skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They might decide ridiculing the incompetent government is worth the PR, e.g., their shows with the US gov. Of course, you're correct that as soon as those govs show some teeth, Apple would change course very fast.

Ultimately, if the biggest monopolies of violence can get your data by just requesting it, you won't gain much from having "privacy." It's better to focus on economics, and use custom hardware and software if you want privacy.
> without using any emotion and trying to be purely logical, can you think of one reason why somebody who doesn't pay any taxes or work full-time should have a vote on the government that is funded by tax dollars from other working people?

Yes, I do. Because moving around cash isn't the only thing a modern government does. Governments hold immense power over each and every citizen, and as such, each and every citizen should have a say in how governments are run.

TLDR: If you can send me to fight in a war, you'd better have me have a say in the decision.
Full disclosure: I have been a waiter on 2 different occasions, many years ago. Regardless of what I say here, I generally tip well.

Why do we have to keep people employed in low-end jobs, such as waiters? I go to quality restaurants and they can't even get good waiters. I'm an educated consumer, I don't need someone to tell me what I should order. Besides they are just trying to upsell on high-profit margin items. I don't drink so that is out of the question. I do believe in waiters at restaurants where the chefs are award-winning or the meal is going to be over $200.

Waiters are like robots anyways.
1. They come over to the table, repeat a generic script their manager has taught them.
2. They return with drinks.
3. They come back with the food.
4. At the exact moment that you have food in your mouth, they come over and ask how your dinner is. (As if they cared)
5. Would you like dessert? Yes, here is our menu. No, here is your check.

Agreed I don't want another app on my phone, however; but dealing with poor service, just doesn't seem worth it.
I'm really starting to enjoy getting downvoted, it gives me hope that I'm not thinking like everybody else, which I believe is important. Especially on this site.
You're adding things not in the OP list I was responding to so I didn't claim that. But let's try:

Reformatting top-quoted replies. This is possible with email because you can pipe the messages through any preprocessing you want. Inserting custom processing into the delivery pipeline is generally impossible with all proprietary systems, but easy with an open standard like email.

HTML formatting: Again, easy due to customizable preprocessing and/or viewers.

Eighty people responding to a thread: This is threading, handled natively by most good email clients. Gmail makes a mess of it though, so I get why it'd be painful if you use gmail. Don't use gmail.

> because the protocol leaves so many decisions up to clients.

I feel like this is a misunderstanding. The clients have nothing to do with the protocol (SMTP), that's the job of the MTAs (mail transport agents).

The client provides the UI/UX interaction part. It is an immense strength of standards like email that there are tons of clients. You may want a completely different UX with your email than me, so you're free to have it exactly the way you want and so am I. And we can still message each other. This is impossible with proprietary walled gardens.
> banned by all of them

Yes, but if you were despised by 193 countries in the world, I think it's safe to say that you'd just be assassinated instead.

These persona-non-grata are really used to ban diplomats (and thus, someone acting on behalf of at least one country).
Independent of any biological or hormonal causes, I can think of several reasons why older folks might be more even keeled merely by virtue of where they are in their life span:

1. The more experiences you have, the less likely any new experience is to be an extreme outlier. A toddler has the best and worst day of their life once a month or so. A twenty-something every couple of years. By your sixties, there's a good chance that most of the extreme emotional outliers are all in your past.

So when you're going through something that would overwhelm a younger person, it's likely you can correctly say, "Eh, I've been through worse." And that realization, and the memory of what it was like after it is itself an emotional buffer. It's hard to feel like your world is falling apart when you clearly remember yourself putting it back together once before.

2. The stakes for your decisions are lower. When you're a teen, it feels like every decision can radically alter the course of your life. Maybe that after school sport becomes your scholarship ticket to an expensive college. Your major determines your career. Deciding whether to go to that party could mean meeting the love of your life of not. The butterfly effect iterated future ahead of scales the magnitude of every single thing you do. But when you're older, there is simply less time for that scaling to occur. No decision a seventy-year-old makes will change the course of their life radically for the next sixty years because, well, they don't have sixty years. Most bets are thus relatively safer.

3. Your existence is more secure. By the time you reach middle age, you likely (though not definitely) have accumulated skills, experience, a social network, job contacts, a career, and wealth. You live in a pretty well-feathered nest, able to withstand most bouts of bad weather.
Visa says they do 150 million transactions in a day, for an average of 1,700tps — and I’d have to imagine their spikes are much higher.
I think that important part is "opinions also gave a feeling of security".

I see it all the time in my daily life, people are insecure and mostly want some confirmation that choices they made are good ones.

They buy a car and then they start saying that other car brands are bad or breaking so easily. They cannot face the truth if their car turns out to be a crap. Seems totally like programming language bros, and some people cannot stand that in other language they could make more money. So what? There are probably people using that language that make less then them.

I don't want to live such life, I want to make mistakes and pay for them if needed. Lots of choices are reversible or can be changed, be flexible.
Deleting my comment then. Cheers!
i know theres a chance i dont have enough context on how to fix it but if its a react or design problem i would be interested to pitch in.. regardless thank you for stepping up to maintain docusaurus!
How's that work in a system of compulsory voting, the topic at hand? How is making me go to the ballot box to fill in "blank" any different than letting me stay home?
The reason UTXOs parallelize better is because when you look at a transaction on a UTXO-based blockchain like Bitcoin, you can deterministically and often immediately know from it exactly how the state of the system will change, and which states will change. A Bitcoin transaction for example completely describes which outputs will be spent, which new outputs will be created, and the new amounts in those outputs. This is a really nice property. It makes validating and analyzing transactions parallelizable by design. The system still has to protect against double-spends globally, but this part is light in comparison and can be very fast.

In contrast to Bitcoin, basically every other smart contract blockchain is account-based, not UTXO-based, and has shared global state. This does not parallelize naturally at all. I like to think its similar to using cash vs transferring money using Venmo. Giving someone cash parallelize naturally, like UTXOs, whereas Venmo requires a database lock.

In account-based systems, it’s impossible to tell how a transaction will change the system's state without executing it. The order that transactions are executed is crucial too, which is why people say Ethereum is single-threaded. Attempts to parallelize account-based systems fall into different categories. Ethereum 2.0's plan is to basically create separate VMs with separate state, called shards or rollups. This can work sometimes, but it makes interactivity between shards (think applications) much more difficult, and interactivity to me is a major reason for using blockchain. Another approach is to embed information into transactions to make them parallelize more like UTXO-based transactions, which is what Solana does. But they parallelize only at the smart contract level, not at the asset level as UTXOs can.

Whereas UTXO-based designs get parallelizability by design, creating a programming model for smart contracts and tokens has to-date been harder on these systems, and frankly there aren't even that many people trying. I've been working on this problem for a while and believe I've found a breakthrough. Check out https://run.network if it interests you.
Also the rather bulky

o.ok_or_else(|| anyhow("Error"))?.map(f)

I've been writing too many of those forms lately, decoding a tree data structure of known form which might be wrong, but usually isn't.
I gave it a quick glance but didn't understand, how is OP's link managing it instead of symbolic links?
Personally, I use git [0] along with GNU stow [1], combined with making the files directly from a literate Readme.org (e.g. [2]). I sync this repository between machines to update files, and when I make changes in the org-mode Readme file it automatically generates the new file. There are ways to pull in changes made to that file directly, but haven't needed to do that. My repo doesn't walk you through it completely, but I think is pretty straightforward. If you want to see it in action along with a few links and pointers, do take a look at [0]. I really like having it all together in one place, and with org-mode everything is very (human) readable.

[0] https://github.com/podiki/dot.me

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/stow/

[2] https://github.com/podiki/dot.me/blob/master/x11/README.org
Creating these channels is pretty easy, BTW. Just glue rsstail and a Telegram library such as Telethon together. I have a channel where HN posts with a certain score threshold are posted, for example.
Why the engine internals exposed using Python 2.7 rather than Python 3?

Regardless of how you feel about Python 2 vs Python 3...one is officially EOL and the other isn't...
Noticed something to try: The post links to an example document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N1XaAI4ZlCUHNWJBXJUBFjxS...

If you change the /preview to /edit you can then go to File→"Make a copy", and you'll have your own editable version of this document. If you change that one to /preview again, you (unsurprisingly) get something that doesn't use canvas, but uses the DOM with the usual div/span soup. Here's an example I created: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RnQonRlivBogXxSl1nTZSCfR...

These two /preview versions would be a good basis for comparison (until we have examples of editable documents that use canvas-based rendering).

Visually, comparing the two /preview documents by alternating rapidly back and forth between the two tabs shows some minute differences in kerning (on only some of the lines). It might be interesting to repeat this experiment on multiple devices and see whether and in what way the differences themselves differ across devices.

One difference I've been able to find is that using the browser's in-built find doesn't work. But all the common ways of triggering search (Ctrl-F or Cmd-F, etc) trigger the search function of Docs, and that seems to work identically in both versions. And anyway the browser's find cannot find things off-page before scrolling down the page, so it's not usable in general anyway.
If you want people to actually be able to pay for things with Bitcoin (often a stated goal), then yes, it does.
I have been over 100wpm (on qwerty) since a teenager, and I'm in my late 30s now, so unfortunately no. (My scores are routinely 115-125 these days.)
Every claim you’ve made here is false and again has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
If you click `Save as Copy` on the example doc you get an editable DOM-based version to compare.

The scrolling is a lot less smooth on the canvas than the DOM.

Text selection seems faster but the canvas version is not editable...

Maybe they are working out the kinks though...
This is not really true, for several reasons. One simple reason is that a bitcoin transaction can have multiple outputs, while your analysis assumes each transaction is between two people.
This use of the word 'handy' reminds me of the classic Red Green Show quip: "If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy."

I have always taken this to mean that if you aren't good to look at, you can still make yourself appealing by being good at things. There is a possible double entendre with foreplay, but I never considered this joke to be suggesting unconsensual groping (I think that's the implication being suggested above?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Green_Show#Handyman_Co...
With a canvas-based engine, the editor is no longer relying on the contenteditable spec right?

For the majority of use cases, do you think contenteditable + view layer which precisely updates the HTML is still viable?
More specifically, what do you think about open-source libraries like ProseMirror (https://prosemirror.net/) or Slate.js (https://github.com/ianstormtaylor/slate) which do that (ProseMirror uses its own view library on vanilla javascript, Slate uses React)?

I understand if you have really long documents or spreadsheets (I imagine latter is more frequent), you could maybe solve performance rendering problems with virtualization, which canvas gives more flexibility to?
> there is a technology that allows them to push pixels in peoples' faces while making it harder for users to engage in "unauthorized content use" and harder to block ads.

That was exactly true in the Flash days and yet it didn't take over the world or kill the open web.
yeah what is it like 15 fps? The repo says
" It is made in the image of old classics, but incorporating some modern ideas."

But does that mean low FPS too?
It's too late to edit this now, but broad money supply increased at 5% per year. Official CPI says that broad prices rose by about 2.5% per year on average since 1990, while the source I linked thinks there’s a good case that it’s closer to 3% or more. In other words, prices went up more like 150% (2.5x) rather than 100% (2x) in total during that three decade compounded annual period.

4-5% annualized inflation would be crazy - but some things have gone up more than that. If your a young person starting out in need of an education and a home - you'll see more than 3% inflation for yourself personally.
Not necessarily if you're part of a team.
I can’t read the post without getting a headache, because there are three flashy, autoplaying gifs in it that can’t be scrolled out of view.
I second this insight. I'm a pressure vessel designer by trade. I got my numbers for all of this here[0]

Liquefied hydrogen either needs to be stored cryogenically as a liquid, or at a very high pressure as a gas (65 MPa). I'm ignoring adsorption methods here.

Given that we can't continuously maintain -253 °C all the time, this method is impractical for mobile usage.

That leaves gaseous storage. To match the current range of diesel tractor-trailers, you'd need at least 4x the volume in hydrogen to come close to the standard of 600 miles between refills. I'm going to assume we need to store 1500 L of hydrogen to match the range.

Other assumptions:

The tank has a max overall length of roughly 2.5 meters.

Inner and outer corrosion / gouge allowance of 6mm

Design temperature of 200 °C (in case of fire).

Material of construction is A-387 5 2 (5% Cr, 2% Mo steel) lined with something that prevents diffusion into and hydrogen embrittlement of the base metal.

Vessel consists of a cylinder with spherical head on either end.

Given:

Inner diameter is 890mm, shell length is 1830mm, allowable stress is 178 MPa at the design temperature, we can use equation 4.3.1 from the ASME BPVC Section VIII Division 2 to determine the minimum thickness required for the given pressure.

D is the corroded inner diameter of the vessel, P is the design pressure, S is the allowable stress, and E is the weld joint efficiency (assumed 1).

D / 2 * (exp[P / (S * E)] - 1) + Corrosion

902 / 2 * (exp[65 / (178 * 1)] - 1) + 12 = 211mm wall thickness

The weight of just the cylinder at that thickness with a length of 1.83m (without the spherical heads) is 11,000 kg.

At that weight, batteries are pretty competitive.

[0]: https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-storage-basic...
Or you could just pay for Youtube which removed ads.
I believe being "banned from Earth" in a political context is more commonly referred to as "assassination"
But if it was sent registered they can at least know that you received it. And from what I gather, the consensus of most jurisprudence is that given you received it, throwing it away unopened is on you.
I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Google Docs is already using a completely custom implementation of word wrapping, text layout, text selection, cursor placement, etc. It's not like it's just a <textarea /> with some CSS styles. Likewise, they seem to already have completely separate DOM elements that are invisible to normal browsers but can be read by screen readers. Based on the DOM on the new read-only preview document they link to, it looks like they will continue to use traditional DOM elements for some of the editing UI (just not the actual WYSIWYG editing area) and for screen readers.
You can't. It goes against the very nature of the medium, like trying to delete something on the internet. If it's something a CPU has to execute, it has to be in memory where it can be dumped. At best all one can do is make it harder to stop less determined adversaries.

That said, there actually is one nasty [1] workaround: run some critical functionality on a custom USB dongle that the user has to have connected in order to use the software. It could be a calculation in a critical path that's not compute bound but without which the software is unusable. It could even be a JIT engine that consumes encrypted code and returns polymorphic executable code designed to be near impossible to assemble back into a static binary. Some fabs can make tamper-resistant ASICs with a specialized packaging process that couples the on chip memory to the package so that opening the package makes the memory unrecoverable for extra security. This level of protection would be effective against all but the most determined and well funded nation state or competitor.

[1] Nasty for the user, the developer, and the investor all in one!
My problem is that mostly I see "abstraction" used as a gateway to introduce "clever tricks" instead of making things easier.
> Why not, for the same reason that everyone can be - to reasonable standards - be literate?

Not everyone can become literate. Very roughly 0.1% of people lack the mental ability to read, even given lots of training. Flipping your argument around, it's totally possible that programming is that much more difficult than reading that 0.1% of the population isn't unable, but more like 10%.
A professional home video conferencing set-up
You seem to have overlooked the refreshment expenses!

"The agenda included three items: approving the plans for the plant, discussing a new bicycle shed for employees, and the refreshment expenses of the Welfare Committee."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_Parkinson%27s_...
Personally, I like it better sometimes for having less features. MS Word has such a massive number of formatting features that interact in complex ways that there's plenty of ways for your document to end up formatted in a weird way and to be very difficult to figure out exactly where the switch is to make it not do something. I think one time I had a document where the entire doc was highlighted in yellow, and it took me over an hour of fiddling with various formatting boxes to figure out how to turn it off. Any word processor that doesn't have the capability to do that has some appeal to me.
Seriously? Bitcoin that has intentionally low transaction throuput is only two orders of magnitude slower than largest online payment processor that was designed with highest possible throuput in mind?
has anyone ever done the modeling on the dynamic limits of decentralized network consensus? my intuition has always been that getting, say, 100,000 globally distributed voting nodes to agree on even a simple truth value will quickly run into exponential (or worse) latency bottlenecks by way of metcalfe's law.

the speed of light, as a hard limit, starts to become insurmountable when your consensus pathway has to be traversed the equivalent of tens of millions of km of signal path in order for every node to have an equal influence on the validity of every other node's vote.

these high tps coins all seem to get around this by weakening decentralization, whether by shortening this path, either because they have far fewer nodes, or are deciding to sum over some approximation of node consensus by sampling or creating privileged paths, or because geography already creates privileged paths (all the nodes are in the same general area, or even in the same datacenter).

I suspect the reason TX speed tends to stay mired in the tens per second region is that no amount of consensus accounting gimmickry will overcome the underlying physical limitations of true global scale decentralization of consensus.
It is now. (The DOGE clones that is)

While DOGE is not directly affected (which is still down), the clones suffered a rapid price drop due to Vitalik taking >$1B worth of dogecoin inspired clone coins; causing the prices to crash. [0] Even before dogecoin reached $1, much worse than expected.

Again its not good news for the late dogecoin (and the clones) baghodlers. Oh dear.

[0] https://www.coindesk.com/vitaliks-regift-of-unsolicited-doge...
Perhaps the niche for a space elevator is bulk passenger transit. An elevator could perhaps ferry more people than a reusable lander, while not turning them into goo as the g-forces of a railgun might.
how does Replit Apps compare to Glitch? i feel like there are so many similar attempts to crack this nut and while the choice is nice, i remember being a little overwhelmed when i was starting out.
> Constrain supply and new construction enough, and all that stuff is intensely maintained because building new is not an option.

Anecdotally, from San Francisco, my experience is the opposite. Most units are in terrible conditions, barely painted over. There is no incentive for landlords to put extra money on the place, it will not increase the price at which it will rent.

You end up with high income people moving into shitty housing, middle income moving to the outskirts and low income people moving to the streets. Only the landlords win.
For what it's worth, I spoke last year about using Gleam to develop a type-safe core for a LiveView application: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCIcJBM_YDw

I think that what you're looking for is already possible today, and that things only get easier over time.
The canvas actually seems less performant when I compared it now. Scrolling is not as smooth. Click `Save as copy` and try it out.
I've thought the same thing. I was lucky enough to grow up with computers. I matured as they did. This allowed me to understand the hardware and software fundamentally. It seems like a lot of that knowledge has been abstracted behind the well polished machines that exist today. It makes it hard to really learn what these devices are actually doing.
Another instance of "middle-aged tech nerd makes fun of kids these days"

I get it, you're not too old to be good at computers, but I don't see the need to put down the younger generation and act like their tech knowledge doesn't extend beyond "video streaming".

Acting like kids are computer wizards is an exaggeration, but acting like young people know less about computing than this older generation is simply wrong.