skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is at its core, the issue of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Bill might be an imperfect angel, but he is an angel nonetheless in spending his fortune to help millions/billions out of abject poverty and suffering. That dwarfs almost any effort by other people.

You could psychoanalyze this as acts of redemption, guilty conscience, seeking further world domination or whatnot, However it's undeniable he's helped many, many people and far, far,far more than his keyboard detractors ever would or could. And that's a very good thing IMHO.
Is abolishing the police primarily an actual sub-movement or is it primarily a straw-man?

"De-fund the police," as I've heard explained from people who actually claim to hold the belief, is about taxpayers being very generous when funding police and very stingy when funding education, infrastructure, and social programs. The idea is that the next marginal dollar might not best be spent on the police, even though taxpayers following historical trends would overwhelmingly vote to spend it there.

I'm no social scientist, but I've certainly noticed that in the inner city the police always seem to have freshly painted, frequently-washed, current-year cars, freshly paved and remodeled offices with new signs and landscaping, new uniforms, and so on, while the food bank and the school are decrepit and run-down. The one time I bothered to look up salaries, they were, uhhh, entirely in-line with those outer appearances. On the basis of this purely personal and anecdotal evidence, I would tentatively support such proposals.

Visiting San Francisco and seeing signs in every parking lot warning you to keep your valuables out-of-sight when parked and then learning that apparently they've decided to not punish crimes with damage below $1000, resulting in a predictable crime wave, makes me think that some part of the "de-fund the police" movement actually does want to get rid of the police, though.

I haven't been paying enough attention to figure out how large these relative sub-groups are. Legitimately, I mean -- obviously if you listen to conservative media you'll get the impression that the crazies are the majority, while if you listen to liberal media you'll get the impression that they're a tiny minority -- I just haven't done the homework to make up my mind as to who's right.

Either way, I'll give a close reading to any proposals they manage to get on to the ballot.
> To go back to the terminal analogy, the terminal is the end-user interface. It's not a framework or a toolkit. What you're complaining about isn't that the terminal is a bad UI toolkit, you're just complaining about supporting the terminal in general.

If I wanted to write something like a high quality drawing tool and my only option was to use the terminal, you’re damn right I would be complaining about it.

Now I understand saying “my only option” is somewhat facetious, as if I care about it so deeply, obviously I should just write native software. But we are clearly moving to a web-first future, and I just don’t think the platform is a good foundation for application UI.

You’re implying that there’s ultimately no difference between a UI library that renders to HTML and one that renders to a grid of pixels in a native app; I am making the argument that HTML is sufficiently poorly suited for non-document purposes that it drags the overall quality of software down.

> The only way that alternative would be easier to work with is if it didn't force you to render your visual state to a pure-text XML-based UI

That is exactly what I’m suggesting.

> It's annoying on purpose, because the default render target for not just your documents, but also your applications, should mostly be a pure-text XML-based tree representing your current state

Why? I am not convinced there are significant benefits to a text-based format over a binary one, other than ease of reverse engineering. I would also argue that HTML doesn’t represent your current state, it represents the state when the page loads. That state is then modified, often in a rather opaque manner, by JavaScript. If we’re going to stick with something text based, clear data binding as part of the markup would be much more beneficial imo. Again: I feel the principle holds just fine for documents, but not application UI.

> But the beauty of HTML is that by default, the easiest way to build a web application just happens to be the way that supports screenreaders, adblockers, scraping, graceful degradation, responsive layouts, etc

It’s the easiest way to build a web app because it’s the only way to build a web app. And while I will grant you that scraping and adblocking is fairly unique to the web, any “native” UI target worth its salt has great accessibility support. As for responsive layout, how long have we had resizable windows where the contents adapt? This is not something the web pioneered.

> HTML encourages even junior developers to fall into a pit of success by forcing them to think about the accessible text interface first

I guarantee you that junior developers are not writing accessible web apps without significant effort. Maybe if they start off with something fairly document-like, sure. But once you start adding modals, popovers, and other controls that the browser doesn’t provide, things get difficult to do right pretty quickly.
That's not optimal. Looks like the deep learning enthusiasts are now deflating the meaning of accepted mathematical terminology.
The font is certainly interesting conceptually, and doesn't look bad (though is largely indistinguishable from its "Garamond" source at normal sizes).

And while I've read the whole thing and understand why the author considers this to be a "Brutalist" philosophy, I respectfully disagree. This is merely vectors adhering to a grid, which has nothing to do with the "exposing raw materials" philosophy that is the core of Brutalism. [1]

To me, early pixel-based terminal fonts feel like the digital typography version of Brutalism -- not even attempting curves or calligraphy at all, but embracing the raw material of pixels for exactly what they are.

If the author wants to bring a similar Brutalist raw-materials approach to modern vector-based typography I'd find that interesting as well -- but that would seem to have been done a long time ago, with typography based solely on primitive geometric shapes, of which classic typefaces from the 20th century would seem most suitable (Futura [2], Avant Garde [3]).

In the end, Signifier is a cool concept typeface. But I unfortunately think the author fails at connecting it to Brutalism in any meaningful way, despite their attempt.

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

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futura_(typeface)

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITC_Avant_Garde
You and the other reply are correct about font sizes. I thought it was obvious that, if you are generating different files for different screen sizes, you can also generate large-type versions. This can all be automated. Why bother? Because the usual format for Kindle books looks bad, like webpages. And, as I said, forget about math, etc.
Chrome adopted multi core far sooner. A great if lengthy treatment here

https://yoric.github.io/post/why-did-mozilla-remove-xul-addo...
Four scenarios on how we might develop immunity to Covid-19
Until the entire advertising community gets their st together I will block every ad and script that I can.

It has gotten to where there the line between advertising and malware is blurred or nonexistent.

It seems to me that every new API or web standard that Google creates is an attempt to stop ad blockers disguised as meaningful useful features.
There are plenty of competitors to Facetime, available across multiple different platforms. Google and Facebook for example enjoy pushing their messaging and video messaging ecosystems across multiple devices.

There's nothing unique about Facetime, except it's Apple exclusive.
Google buys AR glasses company North
> I thought once discovered, people kept looking for what those "bananas" were about and then discovered the sentence above themselves.

I suspect that's what really happened. Would have been better if they included that note since publication time. The first comment with "Banana" then would have been the real indicator. Most others would have simply noted the keyword from the comments before reading the article, like you said.
I’m honestly surprised the move to contactless hasn’t occurred faster, as the costs for hardware seem lower for nfc versus chip.
"Apple replied asking not to publish the details as they plan to address the issue in the Spring 2021 security update"

Besides the fact that I'm always torn if vulnerabilities should be published if the vendor has committed to fixing them: I don't quite understand why a fix can't make it into the next big release that's around the corner (macOS Big Sur and iOS 14). Do large vendors really have such long development pipelines that changing anything is impossible for months? Or do they just have thousands of similarly serious issues and need to prioritize?
Wait, "expressing the people’s will"? Who in this conversation does anything like that? Certainly not USA. We didn't vote for spending three-quarters-billion-dollars-a-year on a military that hasn't accomplished anything in over five decades. Neither did we vote to spend the untold hundreds of billions we spend "in the black budget" on the even less effective unsupervised services. The last four presidents have run for office promising less militarism, but not a single one has delivered on that promise. "People's will", what a joke.
It may be because there are enough consistent deliveries in the area to employ someone dedicated to delivery there.
A greater risk than flames crossing firebreaks is
firebrands or cinders - flaming bits of bark, small branch,
clumps of pine needles - being carried aloft by heat and
falling past the firebreak into combustible dry grass or other fuel, or onto a wooden deck next to wooden siding of a house, or in a rain gutter full of pine needles and twigs
next to a composition shingle roof edge.
Admittedly approaching this with a non-US perspective, but it seems strange to me that PhD students approach their advisors to see what the project/approach is.

Is it normal (in the US?) for a PhD to be as "guided" or prescribed by the advisor as you suggest above? Perhaps my experience differed, but I went for an advisor who takes an old-fashioned "independent research" focus. That's not to say they were unavailable or disinterested; rather they were there to offer input and guidance when needed, but not to steer or even direct. It was up to me to plan what I wanted to do, when to do it how to go about it, what to write up and publish, which conferences to bother with etc. Perhaps this is unusual, but I felt it was a key part of the experience to deliver your own major research programme.

I'd definitely agree that if you can't ask the questions you outlined above, or if they can't answer it, that is a big red flag. A PhD is about learning to ask questions fundamentally, and then set about answering them, so may as well get started by asking your advisor. I'd also try to get an understanding of the culture of the group and practices, since some research groups have more of a "lab" culture where everyone works as part of a bigger project, while I was involved in the opposite - everyone had their own "thing", but would work together when it was helpful.
I, for one, would very much prefer my plane not take off momentarily.

Your mileage may vary. By rather a lot.
Nooo :-)
If you find yourself in a PhD program with an advisor who thinks like the above, it's really important to not internalize their viewpoint.

It's not a job. A job would pay much better!

It's not your advisors money, and they aren't paying you to advance their career.

Independence is critical, but so that you can avoid becoming someone else's cheap labor, and can instead focus on doing work that educates you and moves you forward.

(Thankfully I had a great advisor, but many try and just take advantage of the power imbalance to exploit students).
Information want to be free. Sooner or latter the information will leak. Especially as technology getting more advance, its getting easier and easier to do surveillance, soon everyone can do that. The sooner we adapt with the life where all surveillance records is public the better. Beside it level the playing field, everyone has the same information.
Linux optimizations were the very first and are much better than this trivial old-style PGO. On Linux you can use perf profiles with already optimized binaries, not bloated by pgo, and use these profiles to optimize inlining, branches and hot/cold seperation via autofdo or bolt.

What is missing is using dTrace profiles for other OS's. PGO doesn't lead that far. dTrace would be the best cross platform solution. It's also secure.
What this describes is a mechanism for k8s to delete underlying resources prior to removing them from k8s.

E.g. before completely removing the CRD representing an S3 bucket, this provides a mechanism for that S3 bucket to be deleted from AWS systems.

Which I think is the opposite of what you were hoping.
I'd say it is very unlikely and close to impossible unless it's sponsored by a government fund or a very big IC design company that's as big as Intel. But I'm glad if someone can proof me wrong :-)

Nowadays if you want an RF transceiver chip you either go with direct synthesis of ADC/DAC or homodyne architecture. The companies that have both of these design capabilities are ADI and TI, and both them are happy with their monopoly.

But if any R&D company that probably can pull it off it will be IMEC, and coincidentally it is the employer of some of Openwifi engineers. FYI, IMEC are both funded by Belgium government and a well established IC design company.
Stop or Go? The Confusing State of Cryptocurrency and Blockchain in China
> Rarely is an article so explainatory as this one. The author writes (all below quoted):

Yes, and I totally disagree they achieved any form of "brutalism" with their font.
I recently bought a Kobo and it wanted to connect to my WiFi before it would do anything. I ended up returning it.
If all those apps pulled their versions down at the same time, Facebook/Paypal/Whatapp could very well wind up in court over antitrust concerns as well.
This is an amazing achievement and I salute everyone who worked so hard to get this far.

My grandfather had polio and was lucky to survive. He spent quite a bit of time in an iron lung. Apparently it changed his personality significantly for the worse.
I think Apple was outplayed here, at least for now. Apple uses a single developer account system for both iOS and MacOS. Revoking violating dev accounts is somewhat understandable but because Epic is a large tool vendor on MacOS as well, disabling that account has massive downstream consequences. Due to the particular implementation I don't think its possible for Apple to revoke only the iOS assets.

By being forced to reinstate the entire account under anticompetitive scrutiny, its a PR loss for Apple. If Epic had separate dev accounts for its MacOS and iOS presence it would have played out differently.
I assume that it could work as a temporary solution but the article hints that this problem will likely become global soon. So, instead of moving numbers, it's easier to add some and increase the possible combinations.
While we’re on the topic of carbon emissions what’s the footprint of the post office? Driving around junk, the printing of which burns carbon, with combustion engines, most of which is thrown away immediately.
For what it's worth, Kindle Previewer 3 runs without issue under Wine (well, at least the CLI). I use it to convert epub files to KFX to add to my Kindle.
One can agree with one side or the other but this is nothing short of Apple using its dominant position to try and hurt Epic because they got mad. It has nothing to do with kicking someone out for breach of the app store rules. Fortnight and Epic's Unreal engine are two entirely different legal entities. As you could have read in the ruling.
Show HN: Price/Performance SEO Tool You Can See
Natural monopolies are supposed to be broken up. Naturalness is a justification for government intervention, as it means AT&T lacks the power, naturally, to resist forming a monopoly.
I first heard (about) him on a Podcast called How I built this. It's a good listen. https://www.npr.org/2017/01/23/510576153/zappos-tony-hsieh
Or how about the finest luggage money can buy:

https://youtu.be/6ljOj6GVcnQ
Separate question - if google did what mozilla did and wrapped DNS in HTTPS and ran it to 8.8.8.8 (allowing user to pick other resolvers) - would that be better?

It feels like folks complain - you are sending too much traffic. If google said - we can handle it directly (they obviously can - the bandwidth youtube alone uses has got to be magnitudes larger) people would complain - no no - send us the traffic.

Google already runs 8.8.8.8 and encourages adoption of it I think - maybe it can handle the billion requests per day? Or maybe they can help verisign scale their infra?
I think this shell Renaissance is going to be short-lived. Scripting is a very brittle way to do automation, and that is recognized across the spectrum, especially when handling distributed systems.

The world seems to be moving much more towards APIs and declarative configuration formats, with actual scripts acting as a sort of last resort only. The author even mentions Kubernetes, which is very much designed to replace scripting based control of your systems with an API. Even kubectl is just an utility build over the API, not a core part of the system.

And even outside the cloud-ish world, you have systemd taking over the Linux world one distro at a time, and it's focus is firmly towards replacing shell scripts with configuration files.
I'm not sure what extensions everyone was using that are missing from Fenix. uBlock Origin, Decentraleyes, and HTTPS Everywhere were the big ones for me, and those three were all greenlit for Fenix (at least in Nightly). Are people still using greasemonkey scripts, or what?
I don't remember ever seeing this many S-1 listings on HN. Are they just a new thing? Did I miss them before? Is there something large happening in the market?

EDIT:

- If this first ddg result is to be believed there are 20% more IPOs than last year https://stockanalysis.com/ipos/2020-list/

- There's actually a thread on this, so perhaps downvote this and read/comment/speculate there https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24265456
It seems to have been fixed, I refreshed the tab I had open when this first popped up on hn (that had empty results) and the results look normal now (US).
There's also the one about cast iron skillets, that has a similar atmosphere https://xkcd.com/1905/

Curiously, the three numbers do not seem really independent.
I wonder what the cost difference would be if we reduced mail to 1x per week and got everyone broadband.
Thought about your reply a bit more.

If the movement were "Demilitarize the police", then yes, that is absolutely something I could be in favor of.

As it stands, "Defund the police" is to me a weasel word version of "Abolish the police" and I honestly do think people are just being coy when they claim not to see that.
I don't see how token based transactions would improve the situation. You still require a unique identifier per issuer per client per account.
List of Upcoming IPOs in 2020–2021 / Part 8
Disclaimer: I wrote the article.

I'm not sure where the claimed confusion is above.

The argument is: I want to include something like fingerprint2.js in my page. I know filter lists block it, bc users don't like it.

W/o web bundles, you have to either inline it (bad for perf), copy it to a new URL (which could later also be added to a list), or add some URL generation logic to the page, and have some server side logic somewhere to know how to understand the programmatically generated URLs.

With WebBundles. I call it https://example.org/1.js (which is a diff than what https://example.org/1.js points to in a different bundle) or even just call it https://example.org/looks-to-be-benign-to-the-web.js.

The claim is not that bundles are coming from random URLs, its that the bundles create private namespaces for URLs, and that breaks any privacy tools that rely on URLs.
No personal direct experience - I like that he was an experimenter. Great experimenters have lots of failures to go along with their successes. He made a great company in a way that went against the grain, and survived an acquisition from a buyer with a very strong culture.
The illusion that we are supposed to uphold is that brilliance and serendipity can be planned for, can be scheduled and made into an academic program. Actually research and scientific discovery should never be the job of someone. It should be a side product of general activity in a field, something that is already useful even without the discovery (if you're poor). Or just lesure hobby activity that is fine if nothing comes out of it (if you're rich).

It's also part of the whole inflation and treadmill thing going on in education and titles. Generations ago, going to high school was something significant. For the next generation, high school was the default and college became a special thing. Now the majority (in the US) goes to college. Within the family it feels like satisfying progress. Parents look on their kids and feel proud that they are making it further than they themselves did. But now a Master's degree can be a bit too generic. Having a PhD can be nice in industry nowadays (though of course not required).

So what used to be a special thing for a limited circle of select few with the background and fallback that allowed failure, is now becoming a factory process. PhDs are produced by the thousands and thousands, and we pretend they all pushed science forward. There is a flood of papers accompanying this. Tiny steps forward or mixing and matching existing things, but selling a big story around it, flag planting, trying to claim a huge area when only a tiny aspect of it is actually demonstrated, drawing out huge conclusions etc.

There are many reasons for this. The general societal inflation is just one thing. The other is the overall quantification, standardization and uniformization in our zeitgeist. There must be a standard process for everything. The politicians and bureaucrats demand to have a standard process for innovation. You must know in advance exactly "how many pieces of innovation" will you produce per year, what will be the impact of it etc. Then when you tell them about your plans, all they hear is the number of buzzwords mentioned from the latest fads and tune out otherwise. Ah and they look at your publication list of course. If you churned out many papers in the past, you will probably do that as well in this round of funding, and those papers can all be attached to the funding agency reports, so that will make the agency look good towards the ministry or whatever.
agreed, what's going on? Cash in before second long term crash/recession?
Under the assumption that they are funded to provide that service.
Theoretically, the 4th Amendment, but there's so many exceptions to it lately that it only theoretically counts, with a good lawyer.
Companies need capital? Just a guess, but this seems like a time when they might be running a little short.
It's a bit weird that Firefox deprecated all extensions while moving to a simpler API with a more limited surface area, in order to allow changes to be made more easily in the future to the underlying browser without breaking compatibility with extensions, and then proceeded to make changes to the underlying browser which break compatibility with all extensions using that API.
Minimal React: getting started with the front end library
Wondering the same thing! And where's AirBNB in this.
Might I suggest you watch some videos by the late great comedian Bill Hicks
I was wondering that too and got some good answers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24265456