skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are lots of more compelling ways to reboot the internet that we're currently neglecting. I think we should begin by enacting government regulation to strip more power from the big tech companies, and transfer that back to the hands of everyday users. GDPR was a step in the right direction. We should go one step further, and actually enact the data portability promises that GDPR failed to deliver. We should develop internet-wide schemas for ubiquitous concepts and then require companies/governments to use them as their public-facing data representations. Data rights should be extended to ensure that users can migrate that data around. And no, I'm not talking about transferrable NFT's. I'm talking about internet standards and protocols that are designed for interoperability.
all of these points can be just countered by pointing to sqlite.they have a drastically different community philosophy that shows that there is no such thing as THE oss development model. A language without an open source core is hard to take seriously unless maybe it is just part of a proprietary software suite (max/msp,labview etc.) that makes little sense to use without, but i guess this is exactly where wolfram stands. As far as i heard the performance characteristics of wolfram would be not very well suited to general purpose programming or web services anyways. though i am always jealous when there is a new demo from stephen. most demos would not be possible without that super tight integration of the language and the notebook.
The noop determination is made during runtime within the log method called. So, it's LOG.info(obj.toString()), wherein that method inspects the log level setting, then decides whether to ignore.

Are you saying that Java does or should "optimize" in such a way that it branches to the logic within each method called during runtime, inspects which code would be executed per possibly mutable runtime values (like log level), considers possible side effects (in-method and in parameters) then decides whether to even invoke the method at all?
Just hire good engineers, and train them inside the NSA.
> If you just release the source and don't accept patches then that's not real open source

this is commonly referred to as "source available".
Bad example, those minks were going to be killed anyway, that's the single reason so many of them were allowed to exist in that place to start with.
In Ada (Pascal derivative), there's implicit dereference so we just use it like normal, `A.B`.
I would recommend The Long Dark and Sable. Heavily focused on exploration and immersion. But really any game with an open world that doesn't hold your hand too much and lets you make your own choices.
Where does the 4000 figure come from?
Unfortunately, the tort-based method of enforcement leads to companies doing that notorious calculation: C = cost of safety feature, P = probability of lawsuit, J = expected total damages, if C > P x J, we don't make the product safe.
Ask HN: Life Changing Books?
Hey fellow HN people,
What are some life changing books have you encountered?
You can state the why as well and how it mattered.

For e.g. Almanack of Naval Ramakant is a good starting point.

Thanks.
Thanks for sharing this. What a read though I wish it had more details!
Yea, it's embarrassingly bad.

It sounds like their idea of open source is something along the lines of "slap a MIT license on it, throw it over fence, and hope random nerds on the internet finish it while we wait idly."
> Exactly the kind of comment you'd get from an inexperienced junior developer.

This is unnecessary
I think to make it mainstream would require making it different. The number of people who actually have a use for Mathematica is pretty small. Very few people understand both math and programming. Most people who can program are already employed as programmers. In a larger organization, rather than buying 10 licenses for 200 bucks each, it's better to buy 1 license for 2000 bucks and have everybody bring their math work to the "math person." Organizations see this as a natural division of labor. And it's easy to justify that cost because you can show that the math person is using Mathematica full time.

They would have to add more non-programming and non-math features. And at the end of the day, they'd still be competing with free.

In my own case, I've used Mathematica, and I love it. But the standard arguments in favor of using free tools have all materialized over the span of my career, and I'm happy enough with Python.
What type of illegal activities were they doing that generated $2B in profits over 2 years?
I never heard it that way.

If you can fork it, it's open source, even if contributions are not accepted upstream. If upstream accepts patches but does not allow forks, it's not open source.

It's about the license, not the project's governance model.
Designing a Code Playground for Adventlang
I would consider giving money to news that do things better, instead of succumbing to cynism. This way things can improve. I have never been to a newsroom, but I have run into outlets with better, if mot perfect, standards than these.
We had slavery for almost half of our existence, we’re only just barely removed from segregation, and we’re tilting like a jenga tower into authoritarianism. We’ve had our moments, but I think the idea of American Exceptionalism was only ever an idea.
Solid Snake-Oil Storage: This SSD Is Aimed at Audiophiles
Source available is specifically if the code is not under an open source license. Whereas software that is under an OS license is open source, whatever the maintainers policy on contributions.
I think a theory winning when it comes to “end of the universe - scary version” is what is known as vacuum decay : https://bigthink.com/hard-science/vacuum-decay-end-of-the-un...
Not necessarily. There are some true open source projects where the development model is some company "throwing code over the wall". Often they don't make it easy or even possible for anyone outside the company to contribute, they don't have an open repository or bug tracker, release only periodic tarballs, etc. But the license is OSI approved, such as GPL, BSD, etc. so in theory someone could fork the project.

TL;DR - development model != license
Wrote a bomberman clone for the browser once and wanted to habe some rumble for the explosions.

Turned out, the game controller APIs doesn't support controller vibrations.
He already did
“Halt and Catch Fire”, but IRL. That’s a really awful way to go. I continue to be uncomfortable with so-called “less lethal” weapons since they habituate use of force in more situations, and overall use of force by police forces is demonstrably excessive—but ignoring priors, this does seem like it could be a genuine mistake.
Immune senescence, Christian theology, and the Spike protein
That ban was going to happen anyway, but in 2024.
Seems a bit illegal. Also do not run random scripts from the internet which control your browser. For all we know, they could be scraping your own sensitive data.
(sorry for the cheap meme, but..)

linux enters the chat
>but the existence of large corporate ones like Chrome, Android, .net, VS Code, Tensorflow and lots more prove that exerting tight central control while being fully open source is very much possible.

All of your examples are subsidized by a parent corporate sponsor that makes billions from something else. Chrome can be "free as in beer" and Chromium source can be "free as in libre" because Google/Alphabet make billions in ads from a search engine. It's easy for MS to release VSCode and .NET for free if billions are earned from MS Office, Windows, SQL Server, etc.

Wolfram doesn't have another product that rakes in billions such that any licensing income loss from hypothetically open sourcing Mathematica would be an insignificant rounding error.
Insider trading, market manipulation, every trick possible?
It does not give me imposter syndrome. It just tells me I know absolutely nothing despite having a so-called advanced degree from "a top school". God damn it.
The member of parilment was probably playing him as well...
Yes, there are reasons that studies sometimes lie to their participants. These lies are something that has to be justified to an IRB and the study has to be designed to carefully minimize harm. Lieing to unwilling particiants only raises that bar. In this case, the bare minimum ethical way to conduct this study would have been a careful manual review of every unwilling participant that was going to be recieving deceptive communication to ensure they actually fell under the laws in question.

The compound of deception, legal intimidation, and scatter shot automated selection of unwilling participants is a particularly egregious ethical failure.
enterprise is rarely a good for esoteric stuff anyway

i actually meant pharo above, i never used genuine smalltalk, just what the pharo mooc gave us
I don't remember the loss of the "revenge instinct" being a part of that book. The future humans had optimized for comfort/happiness so much that they evolved to be more and more docile and childlike. They lost their intelligence and evolved into stupid beasts again because they had no evolutionary pressure to become anything else. They didn't lose their self-preservatory instinct -- they just lost the only defensive tool humans have evolved that lets us compete/win against all other animals: our intelligence. Kind of like those birds in a New Zealand island that evolved to be too fat to fly, because the island had no predators. And then cats got accidentally introduced to the island.
My rhetorical strategy resulted in the OP filing the report with the CPSC.

As far as strategy goes, mission accomplished. The purpose of further discussion is that I enjoy it; these are not the views I thought needed to be advanced on the account of being self-evident.

I am very disappointed that this is not the case.
while it isn't inherently slow, all the open source compilers are missing a lot of modern improvements. The default libm in particular is often a few times slower than those provided by Julia.
>Though, the conventional wisdom seems to be that live sports programming can't exist on it's own, and that 'regular TV' can't exist without live sports.

It feels that way. On the one hand, it seems like you have to be something of a super-fan to subscribe to one or more of the sport/league-specific sites/apps. On the other hand, local sports availability or even just sports as TV on in background seems like a pretty significant sweetener for a lot of people who might not pay for TV just for the occasional late night talk show, local news broadcast, or reality show.

Sports isn't enough for me to pay for cable any longer. But, if I did, watching a game now and then would probably be what would push me over the line to pay up.
The clear example counter to his argument would be https://www.blender.org/
Show HN: Timeless articles posted on Hacker News, written 1321 to 2021
I'm genuinely curious. Which satellites are you referring to?
The only way I've seen Ruby work professionally is by using tooling that prevents developers from getting too clever with creating write-only code.
Male deer with antlers routinely gore dogs where I’m from. Deer, not elk.
Unreal Engine 4 (idk about 5) is not open source, but getting access to the Github repo only takes a few minutes. It is an elegant way of letting people fork some code while making it clear it is a proprietary solution.
Actually, it's required for a great many businesses, such as utilities.

It's really weird that HN people think that businesses never have obligations of this kind. It's not even uncommon.
The purpose of revenge is to cause pain.

Animal control tries to do just that, control. If a written sign would be enough, those wolves would not have been culled (except maybe the ones which actually killed tje child).
As a huge FOSS guy, I have to say -- this list is excellent.

I think where this debate/discussion goes off the rails is a lack of appreciation for every aspect of things in their place.

The GPL + Stallman + FOSS et al are absolutely necessary as a sort of extreme visible working model; an endpoint to an Overton Window of this sort of thing and as such I completely support it.

But also, I also do not believe that supporting it requires full and complete buy-in, the way some people do religion. I'm glad it's THERE, and ALSO not everyone has to do it. This is not hypocritical or even conflicting.
Ask HN: Why was Google Glass a commercial failure?
Multiple comments here talking about releasing the source code, as if it's just throwing it over the wall. Open-sourcing software successfully is a commitment to engage with the community on design and implementation over time. Otherwise at best it will be forked and then then lead by another group.
seriously on point 9? "Open source doesn’t bring major tech innovation to market"

I don't know where to begin with this alone let alone the rest of the diatripe.

Closed works for them, their product and their vision, but keep it in scope of what works for you or doesn't, not attack an alternative model because you feel superior...
People have this funny idea that war is a human invention and that nature would be peaceful and quiet without us.

But it turns out ants and termites have been at it for probably over 100 million years:
https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/why-ants-and-termite...
> chemicals affect your brain in ways that simulate bizarre sensory input

Well yea... Duh? No one would disagree with that I suspect.

I think the point is that we can work backwards from these changes to better understand either a) how the brain works and an experience is perceived and/or b) the possibility that what we perceive normally is not the entire experience (to your second possibility)

In both cases obviously these are chemically induced changes/observations at their core. Doesn't take away from their novelty and certainly should be taken more seriously scientifically imo. Ofc it will land in the realm of psurdoscience otherwise.
A strange article that focuses on a straw man instead of the core problem.

> The understanding of intellectual property among gamers and the companies which serve them differs substantailly from that of free software, and literacy in the values and philosophy of free software among this community is very low.

This is plainly false. Game devs are thoroughly aware of IP law, and the huge variety of licensing contracts and obligations. I mean, we have to be, otherwise we'd be having constant problems with software and business partners on one end, and with internet randos stealing and cloning our work for their own benefit the other hand.

And OSS licenses are typically the least complicated ones - and the values of OSS are very well understood, and many game companies contribute what they can as well.

So what's the real problem here? It's that a huge international video streaming conglomerate decided to intentionally violate software licensing conditions, in order to get a product to market faster.

This was not an accident due to "lack of understanding". Maybe it was a case of "get it to market first, we'll swap out that component later"? Or maybe "go ahead and bundle it in, nobody will be able to sue us in our jurisdiction"?
Who knows.

But throwing gamers and game developers under the bus, just because some games-adjacent megacorp is behaving badly, is a really weird look.
People don't confuse Gmail with Google Maps or Google Search just because they are on the same root domain
The question is not about presence of complex tools. The question is about lack of very simple tools. I'm the person who likes simple tools. I need just a little bit more than simple System.out.println from logging. But I'm expected to use commonly accepted libraries and frameworks, nobody will be excited if I'd replace logback with my 200-lines "library". And every commonly used library in Java is complex and feature-ridden.

Sometimes I wish I had more time to rewrite all Java stack, from logging to http server with dumb simple inefficient but understandable code.

May be I should just move to Go. It seems to better reflect that approach. But I like Java language...
Open-Source Deep Learning Trends
Where can I find information about how to build a mobi file? I couldn't find anywhere and I'm not even sure what to search for. Is mobi html+CSS?
There's an even simpler reason why the JIT compiler can't prune it: it's possible to dynamically change the logging level at run time.
As a general rule, animals never attack first. When humans encroach the traditional lands of the animals there are conflicts waiting to happen. Monkeys are smart and usually don’t bother humans, unless it’s a matter of food or threat to their group.

Edit: I'm surprised at the downvotes, isn't human-wildlife conflict in Indian forests well documented?
Has anyone tried prompting GPT-3 with "the following is a transcript of a conversation with a superintelligent artificial intelligence, in which it solves all of humanity's problems"?
I certainly don’t know. Maybe they didn’t, in which case it’s embarrassing.
I have a friend that uses Mathematica, and I had some symbolic math I wanted to run a solver on last week, so I thought I'd give it a try. It wasn't any better than sympy from what I could tell. I ended up taking a monte carlo approach anyway. Generating the simulations was soooo slow in Mathematica compared to numpy. After that demo, I'll have to say the Python ecosystem is far superior for all it's flaws. Sure the documentation is all over the place, there's no unified design so it all feels different, and lot of choices to do the same thing. But when you need something to work right now, at least I have options to switch things out or even fix the code. Wolfram has a lot of lofty ideas that hasn't been delivered on.

13) Try to do everything, but poorly

But seriously how can you build a unified model of computation, when we're still figuring things out? I just tried jax yesterday, their approach to jit & automatic vectorization is really interesting. Wolfram, do you even have a jit? This article gives me less respect for the Wolfram Tech, they're building off the shoulders of giants trying to package it up in some nice soft serve product--it's not a good look to criticize something your building your empire off of.
Deep Learning in Context
Quoting from the blog post.

But Wolfram’s vision for computation is much more profound—to unify and automate computation across computational fields, application areas, user types, interfaces and deployments.

The problem with Wolfram Tech is the above objective can be done by doing one thing and is improving developer ergonomics.

I would say that the Wolfram Language would need a complete overhaul. When I was using it was basically combining Lisp (but using the original M-expression syntax), Symbolic computation and an approach to including every possible mathematical field.

These problems are just since Mathematica is so old it didn't need to or even the concepts of what it achieved it is one of the biggest issues. So, if the Wolfram language just made a bunch of non breaking changes and copy Javascript like syntax then it might actually be useful but right now I don't see it achieving anything like that at all.
The Vedas are supposedly that old
Why don't you put some hand sanitizer in a dish and light it? Then decide if you want to edit your post.
The story does say:
Now, villagers reported that the monkeys are targeting small children which has created a panic within the village.
I understood NFTs better after reading this, what seems to me, fair and objective article and afterwards really don't see much utility in them. I can see how they might serve a purpose in a very narrow, specialized set of circumstances.

https://www.ask.com/culture/what-are-non-fungible-tokens-nft...
> Paid software offers an open quid pro quo

This section points out a valid problem with business models based on open source, but closing the source and requiring payment doesn't inherently solve the problem. In fact, closing the source, which is the usual means of enforcing the paid license, introduces another problem: the developer could be doing something nefarious in addition to requiring payment, and it would be very difficult to find that out because the source is closed. True, reviewing a large open-source codebase is also difficult, but not, I assume, as difficult as reverse-engineering a large blob or set of blobs. Perhaps processor architectures and/or operating systems could impose restrictions to make reverse engineering easier, but that would fundamentally be at odds with license enforcement. If only we could fix our species to guarantee trustworthiness.
Why should they need to explain that?
That seems like it would itself need an explanation. Why would the initial conditions be objects starting at the ~same place but moving with random velocity?

The CMB would also need explanation and I'm thinking the curves of galaxy speeds wouldn't match unless you tweak the initial speeds way too much, but I'm not sure how to formulate that right.
10 and 11 are really the only reasons.
It looks like the Morris book "War! What is it good for?" referenced at the end might have more details.
1/3 of a big basket is still better than 100% of a small one. Udemy does help with visibility, and if you rank high for certain keywords, it could be worth it. You don’t exactly need to do more work for every new subscriber you get too
Typical USA military street gangs. Kids need an AR-15 to teach adults respect.
No but I am a single individual. If I was a company that produced widgets I would use FedEx or UPS rather than maintaining my own fleet of trucks, drivers, maintenance staff, etc.
Smartness always trumps brute force. It's why we are kings of the world, and not the tigers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LMLGuOkK6w
Rebol takes things further by identifying $ as a datatype.

account/deposit $100

Nobody cares about rebol but I always bring it up in terms of expressivity.
native python is indeed quite slow relative to anything compiled, especially when you want to use pure python for hot loops. it's really the saving grace of cython (or alternatives) that makes python tractible for a lot of scientific computing.

I'll agree that mathematica was really slow (but very expressive) when I played with it last. I think this comes down to it's lispy heritage.

julia is an example of a lang that is fast, but even it can be slow because of GC depending on the workload.
Well the guy seems like a VP in corporate, probably would struggle with more than hello world himself...
I don't program in Ruby but every time I look at it I see something different depending on who wrote the code and what their personal style is

I'd say this is a plus, at least in certain dimensions. One of the best descriptions I've heard of Rails' ActiveSupport (a collection of extensions to built-in types included in Rails) is as a dialect of Ruby, one specific for developing web applications. Other domains could and should use different dialects.
Rounding errors, underflows and instability in floats are very well known problems, a big deal if you do anything but graphics.
Yes, working solo is scary. There are so many things that are needed for development these days, that almost everyone has a blind spot somewhere; at the very least in the "unknown unknowns" category. (People who insist that they know everything... they usually don't, they just refuse to admit when they are wrong about something.)

My experience with working in a team is that when a team gets too successful, the management will start removing team members, to put them on a different project. (At the extreme case, this is how one can become the solo developer.) Which drives me crazy! It's like -- if you see that our team has great synergy and no personality conflicts, so we are too productive and could get more work done, why don't you instead assign a second project to the same team, so that we could use the same synergy there, too. And if the other project is similar (projects done in the same company usually are), we could even re-use half of the existing code. -- But, nope.