skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh, he's talking about himself and his friends too, make no mistake. In nurture-vs-nature, those who struggle to achieve something understand how large a role nurture plays, and those who win the "circumstance lottery" tend to insist that it was bestowed on them directly from God.

It's like talking about how there are "just a certain number of super-elite" players of pickle ball. It's conflating datasets of those who have been given access to the entire spectrum of attributes necessary to know and be good at pickle ball, with the vast seas of those who haven't. How can you say it's rare based on such a small data sample? If you were a pickle ball champion, would you really brag about how, "Let's face it, there are only a couple of us; we're just that good."
I find it hilarious that my credit information (aka social credit score) is practically public knowledge but somehow people on the no-fly list isn't.
Agreed!

After starting with screen.so, we realized firsthand the importance of having a name that's easy to remember and communicate.

Also, instead of viewing the domain as an expense, it's more of an enduring asset, which potentially increases its value over time.
Open Source fanatics are the worst. Even if all the software on your phone was Open Source, you wouldn’t have the mental bandwidth to ever verify you trust it. You’re just farming out your trust to a different set of people and hoping they’re more trustworthy than those with closed source. At best this MAY be reasonable because of incentive alignment but that’s super weak.

Not to mention the meaning of ownership is completely unrelated to ability to view the designs of a given object. I think I own the fan currently blowing air at me without ever having seen a schematic for its controls circuitry just fine and everyone for all of history has pretty much felt the same.
Not that I care for drawing circles in GIMP, but that's two steps -- one of which I didn't know was even possible.
For those interested, Bartle is the co-creator of the first MUD (multi-user dungeon, online text style adventure).

He made a brilliant explanation why is text the best medium to activate the imagination:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zctp972y_Eg
Since you presumably don’t trust Apple to scan your photos, it sounds like Apple might not be for you, then. Who will you move to?
Those are addressed to a court or government agency in a specific place. The advice offered isn't for a bunch of rando people on the internet across all number of jurisdictions. And it is only general advice about an area of law, normally at the appellate level, not specific fact-dependent advice to a real flesh-and-blood person. Amicus is also normally an opinion to sway the court on broad policy, not a determination of facts in a specific case.
If google is the middleman between me and all of the internet then I suppose a farmer is the middleman between me and dirt? Like what is even the point??

This seems marginally worse than saying every data pipeline is just a bunch of materialized views materializing slowly.
> When it comes to total cost of development, I think FP wins out even if you have to fill ecosystem gaps.

This is the core point I was disagreeing with:

In my experience (yes, I have used Elm and I enjoy various functional languages), this payoff never comes. There's always something more that needs attention, needs another developer, needs to be refactored because we forgot a use case, and so on.

And also in my experience, by the time you've invested the years of effort required to fill in gaps in the public package ecosystem, it's time to move on to the next niche language trend. I'd rather invest our time and energy in mainstream languages that have staying power, where we're not obligated to carry large parts of the open-source ecosystem by ourselves.
Iirc the rationale for doing it clientside isn't saving money, but maintaining encryption. If it's checked client side, Apple should never get unencrypted uploads unless they're suspected to be CSAM
Cox–Zucker Machine
> On the other hand, we just saw The Green Knight and that one will throw you.

I think I'm going to need at least two more viewings to get from "OK, I see it saying a lot of things about several themes or ideas, and I can tell what at least some of those themes or ideas are, but I have only the vaguest idea what it's saying about them" to "ah, now I get it."

Great movie.
I will believe them if they put their money where their mouth is: as a clause to iOS user agreement saying that if they ever use they ever use this functionality for anything other than CSAM or on anything other than iCloud photos, ever person who was subjected to this scan will be paid 100 million dollars by Apple. I will believe them if they put this clause in, and I know when they have changed their plans when they remove the clause. No more pinky swears, let's add some stakes for breaking the promise.
Stripe is probably the second biggest Ruby place after GitHub. They have pretty good sized teams working on Ruby tools like Sorbet.
84.3% of statistics are made up on the spot
It set the precedent for scanning server side. Which I don’t like but there’s really no way to avoid it anyway.

Now we have clientside scanning, and actually being led by the [note the scare quotes] “pro-privacy” two ton gorilla. It’s a whole different ballgame.
Better yet, hire for area under the curve
Sure, but this isn't exactly intuitive for new users - even those that have experience with others raster editing programs. The de facto expectation is that there is some dedicated facility for drawing shapes and lines.
This is a really fair point, and we will look into seeing what we can do to alleviate this resource usage when in the background.
Incredible thing about art is that people value it differently and for different reasons, so maybe the idea of "enrichment" isn't something universal?
What are Elm users using on the back end? FP or mainstream languages?
I'd be satisfied with a money back guarantee -- if they change the policy then I can return the phone for a full refund.
There business model has always been a threat to user privacy and press freedom, many people were just okay with it cause Apple told them otherwise. Open source is the only model where you can verify though, and so Apple was about blind trust and never about privacy.
Afghanistan's all-girls robotics team frantically trying to flee Taliban
> This seems ridiculous. If the government doesn't have the authority to mandate vaccinations, then banning unvaccinated people from participating in life should also be outside of its authority.

Are you trying to make a general argument, or an argument specific to just vaccinations.

If the former, there is quite a bit of historical precedent that says otherwise. For example,
the government does not have the authority to mandate that I have a motor vehicle, but they can ban me from walking or using a non-motorized vehicle on the freeways. I'm sure you can think of plenty of other examples where the government can require that you have something or meet particular conditions in order to do some activity or enter some place, but they cannot mandate that you have that something or meet those conditions.

> We should not be taking further steps to protect people who are able but not willing to be vaccinated.

Unvaccinated people increase risk for vaccinated people. There was a useful infographic in this Ars article [1]. Imagine two hypothetical states, each with a population of 1 million. State A is 70% vaccinated, state B 30%.

What you'd expect is state A to have 130 cases per week and B to have 5114.

In state A it would be 29 cases among the vaccinated and 101 among the unvaccinated. In B it would be 250 among the vaccinated, 4864 among the unvaccinated. That's a rate of 41 per million among the vaccinated in A, and 833 per million in B. A vaccinated person is 20 times as likely to get infected in state B.

For the unvaccinated, the rate in A is 337 per million and in B it is 6949. An unvaccinated person is 20 times as likely to get infected in B.

Hospitalizations would be 1.4 in A and 18.8 in B.

In A that would be 0.1 among the vaccinated and 1.3 among the unvaccinated. That's 0.14 per million and 4.3 per million respectively.

In B it would be 0.3 vaccinated hospitalizations per week and 18.5 unvaccinated. Those are rates of 1 per million and 26.4 per million.

A vaccinated person in B is 7 times as likely to be hospitalized as a vaccinated person in A. For unvaccinated people, it is 6 times.

Note that in either state, vaccinated people are much better off than unvaccinated, both in terms of cases and hospitalizations. But in B, the state with the low vaccination rate, both vaccinated and unvaccinated people are quite a bit worse off than those in B, the state with the high vaccination rate.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/pandemic-of-unvaccin...
As somebody in computational biology, I think it's important to note that a ton of cellular biology and even computational biology is "not reproducible." This could be anything from bad documentation of how something was run (computational scientists are often terrible at lab notebook culture), to having a model system that lived for a while and no longer exists in the form that initial discoveries were made with. Or it could be that there was just that one batch of reagents that reliably reproduced a phenomenon, and all future orders of the reagents no longer get the same phenomenon, and whatever the difference was is lost to time.

But I would claim that especially in biology, though this is less than ideal for writing up near little explanations of reality, it is still extremely useful for understanding what's going on. Scientific papers aren't meant to be ever-lasting truth, like a textbook. They are communications amongst specialists about "look here something cool happened that may be useful to you too." It is only through lots of work that a phenomenon can be established as widespread in biology, and sharing information before doing 10 years of work helps accelerate everything.

This is why I roll my eyes at complaints like that one about "foundational cancer research papers not being reproducible." It was written by scientists in industry who wanted to take a new paper and develop an entire drug program
around something particularly novel and surprising. Sure, that would be ideal if it worked, but the scientific literature is a lot more than a catalog of ideas ready for commercialization. Scientists in practice understand the limitations of taking a journal paper as gospel. They always try to get something working in their own hands before basing a lot of research off another paper.
It's 15% for small businesses that make less than $1 million in app proceeds.

PS if you are thinking of subscriptions, those are 30% for the first year, 15% afterwards. That's due to the high percentage of subscriber churn, so most subscriptions pay 30% and don't get to the 15% level.
Krita has improved a lot lately. It doesn't crash as easily as before.

When drawing with a brush, and then a line and then a brush again, an annoying window pops up complaining about the layers. I wish it would just select the appropriate last used layer when drawing with a brush again.

Also, the font window does not default to the last selected font. That's a bit cumbersome.

But all in all, Krita is getting there. Nice work, Krita people!
>I recall the NSA's XKeyscore was revealed to put Linux Journal readers in watch lists.

No, it didn't.

See this comment by grkvlt[0] and another debunking here[1]

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12070156

[1]https://blog.erratasec.com/2014/07/validating-xkeyscore-code...
I think the Pandora's box was open though and it may be moving faster post pandemic.
Sounds useful; I don't agree with the degree of cynicism with which this has been provided in this discussion.
I can see that could be true, and communications technology and bandwidth has improved, so perhaps the situation has changed. I would expect it to take years to manifest though, maybe even a decade or more.
Health Researchers Report Funder Pressure to Suppress Results
> Google (and plenty of other search engines) will all helpfully tell you that the slowest animal is the sloth, which is plainly incorrect if you just look at a video of a sloth and then look at a video of a worm.

Would your average person consider a worm an "animal". In the scientific sense, sure, pretty much everything living that is not a plant is an animal, but I think most people don't think of worms when they think of animals.

You can say, "well that's wrong", but that's kinda missing the point. Categories are somewhat arbitrary, and word usage can differ greatly from the scientific or dictionary definition when we're talking about colloquial usage.
I don't like AMP. However, if I wouldn't use a mobile browser which didn't basically do the same (MITM websites), my DATA plan would be over by the fourth day of the month.

The mobile web, after all these years, is still so heavy.

No, devs don't need all images to be for retina display, they don't need to bundle 50 MB of JS on ever pages, they don't need to load custom fonts for text, auto start videos, ... then why are webpages still so big on mobile? What happened to mobile first? Seems to me like it's just native app first on mobile then some amount of responsiveness for desktop websites...

what happened? I'm not willing to visit or spend money on a website that drains all my data plan while I'm browsing for products...

For all the SEO tricks websites use to drive traffic, it doesn't seem like mobile page speed is relevant in anyway when it comes to SEO or we would have a very different web...
>> there are LOTS of legal articles online - with folks name on them

Articles are not legal advice. They are opinions on the law applicable generally, rather than fact-based advice to specific clients. Saying whether apple is doing something illegal or not in this case, with a lawyer's name stamped on that opinion, is very different.
Spanner's High Availability Writes
That’s like saying the federal reserve is “private”. No, the NECMEC is not a private entity. Not only was it heavily funded/created by the gov, but more importantly it is granted special legal status. You and I can’t just spin up our own CSAM database. Nor do we have any laws that say that any companies aware of CSAM must send it to us and only us.
Yeah sounds about right. How did billions in foreign aid get squandered? Well, tons of middlemen (among them the Taliban) took their cut until nothing was left.
With that mindset, everything becomes a middleman. Baker? Middleman for your bread. Farmer? Middleman for your milk. Hardware store? Middleman for your metal. Metal smelter? Middleman for your ore. Oxygen? Middleman for your survival.

Citizens (taxpayers as you apparently like to refer to them) already have access to this information, along with access to a vast amount of other information. When given the choice to read up on government contracts and watching cat videos on GoogleTube they will choose the latter, not the former. Education would be a way to teach people how the world around them works, but that would cost money and it appears that some governments rather spend that money on other things (guns, oil, banks or whatever top spending your local government tends to have).
Not specifically for programmers per-se, but the book "The First 90 Days" by Michael Watkins from Harvard Business Review was very valuable for me when switching to a new company when I was still in the corporate world. It's targeted at managers, but I find the situations translate to nearly anyone. It talks about making the right connections, working with your new boss, and so forth. Your first 90 days leave a lasting impression on your co-workers and manager, so it may be worth perusing.
> Do you scrimp pretty hard?

No, my reasoning is to enjoy life by pursuing what I love and I don't want saving money to get in the way, even if it meant possibly cutting my funemployment short.

> Nice to be able to go on a little trip or eat out sometimes

100% agree! I'd caution against over indulging on consumption though, it can lead to a trap where you spend all your money and not gain much value. Instead of spending money on consumption, I try to optimize spending on money on things that increase my creative output value. I haven't eaten out in a while, in its place I've bought a nice pizza oven and I make pizzas for family and friends. They usually bring the finer things, so I don't spend much money when I'm hosting but I end up having an incredible amount of fun.

Also when I host we usually have alot of leftover food, which then goes into my compost pile and I get to build up more high quality dirt. Win win. I'm thinking of buying a duck next week for companionship and also to help around the garden.

> Most good stuff doesn't need to cost a lot though.

From my personal experience, most good stuff comes from investing in tools that increase your creative output. Those things are always worth the money
Thank you for the info, I will go buy and experiment about this.
Under the current regime, the answer to your question is basically "if the CDC says so then yes."
Intent to harm? Hard to prove. And not yet known.

Would you also extend this malicious prosecution to those who advocate for those with prior infections to get vaccines? That certainly is intent to harm if there is no provable benefit, and even a few VAERs reports.

The real issue is one of timing. Some people know, understand, internalize and regurgitate truths while others take years to catch up. I'm thinking government agencies. How dangerous would it be to start throwing people in jail for being ahead of established science?

How would you mind read someones comments and qualify them if they hold a dicotomy of views with varying probabilities in their head? Are they only allowed to profess what they believe to be true? What is most likely true? Do they have to present all 9 future possibilities and give them percentages and write a dissertation to back it up just to stay out of jail?

I have a better idea. Stop trying to be a hero, no one needs your saving, no one wants your saving. It's this kind of talk that makes people disengage, shut their mouths and become entrenched in their ways.

No longer is it about science, it's about resisting coercion.

And that's where we are today. Better some die today, to save us from tyranny of the crowd tomorrow.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7865979/Appl...

I wasn’t able to find the whole video though.

No time to watch, but. https://www.ces.tech/Videos/2020/Chief-Privacy-Officer-Round...
Consumers are probably in favor this, or don’t care.

The only people who are bothered are people claiming this is going to be misused by authoritarian governments.
What if a phone book gives a wrong phone number for you?
Why is the burden on you to contact the publisher? And who set the law on that? Is a ‘phone number’ some kind of property which can be owned? …and so on…

If you want to fix the photo issue, I would guess claiming the panel would be the easiest way.
If you want to fix it once and for all, you should probably advocate for a law that would fix that. Asking nonsensical questions online probably not gonna change anything.
If they were popular they'd be supported in your editor though.
Reflection in Golang
It's clear now that Apple is never going to back down. It's bittersweet, I'm sad to see them go but also excited for what I think will be a FOSS renaissance.
That's hilarious, and also symbolizes how bad google (have gotten?)is.
Efficiency, specialisation, scale. You doing one thing on your own vs. a collection of many of those 'things' you used to do solo, guess which one has more potential?

This does or course not mean that this applies all the time, everywhere, forever. But in this case, the 'startup' merely has a model of economy of scale, and then probably making sure the benefits are big enough that they can scrape a bit of a provision off of it. That way they can make money while still delivering something that has a higher value to a customer than the customer doing it themselves.
Hubspot; Complete Analysis of the Software
Brian Henderson on squeezing performance from your websites
Irrelevant. The process is the punishment.
> gfx-rs community’s goal is to make graphics programming in Rust easy, fast, and reliable.

Yet one of their main projects involves reliance on the web for graphics programming. This is the opposite of their stated goal in my opinion.
If your non-power-of-two sized hashtable is compile-time-constant, the modulus will get compiled into similarly fast code. It's only needed when the size isn't a constant.

Particularly for large open hashtables having to double the size of your table to go up to the next power of 2 is a really significant memory overhead... and if the size is variable, the multiply is a lot faster. It's a good technique.
I don't understand this response. He was told it was a "secret list." Why would you take such a tone in response to him saying he might not have a problem since he doesn't know about the list? It's a hypothetical about a secret list, and since he doesn't immediately agree with the conclusion, you browbeat him about not having the long arm of the law drop down on him, etc.

More importantly, this:

> Spoken like someone who hasn't had the long arm of the law drop in on them before, or a person who "doesn't care about that liberty anyway, so why not vote it away?"

Who are you quoting here? No one said this at all.

I'm actually disgusted by your comment and the logic you present in it.
Admittedly, Kubrick is the better example here than Lynch: 2001 is a stellar example of both "Their motivations for doing that are up to you" (w/r/t HAL's behavior) and "It means whatever you want it to mean" (Kubrick quite famously refused to provide any sort of guidance whatsoever as to how it should be interpreted)

For Lynch, Mulholland Drive was on my mind--probably since it was mentioned in the article--as the ending (and, honestly, the narrative structure as a whole) requires the viewer to bring quite a lot of assuming and surmising to the table in order to arrive at something coherent. Perhaps the OP meant to purposefully exclude explicitly surreal and abstract works from their critique, but that's certainly not the tone I got from their post.

Perhaps a better counter example could've been Kelly Reichardt's filmography, as she is also quite clearly a meticulous and thoughtful filmmaker (I remember hearing a profile of her on some NPR show a number of years ago that talked about the amount of time she spent getting even the ambient bird songs in Certain Women accurate, or reading her comments about how she would've filmed First Cow in a different aspect ratio if she had known COVID was going to keep it from being widely seen in theaters), but typically cuts off the narrative abruptly, leaving plenty of loose ends dangling: Meek's Cutoff and First Cow are probably the best examples.

As an aside, I feel like the point of Nolan leaving the ending of Inception with an open-ended yes-no question is intended to highlight that, from the character's perspective, the answer no longer matters. I dislike the film for other reasons, and don't particularly like Nolan's screenplays in general, but that particular choice seems pretty reasonable in the broader narrative context of the film.
I expected a more in-depth technical paper with a clear project vision, but what I saw was basically Reframing Superintelligence Comprehensive AI Services as General Intelligence (2019) by K. Eric Drexler: https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reframing/ ... with no citation or otherwise credit given to this prior work.
In the post-GPT3 era, discussing this path of technological development is as straightforward as trivial extrapolation. Expecting things to develop this way in the beginning of 2019, before GPT2, would require prescient analysis.