skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
(author of the blog post here, personal opinion)

Tree-sitter is much more general (and I guess way more complex) and most likely cannot use some tricks we use for "simple" bracket pair parsing. For example, we can almost always re-use nested bracket pairs when characters are inserted/deleted, because the bracket pair language is so simple and it does not matter where a bracket pair is in the AST. But when parsing C# and adding a single opening bracket at the beginning of the file, I doubt namespace/class declarations stay namespace/class declarations.

Also, long lists in Tree-sitter seem to cause linearly growing incremental parsing time - that's why we use balanced (2,3) trees.
You can try it out on their playground [1] by selecting JavaScript and adding some 100k `{}`s. On my machine, adding a single character takes 50ms. When there are 200k bracket pairs, it takes 100ms. When all these brackets are contained in a single bracket pair however, adding characters after this single root pair is fast again (<1ms).
But to be honest, Tree-sitter is still mind boggling fast.

[1] https://tree-sitter.github.io/tree-sitter/playground
I can't wait until they do. TextMate grammars suck and other editors such as NeoVim are already starting to move to TreeSitter which will provide "proper" grammars for languages.
2020-2021 has shown me that most people happen to be 'fair weather fans' of civil rights. Everyone claims to love free speech but when suppression of speech opposing their own worldview comes into play, they suddenly dither and fall back on other rationalizations to justify the censorship.

Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'hate speech'.
Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's 'misinformation'.
Well, it's not free speech being violated when it's a private company doing the censorship. Et cetera. I'm sure you've seen you're own examples of this.

It's pretty disheartening, but enlightening nonetheless. I have a much better understanding of historical moral panics and cessions of freedoms. Whereas I used to wonder how some societies ever gave into such pressures, I now realize it's not that hard to persuade the average citizen into accepting such things.
Ah, the misleading comparison. We are talking about freedom of expression and then you conveniently conflate it with the freedom to have work or business relationships with an enemy or sanctioned foreign entity.
The original point still apply, you have freedom in the USA to defend and express your favorable opinion even when this goes counter the government interests. You could even protest against the us military during a war.
You can do this in China unlike you really want to be imprisoned and tortured.
China is a dictatorship. América is a democracy. Sure, there are plenty of abuse from the police, the federal government, but those abuses once exposed and questioned in the court of law, have severe consequences for their perpetrators. China engages routinely in torture, censorship and genocide, a truly criminal state.
Are you now more interested in child pornography because that's not allowed on youtube?
Was going to comment that it is not science that solves political issues, but rather, engineering. Even logos, ethos, and pathos together do not prevail over trebuchet.
I am not sure what we want YouTube to be.

Sometimes we want it big enough to fight against state-level censorship; sometimes we want it small enough to obey anti-trust or privacy law.
What if ISIS was right about the nature of God and we will all suffer hellfire in the afterlife?

There’s no obligation for YouTube to give terrorists a platform. Regarding a booster shot, I’m sure they will make reasonable calls, nearly exclusively only silencing bad-faith actors. Much like their policy towards CP or terrorist content.
My dream technology would be a way to make my body just ... stop, if Something Bad happened, like all my blood falling out, until someone stumbled upon my non-rotting corpse, patched the holes, and filled it back up.

It's such bullshit that if I stop living for even a little bit my body melts into useless slag like an engine running without oil.
It amazes me that we can create a crisis out of such a small measurement
> too many supposedly trustworthy people lie straight to the public face just to maintain the narrative

This is particularly apropos in the wake of Russell Brand's recent video on FB's Fact Checkers for Covid 19 vaccine information [1] funded by BigPharma, having a huge financial stake in bigpharma, and intentionally hiding their funding by BigPharma, and not adding a notification that the fact checkers are in fact funded/invested by/in BigPharma.

I am starting to read completely disinterested 3rd party sources more, because weighing the pros and cons of a thing is more challenging when the supposed experts are deliberating concealing material relationships. Some old Emeritus professor, already retired, with several phds and just a passing bit of information often gives great criticism of a thing without having any stake in the outcome.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44B-OJcOXxc
I woulb be surprised if even 1% of the videos being pulled out are moderate voices, but that's the price of moderation, in order to enjoy any freedom you need to stay alive but if you get killed by disinformation you lose them all, so in such cases as this one moderation of mass communication channels is the lesser evil even if a few reasonable people get their content pulled out.
LinkedIn censors journalist over China content, ‘disturbing offer’ to reinstate
> Months ago he was insisting that the people who had contracted COVID-19 and who had antibodies in their system may not need the vaccine. Now, we have a number of studies coming out to support that.

No such study exists, please link to the primary research.
Vaccination always offers stronger protection than getting the virus [1], and more importantly, even if they offered equivalent protection for 99% of people, the portion of the additional 1% of people without a vaccine who show up at a hospital are going to be much sicker than the vaccinated with breakthrough infections and more likely to need to go or stay at a hospital for an extended period of time (29x more likely [2]), which our healthcare system cannot support. We've had to ration care and kick out cancer patients out of hospitals [3], who have subsequently died as a result of lack of care, but we should allow for limited resources to be used up by the willfully unvaccinated? I have personally had family members in need of critical care have care rationed due to hospitals being full with 99%+ unvaccinated folks. So much for the personal responsibility crowd living up to their slogans.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-pr...
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/24/cdc-study-shows-unvaccinated...
[3] https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article25394605...
___________ is a blunt instrument of the elites to shut down any discussion that threatens their narrative.

It's a propaganda technique. If the opposite of wokeism etc. were popular and accepted by a large number of people, propagandists would use that. They would, for example, brand any dissent as "not white" or "gay" or "miscegenated" or "degenerate" etc. They did in fact do this generations ago.

If we lived in a super-religious society any dissent would be satanic. This version is still leveraged within the evangelical community.

All narratives will be weaponized by propagandists regardless of whether the narrative itself has objective merit when considered in good faith.

"It will be weaponized. No exceptions."
Gmail's mobile changes irritated me enough to switch over to the barebones Samsung Email app on my phone. I'd suggest having your dad use an email client app to avoid disruptive UI changes on the email vendor's app.
There was a second room where they led the inspectors with true lab eqpt while the other had the inaccurate machines (according to the book)
Conflict is not what you see on TV. Both physical and legal conflict come with tremendous long term cost and risks.

Physical conflict is incredibly dangerous. You can accidentally kill someone or injure them for life in a street fight, thereby ruining your own life. Even if you “win” there’s something awful that stays with you and drags you down for a long time. Being in a job that requires conflict- police officer, soldier, etc - has what I think is a hidden cost that we don’t truly appreciate.

Legal conflict is similar and can take years. If comes with a huge long term psychological cost that sucks away all your emotional energy - the energy that fuels your creativity.

Often in conflict there is no clear winner, making many outcomes unsatisfying and unresolved.

Unless you’ve dealt with conflict in its various forms, you truly have no idea of the costs and risks. It has been glamorized by film and television, and most people are quick to threaten to sue someone or to “kick their ass”, but they have no clue what they’re getting into.

Work to avoid conflict, even if it comes with some costs, until you positively absolutely have no choice but to engage.
The only reason You can watch any video for free on Youtube at all is because Youtube chooses to let you do so. It is not a public forum for debate, it is a business.
Note that there are some areas that may not be damaged or the code is unreadable. The author avoided the big squares that are obvious to the eye and are required for positioning but there are also timing lines and metadata areas that are required for decoding.
One Man’s Endless Hunt for a Dopamine Rush in Virtual Reality
This should have happened months ago. The damage is done
I feel like 'malinformation' describes this kind of thing more accurately, as it is a style of misinformation that has directly harmful effects that can be fatal.

It's another level, compared to misinforming people about other things.
I don't mean so say that criticisms aren't valid; just that perfect is frustratingly often the enemy of better.

For example, the status quo can be justified by "it seems obvious that" rather than being evidence-based. In practice, single or double blind is very often not actually blind [1], in which case it's hard to argue that it would be any different than transparency. Likewise, a new solution "creates all kinds of conflicts of interests and biases", without even considering whether the existing CoIs and biases are any better. Likewise, if people who game the system today have a low reputation, why would the same not hold true in a new system? Likewise, does anonymous peer review actually improve the quality of the reviews (e.g. [2])?

It's good not to blindly embrace something new, but I think it's important to withold judgement too, and see how it plays out in practice, and to make an effort to compensate for the prejudice people typically have towards the status quo.

And yes, absolutely agreed that much more needs to be addressed to improve science. But I also very much take issue with the idea that peer review is fine as-is.

[1] https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2017/10/31/the-fractured-lo...

[2] Heading "quality of feedback": https://plos.org/resource/open-peer-review/
Free speech! As long as we are in agreement with each other.
Do you know what you know?
> Are we going to argue wether spam filtering is censorship too?

It certainly is censorship, but users opt in.

> There are other platforms to post my video to. Hell, I can create another one. I can create 50 others.

Its not just YouTube. Its their platform, and your hosting provider, and your DNS provider, and your payment processor, and your bank. Consider what happened to Parler.

Lets not cheer on the loss of a public good because we could theoretically replace it some day.
Yes, that's exactly what's frustrating about Python.

It's not the performance per se, that doesn't really matter for Python's use cases, it's that the performance charateristics of your program are so erratic it doesn't feel like the pieces are fitting together. Denotationally equivalent operations having drastically diverging operational interpretations means that changing anything is a nightmare.

If you have an API call that does what you want, Python is basically C++. If you don't, you're paying a 100x penalty.

Most of the times performance doesn't matter, and when it doesn't, life is great. When it does matter, the situation feels worse than it actually is because optimizing Python is such a fight.
>Similarly but unrelated, let's also ban drug ads on cable TV.

Amen to that statement... Is there any more obvious cue that news is all a profit machine than a half hour repeating commercials about reverse mortgages and anti-depressants that cause diarrhea?
Turn on showdead in your profile and you'll be able to see it.
Because the rules allow us to send out copies of the final article in "personal correspondence with other researchers" but limit upload to preprint servers (arxiv) and institutional repositories (our own website) to the last version that we submitted, without the services of the journal, i.e. before language editing and layouting.
> If you are producing videos at such a rate that you as the producer cannot actually save the content, then maybe you're doing it wrong.

You can film 8K video on a smartphone these days… but only about 15 minutes of it before you fill up the phone’s internal storage.

If you don’t have a computer with a big hard drive to dump the video off on, you’re basically stuck shoving the video out to “the cloud” and then deleting the local copy so that you can film more. Whether that means pushing the raws to a private object store with an online video editing system hooked up to it, vs. uploading to YouTube where they transcode the raw to lower quality and then throw away the original, it still creates a dependence on the continued existence of some cloud provider.
The lab leak theory was "misinformation" until it wasn't. They say "listen to the experts" and then censor actual doctors and scientists who say the wrong things. An "expert" is apparently someone who has a degree and holds the approved views, everyone else is spouting "misinformation."
Well, any ISIS content on the platform could be considered recruitment material. If in the content of the video no crime has been committed, YouTube would not be justified in banning ISIS recruitment videos or any of their content.
Probably because the purpose of SpaceX is to build a city on Mars, and Starlink is a prototype for a communications and positioning system to be put in place around Mars before there are any facilities on the Martian surface. Remember this is an Elon Musk company.
I agree with most of what you said but my opinion is that right wing media, radio show hosts and podcasters have pushed it too far this time by peddling conspiracy theories that are doing actual harm to populace at large.
I experimented with ObjectBox a bit, but I decided against using it because it isn't open source. The language wrappers are apache2 but the core library is only provided as a binary blob. I think this is bad because you can't inspect how it works, fix bugs, port it to new archs, integrate it fully into your build system, etc. Also, every cursor operation must call into their function entry points (as opposed to being inlined in your code for example).

Instead, I've been working on my own library which also uses LMDB and flatbuffers. It's C++ only and still a WIP, but in case anyone else is interested, it's here: https://github.com/hoytech/rasgueadb
What's going to actually convince people? I don't think it's six months of watching YT videos. Is that one extra video really going to change things?

It seems more like blind contrarianism.
CFTC slaps $1.25M fine on crypto exchange Kraken for illegal offerings
Can you imagine if the previous generation had this opinion?

"Television isn't the place to learn about the flaws in astrology, or about astronomy, the big bang, conflicting visions of human progress, galileo, and the like... we are totally fine in banning Cosmos and keeping children from learning any alternative to jesus christ our lord and savior"
I don't get this.
Here in Germany for example holocaust denial is illegal.

Assume you are in a country where it's not, say the USA. Assume you slowly witness a rise of naziism that as usual comes with holocaust denial. Now the USA make holocaust denial illegal. Would that make you reconsider if the holocaust really happened?

What the anti-vaxxers and their misinformation are doing has lead to the absolutely unnecessary loss of thousands of lifes. Depriving them of any platform is morally imperative.
Dude, the "root cause" is that profit is part of the equation. There is no "right algorithm" for controlling the public conversation. All fascism is bad fascism.

Is that overboard?
We know vaccinated people still replicate and transmit the virus. So the only reason to get the vaccine is to potentially lessen the symptoms. With lessened symptoms you will be less likely to add to the clogged up the hospital system. Should we also ban food ads that contribute to obese or diabetic folks clogging up the hospitals? What about people choosing to ride motorcycles? Kids trampoline ads? Why do we still have cigarettes?
Well, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13056334
About a decade ago my alcoholic Dad was being an alcoholic. It escalated. He threatened me with a weapon. I headbutted his two front teeth out. I was aiming for the nose but he dodged back a little, I do regret the teeth.

Very effective way to end a fight to be honest. It's a bit of a shocking thing to see blood wise and puts the person immediately on their arse so you can get out of there. Nobody got hurt any further.

He died a couple of years ago after his liver switched off, never did try getting off the booze. As he would say; such is life
We have large online retail sellers of books in France (ex: Fnac, Decitre etc) but they don’t want to build the same stocking capacities than Amazon. Therefore most books are out of stock at these retailers and Amazon has a crushing lead online. On the other hand large publishers traditionally are very well connected to the political world. So I see why they want to break Amazon’s lead.

On this other hand the local book stores and their customers represent a vocal minority, mainly consisting of left leaning educated voters. This demographic is probably interesting especially since 2022 is election year…
Exactly. The "web-safe" color cube used on the 1998 web was designed by a physicist. The color palette used on the 1983 NES was designed by somebody who had a high level of color understanding.

If you split up the rgb cube evenly you wind up with many shades of green that are somewhere between "makes me want to puke" and "this is what you see when you get hit with a green laser pointer."
Ah, I didn't say that, did I? I am just tired of having the mask debacle from early 2020, and that is the only real issue that is constantly brought up to discredit the WHO/CDC.... because as you said, people make mistakes. I, for what it's worth, trust people that correct their mistakes over people that never do. because the latter never learn. And they have the tendency to put as much theories out as they can. Because then they have a high chance of being right at least once. Doing that long enough and they can claim to be right all the time. Which, obviously, they aren't. But it's incredibly hard to call them out on it.
I could never read in silence!
This is a problem that decentralised protocols such as IPFS theoretically solve. You reserve x GB on your storage to cache the content you consume and can optionally "pin" content to keep it on your disk indefinitely.

The problem is there are privacy concerns with this type of system as it's possible for anyone to find out who has consumed particular content.
Neo-fascism, plain and simple. If this feels hyperbolic, I’m just applying definitions. The government has already admitted it colludes with these companies to censor. Time to build. Time to exit.
Part of the heavy lifting is in C extensions, but part is in Python code that's hard to migrate to C, and that's the part that takes more time now after migrating the low hanging fruit. I'd get a bit of benefit, but far from what I'd get if the GIL wasn't a thing.
Related: "Why Science Can't Settle Political Disputes" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693269
Agree, but that's the reason why even replacing nuclear research with something else wouldn't have improved at all renewables (au contraire).

Science is incremental. You wouldn't have any of the new materials research without nuclear research. Any. Because you can't understand them if you don't understand the atom, you can't observe them without the electronic microscope, you can't test the interactions without a collider.

Also, scientific discoveries are either focused by the state/profit, or happenstance, luck and opportunity (if Einstein did not work at Bern's patent office, we wouldn't have taken an interest on time and space). And all the new material we think can revolutionize storage are lucky breaks. Supraconductors, especially the new ceramic ones, are complete luck. You could've throne any amount of money on graphene research, i'm pretty sure you wouldn't have had the technology we have now without luck (and electronic microscope).

I'd say "but you're right, the war budget...", but i forgot that the war economy gave use the basics of the computer, new tools, and the cold war was even better for scientific discoveries.
Great feature. Love it. Got the notification when I first turned off my iPhone 13.
At this point I'm not hesitant about the vaccine, but getting it would only validate the heavy-handed approach we're seeing wrt censorship.
Free speech used to mean the right to say anything without persecution. Does it now mean the right to have ones opinion be actively globally distributed by a third party?

This is very much about fighting two viruses: one biological and the other one informational. We agree to limit contacts between people to stop the one but do not accept the same method to stop the other. Why? In both cases it is vital to ensure the measures to not cross certain boundaries and are rolled back.
I'm curious, does this case get so much publicity because it touches upon all the tropes of Silicon Valley? 'Fake it till you make it', 'move fast and break things', 'disrupt the markets', etc.

IMHO, this business model is fine when the only things at risk are venture capital and you're trying to sell more widgets, but when it comes to life and safety - bad news.
I’m not sure if this is true. I think there has always been restrictions to free speech, it’s just what’s not allowed has changed over the years. Try having pro Soviet material in the 70s.
Are you sure it wasn't the other way around?

Weren't they pretending to operate their own equipment while the real equipment was 'behind the curtain' ?
Interesting, I also meant this more generally. I'm surprised VSCode as a whole hasn't begun integrating TreeSitter for broader syntax parsing (beyond coloring brackets, braces, and parens).

Will have to look more into the linear growth you mention.
> How many people make their vaccination decision because of Youtube content?

Every one of the four anti-vaxxers that I personally know. I don't have any objective stats and this is just a single anecdote, sure.
I don't dispute that those things happen and are horrible, but I believe "as often as not" is incorrect. What's your sample? If your sample is a forum where people tell conversion-to-atheism stories, it's not representative. Almost of the religious people I've met feel that way about their church.

Admittedly, my sample is surely not representative either. In particular people stuck in a church community against their will probably don't bring it up a lot with people they don't know very well.

FWIW I'm an atheist. I recently wished I was able to invoke some kind of God concept while talking to a colleague who this year lost her mother, her boyfriend, and two other family members to Covid. I intend to look for something entitled Prayer for Atheists, if it exists.