skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've done this in go. It's fun to do, but the real reason I did it was memory safety issues in C. We need to implement as much code as we can in memory safe languages.
> I knew Google's automated processes were pretty bad...

If you think Google's AI for Spam is pretty bad, then you haven't experienced Twitter's. I've had a Twitter account suspended because their AI does not understand context. I'm not allowed to use the account until I delete the content, which I won't.

In any case, now that you've seen first hand the power of Big Tech, consider the advice of @fsflover and @pornel below. Strive to own you own content. Keep in mind that in cases like this, even HN is Big Tech.
The thing with E2E encryption, is it really verifiable? Has anyone actually gotten/extracted the WhatsApp secrets and then checked that what goes in one end comes out the other fully encrypted, systematically?

After all, everything goes through WhatsApp's proprietary clients and servers, we don't know what voodoo they do along the way. Just because they claim it's E2E encrypted, doesn't really make it so, I'd imagine. Has their E2E encryption been confirmed independently?
If it helps you can think of it like this: Scrum is just Waterfall, but with faster cycles.

Traditional Waterfall(tm) is when you spend a year in analysis, a year in specifications, a year in requirement, a year in design...

And then you put out a piece of software that's already outdated and doesn't do what the customer wanted or needed. But the company got paid anyway, so off to the next project.

With Scrum you go through the whole waterfall loop every 2-4 weeks and the customer and the team have a chance to amend any of the phases after every iteration.

This way there's less of a chance the product is completely outdated and unnecessary after the whole project (comprising of multiple waterfall loops) is done.
> Who in tech do you hold up as an ideal persona?

For me it is mjg59 and maybe Miguel de Icaza, also maybe Linus Torvalds
Should they have not been suspended from trading for a certain period of time in addition to the fine? Take for eg, sports as an analogy - Individual players, no matter who popular they are, are almost always suspended/banned if found cheating.

Capital gains over last few years have been insane. The fine might be higher but a 400MM profit 5 years ago would have easily doubled just investing in SP500.
There is no such quick feedback.

You spend months dreaming up a design spec with plenty of timing diagrams, UML diagrams, classes, etc.

Then, it's reviewed, which means people read it and and try to make comments on it, then everyone pat themselves on the back because it's been 'signed-off'.

Then you start actually implementing it and you quick find out that, actually... And that's not even accounting for any changes on requirements that might have been asked in the mean time.

Feedback means actual, hard feedback, be it from the customer or reality.

Errors get more and more expensive to fix the further down the line they are found and that's exactly why hard feedback (which usually is either actual tests or customer feedback) should be obtained ASAP, which can be achieved through iterations.
MQTT was created by IBM

https://mqtt.org/

If I implement it in Rust now, dont think I will be accused of copying IBM?
I mean, I guess you have a point from a certain perspective, but that sounds a lot like the mindset of a cult.

"Widespread propaganda that the entire world believes except for the select few that live in a tightly controlled bubble where anybody who speaks out is violently silenced" has a lot of common properties with "things that are true".
There is only room for one emperor without cloths
It's a rewrite of one of their main project. Of course they can have some comments about it.
Personally I surely would not want to go that route, but maybe suing(or the threat of it) helps, if you know a trustworthy lawyer?

I would imagine just a letter from a lawyer stating the facts of the incident would be enough to get real attention from google.

I mean, you pay for a service - they just canceled without further explanation. Shouldn't there be some rights left for normal people?

Otherwise yes, your story is a good (allmost daily by now) reminder, to reduce google wherever possible.
VR Chat: the weird new corner of the internet you probably haven’t heard of.
So you're pushing for DeFi and all things decentralized, but whining that the centralized service has enforced its power upon your content about decentralization there? Nice.
mine had no discussion, there was a discussion on the subject some days later and I added a link to my post in it as being a link to the paper under discussion - got some upvotes - but I haven't been able to find it in my posts after going back a ways.
You could call it a power supply, because the monitor obviously had no battery.
> If you are properly isolating your work into an "Analysis" phase, you will properly flesh out the issues and the subsequent specifications and requirements will be complete - sufficient to the task of formulating a development/implementation plan. But if you don't take care to complete a proper analysis - then no, you won't formulate specs or req's properly, either.

But what if that doesn't happen?

(This seems to parallel the "C is safe if you don't write bugs" argument. Processes that require infallibility are bad processes.)

The level of dysfunctionality that can be achieved is baffling. How can someone fail to deliver a payroll system? https://www.smh.com.au/technology/worst-failure-of-public-ad... - it's one of the oldest applications of business computing, and yet somehow it wastes a billion Australian dollars?
> done properly

And herein lies the rub. If a project is more than 6 months to a year in duration, there is very little chance that what the customer now wants is what they wanted before. Requirements aren't created instantly on day 1 ready for dev, you could easily have several years of requirements, during which time people change, the world changes, the law changes, priority changes and then what?

Even systems that are relatively unchanging like the air traffic control system they built in the UK still had a whole raft of issues that needed addressing and at this point, the documentation becomes out-of-date and changes are extortionately more expensive to resolve.
Show HN: Python Wrapper for the OpenSea API
Understanding TikTok’s impacts on public health
3 billion people on this planet cannot afford a new phone or a new desktop every 5 years (to put it mildly).
Care to eloborate?

//A very substantive portion of Sanskrit literature, if not the majority, deals with non-religious topics such as linguistics, logic, poetics, astronomy, rhetoric, mineralogy, statecraft, geography, and more.//

and more source would be nice?
The main reason its not is because none of the literature was for the common man. The sankrit literatures have always been for the elites. It is still considered a sin for millioins of Indians to even read a sanskrit text.

None of the pseudo-sceintific bs counts. Stop saying they had the science in them. Its okay to accept our ancestors were stupid instead of tring to glorify all the pseudo scientific non-sense i.e flying vehicles, cure for cancer. Gimme a break dude.
Here's one way to explain it:

The generalization is that waterfall is a form of organization level open loop control and scrum is a form of organization-level closed loop control of your process. In one case you set a goal and then move towards it (and "damn the torpedos"). In the other case you stop and look where you're going and adjust course at regular intervals iteratively (But "are we there yet?").

In real-time applications, open loop control only works well in narrowly defined situations, but nevertheless can be very useful to get somewhere in a definite amount of time. Closed loop control tends to be more robust in that it is rather more certain to get you to the target in a wider range of situations and in the presence of noise. The downside is that it can be harder to determine when you'll get there.

This way of looking at it, you immediately see the balancing act going on.

Attaching specifically to what you are saying: if you do the Analysis, Specifications, Requirement, Design, Implementation, Testing, Qualification, Signoff just once, your product-objective fit will only be so good. (This is where waterfall stops and calls it a day. It's just a very long "day")

Once a change is signed off; review it in production for a while, take lessons learned, and reapply them to a new Analysis step (and move forward through the steps again).

After the second sign off, in real world practice you're likely to have a much better product market fit than the first iteration.

Wash rinse repeat, after the third sign off, you'll find an even better fit.

This much should stand to reason. You combine your original plan with everything you've learned. Then take the new plan and add in everything you've learned, etc. How could your 5th, 6th or 7th, Nth version NOT be better than the first one?

This is closed loop control.

If I present it this way, it would seem like open loop is always going to be faster than closed loop. Well, in biology this is actually exploited as such: fast processes are often open loop.

Fortunately it turns out that if you're doing closed-loop anyway, the self correcting properties of uberhaupt having a closed loop means that you can get away with cruder/faster steps in the loop. As long as you keep the loop closed. This stands to reason, right? (And else it stands up to empirical testing.)

If you're in a hurry, it might be the case that it's ok to merely hit home close to the target, rather than bang on 100%. Despite some theoretical slowness, you might be able to get away with using a closed loop process with fewer/cruder iterations to get to your target more quickly in practice.

Now what a lot of cargo-cultists do in the case of open loop (and waterfall) , is that they apply it to very long projects, but forget that the world might change while they're still working. Open loop works best for short, well defined projects.

In the case of closed loop cargo cultists: They might end up taking cruder faster steps, but then don't actually close the loop by going back to the start and iterating. Now you have a very bad product.

In practice you'll need to tune your process to your own needs.
PCL: Portable CommonLoops for modern CL platforms
>In contrast, a non–growth-based form of self-replication dominates at the subcellular level: molecular machines assemble material in their external environment into functional self-copies directly, or in concert with other machines. Such kinematic replication has never been observed at higher levels of biological organization, nor was it known whether multicellular systems were even capable of it.

I can't tell if this is computer science, physics or biology. Artificial life?
From my very little experience there are a few categories:

- groups where privacy is a matter of personal security will actively use Libre Software and their own services because it's just too important

- groups emerging from the technical world will naturally adopt Libre software and decentralized services because tech doesn't scare them

- everyone else comes from a world where FB/Twitter/Instagram is the norm, so when they group together on issues related to the physical world they will continue to use the digital tools they are used to

There is a real work of deconstructing our tools and the prevalence of big tech in our digital world, just like there was a necessity to deconstruct the position of white males in a patriarchal, occidental society.
Of course no one is doing the Analysis properly. It's impossible. You plan how to implement something using a library method. But only in the qualification phase you find out that this method actually has a bug on your target platform or is incompatible with another part of your software.
Good because Opiates are a bit out of control and can be deadly.
Brave isn't a mere superset of Chromium. We actually remove, modify, and proxy quite a bit. You can read the nitty-gritty details at https://github.com/brave/brave-browser/wiki/Deviations-from-....

You absolutely could create a similar browsing experience (with excellent extensions like uBlock Origin), but you're still ultimately at the mercy of the browser vendor. For example, uBlock Origin is facing pressure from forthcoming Manifest V3 changes which threaten the existence of the extension (and many others like it). Brave, as a Browser, has committed itself to continuing support for these types of extensions.

One of the other large elements of Brave is Brave Ads & Rewards, and the ability for users to anonymously translate their attention into substantive support for content creators in a privacy-preserving fashion.

Sampson (Brave Team)
I've also made a pretty complex thing with shiki (shiki-twoslash which you could say is similar to torchlight but just for TS/JS)

Torchlight definitely a good chunk of work on top of shiki, and as an external API it might be much easier to work with in many non-JS ecosystems.
Then you render it to text which gives you a decent markdown approximation, and render it back to what you want.
A carbon tax can fight inequality and climate change
You describe the requirements analysis step which itself is a big issue with traditional waterfall projects. You bring someone (or a team) in from either outside the company or inside the company. At that point you are already falling victim to the fallacy that you think you can fully and exhaustively analyse the full problem domain. And even if you think you can do the 100% complete requirements analysis, who says the solution/software you deliver in 3 years from now will exactly fullfil these requirements and - more over - what makes you assume the problems of today are the same problems of the business in 3 years from now?
Unlucky. It might not even be keyword matching, AI systems in use a far dumber than that. AI systems are mostly trained random noise and it can be impossible to know what set them off.

Even if you get this resolved, its not a bad idea to create a new YouTube account, reupload videos you want to keep. And keep good OpSec to avoid them being "linked".
Secret Link Uncovered Between Pure Math and Physics
The fact that you are being downvoted to hell for asking this says a lot about the sad state of the HN community.
I didn't realise that my username-email combination was public. I don't remember ever signing up to Gravatar. Why would I do that?
Poe's law: take the absinthe, or the absinthe takes you!
QuestDB Is Hiring a Python Back End Engineer
If they are promoting competing software over Swarm, you have to question that, marketing or not.
It is absurd to claim Brave is spyware; I responded to your source early this year: https://twitter.com/BraveSampson/status/1348400822925856770. I would encourage you to instead look to competent, reputable sources for security and privacy reviews of browsers (e.g. https://www.scss.tcd.ie/Doug.Leith/pubs/browser_privacy.pdf).

Sampson (Brave Team).
I have a blue light filter, it's advised when spending a lot of time at a screen.

I used to have headaches sometimes, but that disappeared with it.
There are no provisions in the EU treaty that bar member states from opening diplomatic missions on their territories, nor on which countries should they recognize. As a matter of fact, most EU countries have one or several representative offices of the ROC[1]. However, international trade agreements are negotiated by and for the whole EU block.

1. https://www.boca.gov.tw/sp-foof-countrylp-01-2.html
There are proprietary trading firms making hundreds of millions a year doing technical signal analysis.
I guess a recent pandemic would have shown which jobs were important these days:

Farmers
Truck Drivers
Shop Staff
Medical Specialists
Teachers
Infrastructure specialists (power,fuel,extending into IT work)
---
Purveyors of leisure activities, bars/brewing, restaurants/takeaways, online gaming, gambling
---
Venture capitalists and financial experts
Consultants specializing in skimming and offshoring
Sales, marketing and influencers

I'll let you assign the weightings
>I am a paid Youtube Music subscriber and I can't login to even listen to my own music anymore. Amazing.

I guess when Youtube cancels your service they don't need to pay back any subscription fees for the month or whatever amount of the time you are paid up for?
Naked co-emperors sounds like a very modern take authoritarianism and body positivity.
People or teams managing software development workflows usually silently tailor them, fitting the reality of their constraints, often outside of Scrum and Agile (despite claiming otherwise in job descriptions or developer posts)! And that's OK! There is nothing wrong with taking the best from waterfall or Scrum, or you name it, and adding a pinch of personal/novel ideas if a precept from an existing framework doesn't apply out of the box. These concepts are decades old; new tech and new constraints have arisen. People have changed. New answers are needed, or at least worth a shot. It's also OK to re-appropriate out-of-fashion concepts when those are a better fit.

The key, in my view, is to remain open to new or old ideas and to interpret and adapt dogma rather than blindly follow it.
Today I learned about Poe's law
> That won't change until

... you ask people to use an alternative. I got my entire family on to Signal about a year ago. I keep asking the BBC not to use WhatsApp. We'll see.
For me:

- Doesn't come with a built-in ad blocker, so have to install a 3rd party plugin (I don't want to install any extension into my browsers)
- Mozilla upper management have been making terrible decisions for the last 5+ years. By not using Firefox I'm sending a message (I used to give $$ to Mozilla)
- Firefox keeps having features removed (RSS, FTP, etc), and gimping the UI.

It's not much to ask to have these 3 things improved, at which point I'd move back to Firefox from Brave.
Automotive SPICE certifications would like a word...
They print $Billions, so much money they can buy anyone 100 times over.
This article is about someone who threw away the hard drive containing his wallet file/keys, the only copy he had of it. His wallet would be worth $500M. He wants to excavate the garbage dump to find it.

I'm just wondering what that would look like. It seems a Sisyphean task at best, like seeking a needle in a haystack. And how do you make sure you don't accidentally damage a hard drive with an excavator? What makes him think the hard drive is not already damaged because it has been driven over or just the weight of garbage crushing it? What if his hard drive went through one of those conveyor belts with a giant magnet above it to separate metals?

I'm not an expert, but if you take the cost of the excavation project (not just excavation, but also sifting!), then multiply it by the chance of success, it feels like the expected value is less than the wallet.

It's interesting to think about though. You can easily throw away a pile of cash, but never half a billion. The volume would be too big, you would notice. But a bitcoin wallet of the same street value fits on a micro SD, it could literally fall through a hole in your pocket.
Of course the tremendous precision comes at some cost, but I think the fact that these machines are as reliable as they are is already incredible. The engineering challenges involved in managing the fluid dynamics of inks in order to reliably shoot out picoliter sized droplets with incredible precision must be massive.

> Brother has that too, though, and is reputedly even more precise

Really? I don't think Brother really offers products in this space. They have the Innobella line that can do 1.5pl droplets, the same as the Epson unit but with far less colors. However, none of the Brother printers supporting those cartridges seem to offer a very high DPI. The smaller drop size will primarily manifest as improved color reproduction, as blending becomes easier.
I can't be the only one that secretly hopes for this to be the "good" scenario - a highly contagious variant with milder effects than the delta variant (on the vaccinated). This will get the antibodies and resistance up among the vaccinated population, and cause havoc on the unvaccinated who might end up in hospitals. One way or another, at the end of it, there will be fewer unvaccinated in the society and we can move on.
The sad collateral are the immune compromised (who could not take the vaccine even if they wanted to), and the kids younger than vaccination ages :-( However, they might be the ones that can naturally fight this monster off better than us vulnerable adults. So there's that.
They demonize it for a decade, create a sophisticated black market, and now via pen on paper they want a pound of flesh? Pfff.. let them compete in the open market. What value do they provide? None. They are owed nothing, if anything they need to pay restitution to the thousands who rotted in jail for non violent pocession of a flower.
Not if you don't get the source with the binary.
If you can't formulate actionable requirements, you're either not the domain expert, or not communicating properly with the domain expert.

What your service looks like now and what it looks like in five years are obviously two different questions, but a proper analysis will divide the issue between now and 5 years from now and come up with requirements that fill the gaps. This doesn't mean things get set in stone and aren't adaptable to changing needs - when this condition is identified, the manger/developer need only apply the workflow again, and revise the specifications with the updated data, and a new development plan can be formulated. Maybe this is 'agile', but again - it speaks to the fact that waterfall is a naturally occurring phenomenon in engineering/technical matters, and thus should be applied consistently, completely, in order to provide fruitful results.

> You cannot analyse how users will empirically interact with a product that does not yet exist.

I don't agree with this, as I believe it is very, very glib. You can of course empirically interact, by wearing the user hat. Too often the developer/manager/user hats are considered adversarial - but when the decision is made to be flexible about which of these hats one is wearing, during analysis, makes all the difference between whether your product is successful or not. Software is a social service - rigid developers who cannot put on the user hat, are not providing the most intrinsic aspect of that service in their field.

>You're presuming that it's possible to gather the "ideal requirements" when the project first starts, with enough due diligence - and also, that those requirements are fixed.

I make the claim that this ideal can be attained, by ensuring that the early steps in the waterfall process are actually applied. You are correct in noting that "when you don't do things right, right things don't happen", however ..
small claims court, obviously, require them to send someone somewhere to appear.