skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
marc(at)hey.com

Note that I'm not a lawyer, but I've dealt with similar issues before through a qualified lawyer. Happy to introduce you. Not sharing name here publicly, because that could potentially be used against me. (i.e. someone intentionally creating a conflict of interest, etc)
It has certainly 'worked great' for leeches, if you ignore bombs like this logging bug destroying Western civilization.

Can you explain a bit more how it worked great for the bulk of maintainers / authors who don't see any return on their work, burn out and have to do something else?
Will PiHole(so?) be able to block ads before chrome can render them or will these Manifestv3 changes break pages from loading?
A serology test is just proof of prior infection. It says nothing about the severity and would even count asymptomatic cases. So the study is comparing apples and oranges.
But it was a time of low technological progress though wasn't it? Not saying it was NO progress. Just low progress.

Am I wrong?

I'm not a history scholar, so please let me know if I'm off base.
Yes, although that criteria is somewhat subjective. Since an UDRP needs to meet all criteria, you can throw it out by just looking that the registration dates.
Not saying that the op has dyslexia, but i wonder how dyslexia feels like for a programmer?

And dyslexia in general, is it like the mind can‘t stop and „go back“ to the word you just wrote? Or is it more that the eyes don‘t notice when reading what you wrote?
Battery storage is already sufficient and inexpensive enough for deployment today at costs less than nuclear.

A 3x overbuild of solar+wind in an optimal mix, along with a continental grid and 3 hours worth of batteries is all you need for 99.99% reliability: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-26355-z

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/electrify
clearly it is our duty to genocide everything that isn't human to increase our chance of being human in our next incarnation.
Plenty of people do believe that plants are sentient. It is a part of plenty of spiritual belief systems that ascribe life, spirit, and sentience to all living things, and often many nonliving things.
Right. Had the same issue years ago. Did the same and worked the same.

Just point them to https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/help/dndr/udrp-en
Oh a hornet can recognize a conspecific, huh? Can you describe the house you grew up in?
> is holding people's companies together

This is a pretty unlikely situation.

Someone already thought of all this and made Tidelift, btw.
Getting Google to waste time and money would be the best self-expression someone can ever have.
antibody levels after booster are much higher compared to after second shot. there is a chance that it will last longer
> why wouldn't you want to get something that showed such high efficacy against death and hospitalization that had such a low, temporally finite cost?

Because they've already determined that their current health is already highly effective at keeping them out of hospital and death.

So you want them decrease their risk from 0.2% to 0.1% and in exchange expose them to a vaccine that's:

- Expires in a few months

- They've already had a history of reacting to (further shots always worse)

- No one takes liability for

- Relatively has higher risk of side effects among their profile

- Unknown long term risk

It doesn't seem like a good deal
This is a great example of why I'm really starting to hate the internet. You can't express any opinion these days without a few paragraphs with your life story explaining why you're allowed to have such an opinion. (For example having to be Jewish to say anything critical about Israel)
Presumably their wish to cause google some inconvenience is greater than their wish for self-expression, and/or they have other means of expressing themselves so they don't care about any particular project.
no, people should commit security vulnerabilities on purpose; anarchy and chaos should arise

reign of chaos
You meant "commensurate", of course, but maybe "commiserate" was a Freudian slip? I often look at people managing large groups if people and think, "that looks like (it's often) a miserable job". :)
This is discussion about nuclear power generation, not of nuclear weapons, though. Quite different things. Nuclear, esp. thermonuclear weapons are indeed designed to inflict untold damage.
We could point it out and pester Google employees with how dumb it has become in every discussion where it is brought up.

I've been doing this for a while and it now seems I'm getting some support.

The last few years however I have given up Google and after using DDG for a few years I'm now testing out Kagi and I am happy to say that not only is the business model much better aligned with me as a user, but the results also seems to be significantly better than both Google and DDG now.
Israel is still doing 3rd shot (aka booster). Nobody forcing there 4th booster
No doubt. The question is who should be paying them?
Open source isn't broken. The software will continue to get built regardless of funding levels, clearly. But when vulnerabilities like this are found, no one -- especially corporate users -- gets to complain. Any complainers should be immediately told to fund the software they use, or shut their entitled mouths.

Open source is fine. The culture of companies -- nearly all of them, including the one I work for -- that freeload off this work is what's broken. If you are equating this state of affairs with "open source", I think that does everyone involved a disservice.

I work on and release some things under open source licenses. I've been doing this on and off for nearly 20 years. None of it these days is as remotely as popular as something like log4j (the only popular thing I worked on for a while was Xfce, during the 00s). But that's the thing: I don't care (and kinda don't want) that kind of popularity. And if there's a critical bug in my stuff that lingers for a few weeks -- even if it's a security bug -- that's just life. If people want something with faster bug fixes or to-the-minute security responses, they submit patches, or they can pay me. Or, better yet, use an alternative that is already better supported, because I don't want to be paid for this stuff, and take on the burden of the added expectations.

An aside:

> Now let's turn our eyes to log4j2. This project is effectively in the standard library for Java users.

Is that really true? All my (professional and hobby) JVM projects use slf4j+logback. If I depend on anything that pulls in log4j (most of which pulls in v1, not the vulnerable v2), I exclude that and add the log4j-over-slf4j library, which replaces log4j with simple classes that delegate to slf4j.
> Clean Room Technician: You know what they do with engineers when they turn forty?

> [to Aaron, who shakes his head]

> Clean Room Technician: They take them out and shoot them.

Dialogue from the 2004 movie Primer.
While ML model building is bit more difficult , fuzzing a standard engine moves do only what you can understand is certainly possible without too much difficulty.

The point is cheating is bigger concern in online chess than other eSports
The solution to this, along with many other socioeconomic problems, isn't going to be solved through voluntarism.

This is easily solved with a universal basic income. Some of us would gladly forever maintain and contribute to free software if we had our basic needs guaranteed.

I certainly would
>- It doesn't handle different languages well. No in-page translation, no automatic language detection for text correction, etc.

This is what keeps me away. There are extension options on desktop but no solution for mobile.
Sure, in the medium term, nuclear probably is the best solution. But, nuclear is not going to save us from 1.5°C (nothing can, in fact)[0], and it isn't going to do anything for us for 20-30 years. That's how long it takes to build a nuclear plant in the US.

We can't let nuclear distract us from the goal, which is preventing more serious warming.

---

[0]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-...
> I simply do not want to be in a situation where my software that I develop as a passion project on the side is holding people's companies together.

People love to hate on Richard Stallman but he was really clear about the motivation for Free Software (which is not the same as Open Source but shares some tenets).

What companies do with the source is their thing. They get all of the benefits and all of the responsibilities. But the beautiful thing is that if that maintainer is dead or missing or no longer interested, you CAN fix it. Which is very difficult / nigh impossible for closed source.
Would more time or money prevented the log4j bug? If anything that strikes me as coming from too much time spent on overarchitecting something.
IMHO SDL mostly makes sense on Linux because it hides a lot of really ugly window system and GLX setup code.

On Windows (with Win32+DXGI+D3D11) and macOS (with Cocoa+Metal+MetalKit), things like setting up a window, 3D device and swap chain is just a few lines of relatively straightforward code, so SDL is by far not as useful there as on Linux.
TST does look great. Not sure it's usable in my case:

- similar to what others mentioned, I'm running a browser at 50% width of fullscreen (27", 4K display). This is ideal for most websites: it's about as narrow as most websites would natively be. However, this means there's no horizontal space left to sacrifice.

- I've been hard at work eradicating non-standard/exotic tools/workflows/etc. from my life. Maintainers abandon software regularly and then you're left stranded, perhaps your entire workflow gets turned upside down. Good old regular tabs "just work" and do so everywhere. The more you customize your setup, the more you're stranded on foreign territory. There's value in just getting used to what's there by default, to a degree.

TST essentially turns the 1D tab row (let's call it list) into a nested structure. And that really is fantastic. However, I think I'd hope and wait for that to become mainstream and officially integrated and wide-spread, if ever, before relying on it. The usual, top-row tab bar with some 2-dimensional twist seems promising.
It has been done for OPL3 https://github.com/gtaylormb/opl3_fpga

I have a suspicion emulating in software specific Yamaha hardware implementation would not only lead to bit perfect reproduction, but also faster emulator. I wonder how slow of an MCU would one need, 20MHz AVR? 30MHz STM32?
I don’t have dyslexia either but the way that I’ve heard it described is that the letters appear to float around so it becomes hard to determine if the letters are in order or not.

Curious to know if fonts like OpenDyslexic actually help, and if programmers with dyslexia use those sorts of fonts. https://opendyslexic.org/

Furthermore, has anyone with dyslexia attempted to use a screen reader the same way that people with vision impairments do?
The conceit being that I want to watch some McDonalds employee brush his teeth before heading out to work, or get the chance to talk to some guy about his mortgage at a bar.

I don't know why you'd build a game simulating more depth of interest in background characters than people actually possess, and it's not like occlusion culling is a foreign idea.
> Too young or inexperienced or fearful of reprisal to understand how to advocate for themselves and others; and/or

Reprisal is real, especially for the young and inexperienced in places where employees are treated like shit.

> Just unaware that better places to work do exist, and are convinced (much like the thread parent here) that "this is just how gamedev is"

I find it hard to believe that you really think people getting treated like shit at work are "unaware that better places to work do exist". They are absolutely aware that better places to work exist, the problem is knowing which places those are, and then getting a job there.

The negative statements being made about gamedev in this thread are generalizations, of course there are some excellent gamedev studios out there, but on average you're going to do a lot more work for a lot less pay with a lot less respect and a lot more drama than pretty much anywhere else in the software industry.
It would be interesting to get feedback from some of the more successfully funded projects and understand how they have things structured to handle these kinds of things.

I also know there are organizations like the Software Freedom Conservancy who helps to handle these kinds of things who I would highly recommend [1].

I used to donate to a lot of FOSS projects, most recently FOSSHOST. Both the project and myself were heavily attacked and accused of all sorts of things for doing so [2]. It has left a chilling effect on me and others I have spoken to. Most of the people who engaged in the online attack were not even developers, but simply "IRC Admins" of projects.

How does a company or individual support projects financially with this kind of social ecosystem?

[1] https://sfconservancy.org/projects/

[2] https://fosshost.org/news/freenode
This is true. But there are ways to hide that with one more layer. For instance the rackn guys just released an update to digital rebar that uses pipelines and brokers to stand up infrastructure using among other things terraform but the user just specs out what they want in simple profiles. Digital rebar supports aws, linode, digital ocean, etc. You still have to specify a few things unique to each cloud provider but the scripting for each is otherwise the same.
The line between snowball fight and iceball fight is a thin one.
Thanks for the thoughtful article. I've always viewed Free software and to some extent OSS as by programmers, for programmers, period. Contributing code back supports the other programmers who use it. If commercial businesses want to use the software then they are free to contribute back (monetarily to support programmers or with their own code) or not. There is a long history of volunteerism in maintaining the Internet via open standards and I see a lot of OS/Free software in the same way.

It doesn't make sense that businesses don't invest enough in the software they use (paid commercial software or otherwise). That is only to the detriment of the businesses that don't care to invest (their unique use-cases are not improved). It's not quite a tragedy of the commons because nothing prevents the people who do care (Google, MS, Amazon, FB, IBM, to name the large ones) from contributing their improvements back to the ecosystem, and they retain the full benefit of their work.

It is absolutely an unequal exchange of goods for labor for most businesses but the near+zero marginal cost of replicating software means that it's a negligible loss for the authors, if that. The solid benefit for most programmers and system administrators is that they get to use high-quality Free/OS software in the jobs where they do earn money. At least for me, business concerns are secondary; I want to use quality software with a good ecosystem rather than know for sure that my employer paid money for the software that I have to use.
I like how they get halfway through the article before deciding it could also be a raven. And talk like it would just not be possible to distinguish one from the other.
The title of the article is "Open Source is broken" and its subtitle is "Why I Don't Write Useful Software Unless You Pay Me"

And I disagree with both of these statements. Open source is not broken and I'll continue to write useful software, even if you don't pay me, because it's fun.

The actual problem is concisely present in the article:

> There is this culture of taking from open source without giving anything back.

The problem is not with open source, but with how capitalistic systems interface with open source - the same way the interface with any public good.
It's the capitalist culture that's broken; the capitalist culture of rent extraction and of short-term profit optimization.
I _think_ (but unsure) that it should be read “followed by”, and only makes sense in the context of a while loop, where `x = y fby z` means that x will take the value of y on the first iteration and z on subsequent iterations.
In that we all come from the sun and are comprised of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen? Sure.

Plants, too. Guess I'll read up on airatarianism.
Well, here's your chance to explain exactly what you did mean and why you used a poorly-defined term with a lot of baggage in attempt to attack the forum rather than engaging intellectually with the content. The innocent definition of the term isn't a pejorative and certainly doesn't have a meaning which would say it's okay to ignore something just because it ran in Foreign Policy.

Also, while you may have had purely innocent intentions note that your use of that term apparently made someone else feel safe calling me an anti-Jewish slur and telling me to kill myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29521708
Daniel Ellsberg, Nils Melzer, Craig Murray, and Others on Assange Ruling
Thanks! Macroexpanded:

DeepMind’s AI helps untangle the mathematics of knots - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29514642 - Dec 2021 (61 comments)

DeepMind cracks 'knot' conjecture that bedeviled mathematicians for decades - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29466753 - Dec 2021 (3 comments)

Can deep learning help mathematicians build intuition? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29424749 - Dec 2021 (28 comments)

Exploring the beauty of pure mathematics in novel ways - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29405380 - Dec 2021 (4 comments)

Mathematicians Find Structure in Biased Polynomials - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29208141 - Nov 2021 (8 comments)
Funny how that can work. We can’t use natural fruit puree for cannabis edibles because they won’t pass pesticide testing.
> Your feed is made up of the content written by people you're connected to

This isn't true at all. Your feed is made up of content your connections interact with. Likes, comments, etc.

Since so many people interact with vapid and empty "live laugh love" style garbage like Dan Price or B Burns, it's inevitable for anyone's feed to be full of kiss-ass nonsense without hands on curation.
To be be honest that isn’t that bad. Our ships constantly rust and they are usually prettied up before pulling into port. I’m guessing there was more important work to do
I get a little nervous when the responsibility of incentivizing FOSS is framed as a personal responsibility. Isn't there a deeper conversation to be had about how we allocate resources as a society to help build fundamental infrastructure instead of placing the blame on individual people or corporations on their lack of sponsorship or donation?

My apologies if this is flame-bait. I really don't know what the solution is. I certainly could admit that shaming people into contributing on an individual level is a valid tactic and that a good state to be in is to have individual and corporate sponsorship for a long tail of FOSS projects. I worry that focusing on the failings of individuals to fund projects takes attention away from other alternatives.

I really don't know what the alternative could be. UBI? A wide array of government grants for FOSS?
> If log4j2 is responsible for your company's success, you have a moral obligation to donate to the person who creates this library thanklessly.

That's a big if, log4j is a logging library after all. This is an understandable position to hold for other types of dependencies (think react, database, UI components etc.) but the logging library is very far down in the ordered set of projects I'd donate to.

I will however leave a mark and donate to the top 3 dependencies I consider most important in my (non-java) side project.

Edited to add: If you offer your software at no charge, you shouldn't be surprised if people accept that offer. So I even disagree with the "moral obligation" bit. Doesn't mean that donating is a bad thing, however.
I think the issue, which is so well depicted in that XKCD cartoon, is that transitive dependencies can make it nearly impossible to not depend on some low-level, unmaintained library.

It's not like tens of thousands of projects decide to pull in left-pad. But tens of thousands of projects do decide to use React, which (I'm guessing through its own gaggle of many dependency layers) happened to pull in left-pad.

Taking the option of "I'll just build everything myself" then is not really a viable process in today's world, where all of your competitors will be using tons of prebuilt stuff (unless, perhaps, you have the productivity of someone like Fabrice Bellard, but the reason he's so well known is because his abilities are so rare).

I think the real fix is that dependency management tools like NPM and Maven need to make it much easier to "override" dependency package names so that, if a critical issue is discovered, you are not at the mercy of the current maintainers of that package to quickly get a fix into production.
I agree that appropriate compensation is necessary,
but I don't think it's sufficient. There's a lack of
visibility and tooling for dependency management/auditing.
I can't even find a proper list of critical OSS along with
their donation links.

Moreover, there needs to be a fundamental re-thinking of
the security model of languages and runtimes, i.e. even
if I can eval() user input or load a plugin from the network,
it should not be game over. There should be finer-grained
access control in programs, both at the type-level and
with how they interact with the OS. The global view of
"your program can do anything unless said otherwise"
needs to change.
Maybe UBI would be a good use case here. People could focus on their passion projects and wouldn’t need to worry about begging for money from the corporations that profit off of their labors and give nothing back.
Open-source is only broken in the sense that we frequently conflate it with free as-in beer.

IMO, fewer things should be free in general, regardless of whether the source is open. Charging money limits the amount of low-value users and the problems that come with them, it rewards the those contributing their expertise, and it can be a replacement for junkvertising.

So I agree with the author, but perhaps not in the sense that open-source software needs to charge money. It depends on whether the software really necessitates pay and exactly whom should be paying. Charging all users a fee can be counterproductive, but only charging for commercial use by companies can be a way to go.
If I had a nickel for every time I've seen an article claiming "open source is broken", I'd have enough nickels to live on for some time.

The other side is that everything else is broken, too. How much should you really trust a package that you cannot audit and that is maintained by an unknown group of people with unknown skills who are also subject to the whims of quarterly earnings reports? Oh, and you'll never hear what their screw-ups were.
there is no past tense for unsustainable, so if one wants to indicate something was unsustainable in the past they say it 'was unsustainable' but if they want to indicate something will be unsustainable for the future they just say it is unsustainable, one of the downsides of English; also, past performance is no indicator of future performance applies to many things outside investing.

In other words open source as it was practiced was sustainable up until the point it got taken advantage of too much by big players not putting things back into the system. At this point it has become unsustainable.
This same weak argument gets used against "open source", and while I strongly prefer "free software", I still think it's ridiculous how much people make this claim. Get your own terms. Stop trying to make the world a worse place for those who care about freedom, please.
Depends on the bread, doesn't it, Henry David?