skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It's all marketing and popularity contests, and SOAP/XML/XSD lost out.

I believe the triumph of REST over SOAP was mainly piggy-backed off of the triumph of JSON over XML (even though neither has technically anything to do with REST).

In practice, in most people's minds, REST == JSON and SOAP == XML and JSON > XML. Therefore REST > SOAP.

Though as you note, what most people today call REST falls way short of the whole singing and dancing HATEOAS bag that Roy had in mind.

(Personally I think hypermedia is way overrated for most APIs, though that's not an opinion many REST zealots are open to).
the bricks are the blocks not the currency, here the value is in able to write their own names on the bricks with a sharpie.
Imagine thinking that your career is the only measure of a successful life.

Maybe career success isn't as important as we make it out to be and bears costs that aren't worth paying, especially for women.
> I feel that at least 7 out of 10 times I check on them, they're doing a game that involves creation, economics, collaboration, and often multiple of those.

Could you recommend a few titles that are worth checking out?
If proof-of-stake is pushed to completion faster, everyone wins. The reason PoS hasn't yet launched is perhaps because PoW is the default and nobody has yet found a reason to stop doing it.
Yeah. Exactly. I do this when I think there will be users who don’t already have all the dev tools installed, and I don’t want them to have to download and install everything.
The project site has a page on the process, not quite a step-by-step guide, but probably enough to satisfy curiosity. https://www.thefenlandblackoakproject.co.uk/the-table-top
This happened with normal search, Google punished companies for spam links to their websites which caused sites to pay for bad links to their competition to raise their relative ranking.. It's now necessary for everyone to review links to their site and disown them.
The "women are wonderful" effect doesn't stop. I would ask you actually search around a little and read my point again, as well as the many other comments, before dragging down the conversation with phrases such as "convenient excuse".

As other comments have pointed out, the reason can easily be explained by a paradigm shift. One which shifts from a cooperation-favored environment, to a competition-favored environment. Though there is an absence of evidence, the absence of evidence doesn't prove the opposite, it merely puts into question the hypothesis.

> Also the grandparent claimed that females made rules that benefitted the same gender. In other words in a school setting a same sex relationship between teacher and student is such that the student benefits. However this clearly isn't the case per my college performance citation.

The GP stated this goes for women. Clearly, that doesn't claim the same goes for men. In fact, this is entirely in-line with the "women are wonderful" phenomenon, though I would personally believe other factors are at play beyond this.
Because if you don't characterize women as an oppressed people in every possible instance then you're sexist. The truth is that women benefit a great deal from the general goodwill that society grants them. From legal sentencing, to taking your kids to the park, to mentorship opportunities, to simply crossing the road. The list goes on, but western society generally goes out of its way to accommodate the needs of women, particularly in areas such as the job market, where men pave the way with increased risk taking.
Raw sounds were generated by manually fiddling with audio cables, field recording, and tone generators. I fed them all into Audacity and layered and blasted them out in different ways - pitch shifts, overdriving, intentional clipping and phasing, cutting off the tops and bottoms of waveforms, running them through tweaked reverbs and sound reproducers designed for slowing down music - intentionally misusing effects to create new sounds and distortions. Once I had a big project file going, I split it up into sections and started arranging things to create patterns, rhythms, and repeating themes, and work the noise into a kind of narrative that was forming in my brain.
"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

Given how well known other unscrupulous review service tactics are (eg, yelp) I doubt this would be the case. It's hard to keep such practices secret when they involve attempting to extract money from a large number of businesses. Plus Google seems to be reasonably honest about labeling (even if very subtly) when things are sponsored ads or not.

I would find it far more likely that this is simply a symptom of something Google is well known for doing: Content moderation through algorithms/ML which mostly works but still messes up a lot. Either the wording of the review hit some metric on its own, or the business already was detected as being review bombed and your review got caught in the cleanup crossfire. Posting it twice probably didn't help, as that would further convince an algorithm it's probably not legitimate.
Which cryptocurrency does this describe?
The problem with this approach is that it creates serious barriers to entry.

I'm an immigrant who finished a pure-math PhD and went into software engineering afterwards by building up a portfolio and leetcoding in my spare time. With your system there is no chance I could have done that. Passing all of the exams would not have been possible without a strictly CS education, and I couldn't have studied for the exams after my PhD finished because my visa status at the time was tied to being actively employed.

So many people nowadays are becoming productive software engineers from slightly unconventional backgrounds (pure math, physics, boot camps) and this would stop immediately if CS certification became part of the job requirements.
A smart ten year old can write a game and sell it for money, that trumps your subjective aesthetic impressions.

All Roblox games are made the same way. Those should be what sets your impression of the system, not looking at the screen and curling your upper lip.
None of these are unions, what you are referring to is occupational licensing and professional associations.
Putting aside that notes don't really have to be in tune to be notes, this is not where A=440hz originated.

Correction: upon further research, this is where 440hz originated. However, it was not the original standard (or where musical notes come from), and I find the history interesting, so I'm going to post it anyway.

Tuning used to be based off of whatever instrument was not easily tunable (the piano or organ), or some other instrument (oboe?) if there was none. For much of musical history tuning was significantly lower than A=440, albeit with a lot more variation; however, it tended to rise[0][1] in order to create a more brilliant-sounding timbre (particularly in larger venues), especially among instrumental pieces. This led to some contention, especially with vocalists who found the increasingly-high notes more and more difficult to sing. There were several efforts to readjust tuning to something more reasonable, but ultimately none of them worked for long.
Frequency was actually orignically standardized in Article 282, section 22 of the Treaty of Versailles.[2] This may not make a lot of sense at initial glance, but when thinking about it as how good orchestras sound, it does make some sense as an economic policy

This is where I originally messed up, though. The Treaty of Versailles references something else (which I don't have a link for), but which, per [1], standardizes to... 435hz. But again this crept up, and apparently the US and UK did some shenanigans with interpreting it (the UK changed the temperature to get it to 439hz, I haven't found out precisely what the US did), and there was again some debate. Some people gave up and standardized with the UK to 440hz, some stayed at 435, and eventually the ISO did step in and standardized again on 440.

So we may all be breaking international law by tuning to 440hz.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concert_pitch#Pitch_inflation

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzznBt8tVnI

[2] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles/Part_X#A...
Because a company is going to exist doesn't mean it's going to jump 10x+ in value in a few years.

I remember following the WSB AMD memery several years ago and no one really predicted what would actually happen over the ensuing years.

Intel shit the bed on some key foundry investments and AMD had some chip breakthroughs to capitalize on their screwup.

So yeah, some people ended up being right that AMD would do well but I never saw anyone predict WHY.

ANd I can point you to many many that were predicted to do gangbusters and never amounted to anything, funny those always get forgotten.
Yes. No. No.

We have known what the problem is and what the solution is for a long time. - Standard curriculum for non-standard children, and finding out what makes a child special and encouraging that at the expense of other things.
Should we not fix bugs? As for “smart people”, if you are flattering yourself, give it a rest. I just replied to your misguided comment that we should switch engines and go out of business to fight Chromium monoculture. Not smart!
Any discussion of 51% attacks that ignores the game theory of it I think misses the original genius of the Bitcoin white paper.

If one has control of 51% of the network it's in one's best interest to keep that network going successfully. Sure, there's suicidal malcontents and those that just want chaos. But barring some brain cancer it's very difficult for individuals to throw away billions of dollars. Because if a 51% attack works it's not going to work for long, the corrupted blocks are going to be immediately known, and everyone else will just fork off and leave that 51% attacker holding the bag.
I found that, too, but only the chapter titles don't tell you much, do they? What do you make of "State Transitions" or even "Patterns"?

For instance this is Chapter 2 "Forms of Immutable Architecture":

Deriving State from History 29
Historical Records 30
Mutable Objects 31
Projections 33
Event Sourcing 35
Generating Events 35
CQRS 36
DDD 37
Taking a Functional View 39
Commutative and Idempotent Events 40
Asynchronous Model View Update 40
The Update Loop 41
Unidirectional Data Flow 43
Immutable App Architecture 44
Historical Modeling 45
Partial Order 46
Predecessors 47
Successors 48
Immutable Graphs 50
Collaboration 51
Acyclic Graphs 52
Timeliness 53
Limitations of Historical Modeling 54
No Central Authority 54
No Real-Time Clock 55
No Uniqueness Constraints 56
No Aggregation 57

That sounds quite interesting, however with about one page spent on each topic won't go very deep.
I did not mean to imply that a CS degree would be necessary for all work in software. I would oppose such a system as obviously irrational and serving only a subset of incumbents. With your background, you would if anything have found it much easier to enter the field, as you would have known exactly what to study for and, once certified, had more bargaining power with specific employers.

Barriers to entry exist today, and will always exist in some form. The question is who gets to define them. I am arguing that the workers themselves should have more of a say than they do at present.

One union certification could literally be passing some randomly selected leetcode problems. Ideally, there would be a variety of certifications to reflect the variety of niches in software (someone doing TLA+ for embedded applications shouldn't need to know anything about web app architecture, necessarily).

The difference is that you wouldn't have to do it for every new employer, and workers would have more say in defining the body of knowledge considered relevant.

I don't think anyone would advocate for university credentials to be a hard requirement. I personally have no relevant university credentials except some math courses from a community college.

That said, I think it would be fine for someone to submit a transcript from a CS degree to be certified for basic algorithms knowledge in lieu of sitting an exam on that topic.
It could stabilize at a price and not crash, but who knows.

I sold most of my crypto because it's too risky/sketchy for me now.
Nuclear power (in its current form) is extremely impractical compared to wind and solar.

1. It is obviously dangerous, requiring extreme safety measures.

2. It requires large amounts of water.

3. It is unpopular.

4. It is so complex that building plants regularly exceeds budgets (there is little repetition and thus little learning)

5. It requires ridiculous storage/transport protocols for spent fuel. In Fukushima, one of the biggest concern was the spent fuel pool. That stuff is so hot, you cannot safely move it across the country and thus it has to accumulate on-site.

Compare this to solar and battery storage: You can literally build a factory for both in the same ten or more years it takes to build the nuclear power plant. There is absolutely no physical reason not to produce 100 times as many batteries and solar panels as we do now. Resources are abundant (you can replace rare materials at a slight cost of efficiency).

We are not at the point where we can use 100% solar/wind yet but the path is clear. On the other hand, we might be able to do the same with safe and efficient nuclear power, but that path is much less clear. Molten salt? Micro plants? Thorium? There is no one out there doing any of that fancy new stuff in practice, sonny bet is on mass-scale of solar, wind, and batteries.
But the command doesn't know that, and in general best practice is (or was) for commands to not alter their behavior based on whether they're attached to a terminal or not.

I won't deny the convenience. (Technically jumping backwards across arguments in the line editor is trivial, but I admit I keep forgetting the command sequence.) But from a software programming standpoint, the benefit isn't worth the cost, IMO.

And there are more costs than meet the eye. Have you ever tried to implement argument permutation? You can throw together a compliant getopt or getopt_long in surprisingly few lines of code.[1] Toss in argument permutation and the complexity explodes, both in SLoC and asymptoptic runtime cost (though you can trade the latter for the former to some extent).

[1] Example: https://github.com/wahern/lunix/blob/master/src/unix-getopt....
Funnily enough most of these issues people mention with renewables are the same ones Britain faced introducing nuclear power! They coped by shaping demand with variable electrify tarrifs, creating the world's largest electrical vehicle fleet (milk floats) and charging them off-peak, encouraging storage heaters and electric water cylinders in houses and building pumped storage hydro. What goes around comes around. If you want hope for the future look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruachan_Power_Station
I'm not sure I buy this idea that everyone except the US would try and help bitcoin to survive. Sure, China would certainly be happy to see USD become less of a global standard. I think the EU might like to see the Euro more widely adopted in international trade too. But neither of those have a big interest in allowing bitcoin to become dominant. Once you do that you lose your ability to affect inflation through central bank policy, and that's something that's pretty cherished by modern states.
Jews in pre-Nazi Germany didn’t know they had anything to hide. Are you religious? You could one day be targeted. Are you an atheist? You could one day be targeted. What political party do you agree with? You could one day be targeted. You can’t decide to be against this stuff once it’s out there and starts affecting you.
A little bummed that this has nothing to do with the text editor SciTE.
>The belief in encrypted message apps is a gold mine.

I think you mean "the belief that non-E2E encrypted messaging apps are actually E2E-encrypted messaging apps" is a goldmine. Ditto TFA.

Real E2E systems aren't invulnerable: there are certainly hacks that target endpoint devices. But it's astonishing to me how many people end up using centralized, non-E2E apps when secure ones are available.
No what you don't understand is that no one else in the market had caught on to the fact that AMD was the main competitor to Intel!

If only we had known way back when!
I never understand people who oppose hydropower on an environmental basis. Here is the fact. A lake made by a hydroelectric dam is not much different from a naturally formed, river fed lake. Different river fed lakes have existed for billions of years. Yes, they fill with silt over time. No, the sky does not fall. See Stanley Pool for an example of a natural lake fed by a major river, i.e. the Congo.
Again, I can't find even a hint of how to do this on the internet. If there is a way, you'd expect it to be documented given what surely must be widespread interest in the subject. Basically what we have here is an entirely unsubstantiated and unlikely accusation. (Unlikely because the incentives simply are not aligned.)
If you're getting less than 1mbps, I'd wholeheartedly recommend it. Download speeds are between 8 and 16mbps, and I haven't noticed any throttling with 6 people simultaneously connected. Latency is pretty mediocre right now, but it's a massive improvement over traditional satellite networks. I can play online games without issue, and my SSH connections are snappy and painless.

My only concern has been the stability of the connection, there are still intermittant disconnects happening on a daily basis, and it comes out to <3 minutes of downtime per day. If that's a dealbreaker, it might be best to hold off until they get it sorted out. Besides that, it's a great deal. The dish is dead simple to install, and even the router they provide is pretty damn good (sadly it only provides a single RJ45, so keep that in mind)
I disagree. The UKs National Grid see a role for nuclear in its Future Energy Scenarios (https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/future-energy-...), laying out 4 different energy scenarios in 2050, but wind will dominate electricity generation.

Also, the current generation of EVs will provide a substantial amount of flexibility resulting in £billions of savings for the UK grid and consumers (see https://www.kaluza.com/blog-busting-the-myth-ev-smart-chargi...). The addition of Vehicle-to-Grid chargers will further allow increased renewables.

With the cost of these technologies decreasing, the importance of nuclear power will reduce over time.
> Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy.

How do you turn that into code?
Do you have a citation for the number of administrators breakdown? I didn't see a reference in the Time article but maybe I missed it.
CISA will control .gov domains by late April
Two things:

1. Many labor organizations do not consider police and prison guard unions to be legitimate labor unions, because police represent and enforce the interests of the ruling class not of the labor class and have historically been weaponized footsoldiers brought in specifically to brutalize organized labor movements. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/what-to-know-police-unions-l... has a moderately good exposition of the subject. If you don't like overt editorial politicization, skip the first paragraph.

2. I think you have to clarify what you mean by "competitive". If you start from the premise that no advancement or profit is worth stepping on the necks of people with less power, then the only metric that makes sense for evaluating organized labor is fair treatment of the laborers. You will _of_course_ get more coal out of the ground faster and cheaper if, for instance, you use slaves or have zero rules protecting the health and safety of the miners. But you get that exactly by abusing the health and safety of the miners. So does one value cheap coal or not killing people? If one values only price above all else, then of course treating laborers well comes at a cost. I don't think we have a general sense that Chinese labor is treated well despite being an economic powerhouse because everything from there is cheaper and we just _really_ love to externalize costs. Also, don't we regularly have scandals where steel from China fails to meet some quality standard and causes bridges and buildings to collapse? Is it competitive to produce something dangerous for less money? If less up-front cost is the primary goal, then yes. Should that be the goal?
This inevitably came up back when I taught privacy and security classes. I always asked everyone with kids to raise their hands (most hands went up).

Then I would ask "don't raise your hands, but when dealing with your kids, have any of you ever acted in a way wasn't captured on camera?"

I don't mean beating or physical abuse or anything that horrible, and everyone knew it. Combine young tired kids with a cranky, tired adult, and it's almost guaranteed that the adult will have had at least one rage meltdown.

They probably only yelled and ranted. But they probably looked like a monster doing it.

How quickly would such an image or film go viral? And how condemned would the person be?

We are all foibly humans, we all have moments that we regret or that fill us with shame. And we're all glad they weren't recorded for posterity.

Privacy isn't about protecting your best face, your public face. It's about protecting all of your faces, all of your moods, your knowledge, your relationships, etc.

We have free speech, but do we have freedom from judgementalism? Until we do, we all need privacy.
Thanks for the behaviour note—it sent me on a hunt! Of course, before I'd asked I hadn't searched up whether or not it's been used in instruments.

Seems like the consensus is mixed. It might be a sleeper tone wood for a specifically-tuned instrument?

Either way, the results can be quite pretty...

https://www.brentrup.com/page2/page2.html

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruby1638/21176740531/in/album-...

https://reverb.com/item/9428705-brand-new-avalon-a1-oak-cara...

One of the criticisms leveed against it was in line with your dismissal of white oak—because of it's structure there's more damping than a rosewood but it's otherwise bright just with a fast decay. So I suppose that lends itself well to specific playing styles. Not a standout (aside from maybe looks and rarity), but not useless either.

Found a clip: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ruby1638/21176740531/in/album-...
You need to think it through further. Where do the member bodies get this money from?

No, they aren't all taxpayer funded. In some countries they are entirely private organizations. ANSI is a non-profit private company, for example. And the ones that are are taxpayer funded are not necessarily wholly so. The BSI gets grants from the U.K. government, for example, but is far from wholly funded by it.

Standards Australia made just under AUD7 millions in 2017 (for example) from selling copies of standards, via subcontractor publisher SAI. This was just under a quarter of its total revenue for the year. Nearly all that would be gone were ISO to start giving away copies for free, and yet SA would be expected to pay an extra AUD0.1 million in ISO fees at the same time.

* https://www.standards.org.au/about/governance/annual-reviews

So what's your proposal for making up for this lost revenue stream as well as paying higher ISO fees? Across all of those 165 countries.
It would change the feeling in the community. It would introduce barriers in communication that would make it harder to relate. It would fuck with the psychology of both moderators and non-moderators, the same way that uniforms do. It would turn the mods into abstractions/roles rather than human beings. It would infect HN with that priggish approach to authority which appeals to the smallminded and depresses creativity. It would signal lack of trust. It would demoralize any moderator who didn't have the soul of a meter maid.