skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Scala is a great language when Li Haoyi ecosystem of libraries is used. His libs do crazy Scala stuff under the hood, but expose a clean end user interface. The problem with Scala is that most ppl don't use his libs.

Here's a blog post I wrote on reading / writing JSON using one of Li's libs: https://mungingdata.com/scala/read-write-json/ There's now a completely sensible option for JSON in Scala.

But there are also 16 other Scala JSON lib options: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8054018/what-json-librar...

It's so annoying working on a Scala project with dependencies that all use different JSON libs.

Even new, awesome projects like Delta Lake still use Scala dependencies like Scalatest and SBT that should be replaced with Li's libs in my opinion (utest & Mill).

Scala could be an amazing ecosystem if the community unified around Li's libs. It just doesn't seem like that's going to happen. Li wrote the "whats wrong with SBT" article back in 2017 and it seems like everyone is still using SBT.

I wrote an article on the maintenance challenges with Scala projects that trended on HN a while back: https://mungingdata.com/scala/maintenance-nightmare-upgrade/. Li's libs would solve a lot of these issues cause most of them are intentionally dependency free.

It was frustrating for me to see how Li basically singlehandedly fixed the Scala library ecosystem, but how none of the projects I actually used depended on his libs. I ended up leaving Scala after several years even though I like the language when it's used a certain way.

Scala is such a powerful programming language that has so much potential to be mainstream, but it's just so abused by "genius programmers".
The assumption is that you control the compiler (we are comparing with async that outside of duff device hacks does require compiler help).

But even without explicit compiler help, you can go a long way, say, with gcc extended inline asm.
Many people complain about transaction fees and limited throughput of a blockchain.

I can only imagine this ancient system to be a magnitude worse in those regards.
When someone objects to comparisons of taste, they insist that everythinn has essentially the same merit. Which is often hypocritical as they'd be rather found dead than with a lower back tattoo themselves.
Yes, feel people have forgotten about the Blockchain-for-x period but I suspect it will now make a comeback for the wrong reasons.
> I understand the latest X1 Carbons have most if not all of these features.

Definitely not all of them. They key travel and (I think) keyboard size have been reduced recently, Ethernet adapter is no longer included, matte option is only available for cheaper low-resolution screen options.

Since all laptop manufacturers are heavily influenced by trends set by Apple, I really hope that recent changes to MacBook Pro (bigger dimensions, more weight, return of old keyboard design) will make Lenovo reconsider in their mindless pursuit of kneecapping their designs to shave off some additional 30 grams of weight.
I've never seen a case where the actor model actually helped with the business problem. Every time I saw Akka used, replacing it with straightforward Futures-and-for/yield code was an improvement.

Cats et al are frequently abused - 90% of the time rather than using a complex tool to solve a complex problem you want to think about it a bit and simplify it. But when you need them they do things that you can't do any other way, and they're vastly better than the reflection/AOP/bytecode-manipulation that people use to solve the same problem in Java or Kotlin.
Dep Hell is real.
Of course this was said in jest. He just didn't think his work would do well commercially if translated.
I am creating two new webapp for you!
alovez.com alternative to facebook.com and
snapfeel.com alternative to instagram.com
/r/antiwork is growing exponentially
> The logical people definitely change their minds when new evidence arises.

Nah. Logical people will happily simplify world ad absurdum and proceed ignoring all the facts that point to nuance.
Ex-Apple Engineer No Longer Withdrawing US Labor Agency Complaint Against Apple
None of them wants to lose their job or benefits. It's easier to get rid of you by handling you to the next rep enough times to frustrate you. They won't get into trouble for not solving your issue - they did their jobs perfectly.

Financial harm is the single language Amazon understands. Let lawyers talk to Amazon and they most likely won't be thrown around between 1st line reps.
If you have high quality transit, you might also have "share" cars available, doesn't that come out way cheaper if you only use it so little?
> But I think it’s a mistake to see the current mechanisms and lose sight of the actual capability they’re attempting to provide.

This is magnitudes wiser than the typical sentiment of crypto here or in other skeptical communities. When the potential is first recognized, the criticisms then build toward that potential rather than simply having the purpose of tearing something down. Thanks for the piece, Chris.
When I wrote "air into space", I didn't mean it reached escape velocity. Rather, it no longer acted as a pressure cover to the blast. The air have gone up a few hundred km and returned to earth.

FWIW, there was a pressure wave world-wide. The Wikipedia page says a fluctuation of 0.6 mbar was measured in New Zealand. (Krakatoa's pressure wave was recorded going around the Earth three times!)

That said, let's consider the number of Tsar Bomba's needed to lower the pressure by 0.01mBar, permanently, assuming all of the energy from the bomb was used to get air to exactly escape velocity. (In reality, energy also went into space, or melted snow, or was turned into seismic energy, or ... And there will be a distribution of velocities.)

Mass of the atmosphere is about 5.15E18 kg. 0.01mBar is 1/100,000 reduction in atmosphere gives 5.15E13 kg.

Escape velocity about 11 km/sec.

Energy = 1/2 m v * v = 3E21 J.

Tsar Bomba = 210–240 PJ = 2E17 J.

So, assuming the impossibly perfect transfer of all energy into moving air at escape velocity, 10,000 Tsar Bombas.

I don't know how many orders of magnitude more are needed before the spherical cap of atmosphere would be blasted to escape velocity, but clearly even a tera-ton bomb isn't enough.
HN readers love to pretend the status quo needs changing, but when anyone puts forth a concrete idea on how to make that change (like the crypto community), they'll agree there's an issue, but say that this solution isn't the right one. They will endlessly repeat this cycle and proclaim frustration when nothing ever changes.
While I think the stated use case is bizarre and useless, I will note that economic sanctions are almost universally bad, used to hurt the populace of countries like Iran, North Korea, Cuba and others without doing anything to hurt the ruling elites. That said, the problem with such sanctions and trade embargoes is usually the flow of goods, which Bitcoin does less than nothing to solve of course.
Very interesting perspective, and I totally agree! I'm big into the Apple ecosystem, but their software issues are definitively a problem.
I make $30k/month thanks to Bitcoin. What should I do? (2011)
Byju's and the other side of an edtech giant's dizzying rise
These "special" strings that Log4j parse must be in the formatting string though, right?

External Strings should normally be logged as parameters, not included in the format String. For example:

// this is ok
log.debug("user-agent={}", userAgent);

// this is bad
log.debug("user-agent=" + userAgent);

Does this vulnerability still work on the first case?

EDIT: the answer is yes, just tried it myself.
All those moderator actions you described would still be possible in web3. Moderators would still be able to up a topic, merge a topic, delete topics, ...

But:

* The fact that the moderators have access to these mechanisms would be known by all users
* The use of these mechanisms by moderators would be public. If a topic is upped by a moderator, it would be logged in the blockchain. No moderator would be able to do it secretly.

Regarding the fee, it's true that it's a big downside. To get a feasible use case, the devs would need to find a blockchain that reduces them.
All of 1/2/3 could be or gamed or hacked if not EXTREME measures are taken. As proven repeatedly by the hundreds millions in dollars in smart contract hacks and losses that have happened and continue to happen.

People can’t trust the code to do what they want, because when you read it you might mistake a 0 or a O. You trust someone else or machine to audit the code tell you the code will do what you want.

US court systems take into account the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. Its a feature not a bug.
You can't ever be 100% certain - even if you analysed the smart contract completely correctly, there's always the possibility of an ethereum-style hard fork to change what your contract means. So you have to ask how confident you can actually be in whichever style of contract in practice.
Not using Akka, but I have a side project right now being done primarily in Erlang that felt natural to architect with Erlang “actor model” and the OTP (not the only reason I chose it of course, Erlang’s history and certain other features from that history made it a natural fit). There’s a small JVM-integrated component as well, but I’ll likely just be developing it in Java as it’s really just involved implementing an old JSR and I don’t foresee more advanced feature coming too much in handy.

Can’t speak to category theory. Not familiar with it, but I have done my fair share of “reflection metaprogramming” that might get me me shot (dynamically constricting and using generic types through reflection gets pretty nasty).
So like, if you don't deliver those shipping containers of hot sauce, I just click the "I was scammed" checkbox on my smart contract dashboard?

Where exactly does the leverage of smart contracts come into play?

The biggest reason libertarianism is a nonstarter is that it outright rejects the state monopoly on violence. Without a lone arbiter, societies fragment due to intragroup competition and violence. As a society fragments, the size of the monolithic projects it can engage in become smaller and smaller.

International trade is already so fragile that a stuck tanker threatens swaths of the entire thing. Now picture how infinitely improbable a system like that is if there's no physical enforcement mechanisms backing contracts up.
Logical people(usually called Smart people) could be really really stupid.

Einstein as a young fellow certainly did not change Planck's mind, and Heisenberg did not change Einstein's.

Doesn't matter if we talk about Magellan, Newton or Darwin. They changed the world one death at a time.

The reason is that logic is based on very few things(usually binary statements, true or false) and it can focus only on those things. They can dissect and understand deeply something very small and dead(static) but could have real problems understanding the whole system(big and alive[dynamic]).

You only can focus on 5,6 things at a single time and need to invest a ton of time to get results. The world is not pure binary, like mathematics usually study it,the world have shades of gray and billions of things interacting all the time.

In fact, without tools like cheap access to books that make it possible to complete the work someone else has done,and networks that share the knowledge like Universities, cities or the Internet, this process of analysis is so slow that it is completely useless.

For understanding complete systems intuition is just much better and faster. Because it is an stochastic process that could integrate millions of things at once.

For changing your mind you need proper training in the scientific process, and it takes a lot of work and effort to do, because it goes against our primal instincts. You need to be humble and train a beginner's mind all the time.

The fact is that most people believe they are logical while everybody else is dogmatic. But they are not.

They can not do something as basic exercise as proper debate in which they believe and defend only temporarly the opposite of what they really believe.

Really logical people can see their own flaws as a human(illusions and biases) and only then compensate for them.

I bet you,hilyen, believe your thinking is logic based. Hah!
The whole sentence deserves a neuro-science carpet bombing, because there is a "I" in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4uwaw_5Q3I
This reminds me of the book "Skin in the Game".

I have often the feeling that people "believe" in certain things to be edgy or interesting.
> Not correct, but it's very easy to think timestamps will solve this. Timestamps aren't good because system times aren't synced across different computers precisely.

They can be. That's what Google Spanner does, using GPS and atomic clocks. It's not hard or expensive. An atomic clock + GPS will set you back under $1000 https://www.ebay.com/itm/174750548607 for one in a nice box, $200 for a PCB https://www.ebay.com/itm/353611628534. Apparently it gets you to with 1e-11, which is about 10 pico seconds (I think).

But that doesn't solve the problem. Lets say you have two event producers, and both produce two events at times t and t+1. Once they both arrive, it's trivial to process then in the right order. Your problem is there is an unreliable network connecting you to these producers. Those atomic clocks can guarantee those events t and t+1 are distinguishable events if they are just 10ps apart, but how long do you wait for t to arrive before you decide to process the event at t+1 because there was no event at t. I can absolutely guarantee you whatever time you decide is reasonable, the universe will at some point screw you over and drop the event occurring at on your doorstep just after you decided to process t1.

Your issue isn't that it's difficult, it's is you are living in a state of sin if you believe the problem solvable given the premises.

PS: Google Spanner doesn't attempt to do the impossible. In Spanners case there is a single event producer, and Spanner is "merely" trying to record the event consistently across multiple nodes. If there are multiple event producers then it will serialise them in some order, but if there are two disconnected, independent Spanners out there processing the same events from the same producers Google is not claiming there would decide on the same order. That would need a God more powerful than Google.
Agreed on the first paragraph but it feels like the rest is just a misunderstanding of semantics on your part, to me it seems people saying „I believe“ exactly should be interpreted as „I think/pretend I believe“. Figuring out what one truly believes is a lot of work and so as always, we have proxies.
I think the counter-intuitiveness comes from the idea that low demand must equal high supply. It could also just be an illiquid market in both directions; supply and demand both low and roughly matched, but inefficiently.
You can invest in mutual funds which invest in foreign companies. Creating online accounts for direct mutual funds investments is fully digital using Video KYC.
Oh cool, how many people in your community do you know who are comfortable using PGP in their email?
It’s a nod to the future for sure but we had 80 teaching staff, 3 full time CS teachers, 2 more doing design and technology which incorporated some low level C, 1 more from Physics doing STEM extras and 1 in Geography who was 50% time doing lab work for other subjects.

Until CS is a core subject that’s going to be it for staff levels who do coding, but the elephant in the room is the Mathematics team. They are enormous in any school, and if they incorporate discrete math into their core with one semester of coding you now have another 8-10 teachers who would all really benefit from Replit.

So yes, 20% is a stretch, but CS taught as a core subject is coming.
Presuming this is a fancy sci-fi kind of anarchy: multi-sig escrow wallet requiring a 2-of-3 quorum of oracle triggers from observation cubesats owned by both parties plus some disinterested third party.

(People are already doing the virtual equivalent for prediction markets: everyone who cares runs their own oracle agent to forward result data from web2 sources into web3. You “just” need computer vision + good optics to bring that paradigm into the physical world.)
That sounds like Fibonacci coding [1] to me: you can express anything up to -13 semitones with just two fingers.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_coding
There are middle grounds here. Sovereignty, like security, is not binary, it's a spectrum.

You could use a scheme where two of three signatures allow transactions : you, your 'bank' and a notary. Or have such schemes for anything above a value. Or allow transactions by and to a list of whitelisted addresses after a certain date or event (such as a missed canary).
According to a comment here it does https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29506397
If you don’t remove the scrollbar, then the document can be scrolled underneath the modal. You can, these days, significantly mitigate this with overscroll-behavior on the modal backdrop, but the document scrollbar itself still works. (I will note, however, that overscroll-behavior is still missing on Safari. And scrollbar-gutter isn’t on Safari and is still disabled by default on Firefox.)
Let's hope they don't all die this time around.
I've seen those facts. They don't begin to address what MBTI is about.

Astrology is hokum, too, but it randomizes who gets which bit of advice on which day, and gives everybody different advice at different times. That birthdays and planets have no meaningful role beyond randomization does not lessen its usefulness at keeping people who follow it out of ruts.

MBTI is a lesson in other valid ways to perceive and act in the world than what you are used to. Other people do, and it would be a poorer world if they didn't.
> who both understands those advanced concepts and is not a FP fanatic.

Oxymoron.
BourseDirect has stocks at IPO
You can agree with most or all of that and still think the the tokenisation of everything with over expensive compute and storage and infinite middlemen isn’t the win their advocates think it is.

You can own your own data, log in using a cryptographic secure identity and do many other awesome decentralised things through that without needing a blockchain. The latter I think does have value if you want to transfer funds without the government stopping you at the time (retrospectively though they might). That’s not very useful for normal people though.

The problem is that there is little thought outside of crypto for this digital self-sovereignty when the digital world is effectively post-scarcity. Which makes me think that most care more about the money to be made than the ideals they claim to hold.
You’re practically right,
But if your team isn't constantly changing then running your custom solution for at-least more simpler things like logging is better.

Because otherwise you have to depend on skills of a third party library maintainer you have no communication with or contract agreement with, to protect his/her codebase from getting security backdoors, which other malicious actors will constantly try to inject it with, if the library is known to be used by various large enterprises.

Coding with third party libraries is about trust, for simpler functions and packages its usually worth it long term to code it in-house. It’s easier to maintain, only comes with features you need and you’re always aware of what capabilities your code has.

I’m everyday impressed how relatively less npm with node, etc get hacked, considering they use additional third-party libraries for 4 liner functions too.
If your argument is that decentralized ledger technologies cannot in their current state or perhaps ever entirely replace governments then I guess any reasonable person will just have to give that to you. And I doubt as many "crypto evangelicals" would actually argue with you on this.
Rashida Haji
Digital Marketing
YouTube is the best place for instruction because everything in text now is just marketing. YouTube gives creators a way to profit from genuinely useful content, even if it’s not the best medium for it.
I am not convinced by this trichotomy. The "Engagement" effect is just a restatement of the classic network effect, while the "Acquisition" and "Economic" effects are simple consequences of it.

He states that networked products obtain clients easier from the existing network. But this is true for non-networked products too - see the early Gmail invite system. If anything, an invite from a friend to chat with him on the early Twitter was even less valuable than a Gmail invite, that allowed you to email the whole non-gmail world, not just SMS a single friend.

What makes acquisition more effective is precisely the network effect, while a classic business acquires in a dampened geometric ratio, a networked business acquires clients much faster because those acquired through word of mouth find a much more compelling product than the early adopters, some of their friends and contacts are already there, and they derive direct benefits when more and more of their friends go online, incentivizing invitations.

The third "Economic" effect is, again, the direct consequence of the network effect: Slack can charge more for business-wide features because the product is much useful for the organization as a whole due to network effects.
I agree, but as we speak Russia has amassed 150k+ troops on the Ukrainian border and Putin is waiting to see whether the West can apply enough sanctions to make the whole effort a net loss before he gives the green light on an invasion.
Waddlesplash: “I am now writing an Xlib implementation”
What's your ethernet line speed? The readme mentions the cable type, but are you running 10M/100M/1G/10G?

(Probably not 10M, I don't think you can send 64k packets in 4 seconds on 10M; you'd need a little bit more time)
> Cancer as entropy- the plot thickens

Isn't cancer basically the result of entropy? With enough imperfect cell-divisions, sooner or later one of them is going to have a mutation that causes unbound cell-division (i.e. growth).
> The prints look really spotty in the pictures.

That's likely just wear on the print
TL;DR: Xlib (X11) implementation for Haiku is to come.[0,1,2]

[0] https://twitter.com/app4soft/status/1469067255103246339

[1] https://twitter.com/waddlesplash/status/1469067801151348736

[2] https://github.com/haikuports/haikuports/issues/2906#issueco...
Similarly, as I wrote in /r/bayarea a few weeks ago in response to a post titled "At 16/25, almost 2/3 of the posts on the first page of this subreddit are about local crime. I don't think that's an accurate impression of the Bay Area":

The narrative that this post itself is part of:

* Crime is ackshaully down, not up, so...

* ... the subreddit is talking about crime too much ...

* ... and anyways, only out-of-town Nazis/Republicans/Trump voters are posting these articles ...

* ... and anyways, only big companies with insurance are being robbed, so we shouldn't care ...

* ... and anyways, slavery, white supremacy, and redlining made these benighted souls commit these victimless crimes
The article deserves worse, using 'we'. Correctly (ex Popper) the poster went 'I', hence, "well no, not really".
What a crap article. It offered zero facts on WHAT PERCENTAGE of people preferred the new violins and what the confidence level was.
You're looking for what is known as "the green book" published by aashto

Geometric Design of Highways and Streets

https://aashtojournal.org/2018/09/28/aashto-releases-7th-edi...

But this comes after the traffic and environmental and planning studies, so it's more of a "how" to build, after you've at least gone through some preliminary design and figured out "what" to build.

And yes, there is literally a table (for highways at least) that gives values for lane width vs the "natural speed" that drivers gravitate to.