skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Rehabilitation" usually comes after an appropriate criminal punishment being issued and received, not before. That reasonable people think that getting just twelve weeks in jail for his crimes -- which he at no point admitted -- is an offensive undersentencing in no way justifies their description as a "mob".
Sure, but the division between Oracle Database and MySQL Database is pretty large; that being said I wouldnt be surprised if they had somehow gotten some money out of it.
depends on what is a 'substantial portion' of the software. i think that definition is not very clear.
As long as GDPR exists, a European tech company than can challenge FANG dominance will never emerge.
People plead guilty all the time.
That is pretty amusing, I also just received a mail from them telling me that my opinion was important to them. Heh
Very odd choice. If I had to guess I’d say they wanted to make that block of text rectangular, had to add one more letter to do so, and picked one at random without understanding what it is.

EDIT: And now I learn that the designer is Swedish, so if anyone needs me I’ll be eating my helping of crow for that last remark. :$ Sorry Rasmus!
Almost everyone nowadays who dabbles in the social justice business. Most people are already equal before the law, do have equal chances, do get equal treatment. But that wasn't enough, so now the demand is equal outcomes, not matter if it leads to inequality in chances, law and treatment.
The GDPR was enacted two years before it came into force. Companies trading in the EU had plenty of time to come into compliance.

LQDN didn't "wait for the law to get signed" - it was signed ages ago. They waited until it was enforceable.

It's worth pointing out that the GDPR is an EU "regulation". It doesn't have to be ratified by member states, and they don't have to implement some kind of compliant national legislation. This is very different from the previous EU privacy legislation, which required member states to enact suitable laws, which many of them were apparently reluctant to do.

The GDPR came into force the day the regulation was issued. It's just that "came into force" means that the 2-year breathing-space provided for in the regulation began at that time.

[Edit: changed 3 years to 2 years]
I'm currently reading a book called "Facebook The Inside Story" and while it's definitely an anti-Facebook perspective it illustrates a number of ways the movie was unfair to Mark.

The biggest problem, to me, was suggesting that Mark basically stole the concept from the Winklevoss twins. The book traces the origins of the idea and clarifies the context. Things like: there are many other similar social networks, a boy at Mark's previous school had created and shared a "Facebook" project, the Harvard school newspaper was explicitly calling for the creation of a school wide Facebook (and that call inspired Mark to try and create one first), etc. It's less like he stole the idea from the Winklevoss twins and more like the idea was out there in many ways. What he did to the Winklevoss twins was tell them he was working on their project while working on his own intentionally trying to derail them.
Given that capitalism is underpinned by the right to own property, it would seem the more accurate argument is that this particular immorality stems from an imperfect capitalism, that is: one with incomplete property rights. It is not at all obvious to me that capitalism and morality are in someway orthogonal let alone mutually exclusive.
> JWT includes cryptographic agility for the client to change algorithms and and defines a “none” algorithm that disables the cryptography altogether.

"none" is only viable in very narrow circumstances (basically where you have other ways of verifying trust, like mTLS or an isolated network AND you know that signing has a material impact on your system performance). I agree that it shouldn't be used widely.

Thanks for the example. It feels a bit like the old dynamic vs static typing debate, where more flexibility can be helpful in some circumstances (monkeypatching that old ruby gem) but can come back and bit you too if you (and everyone who updates the code) are not careful.

Anyway, hope Paseto (and other solutions) continue to push the ball forward.

And if you are using JWTs, never accept or generate one with alg=none. :)
I'm actually working on a project to revive Amazon Kindles as personal productivity devices. I'm very close to release, and will open the source soon
Do you care to elaborate? I understand it might look similar in style, wouldn't call it a replica though, a lot of the fonts are similar. For example, maybe a detailed pixel to pixel comparison why it might be a replica?
Those witnesses were absolutely not found to be lying. It's just that Salmond was not found to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
It's Apple. iPhones, for example, are unusable and slippery without a case, after which they're as thick as high-end Androids with Kevlar backs that can be used without a case.

If my iPhone had good grip surface I wouldn't use a case, and the thinness would actually make a difference in my experience.
> I haven't been using containers as much lately, but I wonder if s6-overlay's approach could be used to justify including a database into the container with an application. Is that a good idea?

The answer is as always: it depends. My rule of thumb here would be: would it ever make sense to configure the application to use a different (or even just remote) database? If so, then the database should have a separate container (when using a local db). This applies most of the time.

Similarly, if the database itself is an integral part of the application which it doesn't make sense to swap out or have remote... then by all means just include it and tell the user to mount their data volume to /data or whatever. Example: A single-system file indexer.
Why are you taking his words at face value here?
Craig Murray who ‘relished’ identifying Alex Salmond complainers will go to jail
Potentially?

"Not guilty" does not mean "innocent."
Then you didn't read, and/or don't understand recursive idea.. a process that repeats. CS didn't come into existence until 1950's, so lack of process integrity for digital ID/Data Rights shouldn't be surprising, but structure yields results, not literature. Might want to get out of mass media rags too.. "Sovereign Citizen" is anarchistic, this is about structural integrity of a civil Society using accurate administrative precedence. Functional literacy required.. research "Self-Sovereign Identity" for more..
I don't entirely agree. They've collaborated on all kinds of budget products (Ikea speakers, Nothing earbuds, etc.) and even sell quite a few low-cost modular synths. Their accessories are well-priced, and even the OP-Z holds it's own. As far as I know, Teenage Engineering used to make plenty of budget hardware, until the OP-1 took off and they halted production of everything else to focus on it (as well as raising the price).
“Swift is the only language I could find with over 100 keywords”
It's pretty bizarre that an article saying "more antibodies means less infection" (with nothing to do with genetics) spawns a huge comment thread on privilege and racism.
Not necessarily "nefarious", but I certainly don't trust everyone to behave reasonably or logically. The very act of putting the watermark in will plant that idea in at least some of your customer's heads. And since you didn't answer my question about whether you informed customers of it before they made a purchase, I think it's safe to assume you didn't. Even if all of your customers trust you to act reasonably, you could die tomorrow and all of those rights will get transferred to someone else who may not be as trustworthy.
Understanding Rust's serde using cargo expand
Genuinely - are you being sarcastic or just a rube?

People in boardrooms dont entertain reasoning in good conscience because conscience doesn't come into it - just "Does this make us more money?"
The tree structure is invariant across the balancing/search algorithms. Maybe you can do splay on loads and then rebalance. Q is whether this ends up being more costly over time. Now I wonder if there can be a hybric splay with distinct sub-roots.
In case I wasn’t clear, this is a strong recommendation against starting your adult life in SF. Your friends elsewhere will be married with children, own their house, run a nice business, and you’ll be making a pretty good salary but wondering how you were the smart one yet fell 10 years behind in every life outcome.
I am aware of that, which is why I said "almost certainly."

He also chose to fight this case, so if he didn't want to undermine it, his only option besides arguing for his innocence was silence.
It's also that they are different data structures used historically for different things, no?

It'd be interesting to see a high-fanout splay tree, not even 100% sure how it'd work. Do you splay just the one node up to the root and have to split/combine each splay? Or do you only splay the first node in a "chunk" up? Or the whole "chunk"? Is it better to do a B+ type of thing rather than a B-tree type of thing?
http://blakearchive.org/

The William Blake archive is a treasure of a website. I strongly recommend using the search function as it not only returns text (in these handwritten document) but also returns content within the illustrations.
Anyone reading this is free to make of Murray what they want but I genuinely think he is a textbook useful idiot. He obviously has a grudge against the west, sometimes he's a useful counterpoint but other times he's literally just spreading FUD in favour of whoever is not the west (i.e. they weren't GRU agents, they were a gay couple, honest!)
It's named after the one who told other people about the relationship. That's about as fair as you can get.
I was so tempted to jump on this with my anecdata of successfully running ZFS without ECC for a time, but that was in the context of a dirt cheap home tinker box.

If you care about data integrity enough to use ZFS, just bite the bullet and use ECC. If you care about data integrity at all, use ECC. If you don’t, what are we even doing here?
Nobody is saying people should be thrown into the proverbial fire, but the answer is absolutely not to encourage disengagement. This is true across many disorders. To treat an anxiety issue you slowly introduce increasing amounts of the trigger to the person. You don't tell them it's okay to spend their life avoiding it. Some amount of discomfort is necessary. I agree it is a hard balance to strike, as I mentioned in my other comment, but I think much of the current rhetoric surrounding neurodivergence is taking accommodation to the extreme.

There are many degrees to "harming health", what I am referring to harms health in a similar way as encouraging an obese person to eat whatever they want. It's a slow burn. Failure to keep on top of cleanliness, appointments, groceries, etc. is one type of example. Failure to compromise with friends which over time degrades relationships is another.

Not fixing something that is wrong because you are otherwise happy is exactly the fallacy I am talking about. It's not just some theoretical world where the person was never deaf, because for a number of children that grow up deaf they did not actually have to!

Sure you can't disentangle things like "I never would have met my wife if I weren't deaf" - but there are so many random choices like what college you go to where one could say the same thing. It's just a secular version of "God has a plan" type thinking. There is nothing inherent to being deaf that caused any of the person's happiness.

The connection is literally just a matter of plugging in different words - a deaf person being happier than a hearing person does not mean deafness isn't an impairment for them, in the same way that someone with a learning disability performing better in school than a typical child doesn't mean the LD doesn't impair them. But that was a misconception among the people that should have been helping those students, for a long time.

The point was pretty obviously not that helping those students would help them, but rather that they were not helped because of a sentiment similar to what you are pushing. It's an attitude to be discouraged, yet for some reason there is now this trend in parts of the neurodivergent community to encourage it - I'm a good person/successful/happy/whatever so clearly there isn't anything at all wrong with me.

If you literally decline a treatment that would improve your life (or even worse do so for your child!) because you've somehow deluded yourself into thinking your disability is good for you, that's very obviously a bad thing, and that is exactly what this overly prideful attitude breeds, as can be seen on full display already with deaf culture. In a world where there is absolutely nothing we could do about deafness, sure let deaf people think they have some sort of secret advantage over all us hearing normies. But in reality there are things we can do, so we should be encouraging people to get help.
How Americans think about trade
The radius of the universe isn't an accident
(The radius of the universe) / (the Compton wavelength of an electron / 2pi)
= (the proton charge radius) / (the proton Schwarzschild radius).

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%2813.831+billion+years++speed+of+light%29+%2F+%28Compton+wavelength+of+electron+%2F+%282pi%29%29

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%288.414++10%5E-16+m%29+%2F+%282++G++proton+mass+%2F+c%5E2%29

They're identical
I’ve thought about a system where a company has to purchase liability insurance when they dump assets.

So if a plant has a chemical leak, the company can’t sell every other plant, pay a huge dividend, and then declare bankruptcy to avoid paying damages. The plant would have to be insured for up to the total dividend payout. The insurance company would charge a huge fee based on what they think the plant will end up costing after a court battle, etc.
I can't help but imagine jettisoned rotors falling to the ground like spiraling beams and wedging themselves a good portion into the earth like throwing a knife into the ground
2018 post with 600+ comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18784583
I'd do 100% of my job in a browser if I had the option.
For me, the key to breaking out of this loop was to change the Code->Repeat step to Code->Communicate->Propose->Repeat.

My visibility, raises, and promotions became more frequent when I started sharing what I had done and explaining the positive impact, how it benefitted our client, and started proposing what we could do next to have an even greater impact.

I recommend every dev read about the Heilmeier Catechism[1], a set of key questions to address when presenting that inform your audience about what is important to them, and that devs try to address some or all of those questions in every client-facing presentation.

[1] https://medium.com/art-of-the-start/the-heilmeier-catechism-...
Equality of outcome tends to skew towards ignoring decisions or actions that individuals take (as they can and are influenced by the environment), and looking at the environment.

The tricky part is, the real world can’t be quantified or modeled in a way that is tractable to humans in a larger way (near as I can tell anyway), so the people and environment get squashed into coarse buckets like skin color, education level, etc. which not only don’t reflect any individuals actual circumstances, but can be gamed in various ways.

Since individuals also respond to the pressures they are under, it makes it easier and easier to see folks who become more and more helpless and take on a victim mindset (aka there is nothing I can do to get better, hold on while I finish this liter of vodka) - because it works in very real ways, and it’s the easy path. And you can’t reliably quantify something like that, it’s usually too subtle or subjective.

This can easily lead (without very careful and mindful leadership - which doesn’t scale, and often doesn’t get selected for either) to essentially co-dependence. If they try to improve, they lose support and/or get kicked out. If they get worse, they get more help.

There are of course plenty of examples of failure and dysfunction the other direction - insisting that someone who is fundamentally screwed by the environment ‘get better’ while not providing any support and/or dishing out beatings for every minor infraction.

And if you set your metric to ‘everyone has the same outcome/rewards’ - well, it is REALLY hard to do well. Fundamentally, you’ll never get a population to all perform the same. As a species we have a wide and diverse set of skills, predispositions, upbringing/parental influences, resources, and other attributes, and there is literally no way to make everyone equally successful at everything without maybe somehow making everyone equal on all those other fronts - which plenty of dystopian novels on THAT.

So if you can’t make everyone equally successful or identical or have the same upbringing/influences or resources, you can get ‘equal outcomes’ another way - anyone who sticks up above the pack gets smacked down until everyone is equal again, or any venue or opportunity that can’t be made equal gets banned. And that does scale, and also has the benefit of being easily measurable and doable. Which is why you see it so often.

Which is also pretty dystopian, as it’s enforced ‘lowest common denominator’ by definition, and tends to destroy any innovation or improvements and slowly (or not so slowly) suffocates the society. It’s easy to go down, it’s hard to go up.

For your example, if we wanted to be 100% sure that everyone in a wheelchair had equal access to everything without some massive improvement in technology - we’d need to pave every backcountry hike (and ban the ones that we didn’t want to spend the money on), ban rock climbing, ban most skydiving, etc.

Which would essentially destroy the experience one was theoretically trying to make equally available.
Makes you solely dependent on Google. That's not really a problem, but as we've seen many times on HN and elsewhere, there's always the random chance that Google's automated systems can decide that your account meets some unknown criterion to be locked, deleted, or otherwise preventing you access.

It's rather unlikely, but so is the chance of your house burning down.

That's generally the reason people recommend the 3-2-1 rule. By having multiple separate backup solutions, you're hedging your bets. But as is commonly the case in computing, you have to play the convenience vs security/reliability game here and decide where the line between your time and convenience lies against the reliability of your backups and what risks your willing to take.
Lol so if you don't have a Kindle, don't want a Kindle, and don't intend to get a Kindle... then why are you here talking about Kindles? What's your skin in the game?
I would say not. For example, I have been doing oracle database administration work for many years. Even though I'm also good with a lot of other technologies, like Linux, programming in many languages, other databases. But no one will consider me for jobs other than oracle DBA/developer for the salary I know have. So it is kind of a trap. And it is super hard to accept a junior job offer when you are approaching forties.
> That's one way of paying taxes ...

But the EU hasn't figured out how to apply this technique to Apple yet ...
The strawman images that destroyed online discourse
> Society currently only thinks a limited set of things - parental wealth, social status, skin color, etc. - are forms of privilege and we should work to reduce them.

That is one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is that society reserves privileged status to specific groups and denies this status to others, and that things like parental wealth, social status, skin color, etc are _markers_ of this.

In the United States, I believe the latter aligns with the facts we can observe. This is basically the argument of Isabel Wilkerson in "Caste"[0]. I'm not really up for trying to make the case for why I find this view convincing right now, in this comment I just wanted to highlight that it is a different argument than the one you made. If Wilkerson is correct, the actual markers of privilege are quite arbitrary, and phenomena such as racism arise from this rather than being themselves the root issue. The goal then is not so much ending discrimination as it is tearing down the caste system that fuels it.

[0]https://www.isabelwilkerson.com/
> The relevant part of the license is the definition of the covered work, which basically says that the output of any algorithm that uses copyrighted code as input is under the same license.

In other words, you are granting unnecessary additional permission to use the output of an ML algorithm trained on the copyrighted code under the terms of the same license, when your permission was not required if the use of that output was already covered by fair use. If the use is not considered fair use—if the output would be deemed a derivative work under copyright law—then this license is beneficial to the developers of ML systems like Copilot since it explicitly grants them permission to use the output under the same terms. In the best case it's fair use and your license is irrelevant, and in the worst case your license grants them a path to proceed anyway, with a few extra rules to follow. Under no circumstances can anything you write in the licence expand the reach of the copyright you have in the original code, no matter how "wonderfully broad and general" the license may be.

Reading through the licenses and FAQs on your site did not improve my opinion of them in the slightest. Especially the part where you attempted to equate what Copilot does with trivial processing of the source code, e.g. with an editor, to argue that classifying the use of any output from an ML algorithm trained on copyrighted inputs as fair use is equivalent to eliminating copyright on software. The reality is of course much more nuanced. Certainly if the ML algorithm merely reproduces a portion of its input from some identifiable source, including non-trivial creative elements to which copyright could reasonably be applied, then the fact that the process involved an ML algorithm does not preclude a claim of infringement, and it would be reasonable to apply something like a plagiarism checker to the ML output to protect the user from accidental copying. However, the purpose of an ML system like Copilot is synthesis, extracting common (and thus non-creative) elements from many sources and applying them in a new context, the same as any human programmer studying a variety of existing codebases and subsequently writing their own code. The reproduction of these common elements in the ML output can be fair use without impacting the copyrights on the original inputs.

The real question here is why I'm wasting my time attempting a good-faith debate with someone who thinks that "spreading FUD is not necessarily a bad thing…".
summary: "mabez" (Scott Mabin), known for his work on a LLVM backend for the Tensilica xtensa cores that drive the ESP32, has now been contracted by Espressif to enable Rust on all Espressif chips.

A special shout-out to the RISCV ESP32-C3, it's the chip the new esp32-hal crate will initially support, with the other chips to follow.

---

Espressif is forward looking. Afaik it is leading the pack, while the competition is into crappy C/C++ IDE's, stuck in a hopeless local maximum.
Does ‘The Da Vinci Code’ Writer Have a Secret?
Yep, much as it has its drawbacks, Discord is where people jump in and get involved. Convenience wins.
If you've never taken a course in data structures and algorithms - take one. Especially if you'll be tested on them; it seems like the obvious thing to do.