skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>we have absolutely no business building more of them and burdening future generations with them.

I arrive at the same conclusion each time I visit the topic.

And I do not blame advocates of this form of power. Advancement is hard, the rewards compelling.

However, I would rather live less, longer, and look over to my young 5 year old granddaughter and know she has a chance at experiencing something like I did, a clean, beautiful world, more harmonious than we know.

We have excluded ourselves from some of it. The coming decades may see us excluded from much more as climate temp rises.

Read about the wet bulb limit. 135F, I believe it is? At or above that temp, we cannot endure, will die a heat death without tech running. Like "Total Recall" and those people needing air, when the fans stop...

I feel we may know enough to be super dangerous, and our skill, resolve to get what we know as right as we can just does not appear to be enough.

Fukushima may melt its way into the water cycle, and is already polluting the oceans. Being real here, the increase is not much, but the timeline on our exposure to changes and risks is so long. Hard to say what it all means, could mean.

It all makes me want to support and be a part of the mother of all clean, renewable energy build outs!

Just switch us over.

We did what it took for fossil fuels. And that work meant income for so many, new tech, opportunities of all kinds, and the returns have been amazeballs!

And we did well, but here we are warming the place. Costs and risks on that are amplifying same as rewards did.

Nuclear happened, and we got to work on that. The returns have been great, but the misalignment between our nature, cost and risk exposure are more severe.

Here we are excluded from parts of our world and we do not really know the longer term outlook for either of these things.

All that effort got us great tech!

And we have an opportunity to build out again, and thr ability to do it, and it appears green energy, renewables can be aligned fairly well to our nature, cost and risk exposure lower, and we just need to find the will to do the work!

Unlike oil and nukes, renewables are more of a grind than loot box, but doing it could mitigate some of what is to come for us, as well as deliver great jobs, good opportunity and all that good stuff.

It will, or is likely to mean we live a bit differently, but so what! We did that before, can again, and it is not like we have to give the others up, so we do have what we made and can use it where we really must.

Lots of work to be done, tons of families raising kids, living lives, planet standing a much better chance at remaining healthy...

And throughout that time, we can continue to improve on that basic misalignment that comes with nuclear and end what is now well understood harm associated with fossil fuels.

Seems like a step backwards. I see it as a pause, step to the side.

A regroup and big push toward a lower cost and risk future.

Future people will thank us. And we will have done well by our world and ourselves along the way.
A culture born out of C++ and Smalltalk enterprise tooling before Java was even an idea.
Honestly, I know nothing about the e-ink industry. What I see though is that every new device on the market has plenty of comments like "I wish it had e-ink display" and yet there are no affordable devices like this. I am sure there is a huge market for it, so where are they? I can only think of one reason: patents.

By the way, EFF confirm that the patent system is broken: https://www.eff.org/fa/issues/patents.
Air Circulator (Vornado)
Objects: Pencil & Paper.
You're thinking about an individual supply of information between two actors, not a sea-change by making it common knowledge among all market participants.
WebGL 2.0 API Quick Reference Guide [pdf]
Add<&str> for String in a loop isn't as problematic as adding two, for example, Java Strings because of the capacity growth curve and buffer reuse, but it is still worse than not having a `String::with_capacity` call before the loop. I am sad to see that clippy doesn't have any lints for this, but I can see how it would be hard to make a general good suggestion for it.
interesting that you don't level the same at parent poster.
rr is really a hidden treasure. C/C++ wasn't the same for me after discovering it.

It's sort of like the first time you learn about interactive debugging. Everything you did before that suddenly feels like "caveman coding" and you never want to go back.
It would be Apple's (or the bankruptcy court's) responsibility to transfer the access to a competitor's service, in exchange for payment or liquidation proceeds.

In fact, I'd argue that this ought to be the norm -- that content providers be forced to purchase insurance or something precisely in case they go out of business, to ensure customers will have their content migrated to another service, and be refunded for the small proportion of content that isn't available anywhere else.
Only twenty four days late
Upvoted not because I agree, but genuinely want to read discussion on this. I used to agree, when I first started doing Android development and "relearned" Java since playing with Applets at age 14, but threading made me seriously reconsider. These days I make a living writing TypeScript ( nearly exclusively ), and although the tsc says it works, I always have a suspicion it could not work. Whereas with Java if it compiles it definitely works unless you have some R build issue. I think TypeScript is a nice middle ground, but I do wish there were some lower level semantics for backend TypeScript development. I've looked into Rust and it looks very complex and unfriendly ( I would need to rewrite nearly my entire backend libraries e.g. db drivers and ORM generators ). Anyway, it's a decent take, but I wish the same could be said of TypeScript.
The thing is I found quite paradoxical (to stay polite) that you'd spend time drafting something that is not precise, not data to help you but just a document in a tool.

The model driven thing was nice but it was never good enough to actually help with code. It was also deeply rooted in the crippled Java days so full of verbose diagram representing overly verbose classes.

To hyperbole a bit, I'd rather spend time writing property based tests and a few types in haskell in a way.
> Why is this sentiment so prevalent

Because UML is usually used when you don't yet know or decided many details.

If you put them on diagram they will often turn out to be wrong, or even worse - artificially restrict the implementator's freedom for no reason.

"Why do we require 10 clicks to upgrade the subscription plan?"

"Because that's how it was specified"
Stronger unions could help fight income inequality
Yup, I’ve always referred to UML as ‘a formal standard for back-of-the-envelope sketches’. It demands too much precision and rigor to be used during the early parts of a project when you want to just get people on the same page about roughly how things should be structured without baking in assumptions too early. Then in the later part of a project when you’re talking about modifying an existing system, reexpressing the existing semantics accurately in UML first demands unnecessary pedantry.

When you draw a diagram to communicate something about a system, being able to choose which things are important to you right now and which things aren’t is a feature of informal diagramming, not a bug.
Because it isn't about the value you produce and it never has been. It's about your and your company's positions in the rest of the labour market. The people who are wishing for globally universal remote salaries are joining a sad race to the bottom.
> BEFORE SpaceX shipped a portion of the world's precious metals into low earth orbit.

Admirable passion, but I suspect you've been informed unevenly: do please read further on what exactly "low earth orbit" actually means. This stuff will be back, fairly soon.
We use the "noinline" attribute to get control over inlining, which gives a reasonable assurance that we'll get a normal standard ABI call with six parameters in registers on x64/ARM64.
If you were living in a place in China where you could just show up and catch a high speed train, you were very lucky!

My experience living in China is that for high speed rail departing from tier one and tier two cities, you would often need to book a ticket a day in advance, or - if you were winging it - be willing to go to somewhere other than your intended destination. And foreigners cannot get their tickets through the machine like people with Chinese ID card can, so that means waiting 30-45 minutes in the line to get your ticket (even if you booked online), before you even go through security, which is another 15-20 minutes. And if you show up at the main concourse 5 minutes before the train leaves, you will be denied access to the platform due to the airport-like boarding procedure. As such, I always had to calculate arriving at the dedicated high speed train station (usually itself 30+ minutes bus or subway ride out of the center of town) with at least an hour to spare.

It is still far less hassle than taking a flight, but it's not comparable to the real spontaneous opportunities of going by bus/coach or slow train (hard seat). With those forms of travel you really can just show up at a nearby station and go wherever, with little to no pre-planning and less stressful security checks. But then it will take hours to go halfway across the province. Of course, for many Chinese, that is the standard mode of travel, because high speed rail is still fairly expensive by comparison.

All that said... Pretty much everything about traveling by rail in China is better than it is in America. But traveling by rail in Europe is the gold standard, I think. Being able to buy tickets from a machine, not show photo ID anywhere (in the Schengen area at least), just step on and step off, that's real freedom of movement.
As an example, nursing is not only about holding hands and "helping the doctors".
Why encrypted DNS is ineffective
> Even in circumstances where the distances are not too great, and the political and bureaucratic hurdles are.

NIMBY-ism as well? Because I can't fathom how a 400 miles high-speed rail route can cost $100bn unless you're spending years re-drafting your route because every asshole on the way has to be heard.

25 years is not completely nonsensical though, if you want to do this right it does take time.

For a fairly recent example, the french LGV Est is 252 miles (406km), it cost 4bn (including 800 millions worth of rolling stock), and took 16 years before the construction and financing protocol of the first phase was signed and the opening of the second phase. First phase opened a year late, and second phase 3 months late because of the Eckwersheim testing accident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckwersheim_derailment).

Obviously building in California would require additional studies and expenses for earthquake safety and the like, but 12x… seems a bit much.

The cost only makes sense if it's basically all tunnels and briges, like Chūō Shinkansen: that's estimated to cost north of $90 billion for 177 miles, but it's going straight through mountains, 90% of the way is through tunnels.
The Quest for a Floating Utopia
Here goes: https://github.com/dainiusjocas/lucene-grep/issues/84

I realize some relatively obscure Finnish stemmer and Lucene with GraalVM aren't exactly a common use case. I did some testing and provided my use case. I certainly have much English language content to search with using lucene-grep. So, thank you for making it!
To drive the point home on how strings work in Rust and what the pitfalls it addresses are, https://fasterthanli.me/articles/working-with-strings-in-rus...
I mean following 100% seriously: there is no such thing as factory hell. Even in the few places who do actually overuse factory pattern, it is braindead easy to figure factories out. It is not like would be something difficult to understand.

The hate for Java is so strongly meme based.
> The fix is easy, just make MUSTTAIL expand to nothing in debug builds.

That wouldn’t work. The final call is a recursive call to dispatch, if that is not a tail call it will blow the stack instantly.
Of course RR is too expensive to be deployed in production builds. So if you are getting core dumps from "production" you won't have this information. So while RR helps it doesn't completely mitigate the tradeoff.
UML has been on life support for a long time because it served no real purpose for either engineers nor business users.

Any UML diagram that accurately captured complex business requirements was no easier to understand than the pages of code, databases deployed, and a gazillion other things that are required to run any modern corporate.
Graphviz dot maybe?
Never say never :)
this is what I do... I have a UML document that describes the database schema and instead of autogenerating it, I run a compile-time check to verify that the UML is in sync with the schema.
I know, the point was that they don't care to improve the C++ version.
> I also like to explicitly declare immutability/ mutability

Scala takes this approach, using var for declaring mutable variables, and val for declaring immutables. In my experience, in well designed imperative code, only a small proportion of variables need mutation, so using keywords like const and final is backward. It would make more sense to use a mutable keyword, or to do as Scala does. (C++ has a mutable keyword, but it's for a different purpose.)

https://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/scala-book/two-types-v...
If they just renamed it to “eventual full self drive” then all the people who refuse to read the fine print or just aren’t getting the nuance of it would be on the same page with the people that do.

I agree the responsibility for clarity is on their marketing to fix, but I’m also saying that if you read the fine print on the site while configuring your purchase it’s pretty clear what FSD is and isn’t.
There's no reason Apple has to cut off access to your content even if they ban the rest of your account.

They could just set a flag on your account to "consume only" or something. Your account would be banned from "interaction" or further purchases, but you wouldn't lose your content.
It might in a future in which air travel is prohibitively highly taxed. Seems unlikely now, but one can dream.
In the industry, studios will have different tech stacks that make them competitive for different areas. Some will have specialized simulations software for fluid dynamics, others really advanced rigging techniques that allow super realistic results faster than competing studios. A lot of it comes down to custom pipelines and integrations depending on their needs.

The off-the-shelf tools have come a long way for a lot of tasks, but studios still create really awesome in house software that in a bidding situation (VFX) can help a bit. Though to be frank the bidding process is an absolute mess.

When it comes to rendering, it all depends on the focus of the projects and the direction/needs of the studios. Though the end results may be similar, the way you get there will have varying degrees of optimization and flexibility depending what the stack is built on (besides the typical necessities of traced rendering).

Some examples:

- Pixar: Renderman

- Weta Digital: Manuka [0]

- Framestore: Freak [1]

[0] https://www.wetafx.co.nz/research-and-tech/technology/manuka...

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210126083056/https://beforesan...
30% is egregious and unfair. I remember Facebook killed their app ecosystem by charging 30% rates. It had competition from other places, and so their prematurely milked ecosystem died. With mobile app stores, people are either funneled into the app store with no easy alternative (Android) or have literally no other option (iphone). Maybe 1% or 2% would be justified. But 30%? Clearly not
I’d add generating diagrams from the real code, database models, etc. as an alternative, too. General high-level diagrams don’t need the level of detail which UML requires but it’s inevitably not enough detail or accurate enough to understand the system using just the UML diagrams, so you end up with a bunch of expensive time wasted creating diagrams which don’t satisfy either audience.
Under this proposed regulation, it doesn't have to be AI. "machine learning, logic/knowledge, statistics", as long as the goal is on the list of bad stuff in the regulation.
> Suscription Services

I like the term
I used to entertain myself during math class designing tiny fonts for my HP48. And I have 0 design skill. The constraints are so tight if you want really tiny fonts at that level that there aren't that many options anyhow. It's fun and easy to just make some.

For stuff more in the 8 pixel range, there a ton of stuff. If you give a full 20 pixels to one line you can use almost any font you like.
As someone pretty integrated with open source hardware, this initiative weirds me out.

There's a growing community around open source silicon, whether that means ASICs with Openlane & the Skywater PDK or FPGAs with Symbiflow or more general cores with the FOSSi Foundation. But as far as I can tell, none of the folks on the board of OSFPGA are affiliated with any of that work with the exception of Brian Faith from QuickLogic (which uses Symbiflow as their first-party toolchain IIRC). Co-Chairman Naveed Sherwani lead SiFive for a while and started a bunch of companies/organizations with "Open" in the name (like OpenFive), but none of these are "open" in any open-source sense as far as I can tell.

Further, membership is expensive and representation on the "board" is determined by the amount of capital you have which feels antithetical to building an inclusive community where passionate individuals can contribute (and indeed, much of the OSS in this space is driven by insanely productive individuals like Claire Wolf & whitequark).

Finally, quoting from the press release:

> The Open Source FPGA Foundation offers a set of free and open source tools

But the github is empty except for a singular project that just links to work done before the formation of this entity?

So constructive feedback, if you're involved with this initiative, please reach out to one of the many communities that already exist:

- The Skywater Slack

- The Symbiflow Slack

- The YosysHQ Slack

- #openfpga & #symbiflow on freenode

- The 1BitSquared Discord
For rendering images you may want to look at ordered dithering, based on a paper by Bryce Bayer (my father).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordered_dithering

At higher resolutions there are better methods, so this is now ancient technology. You might recognize this dither pattern from the graphics on old DEC computer boxes...
This isn’t actually known to be true though, is it? It seems like a compelling hypothesis, but rejection of external objects is only universal as far as our physical responses rather than emotional.

For example, something threatening might be purged from the mouth, stomach, or intestines. This is something all humans do.

Something undesirable to eat or drink won’t universally trigger a specific facial expression, sound, or feeling.

Further, if I wrinkle my nose in disgust it actually flairs my nostrils, seemingly making it easier to breathe and smell. I suspect this is the same for most humans, but I’m open to correction. It simply has no limiting effect on my ability to breathe or smell, though.

These are important distinctions, and distinctions which make Peterson’s claim less than factual from my point of view.

There’s a great conversation about this on the Making Sense podcast. It touches on this idea exactly, and why we really don’t understand what emotional elements of expression truly mean or where they come from. Things like disgust contain a cultural or environmental element which appear to lack attachment to solely genetic origins.

https://samharris.org/subscriber-rss/?uid=PNISESQukqqj4q8
I think you're reading the comment you replied to right, but I don't (completely) agree with your conclusion.

There are two magic things the format macro does apart from varargs, it checks the format string against the length and format types of the argument at compile time, and it automatically borrows the arguments. Implementing format with varargs means you need to lose those.

Once you lose those calling it looks like

format("{}{}", &1, &1.0)

under the above proposal the type signature of format would look like

fn format<const N: usize>(fmt_str: &str, args: [&dyn Format; N]) -> Result<String, Error>;

Where `Format` replaces the various `Display`, `Debug`, etc traits and looks something like this

trait Format {
fn display(&self, fmt: &mut Formatter) -> Result<(), Error> {
// Default implementation of this method
return Err(Error::NotImplemented)
}

fn debug(&self, fmt: &mut Formatter) -> Result<(), Error> {
// Default implementation of this method
return Err(Error::NotImplemented)
}

...
}

I.e. the trick is that the conversion to a trait object happens (implicitly) on the calling side when you take a reference, so all the arguments are all of the same type.
It's strange to see the contrast between how relatively large a share of transportation Amtrak has in the Northeast Corridor compared to elsewhere in the country. I've heard this ascribed to population density, but it doesn't seem like trains are as popular in places like Texas or Southern California.
The cost per mile is completely different between light rail and regular / high-speed rail, tho.

The french LGV Est cost about 10k€ / mile (4bn for 252 miles), and it was not considered cheap. And that's including 800 millions worth of rolling stock too.

If we exclude the rolling stock from Est's cost and assume those 160bn will be purely infrastructure, it should get you about 12500 miles of track (stations included).
It also takes away from them the riposte of "you're full of shit" or "that number is crazy" because it comes from the biggest Human Resources dept on the planet. It's maybe my favorite interview tactic I've come up with, both for negotiation value and from keeping people from wasting my time. "You're not even going to pay more than the government, even though you have shit benefits by comparison? Adios. Don't call yourself competitive."
Why would I spend an hour on buiding a diagram to generate code if I can type the same code in five minutes? I can read both. This is from real world experience with Rational tools.
> I’ve also written a java_launcher shell script that allows me to write this at the top of Java programs:

One could also use D and rdmd pretty much for the same purpose, I imagine.
I wrote an online iframe editor
I was very surprised when I couldn't find any tool to test, edit or build an iframe online.

I was lazy to open sandbox or vs code, So I build an editor dedicated to everything iframe.

Sharing it here in case someone finds it helpful :)

Link to project: https://github.com/Rakhisharma/online-iframe-editor
> and although the tsc _says it works_, I always have a suspicion it could _not work_

TypeScript fails me almost exclusively due to `!`. The association is so strong that whenever I encounter an error, I am excited to see if it's due to `!`. In the absence of non-null type assertions, TS feels very safe to me, largely due to experience of not seeing it fail.
Did a stint at Tech Guys (Part of DSG) and this was taught as what's known as an ATX-Reset, basically clears out any left over electrical charge iirc.
If they want to use Rust, wgpu-rs is basically a simpler and memory-safe version of the Vulkan API. Obviously the overhead will be unacceptable for some use-cases, but it's a good way of learning the core concepts of Vulkan and 3D rendering in general
Yeah but is that practically the case? Most people just chuck things in the trash. Most are too busy to even think about disposing of their waste properly..
This is the reality of our society