skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Works done(some recently and some already 2 years ago):

Converted from CoffeeScript to JavaScript

Updated Three.js to much newer version

Converted custom shaders to work with the above

Restored missing assets

Made the game playable directly from gh-pages without any backend

More details about resurrection of the project here https://github.com/CodeArtemis/TriggerRally/issues/76
What do you hope to achieve with this? Ok, you win, the term "open source" predates the OSI. So what?

Using the term "open source" without any definition is useless. If we can't agree on a definition, it's impossible to know if we're actually talking about the same thing.

I want people to use the OSI definition in order to elevate debates. I'd prefer to skip past definitions to more substantial matters, like whether "open source" (per OSI) is useful. Is it somehow better than closed source code? Is it _ethically_ valuable? Is there some subset of the OSI definition that provides more value than the rest? These are interesting discussions worth having.

Endless debating the meaning of "open source" is a huge waste of time.

Given that OSI is the only body I know of with a clear definition, let's use theirs and move on to more substantial topics.
Not only it does require a terminal, which is a smart phone, but it also requires a special credit card!
Hi Usama. I think there is definitely potential in this space. Github has failed to deliver in this area and it is frustrating.

First, you should consider IP. People who do this commercially don't want to put all their IP on an unknown platform. If you are hosting, you can make guarantees, you can be transparent about your identity, you can show audits, you can work to increase trust, right now none of that is present. An alternative option is a deployable on-premises solution.

Second, a lot of money flows in this industry through iterative fabrication. You can work to tap that cashflow by integrating with fabricators. There is an opportunity to do the hard work for people in translating their BOM and design files to fabricator-anticipated formats, translating fabricator business process information (fulfillment times, design checks, etc.) in order to become a platform for iteration. This could be an awesome service in and of itself without the whole hosted design iteration thing.

Third, component dealers. You can obtain forward-looking metrics about component selection from switched on component dealers, who can also allow people to secure rare stock through your platform. Some of these deals are very large.

Basically, it's a chicken and egg problem. To get fabricators you need users. To get dealers you need users. To get users you need to add value while reducing risk and presenting a trustworthy and stable platform. Platform businesses are hard to build.

Ultimately you may do well to reconsider your approach and instead of building a platform business just build the visual diff, BOM, fabricator DRC, fabricator order status and other industry-specific software components necessary for someone like Github to acquire you and roll out value to a large user base. This may be much quicker to return and a much larger return.

Good luck.
> Also, it's sex not gender people are referring to.

I don't think so. "The mail carrier follows female gender roles" is bad enough, but why would you describe someone as "the mail carrier with a vagina"?
I think they need to hire someone that is strong on the security side of the business, for two reasons:

* he appears not aware of the role of hardware firewalls in mitigating DDoS by handling efficiently a lot of active TCP sessions (they have specialised hardware for this purpose)

* he is describing in great detail a lot of information that a phisher or other type of hacker can treasure to target him
> One could possibly make a shim

That has been done already: https://github.com/openpvrsgx-devgroup
Hey all, we couldn't find exactly what we wanted in a documentation generator, so we wrote our own. Let us know if you have any questions!
>What are you most exited about?

I believe you to be a good engineering manager. Understanding that knowledge workers need to be interested and engaged is a key characteristic of an engineering manager in my opinion.
My biggest pain as far as Python3 typing / mypy goes has been interfacing with major libraries and trying to add types in a way that isn't just me tossing `Any` everywhere.

If memory serves, Twisted hasn't been too bad. SqlAlchemy is pretty well a nightmare though. I think I saw that the latest release has type stubs. That will be nice. PyQt is also less than ideal...
It would indeed be a massive amount of data, but bear in mind that only a small fraction of HTTP requests hitting GitHub are actually both authenticated and attempting to change the state of the system. Most requests are unauthenticated read-only and cause no state changes in GitHub.
While that sounds like a workable solution, out of curiosity does rsync.net support multiple users and OpenZFS' delegated permissions for more fine-grained control? They're pretty useful, and amongst other things can ensure any given user can create/clone/send/receive/etc, with per-file system capability, inheritance and so on.
I make my experimental apparatus. I send an electron through a double slit. Hilbert space tells me it goes through both, and keeps going through both for all eternity. I only see one flash. The whole of the electron is found to have hit that part of the screen, and nowhere else. This interpretation just kicks the can down the road, to the "emergence of consciousness", in order to explain simple experimental results.
Some other interesting projects

ninjam/jamtaba - instead of minimizing latency, accept it and delay everyone in a synchronized way

endlesss - multiple people adding layers to an 8ch looper
And what exactly are people going to use?

I can get a used server on eBay with 96 TB of storage, usually in 12 x 8TB configs for around $2000 - $2500.

Flash drives? I'll spend 10 times that... hell, probably more. I love having my movies, music, television, etc. on my home server, but I don't love it at the level of 25 large. Now $2500? That's a lot more reasonable.
If in person sticky notes work. You can also look at MIRO
I think the most straight-forward answer is that the working age needs to be raised, budgets need to be balanced, people need to be self-reliant and responsible for their own future, and if all else fails we have a safety net.

I don't actually think that retiring at 60 is reasonable in a society like this, but I also don't think this is a huge problem because many people don't want to retire that early, myself included. In a society with fewer kids we'll need to plan ahead more, but we also are much more productive, so I don't see this as a problem, and most importantly not in conflict with liberalism.

Subjecting personal choice about how many kids to have to welfare debates or population planning to me is the opposite of liberalism if anything.
As a developer acting on behalf of an organization using open source, I benefit from being able to pay the vendor of my choice to host a given piece of software.

If only the single-source author can host it as a service, or you need the permission of the single source author to host it as a service, then my choices are either self-hosting, or paying whatever price the single legal-as-a-service-host wants to charge, at whatever service quality they provide. (The fact they can choose to allow other licensed hosts, perhaps for a free if they want, does not change their monopoly control). It is a form of vendor lock-in, and avoiding vendor lock-in is one popular motivation for using open source.

So yes, this restriction makes something not open source. This restriction also is not favourable to me as a user of the open source software. Open source was always about avoiding monopoly control of who is allowed to do what with the software. Monopoly control of who is allowed to host it as a service is such, and it is more favourable to me as a consumer when there is not that monopoly control.

Now, meanwhile, there are various market battles going on between various big tech cloud providers and other companies providing (previously) open source software. This is also true. Both things can be true.

For the consumer, as the OP suggests, your best bet is when there is software that can be produced sustainably by multiple entities collaborating, instead of a single company.

Now, if that's not sustainable, that's a problem. It's possible that open source is facing sustainability problems due to current conditions.

But that doesn't change the fact that monopolizing legal right to host software as a service is not open source, is rightly not approved by OSI, and is making consumers locked in to that single vendor (or their licencees), which is indeed contrary to intention of open source.
What’s he meant to do with this information?
Members of the California Privacy Protection Agency Announced
I think that the killing of civilians is undesirable, but clearly moral under the right conditions. The proposition is not weather one should "worry too much about civilian casualties" but if they are morally justifiable at all.

Do you really hold that that it isn't acceptable to kill 1 non-combatant to save a greater number of non-combatants at a future date?

You can change the conditions or description, but it is still a trolly problem.
Fuck I hope not. I just googled the CWD occurrence map in the US. It’s...very scary.
>> the spirit of open source

> This is not a thing that exists. What we have are licenses, not ghosts.

Before we had open source, we released software as public domain. The spirit existed before the trademark phrase was even invented and long after people were already giving away their software for free because of the spirit of the community. We used to go to computer swap meets in fairgrounds buildings and buy boxes of floppy disks with random software on them just to see what was around, people uploaded it to BBSes and shared the work they did - we had Donationware, Shareware, Postcardware (a personal favorite), Beerware and everything in between which was 100% based on the spirit of the community. We just called most of it Freeware.

We have licenses because the spirit was abused.
Not entirely related, but how many new diseases are discovered every year ? For example we have new coronavirus every now and then, but what else ?
What if they didn't want to give users a way to iterate quickly through various attempts at obfuscating copyright content by just the right amount in order to bypass the copyright screening?

Not saying that was the reason but it's not implausible.
If you scan down to the footnotes, they at least document the configurations and most of software they measured.

Is there are specific item you feel is more than the usual stretching?

Otherwise, it seems to me to be at most the usual cherry picking to showcase specific strengths and use cases.
Yeah but that’s my point, not everyone needs to actually set it up. The intent is for most to just be users and concern themselves with editing yml files to bring up their services.
Is there some actual concern about WireGuard itself or just the FreeBSD implementation?
How the match fixing scandal toppled the world of cricket
I think this explanation goes a bit sideways - comparing emotional states and happiness, which is not directly related to consciousness.

What I am surprised about is not how sentimentally lucky I am, but how unlikely it is that my consciousness (which by the theory of consciousness being everywhere) ended up in the being that we consider to be "most conscious" (human). Even if I lived a very short life full of terror and pain - I still would be just as surprised that consciousness that could have been "planted" anywhere ended up in me - a human. And so the alternative theory of "only humans have consciousness" would be more attractive.
This can't be emphasized enough. I'm presently pushing mypy and type hints hard in a Python project (passing static analysis and type checks is required to get through the CI pipeline) and it's just a compromise. Honestly, I don't want a dynamic duck-typed language at all, but it is what it is. Right now, the single most important factor determining whether we have any future at all is speed to market, not the increased reliability you get from type safety. And Python just has libraries for basically everything. It's enabled us to spin up brand new services that do exactly what we need to do from scratch in a matter of hours sometimes.

With competing priorities like that, this is the best we can do right now. The other factor is the rest of the team is already familiar with Python. They're mostly infrastructure developers. They're more likely to do everything in Bash if given the choice. I'm not going to teach them Scala or Haskell or Rust in the next three weeks before we need to deliver something. But I can at least teach them Python's optional type hints and mypy.
I haven't had to bother with workspace stuff in years because of Gradle. I know that not everyone uses Gradle, but it gives you an equivalent of `cargo init` or `npm init` to initialize an Eclipse or Intellij project in any filesystem location.
It's all theatre... Absolutely no teeth.
Sometimes you know in advance, but you still want to optimize for starting and not for maintaining.
Thanks for the very informative post!

Really, the licensing I envision would be:

1) Any entity that does/wants to derive commercial value from the software should compensate the copyright holder. Example entities here are both "I want to sell software that includes/is derived from your software" and "I'm a company/freelancer using your product as part of my business operations".

2) Any other entity can use the software in any way they see fit (like e.g. MIT) except that 1) applies transitively to any derived software.

The situation here is less "This is an open source thing where I take all your contributions and profit off it" but more "This is a commercial for-profit thing that would normally be proprietary closed-source, but everyone can copy/inspect/modify the source as long as they do not profit from it".

Contributions would either be disallowed, or under a CLA if for some reason someone wants to contribute to it (with the clear expectation that someone else is going to profit from it).
Well it's certainly worth doing risk reward calculations but so far they seem pretty clearly in favour of taking the vaccine.
An interesting quote from the wikipedia article on prions:

"In 2015, researchers at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston found that plants can be a vector for prions. When researchers fed hamsters grass that grew on ground where a deer that died with chronic wasting disease (CWD) was buried, the hamsters became ill with CWD, suggesting that prions can bind to plants, which then take them up into the leaf and stem structure, where they can be eaten by herbivores, thus completing the cycle. It is thus possible that there is a progressively accumulating number of prions in the environment."

Dark dreams of a planet's biosphere irreversibly becoming utterly hostile to organisms that use neurons to function, through accumulation of immortal zombie nanoparticles that convert more and more proteins to their side.
Ask HN: Do video calls over full-tunnel VPN bother you?
My company encourages the always-on use of a full-tunnel VPN. I don't like the increased latency in videos calls, it makes me sad and impairs my connecting with others over video. Is this a widespread experience in big companies? Is there any hope for movement away from full-tunnel, so we can have better video conversations?
And you want to extend that to any device that plugs into an outlet?

Just trying to get your position straight here.
> You can have quite relaxed rules as long as everyone abides by the spirit of the agreement. As soon as one party violates that spirit you are forced to make everything much more explicit, which inflicts collateral damage on use cases nobody would have objected to previously.

How are newcomers to know what the mystical "spirit of the agreement" is if it's not written down?

How do you detect that there isn't, in fact, a precise consensus over the "spirit of the agreement" if it's not written down?
Plus as a consumer I always thought the "spirit" of the open source agreement included avoiding vendor lock-in, in the first place. Now the argument is that the "spirit" all along was intended to require vendor lock-in, that consumers wanting the software hosted for them as a service should have only one option (Or authorized licencees of that one monopoly option), and that was always the "spirit" of open source?

I don't think so. I thought the "spirit" was the opposite of that, that open source would let consumers of software avoid vendor lock-in or monopoly control of the software.
The people have decided that "open source" means OSI open source. Therefore that is its effective definition. Which means

> If you want to be specific about the meaning of open source, just say "OSI open source" or something.

is wrong. "OSI open source" and "open source" are synonyms.
I flagged this because it has "race" in the title and if there's one thing HN doesn't want to talk about, it's race.

Totally serious, but also totally disgusted.

Yeah, I'm done with HN. Fuck you niggers.

Six-to-a-room six-figure-a-year motherfuckers crying about how life is unfair. Fuck you.
> As far as I know, the term "open source" was coined by the same people who were involved in founding OSI

I think this has been shown to be a bit of a myth.

They claim to have coined it in 1998 but there's evidence of it in use in context without even needing to explain the idea by other people as far back as 1993.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.os.ms-windows.pro...

Also, the fact is the USPTO wouldn't allow them to trademark it because it has a simple existing descriptive term.
What's the infection rate for rabies? COVID is transmissible via respiratory droplets, while rabies requires direct contact through broken skin or mucus membranes, or eating infected tissues.
Sounds like heaven to me. I really dislike the absence of dark. Especially during the summer when it is hot and I would like to increase airflow by opening up the windows.

The claim, in favor of such widespread lighting, is that it makes something "safer", but the evidence seems weak on that:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/11/02/what-...
It's in the article in the link under "Her job status became shaky days after Condé Nast named her to the position, when the offensive tweets she had posted as a teenager in 2011 resurfaced.", which links to https://www.instagram.com/p/CMIKWZegh4n/

The tweets are in the third image in the Instagram post, transcribed here:

"Outdone by Asian #whatsnew"

"now googling how to not wake up with swollen, asian eyes..."

"give me a 2/10 on my chem problem, cross out all of my work and don't explain what I did wrong..thanks a lot stupid asian T.A. you're great."

Not sure if there's more, but that seems to be the main basis of the reaction.
One day I'll design a board with a beefy network switch and a bunch (32, perhaps) of Octavo SiPs (an ARM core, RAM, ethernet, SD reader wires, GPIO in a single BGA package), put a red LED for each module on the edge, stack 32 of those in a translucent box and play with something that, at least, has the same number of blinking lights as a Connection Machine.
I doubt it would be reduced, generally in these kinds of situations I've seen that the same level of effort is required, just compressed into 4 days rather than 5.
AWS, Google, and MSFT are among the top sponsors of OSI*. They are not neutral arbiters in the OSS space.

[0] https://opensource.org/sponsors
Actually English does have a perfectly serviceable word, but for some reason no one is interested in calling at freedom software. yes it is grammatically awkward, but that’s a less worse problem than being semantically awkward, IMHO.
That certainly would be great, but is it realistic?

Manufacturing for example, is heavily outsourced to cheaper locations. We can certainly have all the tshirts we buy in the US made in the US. Hire locally, create jobs, pay a thriving wage etc.

Then the tshirts will cost more. You might be ok with that, but will the rest of the population? Or will they opt to buy the $10 tshirts made in China? Do we impose heavy duties on anything imported, so the domestic products are price competitive? What about export markets? Will Europe buy our $50 tshirts over the $10 Chinese made tshirts?

Paying local workers a thriving wage would be great, and we certainly do it for many sectors (tech for example). I just don't know if it's workable for a lot of things.
I think it's just lack of formal peer review [1]

[1] https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2021-March/00650...
I've heard those rumors for about 10 years already though :)
There are hardware implementations referenced in the blog post, and in the linked published paper.

> In the early 2000s, Farsiu et al. [2006] and Gotoh and Okutomi [2004]formulated superresolution from arbitrary motion as an optimization problem that would be infeasible for interactive rates. Ben-Ezraet al. [2005] created a jitter camera prototype to do super-resolution using controlled subpixel detector shifts. This and other works inspired some commercial cameras (e.g.,Sony A6000,Pentax FF K1,Olympus OM-D E-M1orPanasonic Lumix DC-G9) to adopt multi-frame techniques, using controlled pixel shifting of the physical sensor. However, these approaches require the use of a tripod or a static scene.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.03277.pdf
Cobweb-2: Structured specification of a wafer-scale supercomputer
Compilation is a good example of where using remote machines can help substantially: https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/remote-execution.ht...
Father jailed after referring to biological female child as his daughter
I seriously doubt you are "blacklisted" or anything similar. You've only failed 3 final round interviews, which doesn't strike me as an uncommonly large number.

Can you elaborate on whether it is technical or behavioral rounds that you seem to be failing? It might simply be a personality thing with the few places you've talked to.

If you are interested, I am willing to give you a short mock interview and provide you with objective and honest feedback to see if we can figure out what is going on. Feel free to get in touch, contact info is my user profile.
There were questions around the implementation. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26475519
Recent discussion about its addition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26475519
Animal biology has a desire to copulate. That doesn't necessarily mean a desire to reproduce per se. Modern birth control lets human beings copulate all they want to satisy those urges without the reproduction part.
I'm a big fan of this one too: https://spritesmods.com/?art=veccart&page=5