skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> To me this sounds completely bizarre. Why should a software project be apolitical and without values?

Not all software projects, but certainly some software projects, specifically those trying to create infrastructure.

Over time, we have accumulated some wisdom that society is worse off when we try to politicize a bridge, so that only people with certain beliefs are allowed to cross the bridge, or make telephone calls, or use electricity, etc.

We want everyone to be able to make the telephone call and to cross the bridge. Even if they are going to commit a crime and the bridge helps them commit that crime. Even if they are not committed to western liberal values.

It is this type of apolitical treatment of infrastructure that provides numerous benefits necessary for the infrastructure to thrive:

1. You can't sue the bridge builder or telephone carrier if someone uses the infrastructure to do Bad Thing. This is necessary for the infrastructure to exist. Imagine if a telephone company had to worry about a kidnapper using their phones to make calls.

2. Much infrastructure becomes more useful as more people use it (network effects), in which case the infrastructure should not be fragmented where each tribe has to build their own rival infrastructure. It's more efficient for rival tribes to put aside their differences and have everyone use the same infrastructure. This is especially true in increasing scale situations.

3. Infrastructure that requires long term support and maintenance through a variety of different regimes will need to prove that it is not favoring one regime over another. For the bridge this can be government, but for a project like Tor, they will need the contributions of software developers that do not believe in the western liberal project together with developers that do. And certainly for users running exit nodes this applies as well.

Now against these benefits are the costs. Does it hurt you that your political enemy is allowed to also use the telephone to coordinate?

Well, from a pure power point of view, you would like to dominate and cripple them, but from the point of view of the infrastructure, no, them making a phone call does not prevent you from doing the same. So in that type of a situaiton, it's best to have a truce and say everyone is allowed to use and contribute to the infrastructure.

Now in some situations you can't have a truce because your hatred is so strong. Then you have war. That's when you deny your enemies access to your bridges while blowing up their bridges.

And they do the same to you.

But one thing about that state of affairs is that it's never good for infrastructure. When you politicize infrastructure, you get less of it.

So no, it's not a good idea to try to make everything political. This is true regardless of anyone's moral intuitions. It's an objective fact that society is better off when certain things are not politicized, especially infrastructure services.
the (grim) joke in Italy being that any force that even remotely has some sort of police duties (and there are many), carries a gun, even glorified traffic wardens.

But yes, machine guns and rifles are only carried by units on special duties, normally anti-terrorism (and unfortunately Italy has a long history of internal terrorism).
Don't responsibly disclose, it's not worth the hassle anymore. Unless somewhere has a paid bug bounty program that has a good reputation I just use an anonymous email and send the bug to https://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/
This is why radio is so important, for moments like this, where all the standard ways of communication are shut down.
I don't think politicians are bothered about being "heckled" online. I suspect they are fully aware that, as long as they stay out of it, it's us mugs who spend our time "communicating" online, while they set the real-life rules that we all follow.

I used to strongly support the principles of free, uncensored, and anonymous online speech, but it never seems to actually provide any benefits. I now strongly believe that in-person social skills and networks are much more useful, when it comes to getting things done.
> I wonder how you define "competition"? Because there were way more operating systems in use then, and the industry was far more fractured.

There is way more competition now:

+ Linux (countless distributions)
+ FreeBSD
+ OpenBSD
+ NetBSD
+ DragonflyBSD
+ HardenedBSD
+ Darwin
+ Minix 3 (which wasn't free when Linux was released)
+ Illumos
+ OpenIndiana
+ Nexenta OS
+ SmartOS
+ ...and many others based off OpenSolaris / Illumos

This isn't even an exhaustive list of UNIX-like platforms that are new since Linux and free.

Don't conflate standardisation of the industry with a lack of options. More options do exist today and are in use (eg some games consoles run FreeBSD, Netflix uses BSD, Nexenta is used in some enterprise storage solutions, Darwin may not be used in any free capacity but macOS is clearly used heavily by HN readers, and so on and so forth).

Moreover, I've used FreeBSD, Solaris, OpenSolaris, Nexenta and OpenBSD on production systems over the last 10 years (and the list gets more esoteric if we look past 10 years). So just because you might exist in a Linux-only ecosystem it doesn't mean that's the case for the entire IT industry.
> cannot help but feel like the strong push for rust in the kernel is overstepping some sort of boundary

There's no "strong" push; the RIIR narrative doesn't actually belong to the Rust community (which I've found very pragramatic), but it's so inherently inflammatory that the general public associated it to the Rust community nonetheless.

What's actually happening is that some major projects are evaluating - slowly - whether Rust could be integrated in some areas. Besides the kernel, another high-profile project is QEMU.

> Why, if C is so bad, wasnt one of the alternatives introduced to slowly replace C in the kernel years ago? Zig, D, Ada, ... they all offer massive benefits over C.

Because of the "well-known value proposition" that Rust brings.

I'm continuously mystified, now that unsafe memory management has been unambiguously shown to be the major factor in vulnerabilities, how safe memory management is still not recognized as the highest priority (which doesn't imply to rewrite in Rust/Golang/etc) by everybody.
Those are opt-in in the final (12.0.1) release and the sane tabs are back..
I see an important part of the debate is recognising there are two distinct parts to privacy

Secrecy is where you prevent others from having knowledge of a piece of data, or explicitly share it with a limited set of others whom have the same ability to shield the knowledge.

This is not privacy obviously.

1. loss of control of knowledge.
This is often the bit we worry about. We want to keep control over our data and data about us. But mostly this ship has sailed. Even if there was some reduction in tracking cookies and so on, the usefulness of widespread data collection (from traffic warnings to epidemiology) is enough for most of us to want those benefits in society

2. loss arising from others knowledge or use of data

To me this is the kicker. The use by others of our non-secret data-about-us should be at the level of medical data - held and used in the patients best interests.

We are entering a world of trolley problems - from how to code driverless cars reactions to what is an is not acceptable use of private data.

We need to recognise there is huge upside value in the tracking that happens now (and I hope we will see those benefits whatever) but there are pollution-like downsides and we can massively limit those.

The cost benefit analysis should make society judge the loss of a few million(#) in advertising revenue worth this

(#) I am dubious about the value assigned to privacy-breaching tracking to drive advertising versus say using the words people type in a search alone to give them a result.
That's true. But that's the nature of all influenzas: your immunity is only as good as the last generation of infectious agent.

The reason they choose the spike protein is because it's a vital component in its current state. So to change it and avoid immunity means covid can no longer infect human cells. The only way around this is to radically change the spike protein AND to miraculously find a new spike protein that works for humans.

That's why around 1bn people have been vaccinated, exposed to covid 19 and no new spike protein that circumvents the vaccines has evolved yet.

Such a change to the nucleocapsid is much easier to make as it doesn't need to interact with human cells.
A pen maker is just as entitled (and socially obligated, in my opinion) to reflect on the uses of his tool as a software developer is, just as all tool makers are. Some tools are exclusively used for ill, some primarily used for ill, some dual-use, some designed for good and sometimes used for ill, some overwhelmingly good with occasional abuses.

Opiates are a tool, and the moral calculus of being involved in their industrial production differs from the production of pens. Guns are a tool, and the moral calculus of being involved in their industrial production differs from the production of pens. Some things are designed for apolitical reasons, and yet a politics emerges around their use. The Tiki Torch guys didn't build their product to be political, and yet when they saw their product used in political images in Charlottesville, they felt the need to restate their values, and acknowledged that their product had become enmeshed in politics. That's how things work.

Even the parent comment doesn't draw the distinction fully enough. Knives overwhelmingly serve a prosocial purpose, humans have an almost infinite need to cut objects, especially as it relates to food production. But the use of knives in the context of interpersonal violence does merit reflection, product updates, and an expression of values. I think knife companies should and likely do reflect on the full set of uses of knives.

None of this prescribes an answer to any given question, I am not the kind of person who thinks that someone should be forced to declare a particular thing. But your insistence that the process of the question itself is "ruining discourse in the west" is not a very thoughtful take.

If the makers of Tor have considered the myriad ways in which their tools are used and want to support some ways, disavow others, and design for or against others, I think that's great, and hardly ruining anything.
“A little thicker” is a bit of an understatement. At its thickest point, it’s apparently 71% thicker than the thickest point of the 16-inch MacBook Pro (2021), and 55% thicker at its thinnest point compared to the thickest point of the Mac. That’s a huge difference for portable electronics.
They didn't recognise the number? The whole plurality of the single hiker?
Joseph McCarthy.
That's false. America has probably the most advanced healthcare in the world. Almost every new treatment is invented and made available there. Other countries don't provide that cutting edge stuff for free, they simply don't provide it at all. I live in New Zealand which has free healthcare but we sometimes hear about people pressuring the government to pay for some expensive new drug, or a dying person using crowdfunding to pay for what the government won't, or complaining they have to spend their own money flying to America for private treatment because no doctor in New Zealand is capable of that special thing. But those are the exceptions that get into the news. Mostly people just die when it's too expensive. Our standard for "treatable illnesses" is lower than the reality of what technology can do.

At the extreme end of diminishing returns, I'd guess that most deaths of elderly people in hospital are preventable because machines to perform the function of failed heart, lungs, kidneys, GI tract, etc. exist. But it's expensive, and countries with socialized healthcare don't pay for it for everyone because they don't have infinite money. My dad died this way when his lungs filled with fluid while in hospital.
The thing to understand about stock price is that it is based on perception and not necessarily on potential. Ultimately it boils down to whether you think someone will be willing to pay a higher price for this at a future point in time more than whether you think the company has potential.

Retail investors, and particularly first time investors, in the market have been growing rapidly. These kinds of investors tend to be less careful with where they invest, relying primarily on the media, word of mouth and hype than on fundamentals. With enough people you have a critical mass, creating a chain reaction that's impossible to stop. This is literally free investment for a company. As a serious investor, you would be foolish to ignore this. Even if the company was not positioned to do well earlier, this new found cash flow gives them a huge edge. And thus this creates a sort of a self fulfilling prophecy where more and more people invest, because they believe everyone else is investing, and because everyone else is investing the company will surely become #1 irrespective of where they are today, and inadvertently propelling the company to become #1 in the process.
Some of the premises in your post are incorrect.

--

> The argument seems to be that we have rights because the UN says so.

That's not the argument. The reasons we have human rights is because individual countries decided to implement them.

The Universal Declaration itself is not legally binding. It's just an agreement that participating countries decided to implement into their own laws.

UN can't force countries who didn't vote into it to implement. They can't even force countries who actually voted for it to implement it.

However, individual countries have the freedom to complain or stop trading with countries who don't implement, or on countries that implement but don't follow. Out of the things that countries do to each other, this seems like a minor thing.

--

> Who or what endowed the UN (or anyone else) with the prerogative to declare human rights?

Nobody.

Anyone can declare human rights. I've declared a few myself yesterday during tea time.

The Universal Declaration carries its weight because it was made and approved by the countries themselves who took part in the UN at a certain time. It's not as if some crazy person at the UN has the power to change something in the document at their will. And even if they did, so what?
The point was to use compile-time checks instead of a MMU to separate kernel services.

The concept is interesting (if maybe untested) it allows to have explicit opt-in sharing while blocking accidental sharing
They haven't listed talk or stand-by times... I wonder if those numbers are anything special. That is stand-by of at least week preferably a few...
That sounds like a warm place for a anti-social person.
>elite institutions from governments to media to academia are losing their authority and monopoly control of information to dynamic amateurs and the broader public

No, they're not. The internet has allowed everyone to be effectively isolated and siloed, and fed pre-approved messages, all while fooling everyone into thinking they are more "connected".
“They” has been gender neutral singular for longer than you have been learning English. It’s use, however, seems to have been on a rise.

This is no different than “you” also being both singular and plural.
That's a singularly shitty power grid right there :)

Charging overnight even at 2-3kW is plenty for most people, that's usually enough to get you a good 100-200km away from the hotel and to a fast charger (or your next destination).
And why does the US have one of the highest per capita incarceration rates on earth?

23¢ an hour, maybe?
I used these search terms "reflect no code" and the first hit was https://reflect.run :)

https://www.google.com/search?q=reflect+no+code
>>It was built from the ground up with replication in mind.

Because it was inspired by one of the first document-based, nosql, replicated databases - Lotus Notes.

https://www.wired.com/2012/12/couchdb/
I think it will matter where the model in C does not match the hardware in terms of CPU, cache, and auxiliary processors. Maybe the Rust developers will more quickly adjust to the assembly and machine language of chip developers.

As an outsider, it sounds like C just tries to be a good enough assembly language to save people some time.
Incredible! Interesting that it does so well with such high disk loading, four relatively small counterrotors.

Specs are at https://jetsonaero.com/

jetson weight 86KG / 190LBS
maximum pilot weight 95KG / 210LBS
Dimensions 2845mm / 2400mm / 1030mm
Width when folded 900mm
Flight time (85kg/187lbs pilot weight) 20 minutes
Top level flight speed software limited to 102km/h (63mph)
Flight controls 3 axis joystick, throttle lever
Battery type high discharge Lithium-Ion
Max total power output 88KW
Chassis type all-aluminium space airframe
Motor type high power output electric brushless outrunner
For me that eco system is worth so much.
I find the docs in elixir so sparse, and often land on rails docs because google can't find enough to fill a page.
- SO is the same, I get rails answers.
Active Jobs make background tasks so insanely easy.

I find with elixir I'm adding a lot of boiler plate.
Most cars in Europe where fuel is much more expensive, and therefore manufacturers put a lot of effort into energy efficiency.
I'm afraid it's no longer 1 louder, it's 1 quieter now ;-)
"They" isn't necessarily plural.
The real question is. Have you ever driven a Tesla?
People love writing Rust, if they want to try rewriting stuff why not? Might end up better might end up worse, can't hurt. I doubt it's out of spite for other languages, think it's just out of personal passion and curiosity.
I gave that advise based on what everyone technical around me that works in security also advises, additionally it's the path most of the successful ones have taken or wish they had taken.

My related experience is two-fold, yes I know many practicing professionals but additionally I am generally on the hiring committee for security so my opinion matters on whether or not a security professional gets an offer from companies I work at.

So I would say that is pretty relevant.
I do!

Actually I never upgraded to Catalina and waited until Big Sur seemed stable enough to upgrade to and it upgraded from Mojave without a hitch. I had been following the beta releases of Monterey and it seemed pretty solid, so I figured what the heck, let’s live dangerously baby!

As for not having a recent backup it’s just something that always gets put the back burner. That’s my failing. But to be honest, I wouldn’t have really lost anything of worth, everything important is in version control. Maybe I would have lost a few dot files, some configs, some PoCs, the grooves in my couch. Those grooves that I’ve cultivated wouldn’t cost me much time and honestly sometimes it’s good to get a fresh couch and re-evaluate the grooves of the past.

With all of that said, despite the inconvenience of the upgrade, I would love to give a shout out to Apple support. It’s these moments that you get to appreciate the fact that you can pick up the phone and talk to someone who has some outstanding fault finding and problem solving abilities, leagues ahead of any other provider I have ever had experience with.
These links go to a NSFW image if you have a Hacker News referrer.
Not to throw any pebbles in the garden, but if you compare to how religions work (the self-fulfilling prophecy side), I would not be surprised if that's how the humanity will proceed. Semi-religious leaders speaking of hypothetical progress collecting money to do anything they want with them from a bunch of retail investors.
Agreed. We need to improve a lot on the mobile, we've had our hands full with desktop browsers. About the unfixed iOS issue, was it an issue about the tabs widget on Safari? https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/3835

If not, could you tell me more so that I can create an issue.
I agree, even though my IP is part of a huge bank out of Dallas, and driving to the DC and back would take 16 hours.

But that's neither here nor there.
But OP is right that there is no need to change from he to they - why should it?
Reminds me of this site posted here a few months ago.

https://www.socialcooling.com/
+10

I’ve worked with similar people and had similar experiences. They are negligent, never question their own abilities nor actions, and to compound this they don’t learn from the experiences.

Whilst no-one is perfect, it’s always possible to test before proceeding to cause uncontrolled havoc. Just remind oneself, check, check, check.

Assume that there will be problems before proceeding; forewarned is forearmed.
IANAL, but the way I understood ECPA it only really protects communication while in transit, and both stored communications and data disclosed to third parties isn't really protected, depending on the context.

Search history, and Google's analytics about you, are a gray area, because you are communicating with Google, not using Google as a transport layer with an expectation of privacy.

Like, if the FBI asked me for my text messages with person X, I can hand them over if I want since they are my communications, but if they want the texts from my phone company they are legally protected. Using search is like texting Google.
Sam Altman is behind the eyeball crypto? I didn't know that...
Getting Started • Zettelkasten Method
The supermarket 5 minutes from my apartment just opened their chargers at 0.20€/kWh for 22kW charging and 0.25€/kWh for fast charging (50kW+).

Still a hell of a lot cheaper than gas over here (coming up to 2€/litre in some places). Even diesel is over 1.8€/litre.

At 15kWh/100km consumption it'd cost me under 4€ to drive 100km on my EV. My old Prius did around 5l/100km, which would be closer to 10€/100km.
Has Covid Killed Criticism?
I wonder if we should extend this to real world. Ban anonymity there too maybe make it mandatory to have name and serial number tattooed to forehead and make it illegal to cover it.
So is Tesla another labour rights arbitrage at heart? That would make me sad.

It feels to me that even taking the company at face value, this valuation is just silly. And I thought that for years, so clearly as a short-seller I’d be toast. But the more the price levitates, the more unreal it feels.
> Zig, D, Ada, ... they all offer massive benefits over C.
> The only reason there is a push for Rust so much harder than anything else can only be explained by the community and their almost aggressive spirit of "if its not written in Rust, it should be".

Nonsense. Zig is even newer than Rust and still not ready. D pretty much required garbage collection. Ada probably would have been a decent option but it still doesn't solve heap memory safety like Rust does.
It would be great if CookLang was compatible with, and compilable to, Schema.org's Recipe schemas [0].

Here's an interesting discussion on the subject of ingredient quantities [1].

[0] https://schema.org/Recipe

[1] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/882
It is strange and you're right to be confused. This story refers to a known individual, so there's no reason to use 'they', which traditionally is only used for non-specific or unknown individuals (in addition to its standard usage as a second-person plural).

It could be a simple error, but I suspect a slacktivist attempt to increase the novel usage of 'they' in reference to specific individuals.
This is HN... every few days there is another post about "$old_software in $new_language_of_the_week", years go by, languages of the week change, from ruby, to go, to rust, to...., and the old, original software is still the only useful variant.