skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The hardest part is to be able to parallelize the sorts in the backend and keep the working sets reasonably sized.

If you ask for "first 50 items after key X", you just need to keep a priority queue of size 50 on each BE node and merge them before returning them (I'm assuming a distributed backend). It doesn't matter on which page you are.

But if you specify "first 50 items after element N" it gets really tricky, each BE shard needs to sort the first N elements, and it can use some trickery to avoid doing a naive merge (see: https://engineering.medallia.com/blog/posts/sorting-and-pagi... ).

You can at most save some transfer over the network.
This is the demographic you're talking about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl_Qyk9DSUw
You were confused why people would do things with GNU/Linux without "supporting GNU/Linux vendors".

But that's restricting it to people that use the preinstalled OS, which is strange, because of how fitting it is to install your own copy of GNU/Linux.
For speed, LZ4 is great.
We all know the saying that correlation does not mean causation, however, there's even more to this story:

The FDA - approved drug inhibits replication of COVID-19 in vitro. Sources:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016635422...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32251768/
Awesome, this is really my favorite kind of marketing. I would love it if more marketing dollars went into projects like this instead of generic ads. Great stuff!

Im surprised it’s not open source?
What were the problems that repelled him? I see some discussion about immediate vs retained mode, but what where the gripes that led to re-inventing something?

Maybe start with X and explain what's so bad about that. Athena is pretty damn bare bones. Fast forward 40 years, what about embedded Qt? It's small and fast. What's the problem with it?

I'd be curious to know his complaints and how he addressed them.
> No wonder they always need more money to "fight" "climate change"

Proven posted this comment and I would like to know why it's inappropriate.
This is the best one I've been able to come up with:
https://engineering.medallia.com/blog/posts/sorting-and-pagi...
I disagree with this article deeply. He puts forward not a single example to prove his point. And there are many counterexamples. Just look at the FPGA tooling. By the articles logic it should essentially be the garden of eden of Software. But look at the actual state. It's a rotten swamp with almost 0 real innovation in the last decades.

The open source tooling that has started up in the last 3 years is already more usable and ergonomic then the proprietary tooling.
How Darwin Thought (2016)
https://archive.vn/WX8Jk
This was normalized on the web long before these companies started - they're just the best to do it (though Google did acquire one of the earliest players in DoubleClick).

The term "conversion pixel" is a misnomer these days for a Javascript snippet or API call - the concept predates JS and used to refer to a 1x1 transparent GIF.

Anyways, that generation of tech is being pushed out due to browser privacy enhancements and will be replaced with privacy-protecting browser and server APIs that introduce noise to the data, such that you can still measure the directional/relative impact of advertising without being able to tell exactly who converted.

There are a few competing industry proposals involving differential privacy/cryptography/blockchain/fixed entropy that are being publicly discussed here: https://github.com/w3c/web-advertising
> The TDP on EPYC chips is a lot higher.

EPYC TDP ranges from "a lot lower" (35W embedded, 120W regular) up to "comparable with" (180-240W, a single 280W model) relative to Threadripper (180-250W last gen; current gen is all 280W). It's definitely not a lot higher on the Epyc side.

> I think of Threadripper as mid-tier, and EPYC as the high-end.

This oversimplifies to the point of not being a useful intuition (or is arguably even incorrect). Threadripper is a SKU with a moderate number of cores at relatively high clocks; (high-power) EPYC SKUs have a lot of very efficient cores running at lower clocks. They both have a niche, but Threadripper has unambiguously better single-core performance due to the ~20% higher clocks. And single-core IPC still matters in many applications (to oversimplify: Amdahl's law; but also, latency-sensitive applications).
I don't understand that contribution. Repository author wrote an Angular module based on competing framework, what seemed to be interesting for me.

Than he wrote in the description of the module more or less, no one uses Angular, that it is complicated and literally a joke.

With all these, and other claims being utterly false, it just does not make sense to me at all what is the purpose of this repository.

Is it an Angular ecosystem contribution, or is it an attempt to smear Angular as a way to advertise featured competing frameworks?
Devil’s advocate: compared to assembly, C is portable, but compared to a lot of high-level languages, C isn’t very portable.

Every “implementation defined” feature (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unspecified_behavior#Implement...) creates two different languages (examples are sizes of basic numeric types, signedness of the char type, and evaluation order of arguments)

Also, the standard library is so limited that, historically, you needed lots of stuff that wasn’t standardized between systems (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Autotools: “It can be difficult to make a software program portable: the C compiler differs from system to system; certain library functions are missing on some systems; header files may have different names.”)

But yes, bringing up C on a system is a lot easier than doing the same for, to pick another extreme, Ada, but that’s because only half the job is done. Autotools does a bit of the rest, but still requires help from program writers.
Our vocabulary is influenced by modern computers, where we use every possible bit state. The ENIAC does not really has this, so the definitions are ambiguous. For example, if you are talking about SLC flash or SETUN ternary (which actually have multiple voltage levels), then ENIAC is binary, as it is operating on only two voltage levels. But if you are talking about base-2^n math of the modern computers, then ENIAC does not have it either.

In other words, a binary computer will have 2 possible bit states, 2^n possible byte values, and 2^(n*m) possible word values. For example, Z80 will have 2^8 byte values and 2^16 word values.

A ternary computer will have 3 possible bit states, 3^n possible byte values, and (3^n)^m possible word values.

ENIAC has 2 possible bit states, but a byte has only 10 possible values (which means that some combinations of bits do not form a valid byte). And a word has 10^m possible values.

For more details, let's look at "A REPORT ON THE ENIAC (1946)" [0] from 1946. It is pretty interesting.

The data transmission is in unary(!), see section "1.1.3. Representation of Digits by Pulses". There is a wire per byte which can have 2 voltage levels, and number of pulses corresponds to a number transmitted.

The logic is classical binary, see "1.2.1.3. Gate Tube":

> A gate tube emits a negative signal when both of its input grids are brought from a negative cut off voltage to a positive voltage. Thus, a gate tube is used to note the coincidence of two positive signals and hence corresponds to the logical "and".

The data storage is in binary (or at least bi-state?), see section "1.2.2.1. Flip-Flops". Quote:

> A flip-flop consists essentially of a pair of triodes so connected that at any given time only one of the pair can be conducting. When a certain one of the tubes is conducting (and the other is not), the flip-flop is said to be in the normal state; when the other tube is conducting (and the first is not), the flip-flop is in the abnormal state.

The "byte" counters have ten bits (flip-flops), but only one can be on at a time. so the numbers are stored as 0000000001, 0000000010, 0000000100, etc...

https://ftp.arl.army.mil/~mike/comphist/46eniac-report/chap1...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_Roman_Empire... that's correct, though there might have been regional differences. I don't know if these figures were the same throughout the entire roman empire.
I don't think the value proposition of Rust over C#, Java, and Go is that it eliminates more errors. I think the advantage is it eliminates the same number of errors and performs better/has less overhead.

I agree with your post generally though.
> It's too bad they don't offer a 4:3 HD version for those of us who care about high definition but want to respect the original composition

You can make an approximation of one yourself. In VLC in the menu you can select

Video > Crop > 4:3

I just compared the pilot scene mentioned in the article with Wee Bey, D and the neon signs, and the result is not much different except for the image fidelity.
By that logic any lottery winner could argue that lotteries are a great pension plan.
Flagged as inappropriate proselytizing: the “survey” conveniently neglected to poll the happiness levels of the hundreds of millions killed by Stalin and Mao and Castro...
Apparently they still review it if the product is really good. I remember reading it in their website somewhere. Maybe things have changed
I also always thought that downvoting should be reserved for low quality comments, but I had been corrected and even dang said:

Downvoting for disagreement has always been ok on HN.[1]

I don't really like it, but it has always been the case on HN. The question is if the community voting behavior has actually changed.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17666145
A related story is currently at #1 on the front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25623858.

These are substantially the same discussion, so I think we will merge the threads.
I think both Uber and CocaCola has a lot of work to do until I like any of them. I like CocaCola as a product though. Never tried Uber. For example I really like some Nestle products, but try to avoid them because of their bad company/brand reputation, even if their product is both cheaper and tastier I buy from a competitor instead. Whatever a company stands for and how they act will affect their brand.
A related article is https://www.forbes.com/sites/augustinefou/2021/01/02/when-bi.... (It was posted at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25620707, but the topic and discussion are substantially the same as this one, so we merged them.)

Note: this thread is being paginated, so you need to click More at the bottom of the page to read the rest of the comments. Or via these:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25623858&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25623858&p=3
> isn't this also the syllogism of choice offered by employers to most of the global population?

Not really. Each employer offers an additional "something" on top of all the other "somethings" offered by the other employers.

> You have a handful of employers to choose from.You pick one of them.

This is a step that does not have an analogous correspondent in the politicians' syllogism.
The Myth of the Megalith (2014)
Really? Downvoted because I wanted to know the source for the proven ROI?
If they consistently win lotteries year after year with a good ROI, sure. Not sure how that comparison works.
You can have a sample size of 5 and have it be statistically significant. Or maybe you are using some non-statistical measure of statistical significance?
You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
You're ultimately still relying on the public men-with-guns to enforce anything binding, so suck it up and get back in the public courts.
To which the head scientist of Coke responded in the 70's - don't keep coke in your mouth for days on end.
The counter-point to that is that the world benefits more by someone choosing to actually fix whatever was wrong, rather than just switching platforms (or never choosing it in the first place because they came across the post on HN).

The claim in the comment I was responding to appeared to me to be "hmm, Emacs has a problem, VSCode probably doesn't, I would rather use VSCode". It didn't seem to me to be written with much awareness of what the actual problem in TFA really was, nor with any real knowledge that VSCode actually would be more productive. It seemed to me to be more like "Ewww! Emacs has a bug, someone fixed it with a lot of obscure stuff, no thanks, VSCode here I come".

I certainly respect that for many, VSCode will be a more productive platform when measured by the metrics that matter to them.
yup, need to do it in the signup case as well but it solves the problem
The same tired arguments as ever: miner death spiral, not scarce, ponzi, tether etc.
But with a new timeline. I'm sure it'll happen this year!
Funny. I've never been a Simon fan and never was able to get into The Wire but I love reading his tweets. The man has a gift.
No they're not. Claims 1, 8, and 15 are the only independent claims in the patent (if you're not infringing the independent claims you're not infringing any of the dependent claims: the tradeoff is the more general independent claims are generally easier to invalidate). All of them depend on having a dispatch unit which can be programmed to dispatch instructions into some logic which is configured by a bitfile (and also having the code and bitfile alongside each other and loaded by the same system). Most FPGA SoCs don't have a programmable instruction dispatch unit (which seems to me to be the core of the patent), and they generally do not have the software and bitfield side-by-side and loaded by the same loader, though that is probably an element which is quite vague and could be argued either way.

I don't like patents in general (and especially in software), but this patent is not as general as you claim.
There’s a useful correlary to this for consumer tech.

While it is tempting to monetize with a publisher network, these networks don’t work well enough to justify their own spend for many advertisers. As a publisher you’ll likely be stuck in a race to the bottom until you have sufficient scale for direct ad deals (read as 10s of million MAU).

I’m not sure if kicking fraud out of these platforms would raise ROI, or reveal that the real price of banner ads and interstitials is 0.
Does calling open source maintainers autists not go against the very codes of conduct he seems to support?
That's not even getting into the complete misunderstanding of what open source is and the motivation of contributors and maintainers (nerd cred? Can one be any more condescending...)
This is probably a waste of electricity?
I see. That discourse is verboten. Keep on growing intellectually.
If it really is no strings attached, then it is just a contest for who can write a good proposal.

It is worth spending a few hours coming up with a good proposal, submitting it, and if you win having an extra $1000 in extra money to do with as you please.
> Busybox also seems to include awk. Would that have been a slightly less terrible choice of implementation language, or even worse?

Two parts to that - I don't know awk well enough. I would need to re-implement diff/patch in awk, or make heavy use of sh anyway.

> I was somewhat alarmed for a second there, but at least on bash (version 5.1.4) "set -e" definitely does work inside functions.

The number of _exceptions_ to set -e is actually quite a number:

> If not interactive, exit immediately if any untested command fails. The exit status of a command is considered to be explicitly tested if the command is used to control an if, elif, while, or until; or if the command is the left hand operand of an ''&&'' or ''||'' operator.

set -o pipefail only catches some of those, especially the while and ifs that will continue to standout to blow your foot off... But even more import to note: sh is not bash.

We're talking about POSIX shell. In Busybox's case, it is based on ash. Which doesn't actually have pipefail to begin with.
I was wondering this myself. It seems like a natural extension of the film scanning and editing process that they could put out an HD 4:3 version.

As usual it probably comes down to cost and money - as Simon writes, it was hard enough to get the edit right and on time for the 16:9 version, and who knows how much of that effort would have to be duplicated for 4:3, even with the original as a guide. Still, it seems a missed opportunity.
COM on Windows also promoted BSTR as a language-neutral type, which was a pointer to a null-terminated UTF-16 string (compatible with Win32 entry points, at least the Unicode versions) preceded in memory by its length.
Your [3] has a footnote quoting a Google book that reads "Modern DRAM systems are a good example of a case in which powerful error correction can be provided at a very low additional cost... The following machine generation at Google did include memory parity detection, and once the price of memory with ECC dropped to competitive levels, all subsequent generations have used ECC DRAM"
We did a similar kind of experiment some time back and found both FB ads and Google ads were doing jack shit for us. Google was better. FB ads were absolutely useless. So we stopped our ad spend. We observed no change in our customer acquisition.

Another way these ad engines extract money out of you is by allowing competitors to bid for your brand name keyword. Try searching for Ozonetel on Google. There will be six competitor ads and then our website will show up :)

In our early days we used to be scared and bid for it.Lost a lot of money doing that. Then we talked about it and stopped. Again, no change in customer acquisition. Turns out, customers scroll down the ads and still click on our website.

Are our competitors getting some of our traffic?

Of course.

But my business is not built on the assumption that people will not find my competitors. Its built on the fact that people will explore options and try to find the best fit for them. So its ok.
the burden of arguing that something is productive discussion is on the poster, not everyone else.
let's compare apps with orange.
Option A is awful, no wonder if got so few clicks. It is too hard to busy and more difficult to read. B is simple and easy to read.
I would have assumed B was done by the professional, because it is clear and concise while A may have been drawn by a professional artist, it wasn't done by a marketer.
It seems to me, that this experiment is evidence that an easy to read ad is better than a noisy one.
The effect may be statistically significant depending on your tolerance:

R> prop.test(c(12, 24), c(5563, 4403))

2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction

data: c(12, 24) out of c(5563, 4403)
X-squared = 6.5211, df = 1, p-value = 0.01066
alternative hypothesis: two.sided
95 percent confidence interval:
-0.0059903650 -0.0005970741
sample estimates:
prop 1 prop 2
0.002157109 0.005450829
Technically you're right. Can't argue!
As soon as the libraries are RiiR, then the Rust compiler can optimize across those library calls.
As a person with just shy of a stats graduate degree, the early 2010's were a nightmare of trying to get ad tech companies to grasp their incompetency. I met a dizzying number of slick talking frauds and became quite jaded.
Looks nice. I wish you luck.

I have sworn off these things, after numerous issues with another one.
But which one is the ugly one? I wound argue that A is the ugly one.
> that True Scottish capitalism that miraculously doesn't immediately devolve into crony capitalism.

Prevent the regulatory agencies from being captured by those corporations they were ostensibly intended to regulate.
Seems to be at least partially compilation of other lists, but without giving them fair credit. [0] does make some pretty convincing claims.

0: https://gitlab.com/The_Quantum_Alpha/the-quantum-ad-list/-/i...
Interesting. Why did people return to Rome?
Also, we might have a far better recycling technology in 100 years and will know where to find the material. Perhaps it is better to simply store it somewhere for the future. Only now we should make sure it doesn't find its way to the oceans.
> Again, individuals may disagree but society at large has decided its of enough value to keep in existence.

I firmly believe that's the other way around. Society has ybo say about whether military should exist.

There are always people who prefer to focus on arming themselves and extorting others. Either by threatening or offering protection from threat, which blend together.

People argue whether goverment rules the people, or if the people are actually stronger then goverment and goverment rules just because people will it.

The truth becomes apparent when government and people can't keep stable relationship between themselves and ability to collect tax is threatened. Then the military steps in and supports either government or the people.

That's because the only reason military allows goverments and people do what they do is that it results in steady stream of taxation that military can feed on.

Of course people also benefit from tax being collected in stable and predictable manner instead of military just roaming their country and taking whatever it desires randomly.

Nations, armies and goverments are most advanced mechanisms of keeping human violent extortionists and most dangerous technologies from interfering with the economy.

It's of tremendous benefit to our civilisation, except for two world wars which I hope were enough for militaries to learn that they can't efficiently steal economies to extort from neighbouring militaries.

But nontheless if you join the army you join the organisation that's freeloading on everybody else while sharpening teeth that will be used against them if they misbehave. Until you stay there you are golden. But if you plan to rejoin the rest of the world at some point, time spent in the military will be at best wasted years for you and cause of much damage to your life and psyche at worst due to conditioning and abuse you underwent.

Can you get something good out of it? Sure. But how many ex-military end up in dangerous jobs or without purpose in life outside, treating damage done to them by military with opioids? You probably don't have them in your social circle but I'd say there are at least a few for each one of your ex-Marine friends doing charity.

This belief of mine is mostly based on concept of "monopoly for violence" if you want to read more about it.
It's a subset of the misunderstanding of "meritocracy" that defines it as "how well you can do at a narrowly-defined task" as opposed to the practical definition of "How many people know how well you do at a narrowly-defined task."

Our industry is shot-through with idealists who believe meritocracy should be the former, when in reality it's always been the latter (and always will be, unless someone can invent omniscient humans).
That's pretty much what Xilinx's Zynq product lines are already targeting, including embedded. They're comparatively nice boards to work on, as long as you can swallow the BOM cost.
I was thinking of making a Monokuma myself.
Growth and Bonds
While interesting, can this model be as effective as a single foundation operating with the same funds?
Here you go about trump's "truths" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poxvEir-HWA
Seriously downvotes? It was a joke with a Wire reference embedded.
Show HN: VST plugin I developed that enables remote collaboration in any DAW
Checkout this video by the author. It makes a full 3d complex scene out of a math formula, with step by step explanation
https://youtu.be/8--5LwHRhjk