skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
An interesting strategy to approach it as a light field rather than a projection onto a plane.

It seems to me that these things which most readily are useful for "entertainment" and "museums" don't get the level of investment dollars they need when they solve a real problem that someone has. As a result I fear for it's longevity.

Still, the Foveon camera was a good example of the cool stuff you could do with computational photography, perhaps computational displays like this one will find a niche.
> Unless there is a killer feature it enables...

... anonymity isn't a killer feature for me personally, but it is for some.

Anyway, the parent post's point is just that it's not clear what the 'killer feature' that web3 is offering is.

Without that, it's just expensive and pathetically underpowered compared to other platforms.

You can use it to do crypto. hm... ok. I don't have crypto, and I don't have piles I money lying around I want to throw away gambling or turning into crypto.

That doesn't seem to leave any 'Killer features' for me to care about.
As my post was one of the first in this these threads, the topic had not yet gotten divisive. Moreover, my comment about moderation did not regard my comment but regarded the parent comment, which I felt made a substantive contribution and got downvoted for it for, I am guessing, ideological reasons.
Scamazon, Wak-Mart, and Turget likely facilitate the sale of shoddy goods because consumers need to repurchase them when they break and overall that makes them higher profits. I've had to buy room fans almost every year because that's really the only local option I have now at big box stores near me, The smaller shops are all closed now.

This is why we can't allow the concept of mom-and-pop shops to die off... Quality of consumer goods should always outrank price in terms of importance, that's also possibly why many of the largest outlets are resorting to enabling fake and misleading reviews.
Oh yeah I'm with you on that. The ideal time to get something optimal is when it's been around long enough to prove it's self. If it's good to go get it out the door. You don't make money on features you haven't shipped.

My problem is 12 months down the track getting people to give you the resources to refactor when they get no new features out of the deal. Only the next few will take half the time to develop if you can do the clean up first. But the demand on the new feature with out way every thing else.
The trailing suffix cast (not sure the actual name, but `x.(string)` and the like) are not type safe. Yes, it's not required to be able to try to deal with an empty interface type, but it's there, and it will always compile fine and allow code afterwards to freely assume the cast succeeded without any errors.

I imagine the rebuttal to this is that you could always just manually `unwrap` the `Option` that is returned by the downcast methods in Rust, but I pretty strongly feel that adding explicit syntax for this type of unsafe cast normalizes it to an extent that having an `unwrap` method on a generic Option type doesn't remotely approach. It would be quite a stretch to argue that having the `unwrap` method on Option is explicitly a endorsement on unwrapping on the downcast methods given that Option is used for far more than just that (and especially given the huge amount of stigma that using `unwrap` gets in the community, which is mostly fair but sometimes goes a little overboard). On the other hand, having specific syntax that is used for unsafe casts and nothing else is a pretty explicit argument that it should be done sometimes, or else it wouldn't be in the language at all. Go could pretty easily have gone the route they did with map lookups and had the unsafe casts return two values, the latter of which is a boolean indicating success or failure (and in the cast of `false` being returned, the former value would just be the zero value for the output type), and the fact that this wasn't done means that ergonomics was prioritized over safety.
This isn’t Reddit, be more civil.
Valve wants developers to target Proton as opposed to "native" games. This prevents rot from developers not testing their game on Linux.
As in Firefox is not rendering content with Gecko, it's rendering via WebKit?
How to Resolve Scope Elevation
Am I moving the goalpoasts or are you trying to demonize people and I'm not buying your narrative?
No actual blockchain will be able to (even in theory) take down DMCA'd data. There is no mechanism whatsoever for complying with such requests, anymore than there's a mechanism for reversing transactions associated with activity a government deems illegal.

Individuals running IPFS gateways or nodes may be directly targeted and asked to take down data, but there's no mechanism for "the network as a whole" to remove data. It's exactly the same as bittorrent. So long as one individual in some hard-to-reach jurisdiction continues hosting the data, nothing can be done.
TRIM is a solution to a different problem. This is a higher layer operation that saves storage usage regardless of the media. I hardly consider any an operation where I understand the tradeoffs a "big no no". I'm an engineer, not a six-year-old.
So the way IPFS works is that the URLs are hashes of the content. If providers are pressed by DMCA they can stop resolving the content but as long as one person resolves the content it should be theoretically accessible. Potentially IPFS relays could choose not to relay this but that's ultimately a weakness of the client not polling multiple relays more than it is the network failing to be resilient.

So IPFS does allow DMCA and the like to exist and function but as long as a certain margin refuse to comply, the network continues to function as expected ignoring the actions of centralised organisations.
The same argument could have been made against TLSv1.3, IPv6 or HTTP 2/3.

See how much of the web you can access on an old IE6 installation.

I don’t think anything behind a LetsEncrypt certificate will, for example.
These companies are probably hiring more psychologists and marketers than product quality testers... It shows.
I do really dislike this general attitude that blockchain/web3/crypto is some elaborate scam with no benefits. Everyone focuses on the same negatives but never look at the interesting elements like solving the double spend problem, safely transferring digital assets in a trustless environment, having a working global computing system with inbuilt incentives, etc..

Yes there are crap uses at the moment. NFTs are a bubble, tokens are overpriced. But the idea of taking ownership of your financial wallet, allowing atomic transactions of digital items, allowing fast cross-border transactions, are all cool ideas. The issue is people only see the cryptobro memes and videos about what coin will 100x, or being asked if they own ethereum by their hairdresser, or seeing news articles about NFTs being sold for 500k.

Rather than jumping on the bandwagon of "Crypto is awesome, let's make a ton of money" or "Crypto is stupid, proof of work is bad for the environment, txs are slow" take the time to actually look at some of the underlying tech. I feel most people are just parroting issues they've heard rather than actually taking a look under the hood.

Edit: I found this a particularly well-reasoned explanation of the tech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSTNhBlfV_s
I'm not an expert, but I think a better solution would be to use a dual ported RAM that both the ESP and the Gameboy can access. The Gameboy has a dedicated memory area for cartridge RAM, A000 to BFFF.
Having seen what failoverflow had to do to get Linux running on a ps4 I would say you are mostly correct.

They are not IBM pc compatible.

But for the most part once you get everything working... The difference is negligible.
Yes. You aren't allowed alternate browser engines on iOS. Every browser in the App Store is Safari wrapped in different skins.
I think you're pretty off, yes. Censorship-resistance is one of the core selling points of Ethereum. :)

> but will make it so the address the item is stored at returns nothing

There's no way for the blockchain to do that. The only way this is possible on ethereum is if the smart contract includes a self-destruct function, and the owner of the smart contract decides to call it (either because their private keys were compromised, or because they were coerced into doing so IRL). Otherwise, it's technically impossible to do without taking down the entire network or breaking encryption.

I'm less familiar with IPFS so can't really speak much to that -- but from what little I understand, censorship-resistance is also a major selling point there.

> So, it's the equivalent of some entity controlling the DNS?

There is the ENS, but even then, nobody can take an ENS domain down except for the owner of that domain. Not even the creator of the ENS smart contract, unless they specifically included upgrade functionality into the contract, because smart contracts are immutable.

> Sure, the item at the address is immutable, but you might not be able to get it.

As long as you have access to a single Ethereum node, or access to a service that has access to an Ethereum node, you will be able to get at it. It's hard to imagine you not getting at any Ethereum nodes unless a Great Firewall of China situation exists, and even China doesn't care to ban most proxies.
The Computer Chronicles – Internet (1995)
Is Crypto at Risk of Becoming a New Form of Gambling Addiction?
Every empire declines eventually. And I think they really earned that wealth.
AFAIK, PNG format can't contain portable little icons. It wouldn't make sense, either, since it would need lots of different sizes of those for different platforms and devices. Mac OS is what creates the icons for individual files on a Mac desktop. Type something into a text file and save it... the document's icon will actually show a tiny miniature of the text you typed, not just some generic text-document icon. The PNG miniature is generated by the OS, and says HELLO WORLD, even though the same OS parses it as HELLO APPLE when you open it with quicklook or preview.
> It doesn't make sense to me why officials aren't focusing just on getting as close to 100% as possible of the vulnerable vaccinated.

That's what the priority classes were for. But at this point we have plenty of shots for everyone, at least in the US. So anyone who will take the shot is a good target.

> A vaccine mandate is a great way of making a lot of money for some people...

We've already done so many shots that a vaccine mandate wouldn't be that much in terms of profits. And in the longer term it could easily mean less shots total, if we shut down the virus.
It depends on what you’re optimizing for; reducing boot times is not an uncommon goal.
Sometimes I wonder if the word inflation has two meanings. There's what we typically mean by the word -- a lingering phenomenon which feeds on itself. And then there's the short-term "situational" thing which lasts X number of months.

I think part of the problem is we're using the same word to describe two different things...

"Russell Price, chief economist at Ameriprise, expects inflation to peak at 7.1% in December and January, for example. After that, he expects the inflation rate to fall toward 4% by the summer and below 3% by the end of the year."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/inflation-painfully-high...
feel free to check out /r/Mastodon on reddit, it's a pretty active community and people will be more likely to engage than they do here (too many posts in the new queue on HN tbh).
SARS-CoV-1 is airborne, so why would an informed person think that SARS-CoV-2 was not likely to be airborne? Masks are effective in original SARS and influenza, so why would an informed person conclude masks would not likely be effective on the new coronavirus? Influenza needs boosters annually due to variants — why would a reasonable person know either way at the beginning that boosters would be unnecessary?

I think you drank too much government koolaid in your list of ostensibly false things. Worries about mask shortages, diplomatic relations with China, availability of vaccines in the global south, and inducing people to get vaccinated the first time all led to our governments lying to us and presenting it as science. I don’t think the actions were malicious, but they ended up being both wrong and bad public policy.
So far my strategy is to just ignore it and pray that the problem goes away by itself. If I have to deal with it eventually - quitting is the most appealing option.

However, the reason I asked here is to get a feeling about how common this thing is. Is this normal? Am I the rat in the lab, or am I just late to the party?
The 'leak detectors' – – – and their wooden listening stick (2017)
> This method relies on the idea of a cost, most likely monetary, proportional to the choice. This is obviously incompatible with core principles of modern democracies.

A standard non-monetary proposal is to have all issues voted on separately, and allow voters who choose not to vote on a particular issue to bank their votes for the next election. This is obviously incompatible with voting by representatives in a representative democracy, but isn’t incompatible with direct democracy, which is how many issues are decided in local elections.
> yet none of their hundreds of highly paid engineers are able to do anything

Moderation doesn't scale well, so hundreds of engineers don't go very far even if you put them all on moderation. Google doesn't like to put money on anything that can't be automated (even when it's the appropriate, like customer service), hence you see only ML filters that of course can't tell the difference.

Also, careful what you wish for. As we've seen, one man's moderation is another man's 1A violation. I'd much more prefer comments, downvotes and user defined filters to do the accountability, than a guaranteed-shitty DOA moderation/truth keeper team. I worry much more about YT's slow creep towards a fully auto-play, advertiser friendly TV equivalent.
Internet companies and their defenders sometimes insist that this kind of problem is impossible to solve—that the scale of the web makes a certain amount of bad behavior impossible to stop.

Impossible? Which Internet companies have made such a claim?

And who is their “defenders” that feels so compelled to step for the likes of Amazon?
zram shouldn't really be recommended anymore, IMHO. zswap is the more modern alternative — it does not require a separate virtual device, can resize its pool dynamically, is enabled by default on some distributions, and (IIRC) supports more compression algorithms (trade CPU time for higher compression ration or vice versa).

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Zswap
Blockchain nodes are just servers like http servers or ftp servers and so DMCA notices and other legal measures can be taken against the operators of each server. Whether or not such measures would be successful is debatable, but there's nothing magical about a blockchain in this respect. It's just a set of servers replicating state between each other and (potentially) serving that state up to clients.
The woman was re-selling a bootleg copy from the 80s, and that German court came down on her like a bag of hammers. So glad we have these kinds of idiotic copyright laws that let huge artists and corporate goons step on the throats of small individuals, seemingly at random.

Also I enjoy how the article brought up Clapton's COVID stance twice, even though that has fuck all to do with the actual matter at hand.
I, for one, will never understand how Trunk Based Development (TBD) is considered "sane default" these days. The power of version control isn't just in a record of history, it's also in branching; and most often, I've noticed developers move to TBD because they don't understand the intricacies of their version control system and how to leverage it for a proper async parallel development workflow. You don't need to adopt GitFlow or another workflow verbatim, understand how you want to deliver software and work within the team so that you can adapt it to your requirements.

The points made by the author are confusing to me.

Quality Assurance was under-resourced. They had a huge job of checking and re-checking every feature to verify that there were no regressions. After merging a feature into develop, they had to check again to see if there were any new issues that were introduced by bad merges or conflicting feature requirements.

If this was the case and they were fine with QA testing just the `master` branch after moving to TBD, maybe QA shouldn't have been testing their feature branches in the original workflow. Just use branches for proper code review and then QA only steps in after the branch is merged?

The threshold of conflict was amplified by the time that passed between when a branch was cut from develop to the time when it was merged back.

For bigger features, a branch's life could last one or even two weeks. The more time that passed, the greater divergence there would be from the other code.

Feature branches should be short-lived, as atomic as possible. And if you're working on a big feature, you have to update your branch frequently with upstream changes. Merges of Doom only happen if you're not following version control best practices.

This also requires a little bit of planning upfront (especially if you're working in parallel on a single feature), but forcing that thought is a good thing.

It also seems like they attributed moving to Kanban as only being possible due to the move to TBD, but it's not like it's impossible with a proper branching workflow.

So, the author made the switch to TBD and attributed it to increased velocity and better _overall morale_, but I think they're just enjoying the seemingly greener grass across the fence for a while.
IMO a much more-thorough analysis of the essential point discussed here: https://www.lynalden.com/bitcoin-security-modeling/
It's not always about censorship resistance. What if someone uploads child pornography on IPFS? Do we all just go "ah well, it's immutable" and live with it?
There is a German article, that goes in depth on how to disable pretty much all of them and explains what they do: https://www.kuketz-blog.de/mozilla-firefox-datensendeverhalt...

A few of them actually do make sense for a normal user (i.e. the Wifi portal stuff). But you can disable it if you spend some effort on it or you can also use an alternative build of Firefox without it. Not great, but also not terrible imo. Sorry, that I have no English source.
It’s not on Disney+, at least here in the US. Only on Hulu.
They walked in, didn't use the guns, didn't brandish the guns, didnt even display the guns for any cameras to see.

Yet they pooped on the walls and broke a podium.

How peoole view this as an insurrection, seems silly to me.
> I don't understand what problem email can solve that mail cannot.

I think it's a wrong example. Email provides light-speed delivery, dirt-cheap cost, and brain-dead convenience on top of also being able to mail. So email actually never competed with mail.

Web3 is yet to strike any decisive blow against today's web (or it may never). It's more like another part of the web.

> Transferring money was in seconds, compared to Fidelity/Venmo which took 3 days!!! - Very easy to loan money against crypto holdings vs stocks - ResearchDao's like ResearchHub

For a smaller amount of money (<$100k), banks already can transfer money within seconds. I've seen people sending $1Ms only using their phones, but, IIRC, you need a good record to do that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_(computer_algebra_system... is a literate program.
The smart contract is. It's like https://xkcd.com/932/ . The static JS being served by the site is just a poster that could be hung up anywhere else. Even if that URL is taken down, your money is still safe and sound on the blockchain. You can still sign transactions and interact with the smart contracts, get your liquidity out, etc., so long as you have access to any part of the Ethereum network.
The technology is interesting, but so far most of the use cases involve some form of illegality. If you want to use, say, NFTs for something legitimate, it turns out they don't really work very well for that.

I'd looked at using NFTs for cross-grid ownership transfers of objects in Open Simulator. That's a set of virtual worlds run by several hundred different people and organizations, but using the same software, a rewrite of Second Life in C#. There's no moderately-secure way to pass 3D models around in that system without them being copied for free, which is why most of the good stuff stays in Second Life, which is centrally managed.

Such object instances have prices in the US$0.25 to US$20 range. When you go through a portal from one grid to another, and take some objects with you, a database transaction is required to transfer ownership from avatar A, grid X, to avatar A, grid Y. Otherwise, you could buy one copy and have a free copy in every grid.

The assets have to be hosted somewhere. Somewhere with reliable access times in the < 1s range for a few megabytes.

The blockchain systems just don't have the bandwidth and costs for that. As databases, they're far too slow, and transactions are too expensive. As storage, I've seen $5 for a gigabyte, forever. It's supposed to be funded by investing the $5 in a speculation that storage cost will decline.
But the fine print says basically "until they get tired of doing this".

As for NFTs generally, the art is unimpressive, to put it mildly.

The NFT world is reportedly about half Axie Infinity and a quarter OpenSea, with all the little guys in the remaining quarter. (That may be bogus; there are no reliable stats on this stuff.) Axie Infinity is a Ponzi in the final stages of collapse.[1] OpenSea is becoming a stalled market. Pick some category, like "Bored Ape", which was getting news coverage a few weeks back. Look at the asking prices. Then look at "recently sold" prices. The "recently sold" prices seem to have a lot of zeros after the decimal point.

[1] https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/smooth-love-potion/
[0] is not from McDonalds but in Portland when he lived with his mother. McDonalds was in Grover Beach California.
[1] Solving the Software problem was a human issue not a machine issue. Bugs in software are created by human beings and management tries to cover them up.
[2]Trolls took over that group and began posting sci fi porn on it.

You are mistaking but one incident in which he got arrested in Portland, OR with the Grover Beach, CA McDonalds incident. Using it as a strawman.

Mike was harassed by cops because he was mentally ill. There are several incidents of that. The McDonalds report was buried I wonder why?

So who are you, a Beoing Schill?
Amazon has now removed the reviews from the first link, but I found one where the reviews are for glassware. Every review has a 'report abuse' button, but there is nowhere for me to report the product on the page.

I use ReviewMeta but unfortunately it doesn't appear to be working for these.
They’re not detached. They know everything about you and people around you to infer sentiments and make very good decisions.
I'm negatively surprised how much people agree with this. He's a lazy guy and he knows that. I think there's way too much focus on HN for finding excuses for every bad behavior instead of correcting it.
Is it just me, or was this idea of a lifetime number of votes rather than tying them to a given election kinda slipped in at the end? And kind of a big deal?

Two outcomes that I find pretty undesirable:

1) A small group of super intense extremists save up their votes their whole life and use them to jam through their wackiest idea.

2) A group tries that trick, fails, and now we have a population of dejected, permanently disenfranchised hardcore extremists.
Thanks. Figured it wasn't an original idea but never had a word for it before.
Looking for Freelance Design Work?
True. Yet, misinformation persists and tends to be as or more motivating that the truth.