skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It’s a common misunderstanding that the underside of a wing is flat and the top part curves. A paper airplane with thin flat wings still gets lift though there are several issues trying to scale this up. Similarly many aircraft will happily fly upside down.

Wings need to support the weight of your aircraft while being light this means they need to be reasonably thick especially using the obvious choice of storing fuel inside them. The first obvious choice is a teardrop shape which gets lift from being angled up similarly to the way a flat wing does.

Real wings don’t quite use a teardrop shape, but if you look at the front most part of a wing you see it curves both down and up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_attack#/media/File:Ai...
Ferrocene: Road to Rust in mission and safety-critical software development
Ferrocene Part 1 - The Pitch

https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/sealed-rust-the-pitch/

Ferrocene Part 2 - The Plan

https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/sealed-rust-the-plan/

"Critical Section Rust Q&A: Embedded World 2021"

https://youtu.be/C3X-H4w5a7Q
Men would win every weight class due to stronger ski, connective tissues, different and more efficient bone structure...
The sad thing is, people (like yourself) who were critical of tether a few years ago have already been validated on multiple counts: the Bitfinex connection (which tether denied) was proven; the claim that it is 1:1 cash backed was walked back to “asset backed”.

So it isn’t a case of crying wolf, it’s more a case of pointing out a wolf and being dismissed as FUD.
I don’t think anyone just “accepts this uncritically”, it’s that the accusations are a bit too vague to justify the fallout to the man’s livelihood.
Are you talking about banks or tech companies?

I feel like your comments would make more sense about banks.
It seems there is nothing in the rules that the submission must be your work. Since the Buzzword Bingo was under an Open Source license, anyone could simply submit it...

Keep it in mind for next hackathons!
Government should start legislating that non-renewable energy companies must gradually raise their prices to a level such that demand is decreased to a sustainable level. That would be an easy thing for them to do and the outcome is a must if it’s for the survival of the planet. Does anyone know why this policy has not been implemented?
> flexibility is something you pay for in performance

I lightbulb moment I had recently was that the classic interface-based OO programming paradigm utilising virtual functions was essentially the following declaration by the programmer to the compiler: The function that is invoked can change at any time, even call-to-call; assume nothing. it is a black box with unknown, unknowable contents. Do not inline it, do not inspect it, expect the worst.

If you look at a typical web framework, with call stacks hundreds of methods deep, you'll come to the same horrifying realisation that these are all inherently un-optimisable because of that statement. The compiler can do nearly nothing, and the processor will also struggle to paper over the inefficiency. Meanwhile, in reality, the specific implementations of those interfaces never change during actual production execution! Dynamic dispatch is utilised only during development time, and even then only at compile time to inject test harnesses, mocks, or whatever.

At runtime, 99.999999% of all function calls are essentially static, and dynamic dispatch is a pure waste.
Isn't it worse than that? If both companies purchase 100% renewables from the energy supplier, do they say no to one?

I disappointingly found out that my carbon neutral tariff doesn't guarantee a purchase of renewables, it just guarantees that any energy I use that is over their wholesale bought amount of renewable energy will be carbon offset, which is complete crap.
An app can't tell you that. You need to get out and observe every day. That's the fun of growing plants and raising animals.
Generally for Intel I see the benefits as:

- Part of a roadmap to RISC-V to eventually lure Arm customers uncomfortable with the Nvidia bid for Arm

- Generally hitting Arm at the lower end by giving RISC-V more credibility in the short term

- Open technology like RISC-V is less affected by the US rules for technology discussion/transfer with China
Of all the possible ways to handle toolchains on Linux, I'm quite happy with asdf[1]. I've successfully built stand-alone fsharp/csharp "Hello worlds" off of dotnet via asdf - but I've not used dot.net in anger.

I chiefly like asdf because I typically need at least two toolchains (with various versions for various projects) - eg ruby and nodejs, or python and nodejs.

https://asdf-vm.com/

https://github.com/emersonsoares/asdf-dotnet-core
But I don't understand how data stealing can happen if each process is effectively sandboxed. If my process can't read or write to memory outside of what it allocated, how can I corrupt or steal user data?
This isn’t bullshit. Directly observing the behaviour of live cells in context is a powerful technique. This work means such techniques will be even more powerful, by increasing the feature resolution and reducing light induced damage to the cells.
Sorry but the source is closed sadly, so I can't share it. I would like to write a blog post someday about some of the patterns I've used though, I think they could be useful to someone.
Electron microscopy has drawbacks when it comes to studying biological samples. The sample has to be prepared for examination in a vacuum chamber using ionizing radiation and using fixating processes and reagents that kill the cells and may damage/distort lipid membranes. Brief intro here:

https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/500-preparing-samp...

A low energy optical microscope can examine living samples (in aqueous environments).
This is just baseless, predictable cynicism, devoid of any understanding of basic economics. Someone is doing good work for society and making money? Insert boilerplate remark about how greedy they must be.

Of course, not only is it distinctly possible to contribute to society and make a profit—it’s basically the only way. In the real world loads of researchers and engineers and other employees aren’t going to work for free to appease random Internet cynics (who rarely if ever make positive contributions to society of their own, mind you), so capital is required which entails investors and returns on investment. Yeah, that means insurers or someone else paying money.
So many people have been saying it's a scam for so long that I almost wonder if something else is going on. Like, if you polled anyone who knew what Tether is, I bet 80% or 90% would say it's a scam. It's pretty much consensus. I've never seen a single defense or counter-argument of it online. And the vague reserve disclosure didn't help.

(And, to be clear, I also think it's likely a scam.)

I'd perhaps think it's like the lead-up to 2008 where the people behind the scenes largely knew it was funny money but the general public didn't - but here it seems pretty unanimous from the lowest-level retail investor to the most sophisticated institutional investor that it's a scam.

So what's the deal? Is it gonna be the most predictable catastrophe ever? How have they existed from 2012 until today, seemingly without any issue, despite all of the universally extremely negative PR? What are the odds it's somehow not a scam?
Hah, no. At least the early iterations of those chips required considerable fiddling to get all the pixels to line up correctly. Modern monitors are better, but you still suffer some noise and color artifacts.

It is fairly common to have even low-end SoCs with some kind of LVDS or HDMI output.

Like I said, I get the whole retro-computing deal. A nostalgia for the days when you could really master an entire platform, hardware and software.

I scratch that itch in other ways this year, like messing around with RISC-V instruction set simulators written in Rust. I'll likely try to make a low-level debug monitor for one of them (instead of debugging via GDB), just for fun.

Back in the old days, I had EDTASM for the Color Computer, which combined an assembler, disassembler and debugger into just an 8K ROM.
TWTR because Jack likes Bitcoin, or is there another connection? They don’t have Bitcoin on their books, right?
I have been suffering for the same issue for years. I found a methodology works for me:

Target a clear output -> define functions -> find the valuable inputs

(Ex: Become a top engineer (output) -> what's the core functions of the top engineering minds -> read great books, awesome tech blogs, talk/work with top minds...)
It is has ruined software development. But it seems like at this point there is no way back. But still strange that somebody think it works.
You have an unduly rosy picture of rocket science. The turbopump used in most liqued fueled rockets to presurize the fuel is notoriously complicated. Small changes to the design can result in a dramatic loss of efficiency, or even worse if it starts cavitating the pump can eat itself. For this reason nearly nobody designs turbopumps from scratch and first principles, they take a well understood design and maybe tweek it a bit. And you can bet that they then test those tweeks on a bench a lot.

Similarly devilishly complicated is the injector design. Obviously you want to mix the oxidizer and fuel in the optimal ratio for the highest efficiency. That’s the easy part. But then you also want to offset from this optimum near the edges to produce a colder flow near the nozzle wall to protect it from melting. Of course nowadays people do a lot of computer simulations to save on testing time, but it is still not uncommon to discover combustion instabilities or hot-spots in the engine tests.

So no, nobody can, let alone did, design a rocket entirely in a computer and then send it to the moon without many many tests, and incrementally improved tribal knowledge.
We don't know for sure. They won't release it so we can see. If there was none at all, they could just say "there is none" instead of any of this argument (many might not believe them if they said that, of course, but they aren't even saying it so that point is entirely moot).

Certainly I expect code to optimise things for the specifics of the hardware. That would be useful to have if they stop supporting it and something needs fixing after that point in time (for security reasons for instance) perhaps the hardware can still be more than a fancy brick. That is in part where the GPL came from in the first place - RMS being irritated by a locked-down printer he wanted to add some utility to.
Yeah, I remember I used to get frustrated when I had to read code that used map() or even .forEach() extensively, thinking a simple, imperative for loop would suffice. I slowly came to realize that a for loop gives you too much power. It's a hammer. It holds the place of a bug you just haven't written yet. Now I'm the one writing JavaScript like it's Haskell. Although Haskell could learn a thing or two from TypeScript about row polymorphism.
Fully vaccinated and Covid recovered, yet Woman is positive for Delta+ variant
Not only the title:

"Instead of expending energy to get the colony back on its feet, workers will dedicate themselves to selfish schemes — such as finding ways to place their clones into positions of power."
Differentiating between and audit and attestation is not pedantic but I can understand why you might think it is. I explained there difference here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27532670
TL;DR attestations do not provide a strong level of assurance and there are no standards for conducting them - they are ad hoc engagements. Audits are standardised engagements and must conform to a particular methodology to determine sufficient and appropriate evidence that financial statements are true and fair - basically you need third party info like custodian reports.
That's correct. Also see https://github.com/microsoft/GSL, which is a header-only C++ library that implements the Guidelines Support Library as specified by ISO C++. It's extremely useful (especially to get std::span<T> if you don't have C++20 support) because it provides several constructs to explicitly clarify the _intent_of your code, like `gsl::not_null<T>`, `gsl::narrow_cast<T>()` or `gsl::owner<T>`. `gsl::finally()` is also pretty useful.
Microsoft Basic for 6502 Original Source Code (1978)
"This is the original 1978 source code of Microsoft BASIC for 6502 with all original comments, documentation and easter eggs"
>The toast is coated with special chemicals which will cause the body of anyone whose genetic code does not match the license owner to reject it.

welcome to paradise!
Why would the people running Tether not just park the money in a US Treasury ladder and collect the millions in interest each year? No hassle, no loss of sleep. Why play games? Why risk blowing up your cash cow and going to jail?
Good read! My system is similar:

- Yellow (legal) pad for daily todo. Use pen on this pad because it is ok to not keep it neat because the page will be thrown away next morning. So, next morning, tear off the top leaf of yesterday, start no a fresh sheet with the date on top, and transfer any todos that need to be carried forward. Typically, a todo is either done, or not needed, or still pending. The pending ones make it to the fresh page.

- A notebook for note taking. E.g. meetings, or plans etc. I use a mechanical pencil and an eraser with this one. Mistakes and badly written words can be erased and rewritten. When I reference this notebook, it is good to see that things are legible even after a few days.

Summary:

- Legal pad and a pen for tasks. Start a new leaf every morning.

- Notebook, pencil, eraser for notes. Keep it neat, and can be referenced later.
> not counting CLR DLLs

Why would you exclude those in this comparison - they're already (guaranteed to be) installed on your windows targets?

How about linux/Mac targets?

I think 20-30MB is quite good - puts it in the ballbark of golang.

2MB+ for rust actually sounds a bit big -that's stripped?
I get it now, but someone, somewhere has to take a loss, right?
If tether is sold for dollars, and someone traded 10btc today, but btc loses 10percent of value overnight, that someone can cash out for the price of yesterday, that's great.
But who takes the 10percent hit?
So the 1% don't have power? Or aren't a minority?
> Tether has indeed misrepresented its balance sheet at times, but the reality is it's a highly over-capitalized bank -- whereas most banks have liquidity ratios of ~10% (less than that pre-2008) no one is questioning tether is >50%.

Tether has an capital ratio of about 0.36%. Banks have a minimum capital ratio of about 3% (both of these are looking only at cash/cash-equivalent, not full risk-adjusted capital ratio).

(Cite: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-16/don-t-...).
Why Pitch Decks Require Equal Balance of Text and Visuals
Right, I genuinely do understand why people use it, and don't have a problem with that decision. My point was just that the E2EE chats not being able to be backed up or transferred to a new device/install isn't a feature, and it's strange that Telegram (and possibly your comment, although perhaps I misread it) mentions that it is a potential benefit for data security when encrypted local backups exist in other apps.
tensorflow I believe
My theory is, that they are mostly not backed by real USD nor assets - it's virtually impossible that they have so much commercial paper without nobody in the business even knowing them. They are most probably lying.

If this is true, and everything points to it, then there is simply much less real USD on the exchanges than people think. People often quote the crypto market cap and that Tether only represents 5-10% of it - but most BTC were never really available anyway - they were never bought or traded on any exchange. So the total inflow of USD (or any other real money) is much less than crypto market cap - and a lot of it was eaten by miners, arbitrageurs and exchange fees.

When the music stops - and enough people try to get their real money from the exchanges, it simply won't be there.
Waitrose orders on Deliveroo in London keep disappearing
> Got some examples where it's a problem and not an actual dependency issue?

Try to recompile mesa or say, just the demos (aka glxgears) :) Worst case scenario for Debian dependencies.
I read this comment about 5 years ago on HN.
I'm surprised this is available for Linux and Windows, but not Mac. I've always mentally placed programming for OS X somewhere between Linux and Windows, and assumed that something cross-platform-enough for Linux and Windows could easily be tweaked to also compile to the Mac (e.g. Qt, Electron, wxWidgets).
Bittorrent has everything you'd need for distributing apps: of course the distribution of binaries is there, but it also has storing of arbitrary information, even mutable (http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0044.html). This way once you have a version you can fetch further versions by periodically polling the hash that contains the latest version.
Can't you also pull tricks like moving a bunch of cash into one account, getting the balance printed out, moving that cash into another account, getting that balance printed out, rinse, repeat?

Where a full-on legit audit would take a snapshot of all the finances including debts, AR and AP.
Unfortunately our example isn't representative, and avoids a lot of things that make eigen slow to work with. Parsing the header file will take a constant time, but template expansion etc. can take a long time if you have more code.

Try adding a bunch of matrix operations (particularly chained ones resulting in massive expression templates), fixed size matrices of various sizes, and compile with optimisation and SIMD enabled, and you'll see different results. I really like eigen and use it a lot, but it can definitely result in long compile times.
Show HN: Production level annotation tools for images and videos
From aerial photographs, the building appears to be about 100m in its longest horizontal dimension. It was 12 stories tall, so maybe 40m? Assuming it was made with a steel frame, then the expansion going from that area's record low temperature to its record high temperature would be about 40mm horizontal and about 16mm vertical. Presumably it was designed to handle that, with a decent safety margin.

That is indeed much more than the 2mm it was sinking each year.

But wait...the temperature swings of the frame, and other interior parts of the building, is going to be a lot less than the outside temperature. That's going to cut that 40mm horizontal and 16mm vertical expansion way down.

Also normal thermal expansion alternates with normal thermal contraction, so wouldn't it average out to close to zero net movement over the course of each year, with a small net expansion due to climate change (Florida average temperature is up under 0.5℃ since that building was built)?

Sinking, on the other hand, is usually cumulative. 2mm/year over 40 years is 80mm. So you've got a building designed to expand and contract, staying within some range, having a net vertical movement imposed on it that is a lot larger, and probably a lot less uniform.
As I see it, the federal reserve official's statement really boils down to the fact that if Tether (or any other widely adopted stablecoin) is conventionally accepted to have the value of $1 USD, and the people running Tether can print them, then those people can effectively print USD. And THAT, from the Fed's perspective, is a risk to financial stability.

If I was the Fed I would seriously consider creating my own TheRealUSD stablecoin. Create a token that you have mint/burn control over, and create a portal that allows people to exchange USD for the stablecoin and the stablecoin for USD. No doubt a number of the crypto-libertarians out there will not trust that thing and might object to using it. But from the other perspective which would you trust more? A USD stablecoin run by some random collection of tech people? Or a USD stablecoin run by the Fed?
Remake Pitayan.com
The article "Immutability is not enough" is sub-par in every aspect.

The author never defines, what sort of problems immutable data can help avoid, or what the benefits of immutable data are. And still, after every paragraph, he wonders why functional programming didn't help him avoid bugs in his business logic.

Like, what the hell, the author produced a bug because the order of your operations was wrong? Great, write a test and restructure your code to make it work, at least you know where to look.

Functional Programming does not fix your Game Loop, and it never promised to.
> So you would rather have them waste that exact same amount of space on every computer, just so you don’t have to download it when you want to build a package?

Header files are literally less than a couple kB per package, and Megabyte-sized headers are the exception for huge frameworks like QT or GACL. Arch packages don't ship the source codes, only the binaries (.so files) and headers (.h files).

Overall, the /usr/include folder on my system has less than 230MB, which is a damn lot because I have all kinds of compilers, programming languages and libraries installed. I even have 32Bit and atmel libraries installed because I do embedded reverse engineering and cross-compiling development on other architectures; so I also have gcc, LLVM, rust, go, C/C++ and other programming languages and their dependencies installed. So it's very likely much less than that for others.

If you cannot afford that, you should maybe choose another, smaller, distribution like "Damn Small Linux", Alpine or similar. Debian wouldn't be a good choice for that matter anyways.
My comment seems to have sparked a lot of reaction about safety, but that wasn't the main point. The main point (and the one OP talks about) was about conciseness, and I can't really see how C can be considered a concise language.
> m, a, and b are all type-level variables; the value of m is a type constructor (which is essentially a type-level function), while the values of a and b are types.

Let's try to apply that knowledge, and use my tribe's creed that "similar things should look similar, and different things should look different":

-- α, β types
-- m type constructor
(>>=) :: m α -> (α -> m β) -> m β

-- a, b types
-- 𝘮 type constructor
(>>=) :: 𝘮 a -> (a -> 𝘮 b) -> 𝘮 b

I think that's much better. GP's complaint was correct, writing different concepts with the same notation is confusing.
> What is the problem with the government providing subsistence incomes indexed to inflation ..

There is nothing wrong with the idea except it does not exist. Show me a country where governments provide subsistence income indexed to the official inflation rate, let alone the real rate of inflation. Show me a gov that allows minimum wage to increase at anything approaching inflation. Or show me a traditional bank account that will allow them to save at a rate that keeps up with inflation - It doesn’t exist.

> and letting wealtholders fortunes get inflated away?

and show me a wealtholder who’s fortune is held in cash instead of scarce assets so as to be inflated away - doesn’t exist.

> How does deflation, which proportionally rewards holders of currency, help those with a fixed income more than inflationary handouts?

Watch the bottom 70% of El Salvador’s citizens over the next decade for a real world example. They now get a decentralized savings account denominated in a currency growing at 200% y/y instead of one that is constantly being debased (USD printed 50% of all dollars ever created during the pandemic) - except for crypto no bank account will ever again pay enough interest to keep up with inflation.
The answer to your first question is yes. You can see that in the types.

fmap :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b

The `a` becomes a `b` (which could be a different type but not necessarily), but the `f` is the same `f`.