skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I find it both incredibly humorous and saddening to see Python devs excited about finally getting string interpolation.
Because I can explain Mercurial's mental model to anybody. And I have--from the CEO to the secretary--pretty much anybody can understand Mercurial.

Git, not so much. The whole "staging" area is something that the vast majority of developers simply do not need and would be better off without. The UX of the commands is abysmal--commands that change what they do based upon whether the argument is a file or a directory? Are you insane?

I could go on and on and on ...

However, git has won. I keep my repos in Mercurial and transfer them out to Git for public consumption. :(
Furthermore, the only people who have control over the energy consumption of the mining network are the bitcoin miners. They have extreme amounts of attention directed at energy efficiency. Miners are thinking about electricity costs very often as it's the base cost of operation.

There have been many step changes in efficiency. On a per-hash basis (and security of the network is directly proportional to number/difficulty of hashes) I'd estimate the efficiency of bitcoin mining has increased a million- or even billion-fold in the last decade.

Miners are making their decisions based on the price, which is set by the market: the amorphous sentiment of a crowd of millions of strangers. The price of bitcoin is directly proportional to the rational amount of energy miners should expend mining it.

There is no "make it more efficient": it's already being pushed to be extremely efficient all the time. That you believe bitcoin is not efficient enough is irrelevant and probably unfounded. The market likes it, and you're yelling at the market about efficiency, but the market already decided what the rational amount of electricity to expend securing the network and settling transactions based on the current price.

The only reason you think it's using "too much" energy is because you don't understand the security value of chained hashing.
My experience with turtles is confined to reef diving.

Turtles are unusual in that they are extremely tolerant of hypoxia. It may be that they have adapted to a relatively shallow network that doesn't parse much, but is pretty good at extracting the most meaningful features (oxygen/energy efficiency favored over information efficiency)

I wonder if this patterns persists for other reptiles.
So then Facebook engineers aren’t very bright, or are incredibly deluded. Either would explain some of the behavior we see.
> It's more figurehead than actual rule of thumb and the transition from rule-control to being a legacy rubber stamp has been something that shifted a while ago.

TFA is literally about how it's actually not just a legacy rubber stamp, and the Queen gets involved more than a figurehead would.

> As an aside - if America had a royal family, the prospect of Trump on legal currency bank notes would be zero.

We don't know that. What if the Trump family was the royal family? I don't think this is an unfair question - Prince Philip is probably just as much of a racist as Donald Trump is, if not more so...
The Duchy of Cornwall produces all kinds of goods which are exported to Europe. Brexit will definitely affect it.
This old argument for victim blaming made sense when the UX for publishing content brought to mind submitting a thesis

When the UX is deliberately designed to make is seem more like a free flowing discussion in a bar, the responsibility is no longer sorely with the user.
>If you think this is an objectively a bad thing, you should probably compare the per capita excess mortality of China vs the US for 2020...

Authoritarian regimes are much better equipped than free societies to handle pandemics. That doesn't somehow excuse nor justify crimes against humanity at terrifying scale.

>The Rust community is very diverse and include people from all around the world, including a huge number of Chinese developers.

Including Chinese developers is great. Including a large tech company that has no choice but to act as an arm of its authoritarian government isn't. These are two very different things.

>Not giving China a voice means that "negotiation" is not an option that China can choose when there is a dispute, forcing them to pick some other option instead.

Generally speaking when large-scale atrocities occur, the concern isn't with giving the entity committing said atrocities a voice so much as it is things like international condemnation and exclusion until the abhorrent behavior ceases. Negotiating with and giving voice to authoritarian regimes simply enables them to act in bad faith. History is littered with examples of this. Atrocities become bargaining chips, and that is grotesque.
That’s an interesting point. Makes me think of the loops that are required to be jumped through to enable a trustless digital currency like Bitcoin. The entire network, with transactions of about 1kB in size, can do at most 7 transactions per second (3-4 orders of magnitude lower than Visanet, which itself is lower throughput than all the world’s physical cash transactions could theoretically do if everyone bought one or two things a day on average). That’s the same data throughput of a mid-1990s modem, but with power consumption of about 10GW to secure the transactions.

Pure trustlessness indeed has a massive computational and mental overhead. Some compromise (like the Lightning network, or even a central trusted banking institution) is essential to get anything done. (Even with Bitcoin, you’re trusting open source software, often an actual intermediary like Coinbase, etc... Try to do it without any crypto libraries whatsoever—writing it really from scratch—and it is an enormous project. How many people teach themselves Finite Field theory before doing Bitcoin because they take the trustlessness seriously?)
"The professional...must fight to preserve the naivety that the layman already possesses" - Bill Evans, one of the great jazz pianists.
Mercurial also made the really good decision to support Windows long before git was even functional there. I've got clients who have been using Mercurial on Windows for more than 10 years now. They email bundles to each other and have no problems, whatsoever, and don't even notice git. One quote: "Why would I want to go back to a central repository that I have to be connected to? That's stupid."

Most Windows users, sadly, are simply too backward to use anything that isn't tightly integrated into the Microsoft ecosystem. So, it never really helped Mercurial that much.

GitHub, however, was what drove git.

Unfortunately, Github is to source control as PowerPoint is to presentations. It works--but it's a dumbed-down default and nobody thinks about the fact that there are sometimes much better alternatives for your use case.
Good news, you don't have to wonder how many GlobalSign issued, just look at the Excel file attached to the ticket and you can see all 113 of their "oopsies".
Now? Almost certainly not.

On the side of centralization is a market worth unimagined billions, and perhaps seven providers that already routinely lobby to get what they want.

On the side of decentralization? Little guys who are already being bullied and don't have the resources. Politicians who have other extremely dangerous problems currently, including and especially those in their own industry. Don't expect their help for a long time. Smaller service providers who only want the chance to switch sides. And large independent organizations (businesses, schools, governments) who are really only interested in a cheaper bill for the same service quality.

Look, we have struggled to fix the MITM/plain text problem and spam/origin problem for well over 20 years, and the Internet Age is maybe 30? It's extremely likely that the only way to fix the core design problems with email is to have the service consolidate to a small consortium of services, have them improve the base design, and then fracture the monopolies. That's going to take decades.

And mail is still such a pain in the butt for a user document database. And the user experience is a joke! Asynchronous delivery, best effort failure? I mean, what? The average web page is orders of magnitude larger now! People complain about FAX and FTP.
From the standpoint of a programmer who doesn't want to suffer through constant DIY chunking and packing (very close to my personal definition of hell), a CUDA core looks a lot like a CPU core. From the point of view of someone not writing the code, a CUDA core looks like merely another FPU.
Subject: Re: screen crash processing combining characters
I agree, it's nearly impossible to stop thinking on a dime. What you ignore gets invited back into your head. If I try not to think of a pink elephant, it only reinforces that image in my head. I found that tiring it out through a diverse set of means is the only way to drain the gas, so to speak. I also watch/read/listen to dreadfully boring media to mentally tune out.
CEO of Unilever: “Every Country Is Shifting Towards Plant-Based Diets”
You're thinking of coder.com.

I think it has changed a bit and it's not as easy to get started with their service, but you can still host the server yourself:

https://github.com/cdr/code-server
Dependency Hijacking Software Supply Chain Attack Hits More Than 35 Orgs
Hey, much like the other comment said, Opera Mini made a lasting impact on me. 10 years ago, I was a teenager from Serbia living in a shitty high school dorm at the time with Internet being cut off at 11pm (with a pretty busy day before). My crappy Sony Ericsson with very limited data was all I had to spend nights learning and feeding my curiosity and passion for programming. Opera Mini was a game changer. I read source code, blogs, docs, wiki, posted in forums and chat rooms, even pirated some programming books using it.

Many years later I'm doing great and I honest to God think I wouldn't have gotten as far as I did if it weren't for your work.

Thank you.

And that was a cool story, would love to hear more :)
Thank goodness. I didn't realize that the unsoundness was now contained to unstable features.
This is quite an alarming attitude that seems to be most common among the Python community. It seems like the 2->3 transition filtered out devs who felt strongly about backwards compatibility and the remaining devs have relatively little patience for objections against breaking changes.

There is a huge benefit to keeping existing code working as it is. Both for businesses and the ecosystem. It benefits everyone if the language does everything it can to keep that intact.
If the royalty went away and the UK took possession of its lands, castles, and holdings, it could make a killing off tourism to those private or semi-private residences. Other European countries that are no longer monarchies do this just fine.
Well the main source of turmoil would be in replacing the office since theoretically all the powers in the country devolve from the head of state.

I gotta say that I find the rabid anti-monarchal take a lot of americans have online kinda weird. I wouldn't say I feel "ruled" in any real sense by the British crown even though it is technically true. The Prime Minister and the House of Commons are where the actual legislative power rests and as much as the Governor-General is technically the commander in chief I highly doubt if she called for a revolution against the civilian government that would get any traction.

Furthermore I gotta say that given a lot of the other options I LIKE the hoky kind of odd but deeply rooted ceremony that surrounds our governmental proceedings.

Is it silly that the prime minister has to be presented to the Governor-General to get invested and leads a Privy Council (and for that matter is called a Prime Minister)? Yeah, but it's been WORKING that way for a long time and that inertia is important, especially I think nowadays with a lot of uncertainty from the largest democracy in the world.
Same. I run a 10/10 (mail-tester.com) mail server for myself personally on a VPS from Digital Ocean. Its IP address is on Charter's permanent blocklist and has been for years so I cannot email my mom. I set up a SMTP relay via a free-tier sendgrid and it worked for a while but then that relay got added to spamlists and I could basically only email my mom. Presumably the paid sendgrid setups allow a bit more resilience against getting on those lists.
https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1359209259385294850

> Yikes, someone found a buffer overflow in GNU screen that's reachable via irssi... it's almost like the old days. The reporter says it was found in the wild, apparently used to DoS a minecraft server.
Haven't thought of that book in years but it's the perfect thing to cite here. Bravo.
> Who cares? I don't mean "who cares about this article"; I found it worth the read. What I really mean is: is there really that much interest, or even that much of interest, in the edits of peoples' autobiographical sound bites?

For stalkers, I bet there's plenty of demand.
What you are missing is authenticity. The point Denis is making is it has nothing to do with the atoms but the sanctity of the item. Topps and MLB issued a piece of cardboard when now they could issue a token verifiable on Ethereum.

Let’s suppose you are a huge Justin Bieber fan. Justin sends you a Signal message. You’d feel a frisson of excitement, wouldn't you? But why? He didn’t shake your hand. He didn’t sign your copy of Justin Bieber: Never Say Never. No, it was just some text that appeared on your screen. And that’s the point: it was sent from Bieber himself. That moment is precious, and when an artist puts their work on the blockchain they capture that same kind of moment.
Fair points, though some counterarguments:

- Not all systems make user data (or all user data) visible. UUIDs make guessing or traversing the address space harder.

- Certain types of attacks are easier given known, guessable, predictable, or sequential identifiers. UUIDs mitigate these attacks.

- Certain types of system confidentiality are generally easier to maintain with UUIDs. (Unless, of course, you then hand over the full listing, as Google did with G+.)

- Where merging systems, UUIDs may (or may not) help avoid namespace collisions. (Merging disparate systems with independent UID conventions is a notoriously fraught problem.)

On sites helping search engines: so far as I've been able to suss out, Facebook actually leans strongly the other way. I don't seem to get much insight to Facebook by trying to do site:facebook.com limited searches (through DDG, which is to say, Bing, or Google). FB's view seems to be that if you want to see or search content on the site, you create an account and go there through the account to find content. I don't often find myself interested in searching FB myself, but for as large a site as it is, it seems to turn up in results remarkably less often than other notably closed/annoying domains, say, Scribd or Pinterest.

Even as of 2015, FB's representation among various traditional and social-media options for a set of arbitrary interest queries was relatively modest (though higher than I'd recalled before going back to look at my results) and I believe (based on impressions rather than focused research) it's become more search-engine opaque since:

https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/3hp41w/trackin...
Get away from computers for three days. Camp in the woods. I guarantee it will be easier to quiet down your mind.
Parliament has failed many times, including at least once in the last decade. When it does, the Queen appoints whoever can form a credible government to be the prime minister.
In US law this idea is called defamation per se. [0] If a statement is defamation per se, then the court can skip analysis of whether the statement is defamatory. Defamation per se statements are divided among several categories, one of which is stating that the plaintiff is unfit to practice his or her profession. Accusing an attorney of being "a scam solicitor" falls into that category.

[0] https://www.findlaw.com/injury/torts-and-personal-injuries/w...
The problem with that argument is that the greater efficiency will just drive for harder difficulty, and thus require more hashing per payout. Ultimately the power consumption will always regress to the total payout divided by the average electricity price no matter the efficiency of the miners. Some different non-mined altcoins don't have as much of this issue and I wish they were more popular/more people tried to figure out how to make them work better since they still seem to be in their infancy due to the other attacks they are vulnerable to.
The Queen just might know something about Prime Ministers that would be helpful.
That is a nice feature of OSM, and I've done this a few times.

But I wonder if there is any propagation delay from OSM to Lyft. When I made some changes to OSM data, I expected the Strava app to pick up the changes for route creation, but they don't receive updates constantly. Instead, it took several months until the changes took effect on Strava.
Play Diplomacy
> in which I still needed to look at template code every time I did a HashOfArray/ArrayOfHash

Honestly, that sounds like someone that didn't bother to learn what's actually going on and understand what the language was doing. I mean, that's fine, we all do that... but I wouldn't blame the language for that. Perl makes nested data structures very easy and obvious once you learn what's going on. You just need to actually learn it and not rely on the little shortcuts Perl allows you to use to never make that next step to learning exactly why.

Perl will "just do what you mean" so much that it papers over some of the early learning friction points enough that they build up to a later point. At that point, people either throw up their hands and move on because it's annoying when some shortcut they've relied on isn't working in this one weird instance, or they learn what's really going on (Hint: it's almost always either about understanding references or context at this stage) and it's no longer a problem.

> Try and find a single python developer who would give up their f-strings now.

Things like f-strings and list comprehensions in Python are the exact thing that Python devs used to point out as too complex in other languages (I mean, f-strings look to be pretty much just string interpolation). I think that's evidence that perhaps a language isn't always best suited for all audiences. Python used to be aimed at learning and easy of understanding and use. Now that it's often more targeted for complex engineering projects, you get stuff sneaking in that was specifically avoided by design initially.
Just fix the root problem. Copyright should last fifteen years max. The system now just incentivizes companies to hoard old stuff and eschew making risky new stuff.
Without computers, or at home away from the mainframe, we really had slide rules for just about everything you would need to routinely calculate.

A lot of them are sponsored or provided by corporations or trade associations, TRW provided the ICBM Effectiveness & Survivability model which looks really useful:

https://osgalleries.org/collectors/davis/info_and_image.cgi?...

Even more handy would be the Ground Zero/Bomb Damage slide rule:

https://osgalleries.org/collectors/davis/info_and_image.cgi?...

This is an outstanding black slide rule and its maker has remained anonymous, it's pretty dark but I guess a bright enough flash of light is expected to be available when you need to do this calculation.
https://www.increment.me/
I live in Seattle. I don't bother reporting property crime. The police won't investigate, the prosecutor won't charge people. Property crime is far underreported.
The article I linked lists two such examples. More importantly, my point was that in this case, although the GG chose to do as asked, that was by no means a set outcome. If she had done otherwise, as happened in 1896 and 1926, that outcome would also have been considered reasonable, and most likely not resulted in a public outcry and overthrowing the monarchy.
> This is a convenient self-justifying fantasy.

Nah. This is completely reasonable. We tend to have punishments that are large multiples of the benefits of committing the crime, because people know they will not likely be caught. So, you face the situation of doing something that you 90% know you'll get away with, but the remaining 10% is really, really inconvenient. And if you keep rolling the dice, you'll get caught eventually. (And in a perfect world, would be rehabilitated).

> Would you pay 30% of your salary to go to a hospital that historically only cured 3% of patients

NNT's tend to be pretty high for most medical interventions. e.g. statins. No mortality benefit, you need to treat 217 to prevent one nonfatal heart attack, and you need to treat 313 people to prevent one nonfatal stroke-- so about 0.5% see a benefit.

We pay a small percentage of our income to what becomes city budgets, so I think you're engaging in hyperbole to compare this small percentage of our salary that goes to policing to spending 30% of our salary.

I am paying a bunch of money for home insurance and it only rarely helps anyone...
FWIW Stallman's stance was always that freedom is more important than technical excellence and that he'd rather use and promote a technically inferior product that respected users' freedoms than one that was technically superior but came with shackles.
Match Group to Acquire Hyperconnect
Well that's the problem with all proofs. If the premises are false the proof is not sound. That doesn't preclude the proof being tight, i.e. as in well reasoned and logically argued. Outside of mathematics you will be hard pressed to find a proof where someone doesn't disagree with a premise or two. And even within math we have intuitionists and constructivists claiming things like proof by negation is invalid. So if your criterion for solid proof is one that everyone agrees with, you are bound to be perpetually disappointed. On the other hand if your criterion is proofs that highly intelligent people find convincing after fully understanding the argument, then I again submit to you the ontological argument which even Russell claimed was sound at one point in his life before walking that back and saying it is wrong for some unknown reason.
> Coronavirus has been a pretty good litmus test for which countries have good governments, and which countries do not. The UK has consistently led the charts in terms of deaths and infections.

This is a rather silly metric. The UK is also one of the leaders when it comes to the vaccine rollout, far outstripping any European country, several of which could easily end up behind the UK in overall stats before this is over.
A New Kind of Spy: How China Obtains American Technological Secrets
Current FB employee. Former Employee @ a couple of other FAANG spots and a health care startup that promised to revolutionize the world, delivering medical attention to developing countries.

Facebook is a good place to work. They take care of the people. Benefits are great. None of the stinginess of Amazon. Apple was awesome too, btw. But FB is very employee first. Dark Patterns ? I don't know of too many teams that work on such stuff. When you go through bootcamp, make a selection that you are comfortable sleeping on. I did. And I am ok with that. Don't base your decisions on your neighbors' morals. Ask yourself how you would feel. I am comfortable with the choices I've made.I can go to sleep peacefully.

Worst case : Learn, move on if it doesn't work. Grow there if it does.

The worst place I worked at ? The health care startup revolutionizing the world. Terrible man/woman management all under the pretense of "Changing the world is hard work". I left bitterly disappointed with my experience.

How are you going to change the world , when you can't even be reasonable, kind and nice to fellow co-workers ?
Sweden's current monarch is king because his ancestor was adopted. His adoptive father's father was elected king (after Russian pressure).

Edit: The election happened as the king before him had no heirs.