skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
EDIT: I should have just read GIFtheory's post below! That's pretty much what I meant.

The devil is in the details though. How specific does the outcome need to be? And do you actually have to achieve the intended outcome in order for it to be engineering? Or just use the techniques with the hope of achieving the outcome?

Personally I think engineering is characterized primarily by predictability, usually through mathematical modelling. There's no absolute guarantee of success, but a Hail Mary isn't good enough either. Engineering is somewhere in between.

For example, the Mars Climate Orbiter didn't work, but no one would say that the people who built it weren't doing engineering. A simple but critical mistake was made in it's implementation. If it had been build according to the model, it would have worked.

On the other hand, was the Obamacare website engineered? I would say no. A few napkin calculations would have shown that it would not handle the load. No one had any business expecting it to work as deployed. And that is how a lot of software is written. No serious attempt is made to model the problem and prove that the solution will work.

Now that I think of it, so-called software engineering is the only engineering discipline I can think of where it's widely believed that mathematics is not required. The blogosphere seems to be riddled with posts that might as well be called "No good at maths? No problem - just become a programmer!"
First police failed to control the situation.

But, to make a long story short Republican governor Larry Hogan sent them in. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gov-hogan-leaders-of...

As to why, this goes back to the constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, and Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Guard
The president cannot install a full blown monarchy under the powers vested by him in the constitution. Neither can congress.

The issue though is in the case where Trump is installed in a second term after members of congress are kidnapped, extorted, or even executed, then the question of what is and is not constitutional becomes moot. The application of force in the political process has a tendency to degrade all guard rails, leaving behind nothing but “largest army diplomacy”, or mob in this case.

To whit: “stop quoting laws to those of us with swords”.
This isn't really the spirit of Open Source though. The point of Open Source is that reuse and modification isn't just technically allowed legally, it's encouraged.

I fully support their right to change their licensing, and I understand they may not have thought through the implications of their license -- and I empathize with that. I also empathize with criticism that Amazon isn't doing a great job of supporting the ecosystem that supports them, it would be nice if they did more. And it goes without saying, but I also strongly empathize with the frustration about the borderline trademark infringement that's happening here. That's a completely separate problem.

But I don't like the implication that Open Source licenses are a legal technicality rather than a specific philosophical choice to allow reuse. People don't need to feel guilty about following Open Source licenses, the idea is to encourage reuse -- even by corporations.

We do harm to that movement when we try and backtrack from that philosophy or say, "sure, you have the legal right to reuse the code, but we're going to try and implement social/technical barriers to you doing so." There are plenty of decent source-available licenses projects can use if that's their intent. They carve out exceptions for small-scale reuse while trying to limit companies like Amazon from capitalizing on the ecosystem. And maybe more projects should use those licenses since they more accurately reflect the outcomes that the authors seem to want. There's nothing wrong with having projects that allow only small-scale reuse.

But if someone releases their project as Open Source I'm going to treat it like Open Source, because that's what the movement is about, and trying to reverse the legal progress we've made by constructing new moral barriers in front of reuse is harmful to that movement. When we say that people have a moral right to reuse, adapt, and share our code, we mean it.
It could be worse. There are Western countries with blasphemy laws.
Democrats want to destroy Trump and every one of his supporters. And that is the truth. Ps. He did not call for insurrection. The blm and antifa violence and rioting all summer was far worse than what happened at the Capitol. What kind of America do you want? Go ahead and downvote/ban me here for the truth. Democrats are the true Nazis/Fascists. Think about it. Get your head out of cnn’s ass.
Ah good point, yes, at those lengths you really don't want ballscrews, they are impossible to support and will warp. But for short distance (up to 8' or so) with a support on either end they are fine.
If it can emulate x86, is there really a motivation for developers to switch to ARM? (I don't have an M1 and don't really know what it's like to compile stuff and deploy it to "the cloud.")
I don't think most of Amazon's behavior actually violates any norms and values of traditional open source communities.

I think instead we are finding that norms and values of traditional open source communities are in some ways contradictory/inconsistent; that there can be competing interests where it isn't true that either one of them is the one that "opensource norms and values" privileges; or that the traditional "norms and values" don't necessary lead to the world that enthusiasts had fantasized about.

In a lot of these discussions, I think the underlying basic thing is that some are alleging, often implicitly, that included in the "norms and values of open source" are that if anyone is making money from value provided by open source, it should be authors of that open source, or at least they should get a cut.

I don't think that is in fact one of the traditional norms and values of open source community. In some ways it's even counter to the tradition.

The actual world/ecosystem around open source has evolved to be very different than the one imagined by traditional norms and values though. Compare to how apache httpd was originally written -- 6 or 8 people, each from a different organization, collaborated on company time each getting paid by their employer, to produce something of value to all of their employers, where the only desired 'profit' was the thing being available for all to use.

That is sort of a stereotypical traditional fantasy of open source. It is of software being created without a profit motive, in an ecosystem where people would contribute to such things on 'company time' (they had a steady salary from some company already). The more people using the software you wrote, the better, and you never wanted a cut of their profits -- that is the fantasy of traditional open source norms and values.

That is not the world we ended up with though.

So the problem is that now it is "obvious" to some people that if we wrote the the thing, and then formed a company around that thing we wrote -- it's not "fair" if someone else is making money from it without giving us a cut.

But this isn't a value encoded into open source licenses at all, and that wasn't an oversight, it was intentional because this wasn't in fact a traditional "norm and value" of open source at all, and in fact it is in some ways counter to the actual traditional norms and values, one of which I would say was: Your desire to make a profit from this code should not in fact be allowed to prevent anyone else from using it. It is ElasticSearch which is acting contradictory to norms and values of open source in believing nobody should be able to use their software without giving them a cut of profits from it.

These disputes will keep happening, not because some companies are violating the "norms and values" of open source, but because the actual traditional norms and values of open source are increasingly unable to power a sustainable economy where people can get paid (in the manner they think they deserve?) while producing open source.
I think it's less about difficulty, and more about causing bugs when you're having to switch back and forth between indexing styles. It's just a footgun; it's not difficult to not pull the trigger, but if you do it often enough, statistics start to kick in.
In theory you can compensate for this by detecting the movement/vibration and moving the cutter to compensate. You "only" need 100khz sensors, fast processing and super quick actuators. You can lower this a bit with lower depth of cut and slower feed rates.

Like I said in theory. In practice we don't really have the ability to sense that well. While drivers that are that quick exist, they are exotic, or have limited range of motion.
They signalled to all of us the virtue of "I don't mind if you ignore me".
Sure, there is something to be said for reciprocating the generosity offered to you by taking only what you need.

I think this can become a complicated game of accounting though. Did Amazon take more than they need or did they just build a useful cloud service on top of a widespread open and free product that was released intentionally under those terms?

When Elastic chose the Apache license, what was the goal? Was it to allow as many people to benefit from the software as possible? If so, Amazon is clearly advancing that goal, not hindering it.

Or is the idea that Amazon is somehow blocking Elastic from competing in the cloud search space? Elastic is growing quite rapidly and Amazon's use of ES seems to have only accelerated that growth, so I don't really buy that either.

Furthermore consider this: Is Elastic reciprocating the generosity offered by Apache and the Lucene project, to which they basically did the same thing that Amazon did to them?
I think the original ban was due to worry that the corneal flap couldn’t withstand the g-forces. As more data came in, it seems like it’s a pretty low risk. Same with the pressures exerted while diving underwater
Yep, it's also incompatible with virtually all copyleft open source licenses. So if you were using any AGPLv3 code with elastic you now have to switch to Amazon's fork.
California legislation targets police use of license plate readers
It is on the help screen. Look again.

Left column, 10th item.
I miss when stores in malls and the like would have weird contraptions of that sort (mobiles, pendulums, ball/marble race tracks, etc.) to catch your eye.
> ironically including those from AWS and their employees

Does AWS ever contribute anything that isn't an AWS integration? I'm not asking rhetorically -- those are the only kind of "contribution" I've ever seen from them.
This lack of clarity in law will likely result in huge issues in the sale of your startup if you ever go that route. Who wants to buy a potential lawsuit because of a database selection?
Trademarks are not a requirement for defining terminology. The word "cake" is not trademarked, but if I sell you a used car tire when you buy a "cake" from me, I still lied and misled you about the product.
In my experience it was that by Node regardless of how many cpus or ram the node had.

Regardless very expensive.
Block certain ads > Turn off personalized ads

https://support.google.com/ads/answer/2662922?hl=en

Once you've turned off personalization, Google will no longer use your info to personalize your ads. Ads can still be targeted with info like your general location or the content of the website you’re visiting.
Minimalistic round calendar with a plenty of white space to make notes
Some M1 Macs Affected by Fast User Switching Screensaver Bug
So I guess the options are now to use the “OpenDistro” [0] or the SSPL distro maintained by Elastic.

It’s too bad that Elastic is no longer open source, but respect the companies choice to close source their stuff.

Will be interesting if Amazon just maintains their fork or abandons it to make something else.

I’m not familiar with elastic as a project and not sure how many community contributions they have, but expect that to shrink as I’m not sure many OSS developers will freely contribute to non-OSS projects.

As for trademark stuff, I expect a renaming like Hudson/Jenkins.

[0] https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch
> Then after a period of time, typically 3-4 years, but not more than 5 years, the restrictions lapse, and the source code automatically converts to an Open Source license, in our case Apache 2.0.

I’m not familiar with this type of license. Any idea how/when this time frame is decided? Is it 3-5 years from software release?

I guess I’m confused by the use of “automatically converts” with a vague timeline. If it’s automatic why isn’t the time of “automatic” conversion more definitively known? What’s the event that triggers the change?
There are several newer boards from Bart (including the 6-pack which has some add on modules).

Grbl ESP32 is great. Easily the best of the firmwares I've used so far.
I looked up Canon's and Nikon's lithography numbers yesterday and was shocked to see that they barely make any money off their lithography businesses, considering that both companies make DUV machinery. Although they don't have the street cred of ASML, they are important because (A) there's a shortage, and (B) the demand side of the machinery market needs to foster competition in order to keep ASML from gouging its customers.

To go even further than your comment (with which I agree, 5nm isn't the center of AMD's income right now), TSMC isn't even making most of its wafer revenue from 5nm and 7nm. Straight from the horse's mouth (Wendell Huang, CFO):

"Now, let's move on to the revenue by technology. 5-nanometer process technology contributed 20% of wafer revenue in the fourth quarter, while 7-nanometer and 16-nanometer contributed 29% and 13%, respectively. Advanced technologies, which are defined as 16-nanometer and below, accounted for 62% of wafer revenue. On a full-year basis, 5-nanometer revenue contribution came in at 8% of 2020 wafer revenue. 7-nanometer was 33% and 16-nanometer was 17%."

https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2021/01/14/ta...
Is that really a screw up? Companies pay for certain tolerances on their products. I think it's more likely someone acknowledged your anecdote was possible and decided the cost/benefit analysis worked out to that being most profitable. Most things don't have to fit like Lego (while some things have to fit even better than Lego).
Professional laptops don’t last that long, and a lot of developers are given MBPs for their work. I personally expect that I’ll get a M1 laptop from my employer within the next 2 years. At that point the pressure to migrate from x86 to ARM will start to increase.
I am not sure if that was meant as criticism but if so, could you be more specific for those of us who are not familiar with the domain?
It really isn't, though? I think redux introduces a LOT of complexity and much prefer something like Mobx-State-Tree, but React has been a total breeze.
I kept feeling like I was reading the same thing over and over and just not finding out what exactly Amazon is doing now that it won't be able to do in the future. Skimming the links to the blog post and FAQ didn't help much.

Whatever it is it's pretty deep in the weeds. It looks like the intent is for most users to be unaffected; non-AWS cloud providers to be unaffected; even AWS's Elastic Cloud to be unaffected; but AWS has to stop doing something with specific regard to Elastic Search and I can't figure out what it is.
Emulation is no way to estimate performance.
> The secret service is great, but I don't see them clearing a mile of taxiway in multiple directions for the safety of the aircraft.

I do not know the exact security bubble of the Secret Service, but I think you are mistaken. AF1 creates a bubble around it on the ground for everything: space, fuel, people, food, etc. They definitely control the area immediately around the plane. I would guess further than 1mi. Why? 50BMG can easily reach that far.
They're not law enforcement
Interesting, especially in comparison with other motions for Open Source via AWS. Mongo is the other big name that comes to mind, as well as Redis.
"...players from Microsoft left to join Microsoft in...", wat?
I have never seen the Redis maintainer(s) complain about it though.

Would be interesting to compare/contrast, what leads to the difference.

They do the same with lots of products really. Postgres and MySQL too for instance. Also never seen postgres or mysql maintainance teams complain about it.

What are the contextual differences that make it a point of conflict with authors/maintainers in one case but not others?
It's worth saying that CPU design isn't like software. Intel and AMD cores are fairly different, and the ISA is the only thing that unites them.

If X86 finally goes, and Intel and AMD both switched elsewhere we'd be seeing the same battle as usual but in different clothes.

On top of the raw uarch design, there is also the peripherals and ram standard etc. etc.
It seems like Amazon is using their retail strategy here. It is basically white labeling the product. Just find a popular product. Copy the apis and call it amazon x. Open source license make it even easier.
It's ugly but it's not "incomprehensible".

They got a monarchy. That means something. The monarchy serves as a kind of sacred cultural identity and attacking the monarchy is like attacking the society itself.

Places like England have more evolved monarchies, where saying something against royals won't land someone in jail, but the same sentiment is there. The only way to "dismantle it" is to wait and do it in steps over generations. Even Thailand is doing that now. The royals are largely symbolic and don't exercise direct political power. But there's still a strong cultural attachment.
I was wondering if it was developed to help promote TF more to finance firms.
> Has that ever happened or is that just an argument to let politicians keep their power?

Yes? American history is full of situations like Jim Crow, redlining, anti lgbtq legislation, lack of support for people with disabilities, criminalization of people experiencing homelessness, etc.
This guy is an elite researcher, so this approach works for him. Try doing that as a regular backend guy and you'll get a puzzled look from management, followed by a boot to the posterior.
In short, Amazon don't follow law of trademarks. Then, Elastic instead of enforcing their rights in court, changes license in hope that Amazon will follow law of copyright. How do they expect it will work? I don't get it.
You can define arbitrary work views in Papyrus Autor, including distraction-free fullscreen mode, and there are plenty of reasonable "view" templates to chose from, too. It even has a special "typewriter mode" scrolling. I don't want to advertise the expensive subscription (don't think it's really worth it), but this program has been sold commercially since the 80s for a reason.
At it's core "modern medicine" is not actually a science. We've added a veneer of science, there's science at the edges, but at it's most basic form it remains an art from inception in the 19th century to today.

* Pharmaceuticals: science, mostly, but beware of "pseucutcals" like supplements and herbal remedies. Also beware of new ideas that cut into profits.

* Cutting-edge surgery: science

* Mental health: art, with a dose of science from big pharma

* General practice: mostly the art of laying on hands, distilled experience, a bit of research with your sales rep and whatever you took with you from medical school.

If this feels harsh, remember that, despite solid scientific evidence, it took over two decades for the conventional medical wisdom to move stomach ulcers from "caused by stress you need to relax" to "caused by helicobacter pylori we can treat it with a convenient antibiotic." Inertia is a helluva drug.
A vocoder would probably do a good job, considering it'd put the audio into a speech basis.
Those Days (2020)
Thank you for this comment. It’s a breath of insight in a sea of predictable (and perhaps justified) outrage.
The entire bitcoin blockchain is 11 years old and fits in $6 USD of hard drive space. The biggest problem is that the average transaction is now between $10 USD to $17 USD.
He Crusaded Against Gun Violence in Baltimore. Then He Was Shot and Killed
I think you are mistaken and have missed the recent news which OP is about, but I'm not totally sure what you are talking about.

Which license do you consider an OSS licensed elasticsearch?
How many legos do you have to have to build it and still have enough left over that you need a machine to sort through them?
Many people are fine with it when the centralized power is in the form of a corporation.
The license for the main Elasticsearch is that, but they have some proprietary features (Machine Learning etc.) which are under a proprietary license. Amazon copied code from another project which had stolen this proprietary code from Elastic and resold it under their own banner. https://www.elastic.co/blog/dear-search-guard-users
Your examples from the past were all knocked down (MS) or broken apart to keep the market available to competitors. Are you saying we should do this or just get money out of politics?
I find these kind of obscure, “don’t worry” posts to increase my worrying. Part of the simplicity of open source is that it’s available for easy audit. Having to hire lawyers to use a product means I probably won’t use it.

I also think having people saying “we’re open, but read the fine print” is not good for open source collaboration as it increases confusion and complexity.

Elastic is moving the way of a commercial software company. That’s perfectly fine as it’s their company, but it’s just different than open source.
isnt this what india china kazhakistan and other places are doing?
Also found MarkText, MIT Licensed: https://marktext.app/
I think the title covers that this is "why" the change occurred. Not the explanation of the license they changed to.
The COSS Monetization Reckoning Is Coming
Healthcare providers hope for better outcomes I'm sure, but it's true there's not much financial incentive in most cases. Your comment sort of suggests the model for such a service should be on a per-use model, covered by an insurance company when a doctor uses it for their patient. That's a trickier model than subscriptions, but it may be viable.
You will not find Thai people who support it, except cronies who benefit from the royal patronage network.

The lese majeste laws are simply the work of an autocratic leader and institution that positions itself above the law. Any ordinary Thai who might have been okay with these laws[1] during the reign of the last king (who did genuinely serve as a kind of emotional anchor for Thais, despite the self-enrichment of his family) certainly sees them for what they are: The frantic efforts of a demented, bizarre, spoiled boy-child to deflect criticism and cement power.

[1] Also remember, during the time of the last king, the laws were not really enforced. We all remember stories of black-out drunk Aussies pissing on a portrait of the king by a busy road getting arrested for it, but beyond those theatrical and scandalous episodes, the laws did not really affect many people until the new king took over.
Bad violence is against me and people I like, good violence is against people who I don't like — am I right?
this is one of the main reasons I bought a CNC- to automate work that I can do precisely, but am too lazy to complete.
On the other hand, as a result there are probably tens of millions to be made off a successful suit.