skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The best things are made by people who make them for specific reasons, even if you don't agree with or understand those reasons. Good art is made by including aspects that you want and rejecting those you do not want. In the case of Hundred Rabbits, their entire body of work would not exist without these motivations.

And really, I doubt that many people make things "just for the heck of it". In reality, they probably have motivations but don't, won't, or can't articulate them.
+1 for scripting.

I wrote so many more small scripts for myself. Since I didn't need to consult a syntax manual every, the friction was low.
> Its projected range of 10,500 miles, with a top speed of Mach .90 (690.5 mph), is also greater than other jets in its class.

Better range than a 787 or A350.
Remove Tattoos Using Deep Learning
It looks like the second exhaust is along the central axis of the fuselage.
The && syntax was added in fish 3, released in 2018.
The question imo is if time benefits the incumbents (due to monopoly / network consolidation) or if time benefits the disruptors (due to the commoditization of growth/scale, the shrinking of the distance between 0-$1B, and tech monopolies being based on 90s web tech which is stretched to breaking point). How will climate disruption fit into this, who benefits as the world starts to break faster and faster.
I’m in the same boat. I love meditating, and I have noticed positive effects, but it is no comparison to actual medical treatment. I think that meditation extends my capacity for focus in one sitting, but it never helped with the “ugh” factor, the actual push to do things I didn’t want to do.

Medication helps with the latter part. Meditation helps me capitalize on it further.
I also noticed that information about the actual logic part of the language seems sparse, and would offer that as feedback for the author(s), but the last thing HN needs is more people being haughty and dismissive until an absolutely rock-solid case is made for immediate utility. Isn't it enough to be curious about the ideas represented here?
Modern ransomware teams also threaten to leak your data onto the public internet unless you pay.
Wasn't this the result of the profit criterion, not an active decision?
> As far as Gaza goes, Hamas rules Gaza but they're not the recognized government.

It's definitely more complicated by that, there is some evidence that people in the Gaza area have definitely supported Hamas, but of course they're rejected by the PNA (which rules over West Bank) and Israel.
How does this surprise anyone at all? You're comparing a 5nm-based core to a 7nm-based core, of course there will be a direct disparity in performance. If anything, I'm surprised they weren't able to eke more performance out of it. The GPU is frankly pathetic, and the memory controller and IO subsystems are both obviously gimped too. As a matter of fact, the current M1 Mac Mini quite literally could not connect to all of my hardware with all the dongles in the world. There's just not enough bandwidth to run it all. Even if I splurged for the "Pro" device, it will still have the same bottlenecks as the consumer product.

You can't spend a decade pretending that performance doesn't matter, only to rear your head again when Moore's law is sputtering out and gasping for air. Apple's power over the industry is unchecked right now, meaning they can play all sorts of petty tricks to gaslight mainstream manufacturers into a playing different game. ARM is the first step in that direction, and I for one couldn't be more happy with the hardware I own. Well, maybe if I sold my Macbook Air...
Correlation or causation? Seems that people who, for whatever reason, need (or simply choose) to work 55+ hours per week would be under a lot of stress from external sources.
"what would become" and that changes my statement that Palestine has never existed how?
> And the lock-in is pretty apparent

Can you give examples? Are there licensing constraints, or is it just that they do most of the development, documentation, planning, etc internally?
Similar to Kyoto being excluded from U.S. nuke targets in WWII because Stimson honeymooned there?
> You, personally, might not confuse this with Unreal but do you think that an average person can differentiate between Epic's product and Nreal's product? (I'm pretty sure though that the answer to that is "I don't care, I don't really play computer/video games.")

Honestly? Yes I do.

> In other words, it was already known to them that Nreal exists as a company and they have attempted to settle this previously. In other words, this is a continuation of a 2018 lawsuit.

This doesn't imply Unreal needs to sue. They could change their mind and decide they were wrong. They could have gone through the process and realized that consumers are not really all that confused. They could decide that Nreal isn't infringing on Unreal. These are all possible outcomes. They are making the _choice_ to sue. They might lose the lawsuit and might later with the benefit of more hindsight decide that they should have dropped the whole issue from day 1.
> Not to mention them not knowing basic facts like Moldova and Romania being in fact 2 separate independent countries.

Moldova is also a Romanian region.
> I'd love to hear what exact scenarios it does actually make sense to use Kafka for instead of Rabbit or AMQP1.0 :)

If order of message processing matters, then Kafka is better suited then AMQP.
For example, In a distributed application for money transfers, if AMQP used, message order will be lost and some problems will occur in the following scenario:

User A with an accound of $1000 makes order for two transfers T1 ($600) and T2 ($500)

- Rabbit delivers T1 to server1, before processing message, server1 enters a full GC.
- Rabbit delivers T2 to server2 and server2 processes message immediately, now User A's account have $500
- Server1 resumes its life after the end of GC, but fails to process T1 since account's balance is less than required amount.

However, it is T2 that should have failed because User A ordered T1 first and T2 after.

In Kafka, when user account identifier is used for partitioning key, all User A's messages will be processed by same consumer (i.e server1), so even if server1 enters a full GC, that is OK, since T2 will be processed after T1.
We have created our own transformation layer solution, which includes scheduling, run & version history, and lineage; we do not use dbt under the hood. We share a philosophy of being able to write transforms in SQL one layer above the BI tool -- this leads to greater consistency of downstream answers and allows for business users and analysts to write the business logic into the core tables.
The second engine's exahust is straight out the back of the tail.
At 1 px/m², the Earth's surface is 5×10^14 pixels, so with the full constellation of 10,000 satellites and 1 fps that'd be 5×10^10 pixels/satellite/second (about a terabit/satellite/second uncompressed). If you can shoot 30 images per second, you'd need a 1.6 gigapixel camera.

It's technically possible but not feasible.
Apple Music is bY far THE buggiest software on my Mac, including all Apple and non-Apple software.

So it's not just Windows version.
Indeed, and Type-Driven Development is also a thing.

Given a great type system and editor/IDE types can even be used to derive implementations.
While I won't dispute that Tesla's share price is high given where the company is at right now when valued as an auto business, there are a few things I think are worth mentioning and commenting on in your post.

> Building an electric car is not that hard, especially if Tesla already did all the hard lifting for you.

This couldn't be further from the truth. While making a prototype EV is relatively easy, yes. EV industry followers will note that the real challenge is scaling EV production, and specifically the batteries' production. You don't need to look further then to answer: 'Why don't all of these automakers have tonnes of EVs on their lots available today as we speak? Why are they all '2022 release' or even 'dozens of models in 2025'. Because all of the tier 1 and tier 2 li-ion battery supplies have already been allocated from now to several years out, and if you want 'EV model volume' scale batteries, you better be ready to fork over the capital or purchase commitment for a batttery cell production line that might not have had a shovel hitting the ground yet. And waiting a few years for assembled product.

> But their price only makes sense if they end up being the only car maker left.

Assuming both the gross margin profile and auto ownership model stay the same - sure. Tesla has proven to generate more gross margin per vehicle than other automakers as is, they have 'practically' infinite demand (stimulated by expanding geographies and targeted price reductions when demand sags). And this isn't accounting for GM expansion for vehicles that could be a part of a ride hailing network (autonomous or not).

I do believe, like other 'Tesla fans', that when factoring in their lead in scale and tech, unit cost advantage as well as how things look on a decade or two time horizon, I think it is quite likely that there will not be a better time to become a shareholder in the next 1-2 decades.

One way I look at it is by comparing it to Apple, a ~$2T market cap company in 2020 dollars. ARPU of an Apple customer compared to a Tesla customer is probably between 1/4-1/10 (how much iphone/mac/apple services does one buy versus transportation spend on an annual basis). If you project Tesla margins to look more like Apple's 10 years from now (yes, a big bet), even with similar market share breakdowns of iOS/Android today - it isn't a huge stretch to imagine with ~50-100M EVs on the roads by then - that you could have Tesla with a market cap between 10T and 20T in 2020 dollars. Particularly when factoring in their business segments beyond personal transport/light vehicles.

They are so far the only company making EVs to have crossed the 'valley of death'[See: crossing the chasm]. Startups and established automakers will need to spend billions in order to get EVs sold at scale that generate FCF per unit. It is a tall order.

(Not financial advice do your own research etc etc)

EDIT: Also note that Tesla has stated in an earnings call that they are looking at 50% CAGRs moving forward, and I do think that they could be undershooting this number a bit.
Playing the devil's advocate, if the US is willing to negotiate with both the Taliban and official Afghanistan government directly, why not Hamas and Israel?

(I am not trying to equate these groups; just compare the official vs force relationships)
Perhaps pedantic, but it wasn't an agreement per se, just a regular domestic U.S. law, although Israel did indeed lobby in favor of the law. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyl%E2%80%93Bingaman_Amendment
No, and this distinction is critical to understanding the risk that short sellers take.

To use a slightly anomalous stock which hasn't split as an easy example, if you had shorted $BRK in 1980 when the price was $300, the potential upside was just 100%: In your best outcome, they go bankrupt and the most you earn is $300. Unfortunately for you, Berkshire Hathaway shares are now worth $430,000, so your $300 or 100% upside turned out to be a rounding error against the approximately -150000% loss.

Edit: The reverse is technically symmetrical, but the consequences make it work out differently for the markets and society. Yes, if you'd bought BRK in 1980 you'd have had a liability of $300 (your cash input could be worthless if they went bankrupt) and a potential upside of hundreds of thousands if it went to the moon.

The difference is that if you held the stock and it goes bankrupt, you're only liable for the amount that you put in. Worst case, you bet the farm and you're going to be washing dishes to put food on the table, but it's your loss to lose and your gain to win. If instead you bet the farm in a short position, you never had and will never have thousands of farms to bet in the first place; you're going to declare bankruptcy and someone else is going to have to pay for the bad bet you made. That effectively pushes the losses back on society but privatizes the gains.
Under-featured and over-priced
Bolo de Fubá
Correct. To be included in the S&P you need to be average quarterly profitable + your most recent quarter needs to be profitable.
Is this the end of Tidal, or does it still have some unique value propositions as a steaming music service?
How does that theory explain Tesla having 20x the market cap of Panasonic?
In addition to cost, there are various national laws that restrict satellite imagery with resolution better than various thresholds.
If you hear those said outloud you could totally confuse them
> I generally agree with the idea of a VM that is simple to implement, but... shouldn't look like real hardware

You might appreciate appreciate Urbit's Nock, a "functional assembly language" based on combinator calculus which can be specified in ~40 lines of text, and implemented in ~100 lines of code:

https://urbit.org/docs/nock/definition/

As one might imagine, a naïve implementation of this spec would be extremely slow (for example, decrementing n requires incrementing another variable m in a loop until m+1==n, which is O(n)). A regular JIT can make even the braindead implementation decently fast, but in practice, specific implementations are recognized by the interpreter and replaced with faster ones. The benefit of this approach is that the code itself is rigorously specified by the combinator definition, and you can point the finger at the interpreter if the output from the optimized version differs from the naïve implementation.
The short answer is no. High-resolution imagery comes from low-orbit satellites, which make a complete orbit about every two hours, and image long, narrow strips with each pass, taking days to image the whole planet. There are many of these satellites: commercial, non-military (publicly-accessible) governmental, and governmental (secret), of varying resolutions. These are also supplemented by aerial (plane) imagery.

The net result is that updated-daily imagery exists, but real-time does not. While I'm not privy to the capabilities of the US military, the kind of real-time planet-wide surveillance that movies like Enemy of the State suggest doesn't exist planet-wide.

The highest-resolution images on e.g. Google Maps are from planes, rather than satellites, and aren't imaged anywhere near daily. The only way to have constant, real-time imaging of a fixed location is with a geostationary satellite, which will be so far away (22,000 miles) that the resolution will be low.

Given an unlimited budget, a huge constellation of hundreds or thousands of satellites could come close to real-time planet-wide imaging, but even then, you'd be getting views at different angles as various satellites took images, and you wouldn't ever have a clear directly-overhead view of people walking around.
Thanks! As mentioned in other comments, we partner with and use PBF (Powered by Fivetran) for connectors we believe are best in class. We are committed to ETL reliability, and that ease of use/setup and automatically managing changes is critical for success. In addition to PBF, we leverage Singer Taps, and our team is adding to the long-tail of connectors.
"Tech" companies here encompasses quite a broad list of markets. Just because Apple and Amazon managed to upend expectations doesn't mean that Tesla will. Most of these gigantic technology companies are software companies that have incredible profit margins and really hard to disrupt market positions. Apple is unique in that it manages to sell a premium product with premium pricing without it affecting overall demand with the best-in-class product differentiation that the Apple brand is known for.

Yes, Tesla's managed to do something somewhat similar, but will that continue to hold? Even as automobile competitors finally wake up and start competing on electric cars? Will they become the largest automaker in the world? Tough questions to answer.
Cost per transaction to the users is important, but it is mostly separate from the cost of mining. The cost of mining is dictated by the price. Conflating the two doesn't make sense, because they aren't correlated and the costs are taken on by different groups of people.

Not only that, but not all cryptocurrencies are even trying to optimize for this. I would say that bitcoin is actually in the opposite direction and trying to be as expensive per transaction for both the miners and users as possible.
"Our mistake, you get to pay for it" seems like something that should be illegal.
Dubai-Based Carasti Lets You Rent a Car for Up to Two Years
They have an extremely heavily integrated flash controller. Part of it is what they bought from Annobit.
This is awesome - love the landing page too. Great job!
Recovering “lost” treasure-filled floppy discs with an oscilloscope
Sony's headphones do digital signal processing of the incoming signal. For instance, there's a user adjustable equalizer. This happens in the headphones themselves, rather than on the device they're connected to. This stuff does truly benefit from a higher bitrate.
Nothing worth being upset about here; stocks aren't eligible for inclusion to the S&P500 until they have a trailing 4 quarters of profit.
There are a lot of ways, these are just a few:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/080813/how-p...
I'd say that you idea of Domaim is unduly restrictive. Yes, in an e-commerce or a merchandise based business, Products and Orders are domain objects. But services and ports and interfaces are every bit as real from a complementary domain - the domain Of software design and Technology Operations.

We are at historically bad levels of Interoperability because we don't really engineer software for management. We just call it an implementation detail.

Domains overlap. An e-commerce system will have a domain perspective to Infrastructure and the Infrastructure provider will have domain perspective on a Tennant like a specific e-commerce system. Bother are valid. There's real value in reducing the impedance between those views
The statement "Tesla market value is the same as everybody else put together" means either Tesla is expensive or everybody else is cheap or the statement is inaccurate. It's a little bit of all three.

All other car companies are primarily debt financed rather than equity financed. Ford's market cap is $45B, but because it has $120B in debt which means it is worth $120B to it's bondholders and $45B to stockholders for a total enterprise value of $160B.

So Tesla isn't worth as much as all of the companies put together, it's worth about as much as 2 or 3 of the big ones. Which is still a lot.

But all the other car companies are facing an existential threat. Climate change and the EV transition are going to be tough. That has to be depressing their valuations some.

Tesla also has a really good profit margin. If they can keep that up, it goes a long way to justifying their prices. Pretty big if, that one -- the general assumption is that it will go down as they go downmarket to chase volume. Vertical integration might let them keep it up, though. Think of it like Apple -- 20% market share but >80% of the profit.

What I'm saying is that if Toyota or Volkswagen had no debt, a Tesla level profit margin and no overhanging challenge like the transition to EV, they'd have a market cap similar to Tesla's.

That still doesn't justify Tesla's market cap, but it makes it seem less insane.
> Can't source anything except our own deliveries to Apple, but we've been delivering PCM since ~2018.

Cool, I take your word for it. Thanks!

The referenced document only talks about AAC masters, and the tools at https://www.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/ only create AAC masters. The simplest explanation is that the public materials and tools are just sadly out of date.
This is cool, love to see interesting new designs. Wish the article head touched on feasibility since market economics decide the design of the final product as much as anything, but doesn't make this design any less cool.
Again, what you are saying is not correct. You may be comparing their designs to other apps developed for other desktops using other toolkits, but that's not what is influencing GNOME. The space is saved compared to previous designs that were used by GNOME. Please consider comparing an old style GTK app with a new style GTK app:

Inkscape, old style: https://media.inkscape.org/media/resources/file/inkscape-0.4...

GNOME builder, new style: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-builder/raw/master/doc/...

The old style has four bars at the top (titlebar, menubar, toolbar, secondary toolbar). The new style merges them all into one bar and moves the menus into the hamburger menu. The margins may be bigger in the new style but ultimately, space is saved and the UI chrome is reduced. Also, GNOME Builder is not an application designed totally around touch screens -- it's a text editor, for typing into.

I sympathize if you don't like this style of app (and I encourage you to use different apps if you were used to having a lot of menus and toolbars, and you don't like the new style of GNOME apps), but what you are saying about the design goals and motivations does not match what the developers are actually doing.
Great question. There's no way to know outside of big randomized trials but I'd bet thousands of dollars it's the latter. (edit: surely this has been studied, right?)

Though, I'm certain it would be less "perceiving excellence" like a connoisseur, and more like reaping the practical benefits of solid typography.

While there's certainly a lot of showy typography in the world, the sort found in the body copy of books is generally focused on readability, in other words, letting the eye/brain more easily recognize letters and words. Do we enjoy a book more when our eyes and brains aren't overtaxed? It's hard to imagine otherwise -- who enjoys eye strain?

I'm less sure of it but I suspect this is true for lossy vs. lossless music as well. For example, one telltale sign of badly compressed music is when the percussion sounds more like blasts of white noise than the actual instruments -- these sharp transients are hard to losslessly compress efficiently. (It's somewhat similar to how the sharp edges of text and line art are not handled well by some lossy image formats like JPEG)

Is a drum that actually sounds like a drum going to be more pleasing to the ear than something garbled and white-noisy, even if nobody tells you anything? Generally yes, I am fairly sure.
It's really terrible that these are so clearly broken, and yet they are still used. It's a whole field jerking itself around. It reminds me of the phrase, "Something needs to be done. This is something, therefore this needs to be done."

It's remarkable that pseudoscience is a big part of how we (don't) protect our rights.

To rant for a second, it seems like a case of what I encounter at work too often as a data scientist. It drives me nuts. There's some statistical fallacy where lay people infer one thing, while the logical inference is something else for some subtle reason, and they respond to the critique with, 'well, yeah but we don't need a super rigorous answer here,' or something along those lines. As if a wrong answer is more correct when you 'don't need rigor.'

I think we're in that boat because people so easily mistake approximate correctness in the sense of 'this answer is very nearly the right answer' with approximate correctness in the sense of 'this reasoning is very close to the right reasoning.' The two are interchangeable often enough to create the bad habit, like if you discard an assumption that is very probably true enough, or discard a term that is small. But when they aren't interchangeable, they're really really not interchangeable.

(We're also in that boat because enough people cry wolf about rigor in the other direction, like complaining about discarding an error term that really is small enough to safely/rigorously discard)