skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't have time to read every paper published, which is why we have people we call experts. The hope is that by having published papers public, other experts will read it and kick up a stink if there are egregious errors. Up until that point, to get on with life it is necessary to make a decision if the subject is relevant to our choices.

It is exactly like OSS. Not every user can audit the code, nor should we expect them to. But it's there and we hope that someone is.
I agree with you 100%, I love HN and have been here for years but the downvoting feature disgusts me. Either allow a post or don’t, but this weird “fading” of someone’s post just because some people don’t agree with what someone has to say strikes me as petty and cheap. HN should be bigger than that.
The D programming language has from the beginning built-in support for UTF-8, UTF-16 and UTF-32 code units as basic types (char, wchar, and dchar). This was when it wasn't clear which encoding would dominate.

It's pretty clear today that UTF-8 dominates, and the other two are useful only for interfacing to systems that need them.
Do we not consider emoji a language unto itself?

I was actually quite bemused to discover that some code review software I was using allowed me to "cursor" halfway through a smiley face emoji and enter a space (typing too fast to pay attention)... causing the infamous "box characters" because I'd accidentally split the smiley down the middle.

I get the need for extreme backward compat in browsers, but... this seems like one of those things that just might be worth fixing. Maybe a "use utf8" directive? :)
Thanks for the code snippet, however (kind of a Rust newbie here)

$ cargo install unicode_segmentation (chokes)

$ cargo install unicode-segmentation (seems to work)

and in Cargo.toml
[dependencies]
unicode-segmentation = "1.7.1" (seems to work)

yet in the code, its:
use unicode_segmentation::UnicodeSegmentation;

Why couldn't they be consistent using a dash vs. an underscore ?
> (no dependencies on experimental features of Rust,

Unclear if this is a hard requirement, even if it is, it's stated to be feasible on the timescale of "less than a year".

> support for all relevant architectures)

This is already fulfilled; this is for drivers only, which are inherently platform-specific, and so only drivers that are usable on the supported platforms would be written.

> there could well be a dozen different languages available that improve greatly on Rust

As mentioned above, I doubt that this is true within a year, but beyond that, any new language is also going to have all of these same growing pains, but be a decade behind. When they're ready, they should be considered, but "don't do a good thing now because maybe, some unknown amazing thing might appear" isn't usually a good way to make decisions.
If you study the scientific literature for works that measure actual infections with/without masks (and not hypothetical scenarios on droplet travel distances) you'll find that the science is far from being established.

Take a look here just how many works indicate no effect:

https://swprs.org/face-masks-evidence/

These may be cherry picked of course - no question there, still it is evidence that the science is not settled.

For a "home-run" review see the Cochrane review:

https://www.cochrane.org/CD006207/ARI_do-physical-measures-s...

Not even N95/P2 respirators were found to be effective.
Mapbox Styles for Marine and Bathymetry Applications
There was a significant number of companies doing this for Hacktoberfest 2020: https://hacktoberfestswaglist.com/
People with the opposite view see the opposite "extreme" bias. It's basically entirely in the eye of the beholder.

What's odd is how common it is, and how absolutely people are convinced that their particular strain of these contradictory generalizations is the accurate one.
Also, since 2015 there's been speculation that the FBI's real motive for taking action against Apple was to set a legal precedent to make it easier to compel tech companies to unlock devices/accounts in the future. This appears to be confirmed.
> I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent.

Yeah, I like this perspective but I think there's two axes we can separate a little. One axis is disagreement. (I agree with you <-> I disagree with you). the other axis is effort / coherence. (I'm going to invest significant effort to clearly articulate my point of view <-> I'm going to make a flippant off-handed comment).

Disagreement alone isn't the problem - I've had some lovely conversations on HN with people I disagree with. Eg, a couple weeks ago I had this interesting exchange[1] talking about RMS on the FSF board. But the conversation worked because everyone was careful and articulate. When someone says something I disagree with, but they say it in a thoughtful, well articulated way, I learn something new.

There's probably more factors at play, but as a rule of thumb I suppose downvotes are in the low effort + strong disagree quadrant. In that zone I feel like there's no implied intent to even talk it through. And absent conversation, why are we even here?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767
An easy way to compare the amount of CO2 they release is looking at the size. They only can burn the fuel they carry, and the density of the fuel is similar. The best images I got are

https://twitter.com/rocketrundown/status/956079854511972352

https://twitter.com/erdayastronaut/status/123959552711483801...

To make the calculation more difficult, like the 80% of the volume of a Boeing 747 is room for humans, and like 50% of the volume of a Falcon 9 is room for Oxygen and thrusters.
Lexicon Valley covers these sorts of things regularly. And I think he takes ideas from listeners too!
Do you know the answer and are trying to prove your point? Or are you assuming none and asking a question you don't actually know.
"There may be something better in the future, so we shouldn't change anything ever" is not a very strong argument.

No one thinks Rust is the end-all-be-all. They simply think that Rust is better than C, quite easily at that. And Rust does focus on correctness... If people wanted memory safety, almost any not-C/C++ language would be good enough. Rust's correctness story is wonderful, which is why I myself don't focus on the garbage-collector thing when talking about Rust.

And C++ has been thoroughly rebuked by Linus, and his statements have only gotten stronger with time.
This is the correct take, IMO. This feels to me like a lot of higher-ups at Coinbase are sensing the peak of a crypto hype wave and want to take advantage of the moment to cash out and spread their risk around. Plus they have privileged access to real-time data on crypto market movement (I assume); they’ll know if a btc sell off is brewing long before anyone else. The fact that BTC only jumped to 64k is telling...
The Rust compiler and its package manager are already separate.
Is it me (and have I been hiding/asleep under a rock for a long time) or is Linus' tone vastly (and pleasantly) different from what his previous persona is known to be?

I actually loved (I mean really loved) reading the response as it not only was encouraging but also highly respectful and almost glowing with a trained sort of nuance! Just wow!
Parrot and Perl 6 diverged

To me this reads like the "mistakes were made" phrasing used when someone wants to be technically accurate but not say anything meaningful.

Regardless of whatever Raku developers and advocates say, I, as a lead developer of Parrot, went out of my way to make it work better for P6. Patrick asked me not to do certain things and so I didn't do those things.

Maybe that was my mistake.

But it's categorically untrue that Parrot wanted to get rid of P6 or considered P6 an afterthought or wasn't willing and able to be receptive to P6's needs, and I'm disappointed that that untruth continues to persist.
Apperta says Dyke "breached a private portal to access financial information related to The Apperta Foundation." The police were called. There is a GoFundMe.

https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/security-researcher-launc...
People help each other altruistically, and these networks of interchanged aid, called mutual aide, eventually allow for collective action.
There's https://gitcoin.co/explorer, too, and it's always got new jobs posted and people doing them.
Personally, I don't think C++ would give a similar improvement to Rust or a future competitor to Rust. C++ has a severe useability problem. Many companies have to really restrict what subset of C++ is used based on use cases. I don't know what contributing to the linux kernel is like, but I imagine having readable code really helps. Paring down C++ to the subset that gives measurable improvements while also being readable seems daunting. Where do you draw the lines? Will concepts be allowed, what about template heavy code and SFINAE? If you go down the C with classes route (which doesn't provide too much advantage), it might be easier to for existing devs to work on it, but if you go too far the other way, you could alienate a lot of people who contribute to the kernel already and don't have the time or will to understand the complex template deduction system of C++.

Rust seems to be much more opinionated on how to do certain tasks, which might make it an easier to use for the kernel because there will be one way to do certain tasks. That's my read on things at least.
I don't think it is to worry about, 1 cubic meter of iron weighs 7.8 tons for example... it is not a huge mass in the end.
If you add a header with the channel number and data length and a CRC, it starts looking like UDP.
I didn't read the article.

Fwiw afaic, the reason poverty persists is a product of the market solution we've elected. It's for all practical purposes and intents necessary for poverty to exist as it creates a class of people willing to invest their time at a deficit to themselves (relatively undervalued labor). More or less kin to introducing an artificial concentration gradient, where there likely was none. Without that poverty resources would become increasingly expensive because labor supply becomes more reticent to act on a deficit because they're no longer existentially threatened. Additionally, demand increases as there is more liquidity and velocity. The most compromising feature of this is the megalithic multinationals sinking all that money which destroys the natural local circularity. All the money ends up in Amazon, Nike, and Coca-Cola's accounts.
Right. And you can use something like terraform-inventory[0] as a dynamic inventory source in Ansible. So TF manages all the bits and bobs floating around in AWS, and then ansible takes over to manage configuration on whatever EC2 instances are involved.

[0]: https://github.com/adammck/terraform-inventory
Who was Arno Schmidt and what is Zettels Traum? Some evidentiary fragments
Slash and burn is ancient agriculture, too. While Wikipedia calls it sustainable, it was only sustainable with approximately no humans, resulting in functionally unlimited land. Larger populations can't wait for the forest regrowth part of the cycle.

/grandiose
We are genetically programmed to live for a few decades, reproduce, and care for our kin (both blood and tribe) in a world which was limitless (relative to us as individuals.) I deeply fear this is the sad answer to the Fermi paradox. Now, our survival depends on outsmarting our short-sighted genes.
Linux Package Command Namespacing
Do me a favor and go on YouTube or Instagram or Facebook and look up the million videos of people making music with it. You don’t know what you’re talking about here. I don’t know a single person who flashes their OP-1. By your argument, owning a guitar and only knowing a couple chords is “status symbol” purchase.
A distributed system doesn’t require consensus at all. Consensus is just a famous category of problems within the field of distributed systems, and there are many different types of consensus requirements.

I like Leslie lamport’s definition of a distributed system. I’m paraphrasing but it’s something to the effect, “a distributed system is when your program crashes because of a computer you never even heard of”.

So yeah, I mean a multi-tier web app can definitely be a distributed system.

Typically people don’t think of it like that because those systems are very centralized around a database for example, but in the most technical sense a multi tier application is still a distributed system.

So is an app consisting of composition of docker containers. Message passing in general can kind of blur the lines but yeah this too.
Since XMMS2 ist not supported anymore, any other winamp compatible linux player?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMMS2
The problem with a "smart jerk" is that (from my experience) many mods are awful at separating tone from opinion. Because the discussion always seems to inevitably shift from the starting spirit of "don't be an asshole" to "don't have asshole opinions". However, depending on how invested one is, they may see certain opinions themselves as being unwelcoming. And so the filter bubbles occur, be they for something as impactful as politics or as inane as your favorite TV show.
Architecting ExPlat: Automattic’s New Experimentation Platform
My memory is fuzzy on my slashdot days, but wasn’t there a way to filter the funny suff?
From the 2018 Wired article "Jeff Bezos Wants Us All to Leave Earth - for Good"

Also, is there a term for this kind of weird corporate anecdote? Why are these so common in the business world lol
As a parent, I am legally responsible for the actions of my kids. That’s why a degree of control is acceptable. How much you exercise such control is entirely due to your relationship with the child, of course, but excessive trust does carry a risk.

(This, of course, in addition to regular parental anxiety about the safety of your kids)
My understanding of effective altruism comes from the rationality movement. The impression I got from there is essentially:

IF you want to help people (or reduce some specific type of suffering)
THEN this is the most effective way to do so

whereas this article seems to be emphasizing Singer's moral imperative.

Honestly, even with my limited exposure to effective altruism, I think they have already answered all these arguments. This is the heroic struggle version of altruism, where the goal is to show how much effort you put into something.
It seems like if an NGO provided a UBI in a region that was controlled by a dictatorship, the dictatorship could simply take all the money. When taxes are not set democratically, giving money to individuals seems roughly equivalent to giving money straight to a dictator.
you should be able to understand that even the possibility of that becoming the new ICE has to be priced in, of course you are free not to do it though.
We had a page on our site. it linked to bugs and bugs linked to it. bugs indicated their bounty. lots of overhead.
Not quite equal. At its peak Bitcoin Cash was about 25% of Bitcoin, and at a much lower price too. If you reinvested it at exactly the right time, you could multiply total yield by 1.25, but that's a big if.
There is a lot of example code here:
https://github.com/coqui-ai/STT-examples

If you have any more specific requirements then we can point you in the right direction. Or just join us on Matrix: https://app.element.io/#/room/#coqui-ai_STT:gitter.im :)
I imagine it promotes discourse by encouraging discussion instead of shallow dismissals by downvoting.
I run a one-person SaaS company supporting three products. One is an iOS and Android all-local storage app so that costs me nothing to run. I have two projects running on Django sharing the same RDS DB. I can support two apps with just a single EC2 each. One runs docker containers. The other I did not dockerize yet. For me, the total costs are about $40/month. I have looked at Netlify and other “easy options” but they double or more my costs due to their costly basic tiers.
No humans needed: Drones fly off the factory line
I think about this kind of thing a lot, but I haven't put much of it down in writing yet.

One thing I think is often overlooked is the value of writing a good description. I genuinely believe an issue in the form of a user story can require as much work defining the task as it does implementing it. Some contributions question, clarify, articulate, or integrate an issue so that the implementation becomes straightforward. If you can find a way to pay for that, then I think everything else becomes easy.

Another thing is that sometimes the best solution takes some exploration to find, but if you only pay for the final solution then the cost of finding it is not aligned with the price and the system cannot stabilize. I think this is similar to the problem that Science is facing where funding sources prioritize positive, novel results over the bare truth. I think if you find a way to reward experimentation even if it fails you will have solved a big problem. I think the key might be to realize (in both senses) the value in a failed experiment.
Not sure if it helps, but the UK NCSC has a general government webapp vulnerability reporting form on HackerOne (https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/information/vulnerability-reporting).

It sounds like Apperta might have been "established" in collaboration with Government, although it's not clear if they are still run as such.

In this case, it sounds like a bunch of incompetents who don't understand how the internet, or indeed security, works, who then retained a bunch of lawyers that don't know how the internet or security works either. Lawyers have an ethical duty to act within their own competency, and that can be enforced by their regulator. I'll leave it for the reader to decide if these lawyers are acting within their own competency or not.

The main regulation at hand would be the Computer Misuse Act. Since they published this content onto GitHub, and the author (presumably) has evidence and an admission of this fact, they now have Github's TOS to rely on:

> Any User-Generated Content you post publicly, including issues, comments, and contributions to other Users' repositories, may be viewed by others. By setting your repositories to be viewed publicly, you agree to allow others to view and "fork" your repositories (this means that others may make their own copies of Content from your repositories in repositories they control).

They knowingly made it public. That means you did not exceed authorised access in anything you did, and therefore did not gain unauthorised access to any protected computer system. At least based on the info from this blog post. The Investigatory Powers Act doesn't seem relevant, at least without any detail of their claim - that's primarily to regulate government access to information, and certainly not your access to public information they chose freely to publish.

An ICO report seems reasonable, though perhaps worth waiting 72 hours, so they have gone over the legally required time for reporting a data breach upon becoming aware. What's the bets their lawyers advised them to report the breach properly and promptly?
Does that mean the material can still fully burn when falling down from under 2000km altitude? Or would we see pollution for example from battery materials?
When I lived there it was https://www.youku.com/, not sure if they're still the dominant site now, stuff changes quick.
Not longer, three dimensions. Low orbits range from about 110 to 200km. The next range, from 200 to a few thousand km is vastly larger in three dimensions.
They are references to heuristically derived conveniences

That's every word in existence
Yeah, I’m referring to after all of that. 2020 felt so much longer than a year, so my time interval was way off.

I was referencing stuff like the closure changes [1], review queue redesign [2], and the updates to the “ask” page [3]. Again, I haven’t been on SO much lately so I don’t now how well that’s been working out or how receptive they’ve been to Meta feedback, but it’s reassuring to see they’re finally focusing on parts of the site that have needed it desperately for so many years. Additionally, they seem to be doing better about listening to Meta (at least compared to the “0.015%” reign of terror).

[1]: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/394871/upcoming-fea...

[2]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/346901/improving-th...

[3]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344513/the-new-ask-...
Right, but the claim was this:

if you have been handling Unicode and using wide characters, you have not been handling Unicode properly

I agree that UTF-8 is a better encoding overall for the majority of cases. I don't think that means UTF-16, which for example Delphi UnicodeStrings are[1], is not proper.

edit: maybe this is a language confusion thing. For historically tragic reasons, we're stuck with "char" as the basic element of string types in lots of languages. In Delphi a "widechar" is technically a code unit[2], and may or may not represent a code point. This is how I interpreted the OP. Maybe he meant wide characters as code points, in which I would agree.

[1]: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Sydney/en/Unicode_i...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_encoding#Terminology
In case you did not know this; he took a break a while back to work on his empathy and communication skills.
I keep telling myself this is something I'd enjoy doing - but then I do something to scratch my own itches instead and live without the bounty.
What's really cool about Rust is not that it's a technical improvement on (Ada, C, Cobol, C++, Fortran, Lisp, Haskell, ...) because it isn't yet. It has some really great features, and a lot of potential. It's still young. gccrs is required. It has quite a way to go before it can rival some of the most important _languages_ we use. It's getting there.

What's really cool is the humility, flexibility, and creativity, of the community who develop Rust.

What's really really cool is Linus is holding a hoop into the kernel
Ah, interesting. I could have sworn K5 had a vouching system, where the strength of a rating was partially dependent on the rating of the person doing the rating.
Effective altruism is a net positive, but it’s not a panacea. It suffers from the same problems as central planning and communism.

Donors and nonprofits think they can calculate the most “effective” way to allocate funds — if only we can pack enough phds in this boardroom we’ll end poverty! Problem is, there’s no space in the room for the experts themselves — the ppl actually in poverty.

Poverty is complex and no group of people can predict all the externalities of trying to address it — like using bed nets for fishing instead of malaria prevention or changes in behavior when the rich scientists come to town with their clipboards to conduct their RCTs.

I find it funny that capitalists are all about trusting the free market and self-interest when it comes to business and politics, but when it comes to philanthropy, they know best.

In reality, the solution is quite simple — just ask “the people in poverty” if and how they want help. Most of the time they’ll likely ask for money or a job, which seems pretty reasonable to me and can be accomplished with very little overhead.
Go play some Interactive Fiction titles.
Such as Trinity, Anchorhead, Slouch Over Bedlam, Vicious Cycles.
These will give you an experience far more complex and rich than any book, ever.
That's not what I'm referring to.

I see political topics better debated and I'm radical.

It's just Apple comment threads. You know dang.