skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
maps only generate as far as players have seen. So an old world would have old features until you explore new areas. To expand: Any generated chunk is considered "user modified" and saved whole, since a player could put houses or change blocks there. New areas are generated by the algorithm once reached. This works for new versions of the game as well as mods that add/change biomes.
google block residential ips. even with a specific message. not based on reputation, based on ip block. I am well aware that smtp have been abused for decades now, I run my own mail server and have no problem sending to google outlook etc. my point was only regarding blocking residential ip. google definitely does that (on top of many isp's) and it is not part of how the smtp protocol works. no conspiracy here.
I don't know if it's the case with this language, but in general it is possible to limit the expressiveness of a language to achieve decidability. The language cannot be Turing complete of course, but for example, we can have a language with the same computation power as finite automata, which is Turing decidable, and sometimes enough for the use case.
If your willing to limit dynamic program behavior, then you get decidability pretty easily. As a really stupid, simple example, consider a programming language where you were allowed at most 5 lines of code, where each can perform operations on a single variable: incrementing or decrementing it. You’ll pretty easily be able to figure out if these programs terminate, all because you limited dynamic program behavior.

With this language, it looks like: they force all dynamically-sized objects (any string, any array) to set a maximum size at compile time, and limit loops to be statically sized (or on the length of one of those static sized objects). It feels like this gets them most of the way.

The missing bit is some reasoning about recursion: I didn’t look close enough to see what they do, but it seems like you could either disallow it (not great, but in the smart contracts I’ve written it’s not been super useful anyways), or you could do some sort of static reasoning about the recursive parameters to the function getting smaller (the gas accounting seems tricky here).

IMHO, the hard part of this language is convincing anyone the compiler is totally bug-free. In as hostile an environment as a blockchain, where a single bug can lead to all your money going bye bye, using a “new” language is a risk most people will choose to avoid, unless there is a seriously good reason to choose this new language.

IMO, decidability is not a killer-enough feature to convince people to take this risk.
That solves the problem to one extent and makes it worse to another, and definitely doesn't solve fraud to any degree. With crypto, if a scammer cons my parent to hand over their private key, every company that relies on that key can claim that whatever account action occurs is perfectly legitimate and ignore attempts to correct problems -- after all how would you prove the transactions are illegitimate if they're signed? More to the point: how would we prove they're illegitimate better than we can now?
If nothing else, this thread, and others to which we have both contributed, show that the vast majority of people commenting on HN really have no idea about what maths is, no idea about how proofs work, and no real knowledge of maths beyond school algebra (if that).

This isn't a criticism, they are not trained in maths, and are not trying to be mathematicians. It is an attempt to set expectations appropriately.

So when contributing anything of a mathematical nature, it's useful to remember these threads.
Hmm very interesting, I'll need to play with that and add annotation support on Harbormaster so it works out of the box, thanks!
> If one prefers, he could

one could
It's just the term for a seemingly unsolvable situation suddenly being solved by an unexpected occurrence.
no they don't. That function is a joke. Only works maybe 2 out of 10 nights, the rest are spent at 100%. I have a Chargie (older version) and it really does the trick, every single night. I don't know how the Android app does it, but the iOS one is really transparent and just works as it should. Big thumbs up for the developer!
Nearly all of their public spaces are under constant surveillance. Since Covid, hey are now using robot dogs in public places to snitch on people and they use the dogs to keep migrant workers confined to their quarters during lockdown. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/technology-52619568

Oh and a tiny bit of pot will get you a lengthy sentence, up to life in prison.

No thanks.
Yep. For the last 30 computers and the internet have revolutionized a lot of aspects of our lives but that is at an end. The way silicon chips can change and improve our society have been exhausted. The solutionism of big tech can't change that. The computer revolution is over now. Time to look in the next revolutionary technology. Probably biotech.
I am the developer which literally got hit by a bus, AMA!

I miraculously survived the accident with many broken bones and got back to work in about 3 months. And now it puts a smile on my face whenever I see the term "bus factor". And it probably scared our company quite a bit because I was the only software engineer, so definitely a bus factor of 1. But our company is mainly not a software company so they managed to survive with minimal support from me until I got back.

So yeah, it can happen! Be careful when crossing the street!
Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22847092
Lawyers are negotiators and their job is to maximize the company profit and security. If one signs such an overraching contract it is their stupidity. It is not fair, but in a negotiation you are not supposed to be fair.
Not OP, but here's the exact words from the contract:

>You will give the Company full written details of all Inventions and of all works embodying Intellectual Property Rights made wholly or partially by You at any time during the course of Your Employment (whether or not during working hours or using Company premises or resources) which relate to, or are reasonably capable of being used in, the business of the Company or any Group Company. You acknowledge that all Intellectual Property Rights subsisting (or which may in the future subsist) in all such Inventions and works will automatically, on creation, vest in the Company absolutely. To the extent that they do not vest automatically, You hold them on trust for the Company. You agree to execute promptly all documents and to do all acts as may, in the opinion of the Company, be necessary to give effect to this clause 20.1.
>Do you agree with Markus Persson that Zoe Quinn is a "cunt", and think that Markus was right to tell her so publicly and personally on Twitter?

I don’t know either person but I think they both should have a right to say whatever they want.

>Do you think it's a good business decision for Microsoft to associate themselves with those words?

I think people will care for two days and then forget about it. It’s irrelevant. Some people will boycott the product if they stay associated but then some will like what happened and will buy if they let the guy stay as a way of supporting him. Overall it will make zero difference.
I love the solutions that don't need a complex installation process. I'll try it.

Thank you for sharing.
It is an expected human reaction to a slight. Although some people react with fear, maybe this was the case (?)
Maybe I’m missing something obvious here, but it’s not clear why (1) any bank would offer a Bitcoin denominated account, or (2) how it even makes sense to perform fractional banking against Bitcoin. You can’t change the underlying amount in the ledger and the ledger is the value source, unlike physical Federal Reserve Notes.
I believe something like a static build of crun might work, if the kernel is new enough. https://github.com/containers/crun
>buying something premium that could also be an investment, more of a collector's item

Am I the only one getting fed up with this mentality? What's the point buying toys and not use them?

How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later?

Because the logic will be: if a big part sees this as an easy flip, then no one uses it, enjoys it, has fun and creates memories with it, and down the line you'll have less people to sell this to.

There are two groups of collectibles at the moment imo - highly speculative ones, where every one thinks they will get rich from hoarding and flipping shit, and true collectibles that were played with and have a solid fan base, where people used the products and have an emotional attachment to the brand.

They are rare because people played with them (broke parts, lost others, trashed them), and very few people chose to not use the sets (most of them out of love for the brand, not to flip it down the line - and they were kids, not adults).

If a big part is seeing this as investment vehicles, then they aren't rare - they are just perceived to be rare. If kids aren't building memories around it today, how will they crave it down the line when they're grown ups?

Anyway, Lego is banking on it alright! Good on them.
It’d only be natural that this command randomly kills a process for each fragment created.
Also, BTW:

> You sign an offer letter, not a contract.

A letter is something that is signed by the sender, not the recipient. The sender here is presumably the (prospective) employer, not the employee (to be).

So if (the editorial) "you" also sign(s) it, it isn't really a "letter" AFAICS.

[Edit:] The common-language, and I'd assume in most jurisdictions also the legal, understanding of what "a contract" means is something like "a document signed by two parties wherein they both commit to certain obligations vis-a-vis each other". So all in all, I'm getting the feeling that this "letter" actually, legally, is some kind of contract; only employers don't want employees to realise that, so they call it "a letter". /[Edit]
This was the first time I actually came across a clause of this type in an employment contract. I knew of their existence but had never found them in the wild.

I sincerely hope enough people refuse to sign those that it becomes a problem for companies.

When I go into an employment, I'm agreeing to rent a certain number of hours of my skills to the company's benefit. I'm not agreeing to give the company any kind of control of what I do or don't do outside of those hours. Mind you, I'm not saying I would _never_ sign such a clause, but that would be a lot more expensive. I would probably agree to it if I could work 3-5 years and retire comfortably.
You're hand wringing over the implications of some unwanted flowers and books. I feel very, very comfortably saying that the overwhelming majority of people in the country wouldn't take the threat seriously until the van showed up and they'd rather receive bad stuff in the mail than have dog poo left on their front steps, their car keyed or any of the myriad of other ways people harass each other that leave the victim with a much more unpleasant or costly mess to clean up.

My point is that this kind of behavior is only harassment relative to a low baseline. I don't live somewhere particularly lawless but even here I think most people would just be confused by the mail stuff and their first reaction to the sketchy van would be to either skip town or go down the the police station and try and tell them they're tailing the wrong guy (depending on how squeaky clean you are). The kind of people who don't give you due-ish process don't roll in a new-ish rental van.

Not to say that these people weren't harassed (they most certainly were), part of the reason people spend millions to buy into somewhere like Natick is expressly because it's high class, lots of cops, nice and quiet, nobody ever settles disputes with threat of violence, etc, etc. But living somewhere so mild like that made them very easy for a malicious actor to get under the skin of because anything that doesn't take the form of a sternly worded letter from the someone's lawyer is so foreign in that context.

Edit: and to preempt the inevitable low effort replies, I'm not victim blaming here. I don't give two craps about these people. I'm just somewhat amused by how relative things like harassment are.
How do you deal with e.g. a chunk saved from the old generator with a low mountain transitioning into a chunk generated by the new generator with a huge mountain? It blends between them somehow so all the old chunks are surrounded by old/new blended chunks until all of those are surrounded by new chunks from then on?
Linus media group will in the near future
The proof has errors, there is no fixing it, you can't prove that all horses have the same color given no data about horses. In this proof the base statement is 100% correct, in all sets of 1 horse all horses will have the same color. Hence the error has to be in the other part.

If a student was tasked with proving that all horses has the same color given no information about horses then the correct answer is "I can't prove this", the answer given in this article would give 0 points since the student obviously doesn't understand what they are doing. When you check that test, would you mark the base case as the source of the error of the proof, or would you mark the inductive step? The base case is correct, if you marked that part wrong the student would rightfully complain, their logic works there.
My point wasn't about Jesus' actual racial appearance in history but how the image is used in the current church. Apparently most Christians, at least in the US, like the white Jesus. I suppose, technically, it's white Italian Jesus since the modern depictions are usually based on the old paintings.

I have no idea of the tone of Jesus' skin. Of course, there are paler people in the Middle East. When I traveled there, I met many people who fit that description. But practically none of them looked like the modern portrayal of Jesus. And how could they when the modern portrayal is based on European paintings with European models?

This does bring a racial perspective into play. Especially in a country where the churches are almost entirely segregated. I grew up with the evangelicals. They thought of Jesus as one of them. Not as a Middle Eastern man.

And I'm quite familiar with Jesus' lack of resistance in the Gospels. But, for better or worse, many oppressed people have taken comfort in his story. Seeing him executed by the occupiers and collaborators gave a point of common ground by those facing horrendous regimes. And since Jesus stood up to the religious leaders, and went out of his way to attack the wealthy, there's some comfort and support found there as well.

Which makes it unsurprising modern people with their modern struggles would use Jesus as an example or as someone who would supposedly support them. They're part of a long line of people who have done so.
That line is the last line of their "About" section, and for open source software it is relevant since OSS projects often want people to contribute.
Source?

Doesn't seem to be the case [0].

[0]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325669726_The_Recon...
OP, I have felt many of the same things as you. It sounds like you have very high expectations for yourself - perhaps you imagined yourself being somewhat well known in your field or well regarded in life in some way by now.

The reality is that your expectations may not have ever been realistic to begin with. Most of us are not going to be well-known or famous. Insisting that you 'have to' become this or that in life by point X is just going to make you depressed.

I would say, firstly, you need to give yourself a break and take credit for whatever you have accomplished in life. Your thinking has become distorted. Are you seeing a therapist? They could potentially help you sort out some of these negative thoughts and set more realistic goals for yourself. Those goals should be small and achievable to start - not unachievable pie-in-the-sky dreams that will just make you demotivated.
Did you try just uploading a bank statement from the debit card?
> I wish there is a documented difference in all of these so that International companies can all pay attention.

https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-...

Also, why do you limit to “International” companies? Don’t people from all cultures live in most every country, even in small numbers?
terrariums are great and super accessible, I use recycled glass jars and plants from my yard… even my failures turn into little self-perpetuating mold apocalypses
Agreed, but LYK had ulterior motives with HDBs - he was very worried about creating a Singaporean identity. And believed that home ownership was a key part of that identity (“my home is Singapore”). He also acknowledged that a large part of the population living in kampungs didn’t foster political stability.

So yes, a massive public housing system is socialist in nature, but I’d agree it was entirely a politically practical initiative for Singapore.

And that’s what is so interesting. LYK mentioned his admiration for Deng Xiaopeng - an eminently practical leader. Capitalist, socialist, whatever, if it works it works and Singapore is willing to leverage it.

But it makes for an odd political scene. PAP will admit failure, as long as it’s not politically damaging. Otherwise they quietly take the pulse of the electorate and try to stay ahead of any issues.

It’s a very reactive semi-authoritarian system. They are concerned about losing legitimacy so work hard to stay popular.
You can totally have multiple secrets' sources: one for development that takes secrets from a plain text local file and one for production that takes secrets from Vault. I don't see an issue here.

Also, what's immature about Vault?
Another Solidity alternative is Vyper. It is statically typed, safe, Pythonic approach.

https://vyper.readthedocs.io/en/stable/

https://twitter.com/vyperlang

Vyper is being used in Curve and Yearn (both billions of dollars of TVL): https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/programming-language...
after EIP-1559 eth is now deflationary, part of/related to the switch to proof of stake.

https://btcpro.com/2021/09/05/eth-becomes-deflationary-burn/
Thanks for chiming in. Any chance that you tried an older, pre-v1.0 version? I used to share some of your considerations, but lately I've seen Nomad evolve at a quicker pace and catch up with some of the features I wanted/liked (ex.: readiness checks were introduced in May 2021 with v1.1, going by the changelog).

As others have already said and basing on the official docs (https://www.nomadproject.io/docs/enterprise), the few Enterprise-only features left don't really feel necessary to me for small-medium deployments; especially when there's an Ops team that can oversee things anyway.

Not trying to play the devil's advocate here, I'm genuinely interested in what I might be missing with my current approach.
From the article, tips on challenges for users to show what sets Linux apart from other OSes:

> 1. Learn how to use the shell.

> 2. Find and install packages from the command line.

> 3. Try out a tiling window manager, especially if you consider yourself a power user.

> 4. Compile a program from source.

At this point, the author would have surely alienated the vast majority of users potentially interested in Linux.

I would venture a guess that even most engineers who use Linux at work (i.e. on their laptop) don't know what's a tiling window manager (since it's an implementation detail).
> ...housing, for most cases, a poor investment in Singapore. You buy a home to live in it.

I would consider it a good feature and not a bug.
The Mutual Fund That Ate Wall Street–Based on an Index Few People Know About
Could you elaborate? I've done a fair bit of Threejs and would love to hear about better tools/libraries.
My impression of today's web, greater in css/js size, but with reduced creativity.
I would also challenge the "Google and Gmail account for a very small amount of the global mail-flow". 100% of the companies I worked at use office365 and Gsuite.
> lets start with bank's for instance?

>

> how do you feel about getting locked out of all your money for a false-positive fraud detection?

I don't feel bad about it - it happened once or twice in the last 30 years and it was relatively trivial to fix[1]. I also don't mind that they freeze spending if they think my account was hijacked in any way.

[1] Go into a branch with my ID, look at the transactions they think is fraud, declare that they are not, and get my account unfrozen. The whole process took about 60m, from leaving my front door to withdrawing money again.
The problem with guys like Wenig and Wymer is the classic problem with large organizations: they didn't explicitly say to do something horrible like this, so they're off the hook.

All they did was hire the horrible people and setup the environment where doing horrible things would be not just an option, but the best option to succeed at the goals that they then assigned to those people. They gave these people an enormous budget, and then (apparently) never asked what they did with it.

But hey, they didn't know anything unethical was going on, right?
Why couch this as an "Exciting Update,"[1] then? Why do none of the FAQ entries[2] answer the obvious question that everyone asked here (why deprecate existing cards, let alone in 3 weeks)?

When forced to by customers, you sort of answered it here, but without details or transparency. The Web site FAQ doesn't even do that much - the question that every single customer will ask isn't listed. Needing to update dozens of cards and merchants for zero benefit is not an "Exciting Update" and Privacy ends up sounding dishonest and, well, stupid for claiming that.

If you were forced to do this by a processing partner, then that's what the FAQ and customer-facing popup should say (and explain why and why your partner agreements allow that with only a few weeks of notice).

I went from being a customer and fan to believing that I can't trust Privacy's decisions nor that those decisions will be described transparently.

[1]: https://support.privacy.com/hc/en-us/categories/441448782555...
[2]: https://support.privacy.com/hc/en-us/sections/4414521336855-...
It's not your digital property. Look eg. at Netflix ToS, you're just buying a temporary membership in some club that will allow you access to some content, on their terms. That's not what ownership looks like.

I suspect it will be similar with all other consumer oriented content distribution services.
> While the attack didn’t reveal specific flaws within Blockchain tech itself, it managed to exploit the older “web 2.0” technology that most users need to use to perform transactions.

What a disgusting attempt to deflect blame. Somehow neither my bank nor my brokerage—which rely entirely on this apparently antiquated web 2.0 stack—have never had this kind of problem, yet billions disappear from these web 3.0 companies’ vaults annually.
Why don't big studios produce content that people clearly want to see? It seems like capitalism should dictate that they chase lucrative markets. Studios regularly produce much more niche content than a Jesus origin story.
DeltaChat has an interesting approach to extending email and open standards towards something that feels like "instant messaging", but incorporates a lot of cool features: Bots, multiparty chats, games, e2ee, p2p mode etc: https://delta.chat/
I think they understand that, they’re just saying such a law either needs a regulating body doing the enforcement or needs to be worded very well to avoid frivolous cases.
Creative Computation (2019)