skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My mind also goes to other examples of player-curated "compilations" in gaming. There's a myriad of possible combinations for player/weapon loadouts in Call of Duty, and many players vie to replicate streamer and pro player set-ups. Can those creators copyright their loadouts? WoW buildouts? Diablo characters?
They are leaving behind several fully functioning military equipment which are now under Taliban's control. Basically a gift to them.
...said a stranger on the internet without any sources to back up this claim.
You should read the opinion. Ruling otherwise would essentially eliminate obvious jokes from advertising, and the opinion makes a good case for just how obvious the joke was.
> George Soros talked a lot about how hard it is to give money, how it corrupts both parties (both the donor and the grantee)

Did he talk about the specific how / underlying dynamics, and what if anything could be done about it?

Where would I find that conversation?
The post doesn't go much into details of the effort that went into the firmware development for the PinePhone keyboard, but I've documented it along the way, for the curious, together with options of what may be possible thanks to me writing FOSS implementation of the whole SW stack for the keyboard, and the surrounding tooling.

Most of the last few month's worth of posts here are about the keyboard https://xnux.eu/log
So that the money would be spent on wars in Afghanistan instead?
I maintain a Rails codebase and a Node codebase. We are using esbuild for Node / JS bundling, along with TypeScript. The Node project is much less of a headache than the Rails one, mostly due to TypeScript. We’ve also made an effort to minimize our dependencies. We have fewer npm modules than gems.

All that to say, Rails is fine. But Node is also fine, if you treat it more like Go (minimal dependencies, lean on the vanilla underpinnings).
> Maybe this was just one guy, or maybe OSM has the same "territorial editors" problem as Wikipedia.

I hope I speak for everyone involved, but this seems to be the problem of one person. We at OSM aim to be a friendly bunch and hope you come back to edit.
That's a bad title for the category. It's more like other metafunds and foundations. Included are givedirectly, United way, and various community investment organizations.
Was hoping for more details about their RISC offering. I briefly looked for an entry-level board and they're either vastly underpowered or way out of a "hobbyist" price range.
How can it not be available with Sprockets? You can just add .js files.
I see creators engaging with comment writers all the time, as well as commenters engaging with each other on a community level, particularly in more niche communities
> Tax them

This is an awkward story to message this on, given a greater fraction of her wealth is going to help the needy than does the U.S. government’s.
Well if you want to ultimately have the most charitable impact, "make billions and THEN do good by giving it back" can actually do the most good. By an extraordinary magnitude.

If you think your $1 million today will become $10 million in 10 years, and then $100 million in another 10 years, and then $1 billion after thirty years total... wouldn't it seem deeply wrong to give away the $1 million today, and throw away the opportunity to do $999 million of good in 30 years? Or from an equivalent perspective, to do $999 million of future harm in exchange for a mere $1 million of good today.

Obviously it depends on whether the money will grow, whether who you give to invests it themselves, it's a balancing of risk reward etc. But the idea that you always ought to give charitably now rather than invest and give later seems deeply flawed.
We're using these at my job, and it's been a pretty amazing experience. We built a wrapper[1] so that every front-end dev can build components even easier (without needing to know Three.js), since in the end of the day they are just React components that can be easily composed together:

<View3D>
<Box position={[1, 0, 0]} color="green" />
<Box position={[-1, 0, 0]} color="red" />
</View3D>

[1] https://www.npmjs.com/package/@standard/view
Afghanistan's CCP moment.

I hope this time CCP can teach Taliban some lessons of how to manage a country after conquering her.
Some of these people were probably desperate enough to get rid of the Taliban, that's how the US made friends. I read a piece about a couple of days ago about a woman leading a group of anti Taliban resistance fighters. Probably a propaganda piece but still.
> Interesting opportunity to rethink the model of "make billions and THEN do good by giving it back"

Well if you want to give back, you need to have something first. As heirs, Scott got money without really (deserving|working for) it. It is not really comparable to Gates and Buttet.

> To me it's not good enough to make billions and then do good

Everyone is different, some people choose to do that. It is still better than giving nothing
> the most senior developer in our London based organisation, having been here since the beginning, I make about $11k a month.

Pre or post tax?

As a London fintech contractor (until recently) I have able to pull in around $22k USD pcm pre tax, or very, very roughly $14k USD pcm post tax - contractors have various ways to manage tax load and time off so it's never a direct translation.

$16.5k pcm for an intern still seems utterly crazy, given my starting annual salary of £21k 20 years ago, but if there is a) a ton of money flowing through the company and b) the intern is able to help them bring in more than that over the course of a year then... I guess it's worth it to them, and that's all that really matters.
I wonder if it could ever be considered fraud to accept payment for a case you know to be unwinnable, seeing as how the client would have to be operating under the assumption that the case is winnable.
OK, so what do you recommend for readability and also for stable presentation across platforms?

Reading a book on a screen, I find PDF far superior to HTML or Word or text.
They are on a back-end that does auto-scaling. They stated that they had problems when scaling up past 1000 nodes.

Now, maybe they could have fixed that issue instead, but going from 29 to 58 workers is easy, it's not the same going to 29,000 to 58,000. And 1000 hosts vs 500 is a non-trivial cost.
I am most surprised that there is no fighting back at all. Are all those deserting soldiers really thinking their lifes and the lifes of their families will be spared?
Tap water is contaminated with numerous chemicals (known and unknown).
containers would've solved it

one process per container, easy peasy
yep that is a good one. The goal of this repo to have a bird's eye view of different papers as I read them and to distill that info into one table.
The “no additional overhead” struck me as a really high claim, and this confirms it. 2000 cubes at 60fps is really nothing if you know what you’re doing.
Agreed. I fear the cold calculus is ... Afghanistan is strategically important for Russia, not the U.S., and making it peaceful is actually not in the best interests of the U.S. If Russia wants a path to a warm-water port, then it can deal with it.

I have no evidence of this, so just speculating on the actual motives.
I don't think "Philanthropy & Grantmaking Infrastructure" means what you think it means.

There's a breakdown of which non-profits that includes, including the United Way and other non-profits.
There are two Chinas. One has comparable per-capita emissions as the US. The other is very poor.

They have moved hundreds of millions from the latter to the former. They have hundreds of millions left to go and are making excellent progress.
I have already explained why you are wrong. There is however a new error here:

> There is no confusion here. A singularity exists at the top of Nortons Dome and Norton is exactly describing the behavior of the particle AFTER it exits the singularity. The exact same phenomena is occurring in the n-body problem as nortons dome.

There's no singularity in Norton's dome. The equation d^2r/dt^2 = r^{1/2} is well-defined for all non-negative times t. This is not the case in the three-body problem, where a coefficient blows up in finite time when two bodies collide. The dome example is not relevant here and you are confusing yourself by conflating the two phenomena.

>> >It doesn't make sense to talk about a solution past the point of collision. One doesn't exist.

> This is not true.

And just to repeat myself: it is true, it's a mathematical theorem, you can't continue the solution past the point of the collision. Please check the references.

If you want a heuristic reason for this, note that conservation of energy implies infinite velocities at the point of collision. The situation is inherently unphysical due to it being a mathematical idealization.

edit: If you're serious about the $1k thing, I propose the following. We agree on a precise mathematical formulation of the question "Is the three-body problem deterministic?," an expert, and a charity. We email the expert for comment. If I am right, you donate to the charity. If I am wrong, I will admit to it here, and perhaps donate some money myself. We can put the agreement on our personal websites and post it to HN to publicly commit.
That sounds like the main lessons from the course 30x500: https://30x500.com.

1. Identify an audience

2. Find them where they are (Reddit, Facebook group, etc) and learn their jargon and actual, real pains

3. Create content to help that audience and build an email list of people who trust you

4. Create a product to solve an identified pain

5. Sell it to your audience

I simplify of course, and did not take the course yet, but from what I gathered that's the gist.
Here's a tip that pretty much every philanthropist out there knows, but would probably be helpful to the HN crowd. If you donate appreciated stock, you get a "double" tax break, since you don't pay capital gains tax and you also can deduct the donation amount.

For example, you have $1000 of tesla shares that you bought for $100 a few years ago. You want to donate some money to charity now. If you sold those shares and put them in your bank account and then donate cash, you'd owe capital gains tax (15 or 20% depending on tax bracket) on the $900 gain. So if you donated all of your Amazon stock that way, you would give a donation of $1000 - (900 x 0.15) = $865 and you can take an $865 tax deduction if you itemize.

Alternatively, you can donate $1000 of appreciated tesla shares directly to a charity. Now, you don't owe capital gains, AND you can take a $1000 tax deduction. Double win.

Rich people who give to charity are well aware of this loophole. For them, it pretty much never makes sense to donate cash if they have appreciated assets they can give instead (at the very least you might as well donate the stock and then buy it back later at a higher cost basis, although I think there might be rules about buying the exact stock again within 30 days). And in my experience, most charities are happy to take stock for this reason... because their major donors only want to give stock, so they already have the infrastructure in place for accepting it.*
Reading about Object Algebra!
“Single handedly reshaping America” is an extraordinary claim!

I live in the middle of nowhere and my best friends live in places like New Orleans, Juneau, San Francisco, Portland, New York, rural Colorado, Mississippi and Florida etc. basically, all over the place and nobody I know has been in any way impacted by any of these charities, and certainly haven’t been impacted by this gifting spree.

Furthermore, none of my friends know anybody who has benefited from these “money bombs.”

I don’t mean to sound cynical, but it doesn’t really seem like “giving” when you’re purchasing some of the most blatantly glowing sycophantic PR imaginable. Seriously, what is the actual purpose of this article? Why was it written? It’s “news” that Bloomberg thinks it’s important that I like this person?
Tangent, but I always had a different understanding of the “thundering herd” problem; that is, if a service is down for whatever reason, and it’s brought back online, it immediately grinds to a halt again because there are a bazillion requests waiting to be handled.

And the solution to this problem is to slowly, rate-limited, bring the service back online, rather than letting the whole thundering herd go through the door immediately.
There are a few issues at play.

The biggest one is that the Taliban overtook the country far, far faster than anticipated. The Afghan military crumbled and lost ground about as fast as the Taliban could move its army.

So while there were and are plans to evacuate those who helped the US military, the visa process—tens of thousands of which are in process and which began in the sprint—they weren’t expecting for the situation to change in a matter of days. In June, the US intelligence community was predicting they could have six months post-leaving before the Afghan government collapsed.

Instead, the past week did it.

The US won’t be able to get everyone out, but they are making a good faith effort. They are adapting by, for example, asking allied countries to temporarily take people whose visas are in progress but not fully finished.

It’s a horrible situation. Thousands if not tens of thousands will be left behind. They and their families will be in danger.

But we also have to be careful of who we let into the country And the embassy and in-country forces have other priories as well like destroying sensitive documents—which will itself save lives of people who worked with us—and extracting allied diplomats, their families, etc.
But the idea that new housing is connected to increased water usage does not, as they say, hold water.

https://santacruzlocal.org/2021/02/15/does-more-housing-mean...

As Santa Cruz's population has increased, water usage goes down. Replacing old inefficient single family homes with terrible appliances and plumbing, with 4x as many people in a multifamily building with highefficiency appliances and faucets, and modern landscaping, will likely reduce water consumption.
I'm sure you have a lived experience that guides what you said, but this just hasnt been my experience.

We just use dependabot to issue PRs for updating dependencies, and we merge automatically when tests pass. It's never caused an issue.
Project Harp Space Gun
so is bottled water
At least this one is using modern 64 bit hardware with more RAM and disk space on the system, unlike the reMarkable 2 [0].

Great job from the Pine64 folks, looking forward to the second version of this product.

Downvoters: I'm trying to give you a good deal here. PineNote is almost the same price, if not cheaper and can store more files than the reMarkable 2's 8GB of internal storage. No need to rely on the cloud for external storage.

What is wrong with having another competitor coming in with an alternative that uses modern hardware even when it is close to the same price as the reMarkable 2? Think about it.

[0] https://support.remarkable.com/hc/en-us/articles/36000669953...
Show HN: The “tl;dr” of Recent Transformer Papers
One more vote here for flutter. Dart is not a language I’d want to use day by day but it gets the job done without getting much in the way. Tooling is great and there are a lot of libraries you can use for mobile platforms. Desktop support is a bit behind but is usable. You can also look into something like flutterflow.io to skip some boring parts of ui building. Haven’t used it much but since it allows you to export your code it does make building your initial pages much easier.
Someone already gave them a supply of Stinger missiles.
US have failed to build up any decent military outside of US, since its founding moment.

I am actually not surprised that US had not learned much over the years. The learning at US now is almost stagnant, especially in the political arena.
Actual study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896972...
An admittedly low bar to clear.
The (not anymore) secret talks with Taliban started under Obama already, but looks like in the end the Taliban smelled your weakness and saw the opportunity getting into power without listening what americans want from them.
It simply is immutable. That is how things are. I don't need to convince you of objective reality; you're free to try and unite everyone in peace and harmony to protect that pale blue dot.

And by saying "not mutable" i don't mean that is doesn't change. Of course everything changes, constantly moves, is in motion. It's just that you can't do jack shit about it or determine how it will change. You can't mutate the process as this process is beyond you.
PI was never reserved for peering sized entities... just get PI space.
Rails 7 is heading more that way.

https://world.hey.com/dhh/modern-web-apps-without-javascript...
I suggest going work on climate solutions. Every $1 of progress today will be worth $100,000 of impact within a decade. You're unlikely to capture that value personally of course, but that's not the point. Why take all the risk of needing to become a billionaire when you could have all the impact just by making hard career choices?
You don't want to necessarily play the same game as your competitors, but you should probably consider at least building up an understanding of what it is they're doing, why, and whether there are lighter versions of it that you can achieve. The 80/20 rule can go a long way, and a B2B company that "doesn't do sales" is probably leaving a lot of easy money on the table, depending what exactly that means (do you just not do high-touch individual pitching? Or no advertising at all? [Sounds like you do some of that at least, which is a kind of sales] Do you try to use existing customers to get referrals to new ones? If a potential customer does want to talk to someone do you support that? Etc).

The best CEOs I've known are basically sales people, and they all tell me that it's a skill you really can learn, even with a language barrier - I know several Indian tech folks who sell like crazy in the US even as I can barely understand their accents, so it's not an insurmountable barrier, though I do understand that's a bit of a special case since the Indian culture is very keen on teaching negotiation and sales as a life skill and a lot of the dealings end up being with other Indian entrepreneurs.
There is an one particular group of winner from all of this tho.

Why is it so hard for you and people to see?

All was there to make profit from the war for certain people? It was never about the peace and it can't be.

War profiteering is really really old proffession, isn't it? older than so many nations?
Many charitable causes are time sensitive. As you say though, it is a balance.
Author here. We do and did use autoscaling heavily but at a certain scale we just ran out of headroom on the smaller instance types we were using. Jumping to a much larger instance types meant that we will likely never run into those headroom issues again, plus solves other problems like faster spin up, better sidecar connection pooling and allows for a much higher hit rate on per instance caching.
Aw, beautiful project!

I don't seem to see "The eyes of the heart 2"[0]! Unfortunately the programmer only accepts additions via github and I don't have an account (yet)...

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_(TV_series)
I imagine the EU is “excited” to welcome the new immigrant wave. Whenever the US screws with a regime, they pay.
> So I have a to contest that a bit. It parallels the DOM in structure entirely. You can see how this is the truth when you want to have components outside of a parent-child hierarchy belong to the same ‘component’, you have to use this very abstract concept of a Portal, as in, nothing is natural once you start thinking out of the tree structure.

This isn’t a property of JSX, it’s a property of a virtual DOM. The former is typically used with the latter, but don’t have to be. SolidJS is an example of JSX without VDOM. It compiles to plain DOM operations, you only have a component tree during development. And like React, its compiler was designed to be render-agnostic and can be/is used in other environments.

It’s funny you should mention Portal here. I am working on a technique/hopefully eventual library to transparently (without requiring developer intervention) use Portals as a partial hydration solution—completely sidestepping the tree structure and only rendering interactive components. I believe it will be framework agnostic for anything that provides (or can provide) a hyperscript/createElement function and Portal-like functionality. And like those frameworks, it’s just a declarative data structure and can render to anything.

> Certainly you can map this api to a variety of other APis, which I’m sure is what they did with React Native, but it was built with the DOM tree structure in mind.

I’ve spent a lot of time (maybe too much time) looking at the underlying renderer abstractions of React, Preact, Solid, JSX Lite, several others.

The only one tightly coupled to DOM is Preact (and even that isn’t totally coupled). In fact that coupling is one of the major advantages Preact has in terms of package size.

React’s design has a separate renderer interface/abstraction that is primarily oriented around state reconciliation; the DOM implementation is just one of many.

Solid’s JSX (implemented in a Babel transform somewhat misleadingly called dom-expressions) is similarly decoupled from its DOM implementation with an abstract renderer interface. The difference is rather than state reconciliation it’s reactive.

JSX Lite’s render target is even more abstract, it renders an intermediate data structure that can be transformed to other component libraries, and even some design apps.

You can implement a JSX transform to basically any render target, without React. You can even skip the entire notion of state, events, interaction.

I even use it on my personal site to generate PNGs at build time! Unless you’re looking at my source code you’d never know it.
It's interesting because in normal React usage, the overhead of generating and throwing away a bunch of objects on each update is dwarfed by the cost of updates to the DOM

But in Three.JS the actual updates to the tree should be cheap, right? There's no reflow, you're just setting values in memory to be used by the next render frame. If so, that changes the calculus.

There's also the fact that in an app, it's rare for actual state updates (and therefore React renders) to happen on every frame; usually it's only on interactions. Maybe the occasional animation (if it can't be handled by native CSS animations). Whereas in graphical contexts like this, it's much more likely you'll have lots of objects in continuous motion (and therefore continuous re-renders).

I can see the productivity gains being worth it for a lot of simpler use-cases, but I'm skeptical about the performance claims when you start to get into complex scenes with lots of entities.
anti paywall version: https://web.archive.org/web/20210812181534/https://www.bloom...
It's debatable, because to make that amount of money you will maybe do bad things. Or at least thing that made people unhappy.

Extreme scenario : one person makes all the people of the world work for him during his entire life. And then give his wealth when he dies.

More harm or good ?