skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think that's quite right. It's the same way Formula 1 racing contributes to regular automotive industry. Technological innovations could be adopted by more mainstream industries in a few years. For instance SolarFlare NICs used to be almost exclusively used by HFT players and can now be found in most CDNs or latency sensitive cloud providers.
"Software security matters"

I think the responder's version of 'safety' really boils down to 'null pointer safety' - not 'software security'.

And even then, people keep talking about it like it's 'the thing'.

Java has null 'references' as do most languages frankly and it's just 'a thing' almost never 'the thing' to be concerned about.

'What devs want' is basically something kind of like Java, but that compiles, predictable/controllable performance and memory management i.e. no GC. That's it. It will probably end up being Rust, but that's because Rust will eventually provide all the nice, clean, modern package management, idioms, libraries etc., not specifically because of the 'safety'.

Granted I don't want to diminish that in the attempt to create 'proper memory management' you probably end up writing better software anyhow.
Fought by a tiny minority, yes, but that tiny minority can stir up enormous amounts of large scale contention and discord.
Uhh, there has been plenty of coverage about the existence of the laptop qualified with that it’s unverified. What’s your beef?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/us/politics/hunter-biden-...
Should I Be a For-Profit or Non-Profit
I'm torn on what would be the best way to move forward with my idea. My main priority is how best to serve people.
I'm receiving no money for my participation. I wasn't in the initial Phase I trial, a few hundred people had already received the vaccine before me with no unexpected side effects.

I guess I'm risking it because someone has to. Vaccine trials are incredibly safe and highly regulated. In reality, the worst-case was that it didn't work rather than my head exploding.
Quoting a conservative justice on free speech is not a powerful argument.

What you are arguing here is that free speech is unlimited because the things you don't like aren't actually speech.
> in the name of free speech

Hereby I revoke your freedom of speech.
Is this unusual for online forums? It's been a rule of thumb for decades that 1-5% of users are active posters and everyone else is what used to be called a "lurker" - there to read and be informed/outraged/entertained.

I'd expect the same for politics. Of course politics affects everyone personally in all kinds of ways, but most of the population just isn't that interested.
I like it, I play netgames.io regularly with my friends. I guess this is not just for phones, it is for any online party-link-based web games.
Free speech is more important than any specific progressive movement, because every progressive movement requires free speech unimpeded by the state.

That's why.

You don't get the benefits of free speech for free, you have to tolerate those you don't agree with too.
This may or may not have been a political move, but the theme of certain partisans celebrating when their perceived enemies are deplatformed is disturbing, especially given the parallel phenomenon of politically inconvenient stories being termed "Russian disinformation" that's our societal imperative to suppress.

It shouldn't require too much of your imagination to wonder if one day you will be on the wrong end of this corporate shunning. Jacobin for example is complaining Facebook is blocking their pro-Marxist posts on Bolivia. If your position is "the values enforced by these trillion dollar multinational companies will surely never come into conflict with my own!" you're a fool or a stooge.

https://twitter.com/sunraysunray/status/1320078487970041856
Society at large is being asked to make drastic adjustments because of a collective health issue.

Why is the corporate "right to make profit" sacrosanct when nothing else is?

This is a clear case of Eminent Domain. All mandated, mandatory, Covid-19 related products must be offered at cost, or even better, we should just nationalize drug companies. We're all in this together and companies need to adjust to "new normal" as well.
Ant Challenged Beijing and Prospered. Now It Toes the Line
I've seen it on the client-side. HFT software, written in C or C++ is piloted by traders with C# / .NET apps via RPC
You hit the nail right on the head. This is the same with basically every consumer product in capitalism, which is why it’s so inappropriate for life saving medicine.
Not really qualified to answer this, but I would imagine follow-on rounds of testing. Also, those groups should be protected through herd immunity if everyone else gets the vaccine.
Well, that's obvious. Social sciences that describe societies usually lag behind the events they describe. That's natural. It's also true for other sciences. You won't learn cutting edge Physics in your lecture class. You'll learn the established stuff. It takes a long time till you attend lectures where you'll hear that stuff and it won't be general admission.
Unfortunately “anti-racism” has been weaponized as a shortcut for silencing anyone who may at one point have said something that could be interpreted as racist or even not anti-racist enough. No thanks.

Rather be labeled as a racist and keep my free speech than silenced by some mob authority.
Video game currency is restricted to that video game, and most if not all video games have strict regulations against trading their currency for services outside of the game.

The currency they're selling purports to be a general-use currency for real life sales.
Better or worse than Ad tech based companies?

Most traders I've met have been fairly honest about contributing nothing to society, or that the world would probably be a better place is large segments of the finance industry disappeared tomorrow.

I can't say the same for the majority of developers from Facebook or Google I've met.
I won't re-hash the many great things about Go that have been said. Instead, I will explain some of the reasons why I continue to use Java (for now) instead of Go. Go is seen as one of the best alternatives to Java, and some see it as a better Java. It has won over many shops from Java. Therefore, I think these reasons are relevant to this question, and not just me doing the usual "my language of choice is better":

1. Tooling and library ecosystem of Java is still better. There are tools for pretty much everything, including high-quality commercial offerings. For example, IDEs, profilers, build systems, other languages that run on the same VM. Nearly every major SaaS I have ever integrated with has a Java SDK.

2. Weight of big players behind the ecosystem. Big companies all over the world are heavily invested in Java. Even Google is still more invested in Java than Go (internally, and in Android, especially). This makes Java an insanely safe choice for us small players.

3. The many, many warts and deficiencies of Java (and parts of the Java ecosystem) are well-known. Experienced developers, at least ones with good taste, know how to mitigate them without pain. For us, a language with fewer warts, like Golang, is therefore not as big of a selling point. It's like getting your hands dirty. When your hands are clean, you are reluctant to make them dirty. When your hands are already dirty, touching dirty things is not a big deal.

4. Golang is not the only language evolving. Rapid improvements to the language and JVM are already here, and more, bigger changes are planned (e.g. Loom, Valhalla) that will nullify some of Go's advantages.
Everyone says pros of iOS
Extrapolation. Is there a scientific rationale as to why the vaccine would NOT be safe and effective in a new population? If not, approve it for that population. If there is rationale why it wouldn’t be, ask for more data.
Ask HN: Low-code orchestration system / SaaS
Hi -

I'm launching a product that requires multiple different kinds of workflows (e.g. "Order fulfillment", "Contract Negotiation", etc...).
And I'm looking for a product that can help me seamlessly manage the coordination of these workflows amongst my team, 3rd parties, and external customers.

The way I view it: I have some concept of an entity in my system (e.g. "an Order"), and any time one of those entities are created (e.g. "an Order is placed"), then some sequence of actions needs to be choreographed amongst my team, the customer, and 3rd parties. Currently I'm doing this using hacked together code, but it feels very brittle/hacked together.

I'm wondering if there is an "Orchestration system as a service" that can help me solve this. I've looked at things like Airflow, but it still seems too low-level. I'm looking for the equivalent of something like Algolia, Airflow, etc... i.e. a SaaS product. Kissflow seems interesting, but I'm hoping to have multiple options that I can evaluate before deciding.
ZGC and Shenandoah are not on par with C4. ZGC isn't even generational (yet).
I am pretty certain TC for new grads usually go beyond that.
In what way? Yes, the taxes paid for research, then taxes paid to purchase the product. But if everything was state owned top to bottom, the taxes would have had to fund research, then manufacturing, production and distribution. I wager the amount of money spent would have been exactly the same, so it's more like an accounting trick than an actual difference.
That's what I was thinking. It can optionally integrate youtube-dl-tests or whatever.
At work we can no longer load stuff from CDNs anyway, because GDPR. For customer projects that is. I guess there would be the possibility to include it into some disclaimer but then we would need to check with the CDN about their data retention policy and check with the customer and that's just not worth it.
But zoom has push to talk and indications that you are unmuted, so I still don't quite get what you are talking about. That's ok.
Ask HN: How to get a list of all YouTube “Independent Fact Checks”
Google is adding "Independent Fact Check" info contexts to searches on YouTube for "Biden fracking"[1]. Presumably this is because they're afraid that people will find videos of him saying during the primaries that he opposes fracking and then believe their own eyes and ears.

Is there a way to get a list of other search queries or videos that have been manually updated to show this info?

I'm curious what other topics they've decided to "fact check".

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=biden+fracking
There's also this part of the article:

"We found that setting the refspec option during git fetch reduced our build times by 99%."

So, the article contains contradictions.
Your point is well-made, but I think there are more appropriate sonifications of pi - this one [0] for instance, done in SuperCollider [1].

I think the main difference between this one and the posted one is not just in how arbitrary the "pi" utilization is, but also in how basic and derivative it is. This is something I commonly see from users of Puckette-style languages like Max or pd.

[0] https://sccode.org/1-50w
[1] https://supercollider.github.io/
“Freedom of speech” in any meaningful sense has only ever existed for wealthy people (who are historically white male landowners) or those of other classes whose speech is deemed “appropriate” by such gatekeepers.

Just look at what happens when employees try to unionize: their employers go to great lengths to silence them, and have spent considerable political capital removing regulations preventing them from doing so. If you have money and power, it’s always been easy to silence speech you don’t like.
I have never heard of people upgrading their compiler and/or standard libraries, but expecting to not have to recompile their compilation units.

You seem to be talking about major changes to the fundamental set up of a project while not taking a comparably trivial amount of time recompiling compilation units.

How often are you changing major compiler versions and breaking standard library versions that you would have this expectation?
I meant in terms of mathematical field/topic. Like the progression I did to get an engineering BS was roughly

* basic math > algebra/trig > calculus, linear algebra, differential equations

As a non-mathematician, my impression has been that mathematicians do a lot of proof-based work since (to my impression) the goal is to make new findings, not just learn concepts and formulas that they can apply to their work like an engineer. From my limited experience with proof-based work, it seems like something where you would need guidance and discussion. Whereas when I learned things like derivatives and integrals, it was very procedural and you just needed to learn a process, which is then built on by a more advanced process, etc.

Can one realistically self-learn up to low-dimensional topology or algebraic geometry just by reading books and doing the exercises?
That "tiny minority" still has an outsized impact. The pareto principle applies to pretty much everything.
The differences are pretty subtle... If you want an overview of the whole zoo, see https://lilianweng.github.io/lil-log/2020/04/07/the-transfor... https://www.pragmatic.ml/a-survey-of-methods-for-incorporati... https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.06732#google https://www.gwern.net/GPT-2#efficient-attention
1-5% is very different from 0.06% though.
Interesting. I currently maintain 2 repositories, 20k and 60k LOC, and I consider both applications fairly small as it's super easy to cruise its modules/files. In my books, a large system is probably around 500k LOC and I'm curious how that'd work with Go. It's all about project structure and organization of packages. A single file with 3k LOC is most likely unmanageable. 20 files with 150 LOC each is also not much helpful. However, 5 files with 600 LOC each is a much more balanced split. You are not getting lost in files and each file is of reasonable size. Obviously, it's not always possible and highly depends on application specifics, but I'm just trying to make a point. One should always strive for a project structure that doesn't require too much of a brain juice to comprehend the structure. Otherwise it's possible to get lost in 2-3k LOC regardless of a programming language.
> if it was universally good as it's written, they would have essentially solved one of the major problems not just for Java, but for a large amount of languages.

In a way, low-latency GCs like C4 and ZGC have done that, but implementing them requires a large and experienced team, and not many languages even try to target high performance to begin with.
Facebook and Twitter don't require buying into any particular politics to join.
The source is a long ago personal comment from my dad, who worked with and was personal friends with Fermi.

As to whether it's sarcasm, I'd describe it more as an inside joke with just a touch of the self-aware intellectual arrogance Physicists are famous for (see Lord Rutherford's "All science is either Physics or stamp collecting").

Trying to explain a joke is always dangerous so hopefully what follows won't be a mistake, but here goes:

The way I have always interpreted the first sentence is to hear Fermi saying that when you are doing an experiment, you should have a deep understanding of the family of curves or behaviors the system under test is expected to follow, including the full range of curves that would follow from interactions that are wildly different from what you might naively expect. If you really understand the Physics of the system (this is where it starts to blend the line from advice to a joke), the measurement of one single data point should be enough to tell you which of those possible curves describes the actual behavior of the system (the joke being both that it's funny to be that arrogant and that it's obvious to anyone you'd tell this joke to that mathematically you need at least two points to determine a line, so by saying one point gives you not just a line but a curve the speaker is purposely going over the top for fun). Moving into the second sentence ("two points gives you the distribution about the curve") takes the statement into full-on joke mode, with the comment shifting from an observation about knowing your Physics to an insider dig at the relationship between theoretical Physicists and experimental Physicists (Fermi being one of the greatest theoretical Physicists of all time). When he says that two points gives you a distribution about the curve, he's saying he as a theoretical Physicist understands the underlying Physics of the system better than the experimentalist understands the noise in their experimental hardware, or alternatively that the noise in the hardware is sufficiently uninteresting as to be irrelevant to him. The former view would simply be arrogance but leaving the second option open circles the joke back to include a bit of insider self deprecating humor in that he's purposely ignoring experimental error, a thing theoretical Physicists are famous for doing.
Sorry, in what way are the dominant social media websites (Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit in particular), NOT main stream media in 2020?

Certainly they aren't part of the legacy media, but they all seem to carry water for the same narratives and ideologies.

The non-mainstream media is publications that people in polite urban mostly-coastal American culture sneer at: Breitbart, The Post Millenial, Reason, Parler, Gab, specific independent journalists on some of the mainstream platforms, etc.

But certainly Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit are media and they are mainstream. And they have demonstrated their willingness to censor stories with more or less the same bias (in the same ideological direction) as the mainstream legacy media. They're just the mainstream new media.
Maybe a stupid question, but do we need to vaccinate everyone? I remember reading that heard immunity is 70% or something - so could we get away with leaving the people out that it wasn’t tested on?
An abiogenesis event being snuffed out by another abiogenesis event... that's like alien invasions.
How do you prove to people you are in a vaccine trial, do you have a card?
Why?

I can't imagine why your view of utopia requires that people with money get to choose who they transact with but people with goods and services must transact with anyone who has money. Can you explain why that's fair or equitable?

You're pointing toward a world where I can say "I won't buy from X because Y" but nobody can say "I won't sell to X because Y".

If a seller doesn't believe in mask wearing, a buyer should be able to abstain from them. If a buyer doesn't believe in mask wearing, a seller should be able to abstain from them.

Buyers and sellers are temporary roles we play, not classes of people with different freedoms.
QAnon is consistently claimed to be "dangerous" and "violent". The only justification for this is the guy who went into Comet Ping Pong with a rifle in search of a supposed basement dungeon. But Comet Ping Pong is a Pizzagate thing, which is a different theory than QAnon.

Pizzagate is based off of people taking deep dives into the leaked DNC emails and trying to follow up on some suspicious looking things. Just the kind of people who would be up for doing their own investigation into Comet Ping Pong.

QAnon is based off of people obsessively following and examining every detail of the posts of the pseudonymous Q on 8chan/8kun. A key part of QAnon ideology is that everything is already happening according to "the plan", so there is nothing for individual followers to do. Some of the most anti-Q people I know believe that it's some kind of psy-op to convince people to do nothing in the face of massive corruption because everything is actually under control.

Also worth remembering is that the CPP guy didn't actually hurt anyone. He scared the crap out of a few people, then was peacefully arrested.

So linking QAnon to violence is extremely dubious at best. If anything, the opposite is more true. So why does everybody just push those talking points endlessly and nobody publishes anything skeptical of it? Why is it so incredibly dangerous that we must bust out all the stops against it? This very post is talking about trying to do a hostile purchase of the IP addresses their host uses - who ever heard of the need to do that?!? We don't even do that for ISIS, Al-Quada, etc.

Meanwhile, Antifa and BLM are rioting and burning down cities across the nation, but nobody dares to even publish that, much less start to question their ideology and intentions. Perish the thought of even trying to investigate their links to the mainstream media, basically every major corporation, and Democrat party.
> Zuckerberg will never buy out your blog.

Maybe if you host it on a server which is physically in your house, but most ordinary people don't really have the chops for that, or the resources. Comcast tends to frown upon it. And when they use Instagram because they didn't like Facebook, that's still Zuckerberg.

> Nobody is owed a spot on google's search index and there is a finite number of spots on the first page of a given search query.

They can have editorial control or they can have a monopoly, but not both. But agreed that trying to regulate search results is a fool's game. Dissolving the monopoly is almost certainly the better way to fix this class of problem, across the board.
Smart TVs are quite often slower to turn on, slower to change inputs, etc. Sometimes slower to tune channels, but ATSC is slow anyway.
Smash that downvote button to make society more just and less racist!
Oof, that's horrible. I didn't know some manufacturers require you to connect.
Um. That is exactly what has been happening with the rhetoric around otherizing anything in opposition to Trump. The President of the United States has called for this himself, which should be a bigger alarm bell than a corporation enacting a policy.
> AFAIK I don't know any instances of, say, car companies refusing to sell a car to the KKK or some other neo-Nazi group

Okay. Did you limit your research to car companies? Private businesses can and do deny service to the KKK.
At this scale this seems an unlikely explanation, given that we are in an oasis of the 'desert' containing hundreds of thousands of galaxies.
Wayland is like X11. Xorg implements the X11 protocol. There are other X11 server implementations — XWin32 is one example on Windows.

Nothing has changed with Wayland except we have a new thing and lots of groups writing compositors. And this is great — Mutter, Kwin, wlroots, Mir — and they will all speak a common protocol for putting stuff on the screen and handing input events. And projects with similar use-cases “desktops” are standardizing on common dbus interfaces for non-display stuff.

This is genuinely so much better than the Xorg monoculture. Wayland’s design has made it possible for lots of different groups to implement display servers and have interoperability because what we had before was “X11 actually means do what Xorg does.”

There’s lots of in-fighting about the scope of Wayland and people that want to make a protocol for putting pixels on the screen also handle “desktop stuff” like audio, screenshots, screen recording, keybindings, input automation, authentication. I think this is misguided because it would effectively turn Wayland into a generic message bus between “apps with windows” and the display server when we already have a generic message bus for every application — dbus.

Right now we have things like:

org.gnome.Shell.Screenshot | org.kde.kwin.Screenshot

org.gnome.Shell.Screencast | org.kde.kwin.Screencast

which after shaking out will be promoted to org.freedesktop.* after standardization. Despite the fact that notifications have been "DE specific" in the same way for years and years nobody seems to complain about org.freedesktop.Notifications.