skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> They've figured out all the difficult stuff about e-ink

They meaning Remarkable? If so, then that's marketing-speak. The simple truth is that Remarkable's products all use NXP (formerly Freescale) controllers. The Remarkable2 uses i.mx7D. That has a built-in hardware EPDC. You can google it. The driver is open source. https://github.com/UDOOboard/Kernel_Unico/blob/master/driver...

That's what does all the "difficult stuff". Not Remarkable.

> did you know that to flip pixels, e-ink displays require annoyingly proprietary lookup tables of waveforms that can be up to 5-dimensional?

Yes. But you realize tables are each panel specific. Meaning every single panel you see requires a custom waveform. Nowadays they (E Ink and their partners)'re getting better and have some increased level of consistency so some waveforms can achieve the same result on whole batches of panels. But you'll still see it being batch specific. Take a waveform for one batch and try to use it on another and you'll get lousy ghosty results or maybe even damage the panel permanently.

> and worked with E-ink directly to implement said waveform table, very low-latency partial updates, and other e-ink "secrets" that could very well be worked out via reverse engineering but are otherwise under NDA.

That's more marketing speak. If you look at their code which they published, https://github.com/remarkable , it is just minor patches to NXP's driver. All the hard work was done by NXP.
The drilling is contentious. I'm a strong believer in rote and drill, from bitter personal experience its the innate recall which stays with me, the casually acquired fades. However, this is mainly about fundamentals of arithmetic more than maths, reasoning, logic.

Comprehension of the why in the method comes later, I believe. But there is another school of thought which believes structural discovery of why embeds harder and so young minds are led in this process to invent maths and own discovery of the fundamentals.

I'm not an educationalist. I can't say who is right, I can only share the anecdata that what I keep is the rote and what I struggle with is the invention and discovery.

I don't regard myself as fluent in maths btw. Which, since computer science is a sub branch of maths, is a bit tricky given I'm a computer scientist by degree.

I never took to radians. The approximation inherent in π suits me better, just as log tables do. I never took to group theory, or any of the more arcane underpinning of languages like Haskell which demand a grounding in a particular kind of declarative mathematical notations and what lies behind them. Wish I could.
Since Disney and Pixar merged their focus has been on making film franchises and the surrounding merchandise. So it's understandable that most people don't know that wasn't always their focus. When Jobs took over Pixar, he thought they were making a competitor to SGI. They had ambitions to sell not just Renderman licenses, but Renderman hardware. Jobs really wanted them to be a hardware company. They probably saw themselves as occupying the role NVIDIA fills today.

The feature film animation studio was sold to Jobs as a way to market their technology, in order to sell more licenses and create the market which would want their (still theoretical) dedicated GPU hardware.

Turns out the better play was making an animation studio that would rival and then eventually demolish and replace (via merger and integration) the iconic hand-drawn Disney animation.

I suspect the heads of the animation studio within Pixar knew what they were doing though.
You should probably change the file associations for those to something else.
Ye gods, I haven’t heard anyone reference NetZero in ages. My mates and I got everyone we knew to use it. I still remember when, in the midst of us studying and discussing philosophy, we wondered if NetZero was really free or if we were just paying for it with something other than money. Thus began my unceasing hatred of the advertising-driven internet.
The article was about the US. The economics and politics of the Korean Peninsula are rather different.
I'd never heard of the practice, is it common with other video hosting services?
I’ve seen franchisors collect kick backs from vendors for being an “approved vendor” the franchisee has to use.
I thought about how I'd do this in JS, and it's paradoxically more compact and less confusing without dedicated syntax:

if (leaders.some(i => i == "Yang")) {
alert("Yang is a leader!");
} else {
alert("Not found Yang!");
}
This is why I choose not to purchase streaming services (at least for music.) I buy the tracks I want on CD or vinyl or download.
KSP's approach to the precision problem is surprisingly simple: whenever you get more than two kilometers away from the origin, move the entire universe two kilometers so that the location of your craft, and all the physics-relevant computations on it, have small numbers as coordinates.

(This fix was known as Krakensbane: it solved a bug known as the Deep-Space Kraken, which was essentially that floating-point physics inaccuracies would tear your ship apart when you got much further than the moon or so, before it was implemented.)
Like someone already pointed out this whole announcement could be in response to Google announcing this week it's new Argos chipset approach to transcoding

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/04/youtube-is-now-build...
Why Grantham Says the Next Crash Will Rival 1929, 2000
I love C++ and I’ve to admit that it will need a subset language soon but the examples given in this article wouldn’t possibly exist in well checked code-bases because you can immediately see usage stinks just by looking at it.

I think every C++ is bad article can be summarised like this:

1. C++ has lots of features.

2. Let’s nonsensically combine these features to shoot ourselves on the foot.

3. Uh oh, C++ didn’t help us write good code. Hence, C++ sucks.

People have to accept that in real life there is a thing called code-reviews and senior engineers are supposed to prevent such badly written code.
They don't mean "ride sharing". They mean unlicensed taxi services such as Uber. It's not carpooling.
I've never heard of any of these
I'm more inclined to believe TSMC and Intel than Cisco. They're closer to the problem.

"actually we see that demand continued to be high and the shortage will continue throughout this year and may be extended into 2022 also." C. C. Wei, TSMC CEO

"We expect it will take a couple of years for the ecosystem to make the significant investments to address these shortages." Pat Gelsinger, Intel CEO

Also, this is a deeply technical topic where BBC should cite engineers and industry veterans, not Dan Ives from Wedbush Securities.
TLDR: muh White supremist.
This is partially true... for income taxes.

A large number of people do not pay income tax, and this includes retirees, the disabled, students, the very wealthy, etc etc.

There are many types of taxes. And just about everyone pays taxes of some sort.
news is ultimately someone's opinion that something is 'news' in the first place. i went to mcdonalds earlier - is that news? i guarantee you vice.com could come up with some kind of news story about bored 30-somethings with nothing better to do during the pandemic than go to mcdonalds as a way to take a break from the internet. does that make it news though, just because a news site says its news?

something can be news somewhere [0], and not news somewhere else [1].

[0] https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden...

[1] https://i.imgur.com/OQYuZve.png
> If the company / market is willing to pay less to an underprivileged group, that is going to be reflected in compensation regardless of whether a salary range is posted or not.

A salary range effectively puts a floor on how much you can underpay someone. Does that fix every problem? No, but it's certainly better than the current system.

> The way you determine what the market is willing to pay is to find out what the market is willing to pay.

I don't see how posting salary ranges is any different from negotiation. If a company posts a salary range and gets no qualified candidates, they now know that the offer was too low. Instead of putting the onus on the prospective employee, why not put it on the corporations? I think it probably makes more sense to have companies competing against each other in a transparent and open market, instead of requiring employees to do that work for themselves.

> Negotiating compensation shouldn't be a matter of confidence after a certain point in your career. After you have done it a few times it is not very intimidating. It is a fact of life and something everybody needs to learn to be comfortable doing.

Why does this have to be a prerequisite for getting your full worth? Negotiation skill has nothing to do with the actual ability to do most jobs. If you go to the link related to the Howard and Heidi case study [1], you'd see that there is at least anecdotal evidence that women are seen as less likable and selfish if doing the same thing as men. It's not just about a matter of confidence, but how that confidence is perceived. Combine those two issues together and you can see how negotiation can negatively impact some groups.
> It's also the key simplification that makes "time warp" possible, since two-body orbits have closed-form solutions. To implement time warp with many-body physics, you would need to either keep the integration step size the same and drastically increase the amount of computation, or increase the step size and suffer from extreme inaccuracy, causing objects to crash or fly off into space.

It makes things nicer at extremely high time warps, but it's not necessary. It's not like you need to update orbits nearly as often as part physics. The max time warp is 100000x, and at that speed if you updated orbits every 10 game seconds that would only be 400 calculations per tick, per craft. So without that simplification you might need a smaller cap on satellite swarms, or a max speed of 10000x, but time warp would still be well inside the realm of "possible".

Edit: You could probably get processor use really low by using an exact curve for the most influential object and a very slowly updated offset for other influences.
I wish you were my dad.
Do you have this confused with a different subthread perhaps? The argument you made above is that rail is obviously more economically efficient than aviation, and that to doubt this is willfully ignorant.
I used to follow a blog of two people, he English and she from somewhere in Wisconsin, who met on an IRC channel I used to frequent and who eventually met up in real life, fell in love, and ran away into the world together.

I kinda fell out of touch with that channel and with the two people involved (lost the bookmark for the blog in a HDD failure years ago) but the last update I remember reading was about how they'd settled down (perhaps only temporarily) on some kind of hacker/robo farm in Germany. They had an old farmhouse and a gps-enabled tractor and a bunch of other cool stuff.

Anyways my point is that I think taking joy or pleasure in working the land and/or being close to nature is nearly universal and I think probably deeply ingrained in the human psyche.

My hobby garden is not as high tech as some but I have some RasPis and Beaglebones that alert me via push notifications when e.g. my basil needs watering, so I get to flex that muscle too. I have no desire to be a farmer as a career but I have my garden with herbs and tomatoes and beans and stuff, and I really enjoy watching things grow. Plus you get to savour the literal fruits of your labor.
The payment friction can be taken away, but before every link I click, I would still be thinking to myself: "Is what I'm about to read worth ten cents?"
That's not a benefit, and not how it should work.
That's precisely what was described, wasn't it?
> fragile the physical security of global networks

The easiest way to defeat a burglar alarm is with an axe through the power/communication cable.

(A better system has a battery backup and uses the cellular network, but the latter is expensive and has bandwidth problems.)
I take it that B. C. means "beavers chewing", then?
1% in amount, 4.5% in duration
Yep, I live in the US. There were tons of Leafs were plugged in every day at my office pre pandemic. More of those than Teslas. Also plenty of Bolts there. I see lots of non Tesla EVs on the road every day.
People who own networks are always frustrated on the relative lack of power they have. There’s always someone who wants a nickel every time you do something.

Facebook really perfected their version of it.
the problem I see with the author's very narrow point of view is that Rust, C++ or C are just tools which can all be misused and produce defects when used improperly or without a good understanding. Rust borrow checker can be implemented in a C++ compiler on a subset of the language which is ironically also what rust does, unsafe parts of Rust well are still unsafe... Already C++ compilers and static analyzers (thank you llvm) got surprisingly good at detecting memory unsafe issues (the author's string_view dangling reference for instance). To really solve a broader class of issues (including logical issues), in 2021, I am frankly way more excited by languages with advanced type systems (for instance Idris) than by Rust.
It wasn’t a “deal” with the US military, NASA crammed it down their throat. The redesign only became necessary when NASA got congress to cancel the Air Force launch program to force their payloads on the Shuttle.
People prefer an Uber to public transportation.
I got hit by this, but it only got two directories for some weird reason.
Submitting patches you know contain vulnerabilities to a project as part of a social engineering experiment shows a fundamental lack of ethics -- it doesn't matter if the patches themselves were merged, the intent itself matters. Since the research was sanctioned by the University, the University has shown they do not have strong ethical controls for their research and thus any work they conduct should be considered suspect until those issues are resolved.

Saying "the three incorrect[sic] patches were discussed and stopped during exchanges in a Linux message board, and never committed to the code" is a non-sequitur. Nobody claimed the malicious patches were merged, everyone is saying that the simple act of submitting in bad faith them is the issue.

(I also find it funny they use the word "incorrect" when the correct word is "malicious".)

If someone sent patches to your project that you later discovered were malicious and sent in bad faith, would you seriously allow them to continue being part of your community? I sure as hell wouldn't.
https://bobcorporation.com
That's about $34 in today's money.
I guess I see your point in the context of this thread. But it's hard to see it in the context of my life where EVs are a big deal while all this self driving hype is just a silly side show. My car is pretty easy to drive already...
Videos over messaging are a different problem space from the one outlined in this article. The number of people watching a messaged video is low; latency might be the topline metric the team optimizes for, since it has a big effect on whether people stay in the conversation or leave.

In fact, prioritizing latency might be the reason for the garbage quality you're seeing: reduce the bitrate, and people will receive the video more quickly and more reliably. Whether that's a smart decision is another question.
White women are the most dangerous upholders of white supremacy in SV
This is an impressive Vulcan impression.
It still represents more 3 hours of work at the 1997 minimum wage...
The video is half an hour long, but well worth it. Not mind blowing stuff, just a good story.
It's convenient to blame automakers for what's happening in the semiconductor market right now, but I think it's an oversimplification. They're not the only ones affected by shortages, and about a year has passed since the rebound in new auto sales. The reality is that we need more semiconductor fabs because the shape of the market has changed. It's not just a perturbation from the auto sector. It's demand creation.
Those stations in Chile are going to revolutionise comms down there.

I trekked to El Chalten in 2019 and the entire town was connected with a ~150mb microwave link. With thousands of tourists in town it had slowed to a crawl.
Starlink won’t do much in cities but for regional areas it will open massive opportunities particularly in tourism with today’s instagramming travellers.
Perhaps a better way to phrase it would be along the lines of, "You propose a to-do list app at a team meeting, and you want to demonstrate that it's a feasible product. However, you have a limited time box to ship it in. What do you reach for?" It lacks a bit of the urgency of the original question, but still comes with time constraints.

My original example is born of a decade of cynicism, and you're right that it could reflect poorly on the company. Thank you for the feedback, though in fact I'm happily unemployed right now.
As someone who worked in stores for years, this isn’t entirely accurate. The machine isn’t just being an asshole to drive up service calls.

The machines are filled with a dairy product which makes the “ice cream”. This is boiled nightly to keep the mixture free of bacteria. If the nightly heat cycle fails to complete for one of a dozen reasons the machine locks out. Those unaware of the process usually end up calling for service even if it’s a operations error(not enough product to boil successfully)

Every two weeks the machine must be torn down and cleaned. It’s slightly complex but all well documented. Once the 14 day marker has been passed the machine is inoperable. It must be cleaned for food safety reasons. If your “cleaner” is out or you just have poor operations you’ll end up placing service calls out of confusion.

If the heat phase fails or the 14 day timer has expired the machine "locks out" and becomes inoperable. This is where the vast majority of service calls come from.

I never had an issue with a machine that was less than 20 years old. Taylor makes good equipments you just need the most basic level of operations proficiency.
No one is dying from repairing a milk shake machine. McDonalds is concerned about poorly mixed shakes hurting their brand, which they regard as nearly as bad.
Fortunately, such an idea is so ludicrous and self-destructive that it would benefit no one, not even those with wealth and power, so I don't have to worry about it too much. Capitalism (a terrible system which I am against) requires state coordination in order to function. Libertarians (which you seem to be one) are pro-capitalist, but don't support the institution (the state) that allows capitalism to even function, it's an incoherent ideology. Capitalism without a strong state is impossible, if you are really against the state, you'd necessarily have to get rid of capitalism too.
I think there's something important here, potentially obscured by imprecise terminology.

The Rust safety invariants are, at heart, global properties. The central one is that mutable references are unique. Another way of saying that is: if you hold a mutable reference, then all other references held by all other objects in the system do not conflict with it (either because it is included in the "stacked borrow" or because it doesn't reference the data at all). That kind of property is ordinarily quite difficult to prove.

Rust does it though, by encoding these invariants in the types of functions. Most importantly, these types compose, meaning if you've got one function that respects these invariants calling into another, then the whole thing will also be sound. You can compile them separately and still be confident.

By contrast, achieving similar goals in the C family of languages does require a global analysis. The classic example is alias analysis. It's implemented in many compilers, tons of PhD ink has been spilled, but long story short it doesn't work. You get okay results sometimes on small programs[1], but as systems scale up, basically there always becomes a way for one pointer to alias another.

Thus, the claim I would make is the following: it will not be practical to retrofit Rust-style borrow checking onto an existing unsafe language, because the type system has to be rich enough to express the types of invariants required. The Rust type system has been carefully crafted to be powerful enough, at considerable cost: the complexity of the type system is one of the biggest complaints about the language, and slow compile times, one of its correlates, is another.

I would also claim that trying to scale up static analysis (based on alias analysis and other similar global analysis techniques), while perhaps somewhat helpful, is not going to give comparable results as Rust. In order to get anywhere near the level of confidence that all possible safety problems have been caught, the false positive rate would be unacceptably high.

I think this is one of the enduring achievements of Rust, and one likely to be carried forward in future programming language designs, but extremely unlikely to be successfully retrofitted to existing languages.

[1]: https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...
Definitely. No one would read replies to their own comments either, because they would have to pay back the money they earned when their interlocuter read their comment.
People have to accept that in real life there is a thing called code-reviews and senior engineers are supposed to prevent such badly written code.

Why should people accept that? There is overwhelming evidence that such reviews do not reliably prevent such problems from making it into production. In some cases, other languages exist that do reliably prevent the problem from ever making it into production because the problem is impossible by design.

We can and should consider from time to time whether the advantages offered by an old but established language are now outweighed by the advantages offered by a newer but better designed language. If that doesn't happen with increasing frequency as time passes, we have a serious problem as an industry.
>Specifically, they noted that congestion increased by almost 1 percent while the duration of congestion rose by 4.5 percent. They also found a 8.9 percent drop in public transport ridership and an insignificant decrease of only 1 percent in private vehicle ownership.

This juxtaposition sounded weaselly, so I went to the paper:

>TNCs had insignificant effect on vehicle ownership on average, but they reduced vehicle ownership by 1% in the top ten transit MSAs.

I.e. the effect on vehicle ownership was only significant when you look specifically at large cities.
How can you categorize this as "not a human study"? They were experimenting on "the patching process" which is not some abstract concept, it's a system that humans designed and execute by individual action.

If it was not a human study, then why couldn't they just stimulate it on a computer where the maintainers are completely uninvolved? Obviously that's not possible. Why? Because they were studying the humans themselves. This is so clear even from the apology email that is the topic of this thread, I don't understand how people are still confused here.

This is not a US patent grant where simply adding "yeah that but on a computer" gives you an instant rubber stamp.
Didn't guess; your bio says Galisteo ;-)

I'm near Golden.
Because Uber drivers are not always transporting people. About half the time, they are driving their empty car ("deadheading") on their way to pick someone up. This still contributes to traffic congestion.

The study also found a corresponding 9% drop in public transport ridership.
I love my Apple Watch. I have a bunch of bands for it; changing them is a nice way to start my day.
s/NASA/aerospace/