skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This may sound heretical but the idea of open sourcing commercial offerings always seemed like bad business to me. We are seeing it come to roost now with cloud providers selling a more desirable version of an open source platform that the makers of the platform.

If you strip everything down to first principles, you get paid because you have a valuable asset. That asset may be your skill, your time, a piece of land, a patent, etc. With open source, you give away your key asset and then you have nothing except the wish and hope that nobody takes it and eats your lunch with your own fork. Which is clearly what is happening in this case.

I am all for things being done as open source because you believe in the freedom of it, or it's fun for you, but it seems like a really bad way of getting programmers and businesses paid, if you're into that sort of thing.
Great stuff, I have a similar project using tailblocks and other tail related components.

I find most tail wind products start to look the same, similar to how everyone used bootstrap back in the day.
Tbh I never want to own a full EV. Many in the suburbs or country can’t afford to wait 20 min at a charging station. Many of us like the idea of EV, but also drive 100-200 miles a day or in cold weather or mountains, etc (all of which reduces the range of EV)
> The US narrowly avoided devolving into a permanent fascist state.

This is a huge exaggeration. As looney as things got in early January, I am still certain the FBI or if necessary US military would have removed Trump from office if he refused to leave office or attempted to declare martial law. They are sworn to defend the constitution, not the sitting President.

America is not truly defined by its right-or-left fringe elements, despite the clickbait you see on the web and in the 24/7 TV news cycle. 90% of Americans don’t spew vitriol on Twitter or hate the political opposition. Most people get along. But old-fashioned democracy, compromise and pragmatic centrism doesn’t get clicks or sell ads.
How can I become a fossil?
All fair, but I think it still bears calling out. Repeating a claim that's well-known to be bunk, and using the unqualified word "fact" to describe it, will sow a lot of confusion. Especially when discussing a case that already rests at the center of a great big gyre of misinformation and misconception.
> Many of us like the idea of EV, but also drive 100-200 miles a day.

Isn't the range of a Tesla already well over that? What holds you back if your range is only 200 miles? You can charge at home can't you?
One way you can see it is not fair in the least is that Google would decline to index the content were it allowed. That suggest that the content has little economic value to google.
My statements are pragmatic, based on the uptake of Tesla EVs in the marketplace versus consumers who want to drag a generator around with them to charge.
If my car could drive itself on the interstate highways, I'd gladly take days-long road trips. Let it drive itself while I work or sleep.

Not ideal for the environment, admittedly.
Imprinting and transference are real things, and the more you see the caregiver as a fully fledged human being, the more appealing that trap is.
It's in how you write it:

How did the Three Wise Men find their way to baby Jesus?

A*
> Some of the steps they take seem extreme - the Internet is a scarier place than I thought - but I've taken some of what they said to heart, rejected the rest in a calculated way, and realized realistically I was never that protected anyhow. So here we are.

What steps?
AGPL also harms adoption at companies because of the "invasive" nature of the license. Google, for example, bans the use of any AGPL software. It's too vague for the legal team to confidently understand the "bounds" of the copyleft license.

Permissive licenses like MIT/Apache have historically been what companies prefer to have when evaluating free software. And, generally, it hasn't been a problem for companies like Elastic because companies like Amazon didn't "take" profits from Elastic (and others).

What has shifted is that, where before, there was a "code of honor" that companies could use FOSS software and Elastic would benefit from the uptick in adoption via support contracts, community building libs + writing docs, and encouraging "network effects" for them.

The "cost" of being a FOSS company was lower than the "reaped" benefits of the network effects.

That has shifted with "predatory" behavior from companies like Amazon. That abuse of the "vulnerability" in the FOSS ecosystem is a tragedy of the commons. It means that companies have to be more cautious about what they choose to open source.

This is just my opinion, of course. As a founder of a software company though, I see this as a real struggle. I would prefer have https://refinery.io be an entirely open source tool and we make money via supporting the ecosystem.

Unfortunately, it just isn't clear cut. The best option that I see today is a model like what MongoDB and CockroachDB have with licenses like BSL. But, they're not truly "open source". And that sucks.

We are living in a time where there are no good answers in the face of exploitative behavior by companies like Amazon. It means companies like mine have to maintain a proprietary platform in order to make money.

As a developer, it hurts my ideals. As a business owner, it's a risk I can't afford to take. That's why this behavior is a problem for FOSS.
In case you missed it: Navalny found conclusive evidence of a cover-up for his poisoning [1] [2] [3]. But the best part is how he did it: caller ID spoof + social engineering. IMO exploiting the authoritarian nature/culture was really clever. Every time Kudryavtsev demurs about revealing more details, Navalny (as Ustinov) calls him by his full name. To me, it sounds like he's threatening him or reminding him of their relative position in the hierarchy. Each time, Kudryavtsev continues to spill the beans and give up co-conspirators.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/21/world/europe/russia-naval...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibqiet6Bg38

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwvA49ZXnf8
A YouTube lawyer does a pretty good break down of the case.

Parlers suit:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HFp5E7akgy8

Amazon response:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GB06JtDbtvU
they used to be, but not anymore. webextensions are usually not capable enough to support most of these protocols unless said protocols were designed to support the "web"
It sounds like you are suggesting that regulations should never change. Is that what you mean?
Both with Dropbox and Instacart, their business model didn't make sense to me. But they still became billion dollar companies that will go bankrupt in a few years after making many people really wealthy. I guess it's a different way to play the game
> That sounds good on paper, but what happens when your revenue doesn't closely correlate with the number of users?

I mean, moderation or no moderation, your overall costs are going to roughly correlate with your number of users. If you can't come up with some kind of revenue stream -- be it subscriptions, advertising, or donations -- your site is going to be a money pit.

Besides, depending on what kind of site you're operating, moderation can sometimes be managed by volunteers. Some high profile sites like 4chan make that work pretty well. But it depends on having dedicated volunteers who can agree to enforce rules, which isn't always easy.
Likewise in Australia, there's some great collections which you are free to wander through at your leisure.

Pretty much any publicly funded gallery has free admission.
“I’d wager a cup of water”

I like this phrase. I would like to borrow it if you don’t mind :)
Media in the US is a competitive field, so if a newspaper (NYT or other) withholds information that another media also has access to, then another media will likely publish the story anyway. In the US it's ok to republish facts that were published elsewhere, even if someone had sought at some point for the facts to remain secret. The same principle also gives us things like revenge porn, mugshot publishing, and the like. Some places might have more protections against publishing information, for example when it relates to private persons, but usually in the US what I've seen is that it ends up considered to go against the principle of free speech.
> The mistake cost them whichever rewards amazon are reaping

I disagree because if they had had it closed or non-free open source from the start, they would not have a $15 billion business. Partly because people wouldn't have adopted it, and partly because it is build on other open source projects (Lucene).

I don't think there is a scenario where they get their cake (an open source project and a vastly successful business) and get to eat it too (they have no competition).
I kind of wish for a future where Google withdraws from Australia, but it's highly unlikely.

Also, they never threatened to withdraw search altogether. I watched the parliamentary hearing live and from what I heard, they insinuated they may not continue "some services or features" if the laws are passed as-is.

Honestly though, the idea that Google should pay just for showing article links in results is absurd. Snippets is at best slightly more of an argument, but honestly they're making use of the og meta tags that these news sites have put in their website themselves.

It sets a horrible precedent if you have to pay others for the crime of linking to their content.
The Vision Jet uses the Garmin G3000 which is an upgraded version of the G1000 which is quickly becoming the standard avionics for general aviation (new) airplanes. Incidentally the Phenom 300 uses the G3000 as well.

If you can fly a G1000 in a Cirrus piston or Cessna, the G3000 is an easy transition.

The avionics and FMS of a typical airliner is positively COBOL by comparison. To get type rated in modern GA jets is pretty easy because the avionics are generally what you are already used to. However, the G1000/G3000 aren’t part 25 certified, however there is now a G5000 that is Part 25 legal, so I expect there to be some considerable improvements trickling up into the bigger jets. (Part 25 is basically “transport category” aircraft.)
They sample the SMART metrics once a day. Would more frequent samples would provide a better signal?

For example, perhaps the read errors number increases about once a week. But in the week before a failure, it increases once a day. Or in the day before a failure, it increases once an hour.

OS-level metrics could also be predictive: write latency, i/o queue length, communication errors, and checksum errors in read data.
Well, yes and no. Like "The traces were found in passenger jets[44][45] BA875 and BA873 from Moscow to Heathrow"
The biggest problem with the F35 is that there is a cockpit at all. The human immediately makes the platform less capable and 20x more expensive
Leaking a few drops of gasoline probably won't do any damage. Shorting or arcing 800V is several levels of "nope" above that. You can be dead in a fraction of a second.
Uber Offs!
That's assuming that using fraudulently acquired IP allocations is a normal and common occurrence. It is not. This is very distinctly abnormal.
https://rosenzweig.io/blog/asahi-gpu-part-1.html
Works, but unfortunately the vault has to be unlocked in a non-private window first.
Ask HN: Anyone using a WireGuard VPN they’d recommend?
What will they do when Firefox is defunct and has no more active development?
I quite often drive beyond the range of an EV, to a place where there are no chargers at all. If I could just have a little range extender motor that I could put petrol in and use to charge overnight, I could fully commit to EVs right now forever. But I can't yet. That little bit of pragmatism would make it all work. It'd even fit in the front cargo space of a Tesla!
The point is that there's a difference between medical doctors as a profession, and medical doctors by training engaged in research.

It's not a homogenous demographic, and it doesn't have a substantial overlap. So there is a very large (super-majority) of medical doctors who have absolutely no training in research, statistics etc. Because it's not what they do - they are not scientists. Their training is about their obligations to follow current developments in best practice, drug prescriptions etc. (or the same but for surgical technique) and apply it. They do not do science, they don't even necessarily particularly understand the scientific method.

So it is absolutely incorrect to imply that all medical professionals are "the scientific community". They're not. Those which participate in and publish research are but that is not even a significant fraction of their population.

Comparisons about what general population surgeons and medical doctors historically reacted to changes in practice does not say anything about the idea that these people represent a peer-reviewed scientific consensus, because they didn't. They represent the equivalent of a mechanic rejecting manufacturer recommendations on fuel quality and complaining about it to their colleagues.
Have you considered BSL [0]?
The fresh versions are source-available, but older versions convert to open source (GPL, Apache or something) after a few years.

You can still build a business on your software -- as long as you keep developing, no competitor will be able to use up to date version. And people who want to rely on open source can do so, knowing that the software will get open-sourced eventually, no matter what the company decides.

[0] https://mariadb.com/bsl-faq-adopting/
How is it possible we only have one grainy picture of this person? I mean this in all seriousness. I don't think I could go around the corner without being on at least 4 cameras.

Is this some sort of joke the FBI is playing on us? Do they really not have any more evidence than this?
Ok you're right. We would need more data points to determine whether the enforcement was selective or not.
Maybe there is a middle ground for companies to use SSPL/BSL with a "profit sharing" clause or similar. It's still not "open source" in the traditional sense. But it could be a "win/win" scenario?
The quotes might signal opposition, but they also might just signal fuzziness. E.g. This is a word that you're probably familiar with used in a specific jargony way that you cannot deduce merely from the standard definition.
In the balancing test the judge asserted that granting the TRO would do damage to AWS, which is laughable. The bias here is clear.
Some things can not be easily purchased with money. Getting paid twice as much may let me retire faster. But what if I don't want to retire? What about people, who actually love their jobs?

Intel engineers design chips, used by billions of people. There is a certain value, placed on such jobs. And it appears, that Intel management is happy to exploit that value.
got it. I will start flagging any comment that in puts down a company with comments like "company X is toxic/scammy/lying/dicks" etc.... Lots of those all over.
Ehhh that is not a fair comparison... if you get some petroleum on your hand there is no immediate danger as long as you are not near an open flame. Even if you do manage to light yourself on fire you have a decent chance of surviving.

If you get some kilovolts backed by 100 amps on your hands you are pretty much instantly dead.
The difference between us is that you are making an effort to jump to the stupidest possible claim you can think of, like here where you have managed to read "should not plan to" and twisted it into "should be prohibited from".
+1. There is no reason to downvote a professional opinion. This is not reddit.
Is it to their advantage to sell lamps that last much, much longer?
The essentially over enemy territory and wasn’t really a war are important qualifications. Compare the odds of a downed pilot avoiding capture in a WWII bombing mission over Germany with the majority of missions over Afghanistan and it’s clear they where contested territory. Still high risk, but also a very different situation.

Close Air Support is definitely a major role for the F-35, but you have troupes there so it’s contested territory. Patrolling no fly zones is currently much better suited for drone aircraft, but might become important again.

So yes exceptions exist, but you really don’t want to run air to air combat missions out of air force bases anywhere near contested airspace. The risk vs rewards very much favor longer flights with mid air refueling.
9ms 50%ile node latency is good, but that number is normally 1ms for big internet services. See https://dl.acm.org/cms/attachment/3658918e-7081-4676-beec-aa... Mission critical stuff goes even faster like BigTable which has numbers 4x better than the figure.
If you live in the suburbs or country, there is no need to ever wait at a charging station since you presumably should be charging at your home. This is just like charging your phone at night, just on a bigger scale.
Amazon Fresh.
He's an anti-feminist, Bell Curve supporter whose community tolerates white nationalists:

https://web.archive.org/web/20180912215243if_/https://www.re...
It’s not a chilling effect. It’s how value is exchanged in a free market.

Open source makes sense when many companies benefit economically from sharing resources to develop common software/tooling.

Open sourcing code from inception can lead to adoption and create profits.

At some point that code may be more valuable to another company in some way and they profit from it.

I don’t see Linus Torvalds complaining about companies that profit from Linux but then again Elastic Search has shareholders to answer to and their trademark has been violated.
Does “clearly” mean you have evidence? It sounds like your argument is that everyone will cheat if they have the chance.
It seems like a lot of companies want to open source their software which would otherwise be a key secret sauce in order to get popularity, recognition, and traction. Once they're well known, in this case, Elastic; they are complaining about how others are taking advantage of their position. It's shooting themselves in the foot.

It's kind of like an Uber model - offer taxi services while bleeding cash to wipe out the entire Taxi industry (Short term success) to get fame and popularity, get AOUs and ARPUs going; and then have a difficult time monetizing their mistakes.
Hybrids and EVs are very different. And what you need to do to make one does not translate very well to the other.

Before either hybrids or EVs were commercially viable, The Innovator's Dilemma included a case study done for the car industry on the switch to electric. The case study concluded that, based on the history of disruptive innovation, the requirements of driving, and the trends in batteries, electric vehicles would become economically viable around 2020. It also concluded that traditional manufacturers would pursue hybrids but would have trouble moving into the EV market.

As a prior correlated example, shortly before steam became competitive for trans-oceanic travel, sailboat manufacturers briefly produced hybrid sail/steam ships. In so doing they made acceptable compromises to sail to allow for the reliability of steam near land. However none of the companies that did that survived into the steamship era.

In fact every detail of that case study has happened as predicted except that they predicted that EVs would start at the bottom of the market and move up, while Tesla started at the top and moved down. However the jury is still out on who will wind up winning the EV market - Tesla or one of the Chinese or Indian manufacturers who produce low-end EVs in higher quantity than Tesla. If it is China or India, then that case study will work out in every detail.

But the point remains. Designing an electric engine whose job is to be a boost to a gasoline engine, compromising both power and range, is not on a natural technological path to a pure electric vehicle. And history suggests that companies that go that route will have trouble when pressure comes to switch to the more natural technology.

Therefore Toyota's migration to hybrids is not only not a move to EVs, but it was both predicted and is suggestive that they would have trouble moving to pure EVs.
Last.fm tells me that in the last 2 years I've listened to songs from 2,015 different albums (almost exclusively via Spotify). That goes up to 4,238 in the last 5, and increases by a few hundred per year thereafter.

The top 50 albums over those 2 years are a quarter of my listens, the top 100 are just over a third.

Even if two-thirds of that album count is bad metadata (e.g. the same song counted against multiple different albums/compilations/etc.) it would still be prohibitively expensive to consume anywhere near the same breadth of content if I had to acquire perpetual rights (from Bandcamp/iTunes/etc.) for everything rather than effectively renting them out for a single play (from Spotify).

The other thing I like about the streaming model is that artist remuneration correlates to how impactful their work subsequently is to my life (i.e. how many times I listen to it both during discovery and then over the subsequent years/decades) rather than how effective their marketing is at convincing me to buy the album up front.
Looks like a potential malware artifact.
I’m homeless and pay $10/mo for a terminal app.

The value is in the eye of the beholder... FWIW I used to be a pretty well paid software engineer, and I run as much of my personal IT as possible... so for me, the $10/mo is worth it to save seconds 100s of times per month and make hours of experience per month pleasant.
I fear that that moment is not all that far off, given the direction that Mozilla has been taking with respect to Firefox development recently.

Chrome might be playing hardball, but Mozilla seems determined to just walk away due to incompetent management.
I don't know enough about law to be able to tell if it's being presented with or without a bias, but that intro in the first link did not give me hope
Thank you. These look lovely. Do you have any plans to add dark mode support to them?
As soon as you say something that the OGs dont agree with you get flagged and censored.

What you say is true, people often downvote things they don't agree with.

However, I think you're also getting downvoted because you're using words like "fanboys" and "screwed". People on HN tend to react very negatively to inflamatory language.
I think giving a USB key or login details with access info to your password manager to a trusted friend or family member might be preferable to having a paper binder that could be lost in a disaster situation.
>If you want to offer ElasticSearch as a service, you have to open-source your entire hosting stack including UI.

It's worse than that: you need to release your entire hosting stack under the SSPL. It's extremely unlikely that you're able to do this. Hope your servers aren't running Linux! (Or bash or the GNU coreutils or...)

If it were acceptable for the rest of the stack to be under another free software license, I'm not actually sure I'd be opposed to it. But yeah, as-is it sure looks like they've just written the license such that it's impossible for a hosting provider to comply.
I’m not sure Toyota would have invested in the super charging network. I’m also not sure a Tesla would have been good without it.

If you want to do a road trip in an EV Tesla is often the best/only option.
Being able to walk away is often a good bargaining chip to have during negotiations. Google should be careful however because plenty of people might just simply accept this and change search providers away from them.

Perhaps gmail is next? Google Search is a flagship for Google. If they're prepared to let that sail away then Gmail can't be out of the question either.

Interesting times.