killing each other with rocks and sticks. Fighter planes aren't going anywhere soon. Billions of people want that capability.

To do what they envision, using lasers or space weapons or drones or cyber, people die. Lots of them. We will need to kill millions to move weapons tech forward, like throwing people to the volcano. There's a reason why this work is scary. It is. It is scary. Millions, maybe even billions, die moving this stuff forward. Leaders, and rightfully so, do it without batting an eye. It's a problem if you don't do it, if you don't march people regardless if they live or die.

Knowing the seriousness and critical application of weapons, I am pleased to see them not advanced. It's like rooting for a horrible Biblical flood or a meteor strike that kills us all. New weapon developments horrify me, they really bother me.

That head transplant guy. Covid. What they are doing with organs. All weapon applications. People if they knew better or had some good would lock themselves away and hide under the bed.
Start looking. That place is going to fail.
Government lays out the foundation upon which innovation can take place. They build out shared infrastructure and provide research funding to universities, which private corporations get to use to create profitable things in the real world.

Using your examples, Ford wouldn't have been successful without the massive government investments in our roads, and the internet companies wouldn't have been successful without all the publicly funded computer science research over the past half century.

We're probably overdue for some wide-scale government investments in renewable tech, and I'd personally love to see a substantial government initiative to not only modernize our digital infrastructure (the average household internet connection in the U.S. is ~7 Mbps), but really push it into the future, whether it's via fiber, public wifi blankets over dense urban areas, cell towers, satellites, or some combination thereof.
Hey HN!

Yesterday I set myself a challenge (after being dared by a friend). I wanted to create a startup in 24 hours.

I got inspired by Wes Bos his Pricing Power Parity he used for his courses. What is PPP you're asking?

"Purchasing power parity (PPP) is a measurement of prices in different countries that uses the prices of specific goods to compare the absolute purchasing power of the countries' currencies."

Offering discounts for lower index countries gives them a chance to also move forward with their business. It's unfair that everyone has to pay the same price for a product.

I'm currently sitting out corona in Bali. What I never realized is, that the average salary in Bali, Indonesia is $133 per month . They have no fair chance online with salary gaps this big!

So, offering PPP discounts is an amazing way to help people out. But, offering these kinds of discounts can be quite hard, so I set myself out to make it easier. It also seemed like a small enough scope to build in one day.

Parity Bar makes it super easy to give discounts to customers around the world, based on their location.

1. You add your discounts
2. Style the banners
3. Add the script to the website
4. And the tool does the magic!

It's free to use up to 10.000 visitors. After this I gotta charge a little bit, to pay for all the APIs and server costs.
I’ve recently got a roborock vacuum, and it’s actually been life changing. I have a number of pets, and not having to vacuum 3x a week or so has been incredible. I had a roomba when I was a kid and it sucked (or not I suppose). The roborock has lidar and it’s super meticulous.
> This goes into a whole discussion of whether we should concentrate gifted students or disperse them, but that's another topic.

One of the common complaints higher performing students have is that they are dispersed in their classes and very bored as the teacher teaches to the lowest common denominator. Now, that is classrooms, not schools, but you have schools that try to accommodate gifted students in their own tracks and...why are they even bothering putting them in the same schools?
Solar in Australia: A better investment than shares?