skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Elliot Management, one of the activist investors of LP mandating this change have long been known to get their claws into "underperforming" companies and insist on strategy change that is anti-free, anti-opensource. They did this around 2014 when I worked at Citrix and got them to sell off products not aligned with the flagship and close down some otherwise great software that was in part free-for-use-in-small-environments.

For e.g Citrix Xenserver (now Citrix Hypervisor) employed a lot of the founders and top talent contributing to the Xen project who being the hipster developer types fully buying into the free and open kinda felt betrayed that the ship they'd join to sail had changed course and eventually jumped ship - causing a brain drain to both the company and the upstream Xen. I wouldn't conclude this caused Xen to lose out to the competition - but the decaying cadence to the upstream project I'm sure was a contributing factor.

I've long since worked at Citrix and I hear now their product strategies and key offerings are "sensible", their valuations and stock prices are healthier, etc - which for the investors and employees is great but it appears this has come at a price of a less-free, less-open, insular monoculture. I don't particularly regard that as a success.
You're aware that your experiences are not universal though, yes? Anecdotally, I know far more people who have been mugged than had their accounts zeroed out. I actually know more people who have been passed counterfeit money than have had their accounts zeroed as well!

It's also hard to have silverfish eat your bank account balance, or have your credit card account catch fire and disappear.

https://pestrepublic.com/do-silverfish-eat-money-how-to-keep...
Am I the only one who can't make FairMail deliver mail faster than 15-20 minutes? The notification is on, the battery optimization for the app is off, still nothing. K9 actually receives the message earlier, despite not having a persistent notification.
Can confirm.

Been through a few 'adversarial' interview processes - if that is what it is like to work with you then no thank you.

I don't want to report to someone in another city that I never even see.
I was commenting in support of your position. Sorry if that wasn’t clear!
Which is when the monsoons will alleviate the drought. So this is a signal of an issue mitigated.
Except the New Yorker isn't a newspaper, it's a literary magazine. It and its writing serve a different purpose.
how many pieces a machine can manufacture = output

working hours = input

Would the professor be okay to pay me for the time I spend reading web? I mean, from his perspective, it is the time I spend that is important, not what I do.
The point is that studies back up the requested priorities/interests of the users. You stopped at the word "goal" without reading the rest of the sentence. (ETA: Also from a pure syntax diagramming perspective, that parenthetical was tied to "my understanding" not "the goal".)

To make my early point more explicit: average users don't care about Progress Bars with exact percentages and to the second/millisecond estimate times. Users want Progress Indicators that tell them the app hasn't crashed, is busy, and is busy with something relevant.

Progress Bars in general are just a bad way to tell users the information they want, whether they "lie" or not. I agree that in the case of an unrecoverable crash, an application should no longer show a progress indicator. I agree that users dislike it when an app suggests something will take less time than it does, but I think "build better estimates" is a Halting Problem trap and I think the answer has to be "show fewer estimates" and "build intentionally worse estimates". "32.5%" and "ETA: 3:21:59" shows far more implied accuracy that any system can actually deliver on than "Fooing the bar" and "This may take a couple hours" do.

The point is that it isn't "lies" versus "Truth", but "uncertainties" versus "implied lies". The application is always likely uncertain how much time things will exactly take, that's the nature of software (and the vagaries of hardware/internet conditions/weather, plus the Halting Problem). Specific percentages and too accurate estimates lie in their own way that the tasks being taken are all fungible and exactly linear in time/space, that the possible error bars are in parts of a percent and seconds rather than tens of percent and minutes or hours. There's always going to be "implied lies" in a progress bar, the question in this article, this thread, and others is how do you present how much that "you don't yet know" to the user that doesn't give them the wrong impression?

Again, developers certainly care about the raw percentage of work done or the raw estimate down to the actual second, but those sorts of details do more harm to the user's value of the system than good. They sometimes think they want to know those raw scores, but those raw scores don't actually tell them what they want to know or what they need to know. It's not a "lie" to just not give those raw data to the user. It's sometimes more of a "lie" to give that raw data to the user and then frustrate the user that the last 1% is different from the first 1%, that the exact-to-the-second ETA was wrong by hours.

Progress Bars are one of the best Progress Indicators we have, but they aren't perfect and they confuse and frustrate users sometimes as much as they help.
Programmable optical quantum computer steals the show
> We supposedly draw the line on how others spend their energy when it comes to bitcoin and nowhere else.

Nowhere else has an incentive to use as much power as possible. With your example of animal agriculture, the incentives align towards a lower energy expenditure (if a farmer spends more on energy, either the profit is lower, or the extra cost is passed to the customer, who then has an incentive to consume less). With Bitcoin, the incentive aligns towards a higher energy expenditure (for a given Bitcoin price and amount of transaction fees, a miner which uses more energy gets a higher portion of the block rewards and transaction fees, so the collective energy usage of all miners converges towards using all of the block rewards and transaction fees to pay for energy).
I have a tube of IDT R3041s and R3051s. I remember using GCC compiled for a DECStation 2000 to write code for them. (I made a hand-held computer based on R3041).

I also have a tube of ARM 610s (VY86C060s I think) from the same project, but R3041 was PLCC, whereas ARM was fine pitch PQFP. PLCC was easier to deal with at the time...
Yeah, I was thinking trait while reading that bit... maybe I missed something?
I meant "moot" only in so far as it's a useful measure of productivity.

If the hours aren't tied to either the cost or the price, then I don't know how they can be tied to productivity in an economic sense.
> it's been around for 8 years and nobody is using it

That's laughably wrong, go look up how much revenue the Ethereum network is bringing in with smart contract fees.
Anecdotally, when I worked in customer support, we were explicitly told that we had to hit a certain number of replies to customers in our ticket system. So I played by the rules: I very clearly grabbed all the easy-to-reply tickets, sent the easy reply, and dropped them if they got hard.

Appropriately, a manager spoke to me telling me this was unacceptable (though he did concede the goal was stupid), and gratifyingly the official goals soon changed to reflect an appropriate balance of consistency with a customer as well as some degree of overall throughput.

The drawback there is that accurately reflecting what they want in hard metrics might not really be possible because it does come down to a judgment call where the exact balance between support quality and throughput lies (and it's often a shifting balance as well, depending how much support load there is). Which is probably why managers fall back on stupid but easy-to-measure metrics.
Agriculture encourages large families since children can help out in the field. Meanwhile with a hunter gatherer lifestyle the amount of food that can be acquired is not limited by labor but rather by the local environment. The effect is that you have lots of people doing backbreaking work every day.
> Could you explain how cybernetics is outside the current paradigm?

Not easily, but I'll try. And thanks for asking.

> It's "just" control theory no?

That's the view from the old paradigm looking "forward". From the new
paradigm looking "backward" control theory is the beginning of the new
paradigm. To me feedback and control theory looks like a slow and
painful rediscovery of Wiener and company.

Cybernetics grew out of the study of "loops of causality".
In logic, "A = not A" is a contradiction, in cybernetics it's an oscillator.

It's very difficult to describe the paradigmatic shift. I could point to
Shannon and Wiener. Shannon's paper is in many ways the epitome of the
scientific paradigm that started with Newton and could be demarcated by
Einstein. Already with Quantum Mechanics we're starting to get into the
new thing (but the name "mechanics" kind of points to the old way still.)
The crux is the change of emphasis from concrete and static to context
and relationship, the "verbs" rather than the "nouns".

Consider the cannon vs. the heat-seeking missile. In the first case the
science is ballistics, in the second it is feedback and control (with
ballistics as a kind of substrate) and the physical properties of the
mechanism are secondary to the metaphysical properties (the "causal
loops" embodied in the mechanism.) Note that the cannon also has its
feedback loops. After you fire you measure the result and adjust the aim
and so on. The paradigms aren't separate, they all co-exist, it's a
change of attention and emphasis. And speed, of course.

It almost doesn't matter what the missile is made of, electric circuits,
clockwork, fluidics, etc. The crucial aspects of it that define its
behaviour are intangible not physical. That's why Cybernetics can be
applied to living systems just as well as machines.

(FWIW, I never went in much for the "Second-order" cybernetics, it got too
metaphysical for my taste.)

Anyhow, I hope that makes more (rather than less) sense. :)
I tried to build this for my MVP which was also CRM. I stopped for other reasons, but this is how I was doing:

1. Store data locally in SQLite.

2. Export from DB to JSON string.

3. Encrypt JSON with in memory password.

4. Save encrypted string on backend server running Laravel and MySQL.

Basically, I provided backend only for sync functionality. And I liked that data was encrypted on client, so I had less liability.
Regulators removing the only choice a consumer has today for an end-to-end curated experience, a choice made by a minority of buyers, seems anti-consumer and anti-competitive given the options.

Users are free to make a philosophy and convenience choice between PC and brand-designed consoles that come only with brand-curated catalogs and brand-operated stores. Consumers deal with the consequences, such as being able to have Cyberpunk 2077 from more than once source on PC, and from zero sources on Playstation.

It’s unclear why users should not be free to similarly choose between Open Handset Alliance mobiles and mobiles with brand-curated catalogs and brand-operated stores.

Nobody is forcing developers to support that philosophy, just as nobody forces an indie developer on Steam to land on Playstation or Xbox or vice versa.

Disappointing to see this heated hue and cry where the majority want to squash the rights of the minority to have a device where everything it can do is available in a single well-curated trusted purchase and subscription place.

Unsatisfied with majority share, various factions aligned around “open” are essentially trying to outlaw the commercial and market dynamics enabling the single-stop-shop console experience that a sizable but minority segment of consumers prefer even if it means they can’t have Cyberpunk.
Just a small point, but I feel like the editing has also gotten worse over time as newspapers have gone digital. I see spelling errors, punctuation and other problems in WaPo about once a week, and I don't even read it all.
I spend a lot of time near the TX/Mexico border. Everyone gets stopped, you get asked a couple questions and that's it. I haven't been required to show ID or anything like that. They do a walk around your car with a dog and then wave you through.
I do think ISO 8601:2004, which is now ISO 8601-1:2019, is a reasonable standard. It never tried to become a computer data type and/or format standard; it is a simple extension to human-readable date and time format modulo ambiguity. Even infrequent formats like intervals are not complex and can be easily learned. By comparison RFC 3339 only covers a very specific use case (which is the internet protocol), and if we had only RFC 3339 but not ISO 8601 we will still be fighting over mdy vs. dmy vs. ymd order for human-readable dates. The only problem with ISO 8601 is, well, it is not openly available and Tim is very right about that.

ISO 8601-2:2019 [1] is however a complete mess. It is too complex for human consumption and too ambiguous for computing uses. I argue that it should be shelved as soon as possible.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20171020000043/https://www.loc.g... (draft standard)
i guess this is also a way to advertise for positions, albeit long-winded.
Something can be a pretty big deal in terms of security, and get dressed up in sensationalism by news outlets to get more clicks. They're not mutually exclusive categories. But it's the "we can get clicks by reporting more of these" that most folks notice, rather than the reporting being in lockstep with the number of hacks being perpetrated every month/week/day for the last 4 years.
Good lord can we please move away from the common misnomer of kW, MW, GW, and TW when we mean kWh, MWh, GWh, and TWh? It makes me angrier than it should, but aside from BTUs (heating/cooling) it's the only one I'm aware of that is so stubborn.
You're not wrong, but unfortunately a lot of libraries call it ISO 8601, and not RFC 3339. I think a lot of people probably mean RFC 3339 when they say ISO 8601 (myself included for a long time).
I have occasionally come to the defence of CPI in several threads. What drives is usually that the critic shows little knowledge about that the CPI is and/or how it's actually calculated. There are real technical issues with CPI estimations. But forum and blog posts rarely reach beyond the level of "everything I bought/want to buy is getting more expensive faster than the CPI, so it must be bogus".

It triggers me in a similar way, I think, as comments like "my (sisters'/neighbours') kid got really sick after his vaccination, so vaccines are very dangerous". A small number of people really do get sick after (and sometimes even from) vaccines, and probably no amount of research will override their personal experience. But it's a bit disheartening if the level of discourse never rises much above personal experiences.
For erudite articles on everything from Tang Dynasty poetry to the international ransom insurance market, I recommend the New York Review of Books and the London Review of Books. Or, in general, any of the book reviews. They give assignments to gifted scholars and writers who take the books they "review" as starting points to go deep into all sorts of topics.
Show HN: Our Loom competitor for Support reached 1000+ users
No, if Bitcoin was PoS, Mt Gox would bail themselves out and govern Bitcoin to this day. Early on, Mt Gox was responsible for over 80% of all economic activity on the Bitcoin network, and was by far the dominant holder of coins.
Source Material: the complexity and devastation of global supply networks
This take is probably going to be controversial here, but I suspect that most metrics don't accomplish anything beyond giving control freak managers a sense of control or insight.

Most complex processes can't be reduced to a handful of simple variables - it's oversimplification at its worst. The best you can do is use metrics for a jumping-off point for where something /might/ be going wrong and thus start engaging with actual humans (or reading code/logs/some other source of feedback). Too often I've had to deal with management who go straight from metrics to decisions and end up making bad decisions (or wasting everyone's time shuffling paper to generate good looking metrics).
SVE is looking like a general-purpose ARM instruction set in the future.

I believe the Neoverse V-cores (high-performance) will have access to the SVE instructions for example. So the SVE-SIMD is not necessarily locked to Fujitsu (though Fujitsu's particular implementation is probably crazy good. HBM2 + 512-bit wide and #1 supercomputer in the world and all...)
I'm curious how your bank account is being emptied so often?
Also for comparison: a single pumped-storage plant will often have storage capacity in the GWh; e.g. the Linth-Limmern pumped storage part in Switzerland can store 33 GWh and provides 1000 MW peak power.
If synthesisable MIPS cores from R3k to R20k enter the public domain, that would be something special. based on how previous such "announcements" have turned out, it's not gonna happen this time either.
I'm afraid that you are comparing apples and Walmart.

Unicode is a standard for encoding characters.
ISO is an organisation that _creates_ standards for just about anything.

Unicode became a standard as a result of beating other competing standardisations.
ISO declares that whatever they came up with is the standard, no competition required.
Hence the effectiveness of the business model.
I've been hearing this for years now. All of them have thusfar become a complete failure in both usability and reliability.
Thanks for the interesting data point regarding purchasing power. I think we would agree that you’d expect purchasing power to increase when efficiency increases, rather than staying constant. And as efficiency (as measured by value i.e. usefulness/efficiency of capital) has continued to increase while purchasing power stayed mostly stagnant since 1971, those earning their income from labour are drawing the short stick, while those earning their income from capital gains (ie efficiency of productive stuff) are doing much better.

If I misinterpreted your comment (I think we agree), I welcome your explanation of why purchasing power stays the same when efficiency increases since 1971.
SpaceY 1.0 – a SpaceX-inspired addon for OpenTTD game (2020)
I appreciate your honesty.

Fast and cheap transactions have been around since long before Bitcoin. Bitcoin's innovation was to make those possible without a trusted centralized intermediary. Therefore, decentralization and security are arguably the most important properties when evaluating cryptocurrencies. And Bitcoin is king on that front. Cryptocurrencies that promise faster, cheaper or "more energy efficient" transactions pretty much always have to compromise on that.

But as an end user, you probably wouldn't know that. That's why I'm frustrated with people who authoritatively claim things like "there are so many better crypto-currencies" while not disclosing that they're merely commenting from a "user experience" point of view.
Ask HN: Dashboard UI for OSS Projects
Hey HN,

What are your recommendations for browser-based dashboard templates or frameworks that can be used inside of an OSS project?
I grant the other points, but if the government took over the bitcoin repo and changed it, why wouldn't people just keep using the old version of the software?
I don't think we're disagreeing here, at least not about the broad economic and technological dynamics. I agree that, in the large, technological improvements do improve your ability to meet a budget, including to feed yourself, and I think the examples you gave are great. I don't think he's off-base in appealing to that general principle; it's just a matter of failing to realize when specific cases deviate from the heuristic.

That is, it doesn't follow that every technological gain has that effect, and it doesn't mean that that year's technological gain canceled that year's gain in costs of necessities. It doesn't mean that a new iPad's being 50% "more powerful" translates into it providing the utility of 1.5 "iPad 1"s. And it especially doesn't mean that improvements purely for luxury entertainment goods can ever truly act as substitutes for necessities.

Dudley was speaking as if that past year's improvements in the iPad really did cancel, in some substantive way, that past year's gain in necessities. (Remember, the iPad was released in 2010, and the story is from 2011.) It's not relevant to compare to e.g. not having mobile videochat integrated into your phone at all (since we had that in 2010), or the efficiency of cars from the 70s.

>The few bucks you save by not topping up your oil can pay for more expensive bananas,

And as above, those fuel efficiency improvements happened over decades; there wasn't significant gain in the prior year that obviated the extra costs.

Edit: Furthermore, as in the other reply, I think price changes purely attributable to technology aren't relevant to the kind of inflation central banks care about, and shouldn't be regarded as offsetting the "too much money/too few goods" problem.
Because PoS effectively means a handful of exchanges run the coin. This is far worse than a handful of mining pools, because pools depend on many more individual hash power providers.
>You can switch a Camera brand

Not if you've bought thousands worth of Nikon lenses
Free UX/UI audit for your product
I run a UX/UI design studio that provides design services for a flat monthly fee. (apselon . co)

Looking to help 10-12 founders by giving them UX/UI suggestions for their product. If you're building something interesting, add a link in a comment and give us a quick recap of your product.

We'll only outline the most important points and won't have the time to dive too deep into each product, hopefully this will be helpful.
I’m not familiar with Chrome/Firefox extensions, but for Safari Web Extensions you can indeed restrict extensions. [0]

Edit: Looks like this feature is present in Chrome/Firefox extensions as well but for all these platforms (Safari included I think), this needs to be implemented in the code itself[1]

[0] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/saf...

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10504239/limit-chrome-ex...
> Bars don't have these.

People can and do take pictures of the 'offenders' at bars, gyms, even at the park, and post about how creepy they were on social media. Even if they aren't flirting, but just look silly or menacing or ugly or whatever.

This might not be a legal permanent record, but it will be there for discovery permanently. Social Media's propensity to do facial recognition on posted pictures will only help with this 'discoverability' of undesirables.
I certainly didn't mean to imply it was trivial (or even possible). I'm just pointing out that assuming increasing LoC implies an increase in necessary complexity is just wrong.
MIPS was being used in set-top-boxes and media players as well, like https://www.imaginationtech.com/blog/dont-let-the-cpu-contro...
Banks are not good at storing value over time, that's why institutions and high net worth individuals are searching for alternatives.

Banks store government money which depreciates gradually in good years, and devalues rapidly in bad years. It's all one direction, toward zero, it never gains value.

On top of the relentless depreciation, add the risk of bank insolvency.

Banks are terrible stores of value.
That and long Covid.
My stats training was in the 90s and we absolutely covered leptokurtic things.
Fwiw, the Ethereum Foundation is also a Swiss nonprofit.
Is this true? You still need connections to the rest of the network so that you know your block chain is the longest one and you get the number of confirmations that both of you feel is sufficient to remove double-spend risk. So it's not really just between the two of you, even if you both have full nodes. Right?