skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> but do you really want to draw borders around a fixed and unmoving set of allowed topics? second-order effect: having a #games channel and not a #movies channel discourages discussion of movies because there’s not a “proper place” for it

First, many discord channels are based around a topic, not a person, so sub-topics come naturally.

Second, there usually is a request channel that allows one to voice a need for a new channel, and there's role system that can permit any designated persons to harmlessly create channels.
I don't think the points raised in this article are strong enough to merit the title, but it all feels like reasonable and valid criticism, the sort of thing to season your perspective with.
I guess you have heard of someone doing it in a Nissan Leaf : http://electric-explorer.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,det...

The Hyundai IONIQ 5 has optional solar panels on the roof to charge the battery. Maybe this system can be hacked to put bigger solar panels but perhaps it wouldn't handle a lot more power.
Checkout https://github.com/vlang/v/ .

Recompiling the V compiler itself from scratch (V is written in V), after you make a change to its source, takes ~2s.
Ask HN: Where would you start looking for development clients?
Disclaimer: This is not a sales pitch, I'm not trying to finds clients here.

After years of freelancing / contracting, during the last few projects a nice fellowship of 2-3 (mostly frontend) developers has formed around me. We have worked on some rather serious projects, I am confident regarding what we can offer.

I see all the "who's hiring" posts, but our biggest project is soon coming to an end and I'm almos clueless regarding where I should start looking for companies who would want to contract a small company for custom development services.

We are too small and our projects are usually too long for us to hire a dedicated salesperson.

What are some common ways you've found to work to find new clients?
> Auto-updates are an attacker's dream too.

Why?
An interesting related concept is Mogees [0] that converts any surface to a musical instrument using a contact microphone. The initial underlying theory is described in the thesis of Bruno Zamberlin [1], where he describes in chapter 4 a work with Carmine Emanuele Cella where a piezo sensor is used to convert the vibrations on any physical object into musical sound.

[0]: https://youtu.be/xdo8N30qb2A

[1]: http://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/12312/
Show HN: [New feature] we added burnout tracking to our wellness program
UV light and mildew: why physical objects degrade over time
> As long as you don't work for sweatshop that expects delivery on day one, it's no biggie at all.

What about "a big company with multiple dev teams that are expected to actually deliver things on time"?
At the risk of sounding like a HN stereotype, for those who don't know what a TPU is:

> TPUs are hardware accelerators specialized in deep learning tasks. They are supported in Tensorflow 2.1 both through the Keras high-level API, and at a lower level.
> 1) A boycott is a boycott; they only notice that people are boycotting them.

Well if that's all they can find out then the boycott is pointless. If a boycott is meant to change the company's behaviour then there has to be a way for them to find out what the boycott is about.

> 5) As I already mentioned, some of the people boycotting seller A are probably also boycotting sellers B and C even though they can't be bothered to boycott D, E and F; some others boycott A, D and E although not B, C and F; some A, C, and F; etc etc. For every boycott, you'll find people who also for the same principled reasons boycott other sellers. Lots of arbitrary decisions make a random distribution; it all evens out.

That's only true if everyone is making their decisions randomly though. It doesn't hold if there's a correlation in which companies people do and don't boycott, e.g. people think they're arbitrary boycotting some but not all of the companies that do X, but unconsciously they're boycotting Chinese companies but not American companies.

> And the numbers (or number-adjacent adjectives) you keep throwing around, apparently in an effort to lend your totally subjective opinion some air of scientific legitimacy, are still totally arbitrary, or to call them what they are: pulled straight out of your nether orifice. How do you KNOW that "an arbitrary boycott is less than 20% as effective as a clearly principled one"??? What data do you have to claim the question is "whether an arbitrary boycott is completely 100% ineffective or a teeny tiny smidgen effective", when it could just as well be whether it is -- to pull equally random numbers out of my own arse -- 90% effective or only 60%?

All I've been doing is clarifying what I'm saying. I'm putting numbers on it because you asked! First playpause had some strange fixation on whether I was claiming arbitrary boycotts were completely ineffective or only mostly ineffective, and then you jumped in with some strange fixation on the numbers I used to illustrate what I was saying. It's a bit much to ask for intense precision and then complain when I try to be precise.
I think my soul should be inalienable.
Maybe developers could stop designing websites that only work on Chrome too?

I'm tired of seeing "your browser is unsupported" and denied access while using a chromium based alternative. Or broken features because someone had to have their bells and whistles
It's not just "c-suite execs".

If our department has 60 devs across 5-10 teams, the cost of "simply" bringing in people who don't know the language and expecting to both onboard them to business and teach them a new language becomes astronomical
I only use hardcoded arrays in C, that way it's hard to leak anything and you avoid cache misses, but I feel fortunate I use Java on the server because I would not be able to sleep with C crashing on there!

I think the real technical reason, like you allude to, is closer to this quote:

"Many lock-free structures offer atomic-free read paths, notably concurrent containers in garbage collected languages, such as ConcurrentHashMap in Java. Languages without garbage collection have fewer straightforward options, mostly because safe memory reclamation is a hard problem..." - Travis Downs https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/07/06/concurrency-co...

But I have yet to meet someone (4 years into this realization) that can clearly explain why in a way that anyone could understand and more importantly accept!
Our leadership went all in and even created a special AMP agency. After cutting the losses and the promotion of endless google shills we are left with nothing except defunct code and some junior and mid level devs that are basically useless for the rest of the operation.
Another strategy is to get closer to someone that shares your vision for the future but has a lot more resources and let you work on your long term ideas. There is a limit to the set of things you can do alone.
We ended up with plenty of idiomatic code. They came in with 0 FP knowledge.

Turns out you can learn the ropes & values in a couple months tops. Then you can learn with anyone and grow together.

All the things you fear are barely consequential in practice in Haskell. All those things - who cares? What's the worst that can happen? The language puts such a high floor on the code it's okay. The main mistakes these newbies can make are stuff about database & distributed system design - orthogonal to Haskell and something they should be mentored on anyways.
Great read. They wrote a DOS in 35 days using punch cards. Amazing.
In short, they’re Commies.
Jony Ive’s first major design since leaving Apple
With an effort, git becomes a familiar tool to use, but does it every become easy to use? There is a reason people have called it user-hostile.
These are merely operational details. With some training and a little bit of Darwinian selection, I could easily see the same guys that mastered stealing catalytic converters in 2 minutes [1] shifting their focus to EV batteries. It might take them longer, say, 5 minutes, but the payoff is far higher.

[1] https://www.edmunds.com/auto-insurance/in-under-two-minutes-...
> Otherwise I don't think I have a very wasteful usage of electricity.

Well, of course you don't think it's wasteful. But that's irrelevant. We're talking about putting the power to decide what's "wasteful" in somebody else's hands, maybe some appointed judges somewhere in the government. It doesn't seem like you want to put that power in my hands, though. Still waiting for that list. I'm ready to dictate which of your activities are worthy of electricity.
Are there modern-day examples of impressive bootstrapping? APFS comes to mind.
There is no such thing as combinatorial explosion here, just take the longest branch every time.
Through the Nuclear Looking Glass
"Serious designs" are nice but no pathfinder demo plants yet. And all that stretches the timescales.
The question is how much material can be reclaimed from the battery.

Batteries are resource gold mines with most material readily available (the casing, for example, would be the easiest thing to recycle).

Further, simple recycling (burn everything) of the inner parts is almost certainly worth it just to reclaim the current contents of nickel and cobalt.

What's not clear is if other resources can be reclaimed or if this can be taken further. Can we also reclaim the electrolyte (The substance between the anode and cathode)? Can we do all this without smelting down parts?

That's the unknown. That's also what manufactures are saying when they say "we don't know if this will be more or less valuable in the future." Because, as you can imagine, if recycling is simply applying a chemical wash to the electrolyte and reusing everything else, then you've saved $1000s of dollars avoiding making a new battery.

If, on the other hand, that's not possible, then smelting will still happen as that reclaims expensive materials (primarily nickel and cobalt) at a fraction of the cost of mining them fresh.

In other words, we know how to recycle battery materials. We don't know if we can recycle all of the battery materials. As a result, battery manufactures are just waiting until the cost of manufacturing new batteries becomes cost prohibitive without starting a recycling plant.
> If you can still have two actors waiting on one another, you’re letter-of-the-law deadlock-free, but your program is still in effect deadlocked.

How is it letter-of-the-law deadlock-free?
Dupe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29122083
If you don't want to read dystopia, but rather utopia, checkout my latest essay on:

https://unturf.com
> managed to be created and function on computers that had 500 MB HDD, 300 MHz CPU, and 4 MB RAM.

Proceed from the other direction: you have those resources, what creatively can you do with them?

I think the three big differences are:

- nothing was "responsive", everything targeted a (pretty small) fixed resolution. Fonts were bitmap, ASCII, and fixed-width. No need to run a constraint solver to do layout.

- object orientation was rare. Data would be kept in big arrays. No virtual dispatch, minimal pointer-chasing (this is bad for pipelines), no reflection, no JITs, no GC pauses.

- immediate-mode GUIs rendering on a single thread. Draw everything in order, once. If something's off screen, ignore it as much as possible.

You can see all these in play in the Windows 3.0 -> 95 era. Classic "Windows Forms" apps render in response to a WM_PAINT message, in the (immediate) thread of the message loop, directly into the framebuffer. This could be seen by moving a window on top of a crashed app or part thereof - moving it away would leave a white space. Classic Windows apps are also not responsive - all the positions for controls are fixed pixel locations by the designer, so they look stupidly tiny on high resolution monitors. ( https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/d... )

Microsoft tried to supercede this with WPF/XAML and the compositing window manager Aero, but it's not been entirely successful as you can see by the number of obvious Forms dialogs you can find from Control Panel.

> Dwarf Fortress and Rimworld eventually both suffer from the same problem: CPU death.

Simulation games tend to expand to fill the space available. It's very easy to have complexity runaway of O(n^2) if you're not careful, which gets much worse at high numbers of objects. The trick there is to constrain the range of interactions; both what interactions are possible and over what range, so you can keep them in a quadtree/octree/chunk system and reduce the N input to each tick of the simulation.

Further reading: not just Masters of Doom, but Racing The Beam.
Nice! I'm creating a side project with Janet and was thinking I'd experiment with this.

Also: are you me from the future?

Groetjes!
That's only less than what you get working the length of term of the average job with a FAANG in silicon valley...
> the advertiser ultimately wants to buy a certain amount of conversions

That's not right at all for a large segment of advertising: the cheaper conversions are, the more most advertisers are willing to spend.

Imagine I currently earn a marginal profit of $10 on each conversion (widget sold etc): this means roughly I'm willing to pay up to $10 for a conversion that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Conversions that cost more than $10 are definitely not worth it to me. I have some appetite for conversions that cost close to $10, but at some point I run into (likely temporary) capacity constraints and my marginal profitability decreases. The cheaper conversions are, the more I can continue to increase volume, and so the more I'll spend.

Additionally, internet advertising is competing with other forms of advertising, and advertisers want the most cost effective medium. Increase the cost of a conversion, and the marginal advertiser shifts away from online ads.

One way to see this is to imagine that instead of talking about online ads we are talking about any other product. Raise the price (cost per conversion) and people will decrease the amount they buy.

(Disclosure: I work on ads at Google, speaking only for myself)
Then the comparison would be fair if it would go through all the different options. Picking the one that is quite heavy to host like gitlab (but does way more than what fossil does by the way) for the purpose of saying that git sucks is misleading.

There's options like gitea that are lightweight and super easy to host.
The carbon industry wants delay on decarbonisation. New nuclear projects are poster children for delay, because the industry has been mostly incompetent at shipping and lacks urgency.
What's Ortingo?
Note: This may come off as self-promotion, but what I'm promoting is of an intent of good faith, and a true benefit to our society; I would greatly appreciate some decent traction, as this platform is fully-built and complete, with the exception of any changes you may find appealing or necessary.

So, what's Ortingo?

Ortingo is a place to discuss things that matter, without the infinite scrolling. Instead of posts finding you, we choose to put you in control, letting you find the posts that are relevant to you, eliminating the privacy problem of personalized content and keeping all content in fair, equally-trending circulation — making the feed a thing of the past. We don't run ads here, because you're entitled to experiencing social media without them. Alternatively, we do business by selling optional storage plans for storing your discussions — with Ortingo Basic always free.

Wanna check it out? Link's ortingo.com
'Brand Safety'... advertisers are very keen on this. They don't want their ads being flung across the dregs of the internet. Take grindr as an example... this app was blacklisted by most advertisers not because of homophobia, but because they don't want their brand appearing next to potentially pornographic content.

The same happened when covid first broke out. Brand conscious advertisers didn't want to be associated with any covid-related content, no matter what the context.
I've been programming on a microcontroller for the first time this past year, and tinyvga and similar sites have been critical in getting my project working. It's very rewarding the first time you get some low level bit banging to produce a screen, keyboard interface, etc.
Hmm, I don't think that one would help with OOM killer termination either.
>It is welcome, I had just assumed you had not read to the bottom of my comment.

I went back and re-read your comment, and yes I did read the bottom of it.

The stores I'm talking about aren't large retailers (like Target and Aldi) as you mentioned.

Most of the small stores I'm talking about pay 3-5% on CC transactions, unlike those chain stores who likely pay 1.5% or less.

What's more, the volume/revenue of such small stores makes such fees prohibitively expensive, unlike Target or Aldi, who already pay less and whose customers are more likely to spend larger sums.

The profit on a sandwich and a beer ($10-12) for such a small store might be a couple dollars. Having to pay 1/3 of that in CC processing fees isn't viable.

Which is why those stores have credit card surcharges.

That was my point, which is, at least AFAICT, a much different one than you made.

Apologies if I misunderstood.
Try the dawn of everything by david graeber. It does show the vibrant nature of the historic and pre-historic world.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56269264-the-dawn-of-eve...
and waste
Those particle energies come from D-T fusion. Helion is doing a hybrid of D-D fusion, which produces lower-energy neutrons comparable to fission, and D-He3 fusion which does not produce neutrons. They say the combined reaction will produce only 6% of its energy as neutron radiation, compared to 80% for D-T. There will be some D-T side reactions, but not much.

Reactor size depends on the design. For tokamaks, output scales well with reactor volume. But it also scales with the fourth power of magnetic field strength. Two well-funded startups are building tokamaks with newer superconductors that support stronger magnetic fields, allowing them to get the same output as ITER from much smaller reactors.

Other designs have different scaling laws so aren't necessarily any particular size. Helion for example is pretty compact.
Thanks! Interesting result, baseline performance is impressive (pretty close to my R9 5950X which does 4853/5069 MB/s) but the CRC32 hardware is surprisingly mediocre (Cortex-A72 on Graviton1 does 14840/14483, Neoverse N1 on Graviton2 does 17066/19560)
Anxiety link to irritable bowel syndrome seen in DNA
Shipbreakers [video]
thanks for sharing. https://www.godrej-ananda.net.in/
Some new BMWs won't have touchscreens thanks to chip shortage
>It is the same thing if the end result is prices differing by the same amount.

Perhaps, but as I said:

...discounts for cash are usually significantly
less than surcharges for credit cards.

At least that's been my experience.
The USA is not falling behind those countries. It’s in healthier shape than all of them.
They used very low level programming and access to machine low level interfaces.

You could do the same thing today but spend at least 4-5 more time developing your software.

For example, I was a kid and used to fill the screen using Look up tables fo colors, you had access to the frame buffer and do things like displace the elements in the table, as a cycle, the entire image will change giving a movement impression. The work was done by the electronics of the framebuffer.

In the past the people that had access to real terminals did the same, change the information of the text on screen and the hardware will render it beautifully(even prettier that today's terminals). But those terminals were super expensive and proprietary(tens of thousands of dollars). Today shells are standardized, free and open source(and usually use much ugly fonts)with fonts from all over the world(terminals have very limited character sets).

Also game consoles did the same. The hardware did draw tiles that were previously drawn. You told the console what tiles to draw and the hardware did most of the work.

>Is it possible to recreate this level of efficiency on modern systems?

Of course you just need to pay the price: Development is so slow and painful. Low level programming is prone to very hard to find bugs.

Programming things like FPGAs or GPUs is hell in life. You work super hard, you get little reward.
Fossil does not have a "rebase" command, but anything you can do with rebase you can do in Fossil, and more.

Fossil allows you (for example) to fix typos in the commit messages of published branches, safely and in a way that does not destroy history and propagates cleanly with "sync". It allows you to modify the DAG safely, and in a way that does not destroy history and propagates cleanly. It does this by providing special tags that when added to a commit change the check-in comment, or branch name, or parents of the commit. The original immutable check-in is preserved, but for display purposes, the tags can override some properties of the original check-in.

Real example from just this morning: Last last night I mistakenly merged the wrong way. I merged the reuse-schema branch into trunk, rather than merging trunk into the reuse-schema branch. When I saw the problem this morning, I was able to fix it, even though this mistake had already propagated to other repositories. The change entered the DAG as a supplemental "correction" tag, so no history was lost, and if in 20 years somebody wants to go back and figure out what happened there, they can, because all information is preserved. But for day-to-day viewing of history, it looks as if I had done the merge correctly to begin with.
Interesting word choice "consumable" versus "parts require maintenance".

One suggests a lie, the other is just SOP in any plant with moving parts. Are you sure you're an engineer?
At a minimum, batteries contain large amount of steel, nickel, and cobalt which can all be extracted through simple smelting (Boil the metals).

Why would you throw that away? Those are valuable and expensive resources.

The question is entirely around if you can go further and recycle more of the inners and if you can do this without smelting down the whole battery.

I'm completely convinced these batteries won't end up in landfills. I'm less convinced that we won't get there without burning a bunch of silicon and lithium.
Django Blog App Tutorial Free
I don't think any of your points are wrong, but you neglected to address properly the substantial and useful point the person you are replying to made: That it's the primaries in the US system that provide citizen driven democracy.

That's a fair point, and a meaningful one too.

> The primaries only serve to choose a candidate who will be "electable" under a broken FPTP system come election time – it is a losing proposition from the very start. Americans are only given the illusion of choice, with all the fanfare to keep them happy.

Well there's clearly some evidence this isn't the case. 2 out of the last 3 presidents (Obama and Trump) were not the pre-ordained establishment candidate, and it was broad popularity by primary voters that caused them to become the candidate.
Show corresponding Haskell vacancies—somebody has to maintain the code if it exists.
>Honestly at this point, if you trust google you’re a fool.

And same rest of FAANG. Though Apple and Netflix still seem to be evil-lite for now
Types of Cryptography
I work for a large firm (hundreds of engineering staff) that invested in strongly-typed FP. We deliver things on time because we're not putting out fires caused by stupid runtime errors. There's more than enough time to teach the juniors along the way too. Once again, education is a ultimately a facet of productivity, not something that detracts from it.