skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Open Source Induction Furnace, Press forge, Bioplastic extruder? Really? These are extremely specific machines. A lot of them in the $100k range. Nobody is going to make an opensource design for them.

My biggest disappointment though is that their 3D printer isn't complete yet even though that's low hanging fruit. Simply modifying an existing design would have satisfied me but nope. They don't even have a 3D printer design.
challenge accepted: https://github.com/ityonemo/zigler/issues/240
People with dementia twice as likely to get Covid-19, study finds [full paper]
What law are they defying by playing music? Motives aside, in principle, if people should be allowed to film why should they not be allowed to play music?
I'm not saying it's the solution. I'm just pointing what is idiomatic go. Certainly there are arguments for and against code generation.

Where I work we are a go house, and the number of tools I've seen in our pre-commit configurations and in our development environment setup scripts is pretty intense. So is the number of questions around said tooling. There's a lot more friction than I'd expect. I can't even use lack of experience as an excuse for these questions because they're really talented people. Some of them have worked on the product for years, and have literally moulded the product's tooling into what it is today.
Your code is buggy, though. It will only ever accept two parts because of `cmd, arg = parts`, so `["quit"]` will fail, and each command might accept a different number of parts, so you can't just test `0 < len(parts) < 3` for all of them. The pattern matching version is harder to get wrong.
Thanks!

This is exactly the sort of use cases we had in mind. Would love to work closely with you to help you in any way. If possible, can you drop me a note on pranay at signoz dot io
Paintings are not the best example (although even there: plenty of paintings that can be forged perfectly, and some where the originals have not actually been painted by "the artist"), but lots of Art can be perfectly reproduced and the generally accepted value is still in "the original(s)", not any of the reproduction. Some installation pieces literally only exist as instructions on how to create them - and still the right to make "the one" is a valuable thing sold. Film works might exist as a limited set of perfectly copyable DVDs - pretty much the hard drive concept you propose. That it works like that is in many ways convention - and copyright law.

NFTs are pretty much the same: of course you can copy the pixels or source code, but the presumed value is in holding the token that has been defined as representing ownership of it - with the additional argument that that is harder to fake.

If that is something you consider valuable and want to spend on is a personal thing (I personally don't), but it works as long as enough people agree that that's how it works. And blockchain stuff has right now lots of money floating around, and Art can even provide additional perceived legitimacy, so the market of people to agree on that is there.
Why Story Points Are a Horrible Metric for Software Engineers
Given that copyrighted audio is- more or less by definition- available as a separate track without interference, it shouldn't be too difficult to subtract it from the video's track.
While this is technically correct from legal standpoint, the kernel of truth is in there. (Il)legality doesn't matter much compared to consequences. Consequences matter a lot, and in that case his advice is perfectly sound.

That one "joke" you made when you were sixteen might render you unemployable by 2040. People evolve, and their earlier marks on earth vanish. Before social media even the worst could re-make themselves into something better, now even the best have their worst moments permanently recorded.
Are you sure the second one isn’t just declaring not_found as a stand-in for 404 so the case statement two lines below can refer to business logic rather than a “magic” constant?

I would NOT expect for the line “case not_found:” to reassign the status variable to 404 regardless of what it was before.

I can’t see how or why that would be intended behavior.
Quant at Large
> Actually, not true.

Actually, it is true but not exhaustive. Nor was it intended to be. I was addressing the context of monarchy in the UK, as the rest of the comment makes clear.
Designer fashion is mostly statement pieces meant to be worn only on the occaison. You need fast cycles to keep the statement exciting and fresh.

The fashion cycle for boring yet functional clothes are much longer.
I said nothing about credentials. Or if his ideas are worth my time. This article is full of straw men but I'd give him another chance. I just said opinions and a platform don't prove expertise.

You could pontificate about me for 14 years without learning more than you know now. Saying robust interpretation just begs the question.
>It is worrying that the Queen can just say no before legislation gets off the ground

The commonly-held belief in the UK is that the Queen gets to do this exactly one time before she is abolished completely, on the assumption that millions of people would riot if she used her power in such a direct fashion without a truly extreme reason (like a nuke blowing up Westminster or something).
> they lose their copyright altogether

Big no to this, as that can and would be abused by scavengers, but the rest is sane and broadly agreed to be the way.

What tou want instead is fines by revenue / income.
In chess there's an idiom for this. "Long think, wrong think" because it's a quite common phenomenon that very good players will ruin positions by rather than playing with their good instinct, over-analyzing a position, there's a related situation of the hardest games to win being already won positions because there's so many ways to win that people will on occasion start doing something really stupid akin to the example of having too much choice in the article.

I think a nice collective analogue to this is Alfred Whitehead's observation that 'civilisation advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking of them'. Progress is being made by holistically integrating knowledge in a way that makes it sort of ambient.

It also reminds me of a slightly snarky article why all the people in the rationalist cult never seem to actually be successful at anything other than rationalism. It's precisely because consciously thinking is easy, it's the integration of knowledge into the whole is what's difficult but actually necessary.
A previous employer used it when they wanted to move away from ActionScript due to flash EOL approaching as the goal of transpiling to multiple platforms was appealing, performance was not the best however and they ended up moving towards a different approach. Still, by the time I joined a few primitive libs were maintained in Haxe because they were stable and there was no reason to migrate them, so I had to dabble with Haxe a few times at work, not saying it was terrible, but it was far less enjoyable then our much more robust TS setup, this is arguable tho as since it had been deprecated by the company it received fewer tooling support in house.
This is just a suggestion and I am not a lawyer and this is probably in the gray area and a bad idea, but one could upload the videos their own site (server) then embed links to the files on your social media platforms. Each platform could censor your post, but the video would remain. If you are truly violating copyrights, then you could of course lose your domain or face legal repercussions, but if this is a case of a bot being overly aggressive, then it might avoid the problem. The only reason I could see hosting a video on platforms like Youtube would be if you wanted to monetize it or expected a significantly large number of simultaneous viewers. Even then, you can downsize/optimize it for mobile viewers and then link to a full size version for media outlets to use.
Those devs have gone on to write a good series of tutorials and a pretty swish 2D level editor https://ldtk.io/
Intel sues engineer who joined Microsoft over trade secrets
Show HN: Simplest React Carousel ever with hooks
Understanding Power Laws – In Wealth, Startups & Venture
I believe it's been a cause of care for very easy and expressive string formatting syntax in other languages
The bitcoin network will take exactly the same amount of energy mining an empty or full block. So a transaction does not use much energy (except for propagating it etc).
By holding bitcoin, you reduce the supply, thus increasing the price of bitcoin. By increasing the price, you increase the value of the block reward, thus making it more attractive to mine bitcoin. So actually holding it, not transacting, will increase energy consumption.
Covid-19 Deals Tracker: 8.56B Doses Under Contract
> Google has on purpose made Android different enough so that no Android SoC could run mainline Linux.

daily reminder that this is only possible because the very people in this site, "did not care about GPL or tainted kernel" as long as they had their nvidia GTX working to play quake.

ha!
Google trends disagrees: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&ge...

hehe ;)
In 12 states, you are NOT allowed to film cops. This implies that in the other 38 states, the public has decided you are allowed. Law is subjective by spirit, and playing music so that anyone filming you cannot legally share the film seems like a violation of the spirit of the law.
Ask HN: Anyone else things that all BI tools suck?
I think GitHub is generally safe as long as you have an exit plan for when it's no longer the place you want to be. Know where you're moving your issues and actions if you decide you need to leave.
If possible? ONLY do it during work hours.

I don’t work to make friends with co-workers and hang out after hours. I’m there to put my skills to use, get paid for it, and fuck off to live my own life. Asking me to come to an event and participate for free is bullshit, especially an online event! If it hurts my reputation, whatever? I’m still getting paid and have no desire to get promoted to upper management.
I remember many years ago I discovered this site and my first thought was that quality of discussions was good and that couldn't possibly last. Usually web forums have a particular birth, flourishing and demise periods. HN seems to be an outlier, maybe because it isn't a typical forum discussion platform, I'm still nostalgic for all the lost web forums of the past.
> but Go considers this a feature, not a bug

I see this dismissive philosophy in golang a lot (I'm not saying you're doing it, mind you). The entire language is full of arbitrariness. I've seen enums being dismissed by the golang team just because, without providing any meaningful arguments. Same with how nullability was not addressed in the language, contrary to how proper modern languages have tacked the issue. The excuse? "that's how the underlying machine operates". Quite meaningless and dismissive really.

Time and time again, it's been shown that the goal is to have a simplistic (not simple) language that also makes it easy to write the compiler for. This breaks down at larger scales because reality is complicated.
Carousel implementation is almost only on react hooks
It's consistent with how scoping works in loops and `with` clauses. Agreed that it's more problematic here, though.
I'd try NVRAM reset.
sure, but which languages would be capable of dodging the "not enough libraries" complaint if java is the baseline? Maybe 2 or 3?
Tbh, I don't even know if it is true today. Circa 2008-2010, I think Mercurial was certainly better -- it was certainly better designed and easier for a newcomer to use.

I'm probably going to be wrong/off on some stuff, but this is what I remember from the old days:

* Mercurial had a better CLI by default -- it was closer to SVN, which made it easier to use, and it was designed so that you had one command that did one thing, whereas git was more flexible but you needed to remember a lot of option flags.
* Mercurial had better early GUI client support (this changed, but early on, I know this was a draw for me as a Mac user)
* I'm pretty sure Mercurial had better Windows support (I didn't use Windows so I can't speak to this, but I seem to remember this)
* Better documentation

But git has evolved a lot over the last decade plus. Not only did GitHub really change the game by creating a more social layer on how to contribute/use git (and yes, I realize GitHub != git, but it definitely helped introduce a lot more people to git), it had features that really honed in on some of the pain points git had compared to Mercurial.

Although BitBucket was sort of positioned as a GitHub for Mercurial solution, it never achieved the organic/viral adoption of GitHub. And when Atlassian dropped hg support last year, it was pretty much confirmation that git "won."

Other than Facebook, I can't think of any major companies that use Mercurial or major projects that use hg.

I used to be sad about this, because I felt hg was better designed, but I came to terms with the reality a long time ago. It is what it is, and version control is often something that network effects define. Use whatever you want for your projects, but git won.
Does it shadow the outside variable or mutate it?
This is not about the laws.
YouTube has their own copyright processes that are more stringent than DMCA. They allow companies to automate take down and take over requests with no repercussions. Everyone who shares a video to their platform has agreed to this process.
Exactly, meant to say that :)
I was a Perl developer/scripter for the better part of 3 years - wrote a 2-way LDAP<-> HRIS synchronization system in it, complete with customizeable Schemas. Then, 3 or so years into my Perl experience, in which I still needed to look at template code every time I did a HashOfArray/ArrayOfHash, I tripped across some python code explaining how everything was objects.

Within a few seconds I tested that theory, by populating a list with dicts and voila - just worked. Close to the last day I ever touched Perl.

The python language expansions that have come recently, f-strings, walrus operator, and now matching - are great in that they don't make the language more complex - all three of these are easily explainable in a few minutes to the novice, and once they understand it, they can quickly (and profitably) incorporate it into their code.

I wan't there to be a steady drumbeat of these improvements that let me write more elegant code, more concisely.

Try and find a single python developer who would give up their f-strings now.
Already true with string formatting, map/filter versus comprehensions, plenty of other things.

Find me a modern language where that isn't true, though.
> Python lets you do _far_ more shenanigans that Javascript does

Does JavaScript let you do this monstrosity of terrible code?

Python 3.7.2 (tags/v3.7.2:9a3ffc0492, Dec 23 2018, 23:09:28) [MSC v.1916 64 bit (AMD64)] on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> class Dog(object):
... def speak(self):
... print("bark!")
...
>>> class Cat(object):
... def speak(self):
... print("meow!")
...
>>> animal = Dog()
>>> animal.speak()
bark!
>>> animal.__class__ = Cat
>>> animal.speak()
meow!
>>>
Thanks for the tips. Agree, we need to fine tune our druid setup and make it more performant. If its Ok, can I reach out to you on twitter DM to get some specific advice?
How NoRouter works:

The main NoRouter process launches the remote subprocesses and transfer L3 packets using their stdio streams.

To translate unprivileged socket syscalls into L3 packets, TCP/IP is implemented in userspace using netstack from gVisor & Fuchsia.

[1]https://norouter.io/docs/how-it-works/
>It is precisely by establishing epistemic standards for deciding when we are mistaken, and when not, that we are able to evaluate historical sources and even formulate the claim that they are "subject to power relations".

Only Foucault already knew that, and had studied extensively how those "epistemic standards" have been established and developed.

That's part of the problem, those standards are not some objective yardstick, but involved in the same issues themselves (again: not for hard facts nobody really cares to challenge, like "water boils at 100oC" but for facts that people do care about, have interests invested in, and so on, whether they are political, pedagogical, historical, and so on).

>So your defence is rests precisely on the sort of underhanded equivocation being described.

Well, then again, your comment rests precicely on "vaguely know about the works described, so will attribute strawmans to them, as if those authors haven't already considered the naive solutions I'm proposing to the issues they study"...

Re (1) there "being a practical distinction" is irrelevant, if the distinction is of no practical use. At best one can self-congratulate himself of knowing the "real truth", while outside, the accepted truth is something different. And nobody in their right mind would just trust that person, or trust that "they" have the correct epistemology/methodology, when most disagree.

For example, in the 19th century South the "truth" was that "blacks are inferior", and that didn't change with a different epistemology -not to mention most scientists agreed at the time to the same "truth" in every "civilized" country-, only with different power relations and social work. In the end, it took a whole civil war. Any "methodology" will be applied (and accepted) once the power relations change (or are forced to change) not before. It's the power relations enabling the change of the "truth".

Heck, even in hard sciences, like physics, as Kuhn wrote: "a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
> Why is it naive or calculating to look for coherence in a world-view?

It's naive or calculating to take carefully selected elements from the disparate positions of different people in a diverse group as a “world-view”, much less to demand that that faked-up strawman of worldview be held to a standard of internal consistency.
knowing what kind of structure a rectangle on your satellite image is, is also a big problem. A shed or car looks roughly the same. So I would say it's more about getting better Satellite and plain images + combining that with knowledge about the area and government.
FWIW I built an RTK GPS system with two raspberry pi’s and three $75 GPS receivers and it has 3cm accuracy. Deere didn’t do anything to get that accuracy beyond integrating existing GPS technology in to their tractors.

For others that want to know more check out:
http://rtkexplorer.com/

Also there’s a new device called the OpenRTK330 that looks promising.
The difference between a Monarchy and a Dictatorship is a question of tradition and the concentration of power not the line of succession. North Korea for example moved from father to son as a Dictatorship, give it 5 generations and you could call it a Monarchy.

However, even if it’s generally accepted that the child or close relative of the current leader should become the new leader there will eventually be back and forth over time between the royal family and other members of government. In theory they might have absolute authority, but in both practice and tradition there will be many informal limits.
You do know that is EXACT same flawed logic that Auto Manufacturers have been making for Decades... and the EXACT same aurgument that John Deere, Apple and every other Anti-Repair advocate makes

The plebs just can not be trusted to repair their own things, it is far too dangerous. If you repair you iPhone you might burn down your home, if you repair your brakes you might kill grandma, and if you repair are Tesla you might .....

Safety has never, and will never be a valid reason to prohibit independent / self repair
Likely depends on the app specifics... but likely a bit lighter on resources for dart/flutter over electron.

That said, VS Code absolutely shows what can be done in an Electron based app that works well and is very responsive for it's breadth.
Learning How to (and How Not to) Kill
This is poignant for me, for reasons that have nothing to do with the technical merits of git vs mercurial, or github/Microsoft specifically as a company.

> It’s not just Bugzilla. It’s the wiki, the mailing lists, the quaint little Mercurial web interface. The little open source thing that we rely on but no one is working on and probably has security holes in it. It’s all janky, and it causes developer friction. It causes it for Sam and I, and we’re old Unix command line cowboys, so for those that expect computers to treat them like computers do in 2021–with slick UIs and without cronjobs that occasionally fail until Ryan rolls along to restart a service over ssh–it was becoming untenable.

The bar has been raised for developer tools in 2021. The OP recognizes it, it's true.

The bar has been raised by hosted products, usually corporate/proprietary products, that companies often give out for free at least for some and at least initially.

It is very hard to compete with this with "DIY" systems. It's just a fact. You have to spend a whole bunch of time on your tooling infrastructure, and you still don't really get close. As an open source developer you'd rather be spending it on the product, not the tooling infrastructure.

(It's way easier to get people to volunteer to contribute to the product, often because they are scratching their own itch, then it is to get people to volunteer to do "ops" stuff for you. The ops has diverged into somewhat of a different skillset. Who wants to do ops for free for open source products? Some people, sure, but not nearly as much as there is demand, or as there would be demand if they were all "self-hosting" everything instead of using the oh-so-easy commercial hosted offerings...)

And then a lot of those open source products themselves are just janky and poorly maintained, there isn't enough labor being put in.

We could have imagined a different world. This is not the world the open source afficianados of 20 years imagined or wanted.

But... this is where we are. Nobody wants to spend all that time trying to keep the janky self-hosted system running, when it's so much clunkier and you are probably making it harder for new contributors at the same time, and you'd rather it just were done for you so you can focus on the code. Even when you know what you are giving up in terms of control or the free software world we'd like to be contributing to.

The author is writing knowing all of this, knowing exactly what is being given up, but seeing it as the best option to get the open source product (SDL) developed as high-quality as possible, and regretting that this is where we find ourselves.