skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> all the correct answers

That is clearly not possible, so it can't be what they are doing.

Rather than diffusely encoding that knowledge in a massive number of self-organized layers of weights, it is explicitly encoded. The remaining network can "focus" on mapping input to retrieve the relevant information stored in that database, and extracting/interpolating/extrapolating that information based on the current context to generate useful output.
And that 2px per full spin of the scroll wheel ensures I really had time to absorb the content.
That’s not really correct. TV went straight from 4:3 SDTV (NTSC/PAL) to 16:9 HDTV. There is no 16:10 TV (signal) aspect ratio. It’s true that there were a few "HD ready" LCD TVs with 16:10 aspect ratio (1680x1050 resolution), but those were never dominant and didn’t precede 16:9 TVs (which were already there in CRT/Plasma/RPTV times).
Computer monitors on the other hand went from 4:3 and 5:4 to 16:10 in the mid-2000s, and then to 16:9 from ~2010 on, after 16:9 had already been well-established on TVs.

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio
Agreed; I've never really liked C compiles, and the Go build process is dreamy.

Another win (besides more features, and recent performance improvements) -- the Windows version is now a snap. Now `mlr.exe` takes it rightful place alongside the Linux and Mac executables (https://github.com/johnkerl/miller/releases/tag/v6.0.0-beta). Go+Windows is heavenly & I'll never need to tweak MSYS2/Appveyor/DLLs/etc again. :) See also https://miller.readthedocs.io/en/latest/miller-on-windows/
Really get good vibes from the company, can't quite put my finger on it... Never hearing back from them about a job was a bigger disappointment than usual.

Problems with synapse are true, but it was a good compromise to push out an early implementation so things could get rolling quicker with getting people to actually use the clients.

Just when I get used to some issue/missing feature in the clients, they seem to fix it.

And in general I trust and know that decisions with the spec are being made carefully.

I use it for an intimate chat server with never more than 8 users, so I can't speak to some of the problems. I can just say the trajectory itself for Matrix is strong. A good effort to fight slack and discord. Wish all the discord servers people use were matrix instead.
Hey HN! I'm looking for books on programming curves, key frames, brushes, rigging systems, etc.

My google-foo seems to have failed me here. I've found some reasonable blog posts, but am looking for something slightly more technical and in depth.
A contrarian and provocative tone like this invites downvotes, I'd prefer to see this discussion remain constructive instead of throwing accusations and hyperboles that derail into a flamewar. Given the low-effort content of these replies, I would consider that trolling.

I do not completely disagree with the parent though. We did not get exact figures, and in my circles, only die-hard geeks have heard of the Steam Deck, even regular gamers who spend a lot of time on Steam didn't know what it was. Granted, I asked them just a little after the announcement.

Anyway, I am not sure valve is trying to rival Nintendo here. They probably want Steam Deck to become profitable, and I think they would welcome competitors who come up with Steam Deck alternatives, especially as SteamOS becomes available.
They don't even need to be broken up. Anti-competitive mergers just need to be prevented.
Although that might be applicable to businesses that let people deal with money, why would any of those be an issue for Tinder?
Isn't a new Indian law about to come into effect related to credit cards? I wonder if this is that law's fault rather than Heroku's fault.
I cannot see a world in which use of NSO tech is legitimate. Get a court order to tap the phone line, etc.

How can usage of a Mossad / IDF tool be considered legitimate? Just because the ruling party in a state decides so, doesn't mean this has any bearing on human rights or _legitimacy_.

China is eradicating Uyghur culture and running for-profit concentration camps. These are legitimate uses of their Governmental powers. Does that make them ethical? Of course not.

Technology like this is dystopian and anti-humanity. There is no way that this technology is profitable, exported and somehow used for "legitimate" purposes. The entire enterprise is predicated on making vulnerable people more vulnerable. The end result is more Khashoggi awfulness, how could it NOT be?
That combination seems not unreasonable - basically saying that you should have no expectation that they've performed a background check [and incurred costs] but that they reserve the right to perform them on any user at their own discretion should they decide to incur those costs.
Just a silly collection of buzzwords, mentioning all the useless stuff which gets only loved by advertisers, but have no real world use, one can not solve better, faster and cheaper with stuff which existed long before all that over-hyped–soon-be-gone silly 'new' 'inventions'.
I think you missed my point, which is that Tinder does seemingly very little to stop it. Even in markets where it is legal, like in the UK where I am, it is actively detrimental to the user experience for most users.
> it means that the entire compile time set of problems is also lifted into runtime

It's what Swift does if inlining is defeated, the type arguments are passed at runtime as a classical argument on stack.

You don't need full reflection as you suggest, only to be able to materialize the types as structs + an interface at runtime. Yes, it's a little slower but most of the overhead comes from the function not be inlined.
Does the US State Department trust the local Ugandan Best Buy employees not to run a swim swap for $50? or $10,000?

With an Ugandan sim comes the security of the Ugandan mobile network and its employees
I could use a marketing intern.
Ah yes, West LA is a representation of the rest of the world, and to people with incredibly busy, corporate lives.

I've heard stories of lesbian women, especially, FLYING ACROSS THE COUNTRY to meet another person they have interest in because it's that hard to find matching personalities.
Sanskrit could also be like Haskell.

Structured. Very precise rules. Yet nobody speaks it in practice.

Also while on the topic, may I point out that there are some things you could say in some languages that are nearly impossible (AFAIK) to say in English.

Let me give an example.

(Okay how do I — for the benefit of all of you — express something in English that I'm trying to prove is impossible to express in English?).

Consider the statement: Joe Biden is the 46th President of the United States.

How do I express a question in English that asks this "order-number" of Biden such that the answer is "46"?

Something like "Joe Biden is how many-th President of the United States?"?

But I can't ask that because there's no such word(s) "how many-th" in English!

Yet it's trivial to express this in plenty of languages. I belive German is one language where this can be easily expressed. It's trivial in the Indian languages that I know.

In English I would have to ask something like "Biden is the n-th President of US. What is n?", which is totally lame.

I hope you understood what I'm trying to convey.

If you want to get started about these kinds of things look up "declension" on Wikipedia [1].

I'm not a language expert so I don't really know what I'm talking about (perhaps experts can contribute and correct me), but the tldr is that:

* the declension situation of modern English is primitive

* German has 4 cases of declension

* Latin has 5 cases of declension

* Sanskrit & Hindi has 8 cases of declension

* Ukrainian declension situation also seems to be fairly advanced

In languages with more cases of declension, it's apparently easier to express certain things.

I hope this was useful.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declension
Well, after reading all the high marks about Tuple in the comments I installed it and paired with a co-worker this morning. We got up and running in a matter of minutes. It just... worked. Such a more pleasant experience than a google meet.

As an added bonus were able to understand and solve a bug that's been plaguing us for weeks now in our first session :-)

I really like how it just stays out of the way.

I threw out the link to the rest of my team to see if others will try it out as I want our team to get more comfortable with pairing.

Well done and congrats on building a focused sustainable product!
That may be the least googleable language name I've ever seen.
Same argument used against gdpr all the time, and proven false all the time. It's easy to be small and compliant.
The gotcha with C# structs is that they're passed by value. If I pass a struct, and then the callee mutates one of its fields, this isn't reflected in the caller. JavaScript values other than primitives do not work this way.

If your codebase is entirely C# and you're just compiling it to JS so that it can run in browsers, then the compiler can fix this by inserting copies where needed. (The Turing-completeness of JavaScript implies that something like this must be possible.) However, if you want to be able to freely call back and forth between C# code and JavaScript code that doesn't know about this calling convention, while maintaining the full semantics of both languages, then you are going to run into problems. That's what I'm claiming is hard.

There's no conceptual barrier to reflection; the problem is just that the required type information might be a lot of bytes, and it might be hard to tell for sure whether it's actually used at runtime. You might also have to ship a lot of support code that emulates enough of the CLR to make these operations work. So there'd be a strong temptation to just not support these features, which then would cause dependencies to break unpredictably.
If you're using your own hardware on your own property you're probably failing resiliency 101.
"Promises aren't inherently an "inner platform". You can certainly make them part of the "base language", like Rust."

That's fair, and I will try to update my internal mental model and stop unconditionally referring to them as such. Thank you.

(My primary objection to them is the way they throw away the stack and throw away structured programming as a result, but they're at least less bad if they aren't also an inner platform. :) )
So what you want is a command economy?

Nah, I’ll pass. Markets are made up of people, they’re not just some abstraction. Governments have good uses, but determining who is participating in what market and how much market share they have or are allowed to have isn’t one of them.
Partition it geographically. If they want to compete in certain cities/regions/countries where the user base exceeds a certain number, they must spin off subsidiaries for that area. I can't imagine people looking for a date on the other end of the country outside of very specific circumstances.
Are those manufacturing bleeding edge nodes or mostly component assembly?
This is approximately half the plot of Terry Gilliam's movie "Brazil"
The web and JavaScript is the same as codecademy - no videos.
You and me have much more incommon with Russian or Chinese people than we have with our corrupt and shitty leaders.

Never forget that. The 99.99% of us are just humans together and we don't want to fight anyone.
thousand. 110 thousand. This is a low estimate, that covers the first 90 minutes of preorders. The source that was linked contains details.
In theory, if this was considered a big enough problem, yes - the market would resolve this. And by "big enough problem" we have to remember that market-driven economies respond to market demand forces.

Plastic in the ocean is definitely a huge problem, but it's not a market problem - not yet. When consumers are willing to pay to get plastics out of the ocean, hundreds of companies will appear eager to solve the problem.

There's a comment above (@pdpi: "At what timescale?") that identifies the issue at hand. In this case (and in a lot of cases) we need regulation because market demand to solve this isn't fast enough (or may never exist)
The phone requirement is probably to make 2fa a minimum measure. Makes sense since PayPal has overhead costs associated with fraud.

It might even be required by banks and credit card companies.

For what it is worth, your phone number is not a secret. Nobody needs to data dump PayPal to get it. Also eBay and PayPal split years ago.
> Please be aware though, that there's always going to be a large population segment that will desire to proceed directly from point A to B in comfort.

How large do you consider this population segment to be?
I think this limitation is an artifact of the fact that the proposal is an idea being tossed out on social media. A real law would have some sort of grace period. That grace period could be chosen arbitrarily, it should be set such that any well-run company would have time to respond.
broken up how and to what end? if you review definitions of antitrust and monopoly, you'll find they really do not apply to the dynamics at play with consumer internet services that displace existing decentralized norms and enjoy majority market share due to network effects.

not saying there isn't a problem, but maybe trying to shoehorn 19th century solutions onto 21st century problems isn't the answer.
Go 1.18 also includes the new net/netip package which is huge, now the Addr type holds less memory, it is comparable and immutable.

There is also a great post(See: https://tailscale.com/blog/netaddr-new-ip-type-for-go/) in Tailscale's blog which deep dives into why we needed a new IP type/library in Go.
Yeah the PS3 clusters were much more news worthy as the cell broadband engine cost 1.5 thousand dollars at the time as a PCIe card.
In the US, "People, elected and held accountable by citizenry at large" found that banks were "too big to fail." They did not restrain "the power of the actors in [the market] in check." What makes you think it'll be different this time?
Every high refresh rate LCD that I've seen advertised also has variable refresh rate support. As long as a multiple of the framerate is within the monitor's range, there shouldn't be jank.
Contacting Apple would likely lead to a refund. No need to go to the trouble of doing a chargeback. This is one of the reasons developers don't like Apple's IAP policies: developers have no control over whether Apple decides to give a refund (or not).
No. I don’t really follow them closely, I just thought their marketing page was a good list of possible use cases.

The article did a good job explaining what general problem blockchain solves, but didn’t give me a very good idea of what problems one might try to solve beyond existing implementations.
Even it if was open source, just deploying something as convenient as google drive is a challenge. i.e. something that works on iOS , Android and Web + has proper access management and has enough storage (including automatic backup).
This is actually wonderful (for him). Tinder is terrible. There's not enough space for a real profile (that nobody reads anyway) so everyone just goes based on pictures and humorous quips, leading to everyone becoming a stereotype. There's definitely no more than 6 different kinds of profiles on Tinder.

Go make friends in person and meet dates through normal social interactions. Sounds crazy but it has an impressive track record.
It took a long time to really become mainstream, TV broadcast was firmly 4:3 until roughly the mid-2000s, and 16:9 TVs were expensive until LCD TVs became cheap. There was a long interim period were 16:9 was mainly a DVD aspect ratio you watched on 4:3 TVs with black bars.
It's pretty common to use Tinder for hook ups during holidays
I feel so validated by this comment. Cannot understand how Teams lays out participant video windows. I keep looking for a magic “arrange by” context option that obviously does not exist.
So as you might intuit, having everything work totally differently doesn't scale so well. So a lot of the chemistry inside cells is strongly standardized. Ok, so the nice thing about standards is that there's a bunch to choose from, and sure there's a lot of times when cells cheat just a smidge (or two, or three).

But... end of day, if you squint just a little, most everything is done with a standard set of amino acids that chain together in standard ways. In some AA's The Amino and Acid groups used to daisy-chain them together dwarf the actual active part! And data is stored using a standard set of 4 ( ok 5, ok... exceptions exist) bases.

(Just to be sure, eg. Hemoglobin does suddenly have an Iron atom in there, but it's still _mostly_ made of standard "lego blocks" == amino acids)
Not unless you provide evidence that you are in fact a real person.
I should have been more clear, so let me correct that. I am convinced. I agree that harm was done, and suffer from generalized anxiety disorder myself, so I empathize with the panic attacks that people received.

It is because I believe that harm was done, but also because I am a privacy nut myself, that I am trying to, for my own sake, characterize how I should approach sending emails like this in the future. The study may not go on, but individuals still will send these emails as long as CCPA/GDPR exist. (Just to add some color: It's my anxiety which is causing my to want to delete everything from the internet. If there's minimal info about me online, I can rest easy. It's why this is a throwaway that I will abandon shortly.)

Reading everyone's thoughts is what changed my mind. I now understand to have underestimated the emotional and legal effects CCPA/GDPR requests could have on small website operators, and will be more judicious in the future (like this study should have been) in pre-filtering and my wording. Reactions like kstrauser's (elsewhere in thread) were initially surprising to me (perhaps because of the faceless nature of the internet), so I hope you take my about face as genuine.

Where do you think this balance lies? I still believe consumers, in general, should have right to ask those with their data about their processes; to give it to them; and, to upon request, delete it. And further, in general, I think these interactions are the kinds of things that researchers might legitimately want to study. I found your other comments to be thoughtful, so I am curious what you think explicitly.
I agree with you entirely about individual actors within corporate structures being prosecuted way too infrequently. Every manager who deliberately undercounted employees hours should be in prison, and it's an injustice that there's a disparity that favors structural crime over personal crime.

(I don't necessarily agree about civil forfeiture, in that the police are acting on behalf of the state - the structure itself is what is taking property without due process. That's more harmful to individuals because there's no recourse, but the fault is primarily with the law rather than with individual officers.)
It's about time. The world needs a break from humans.
When I think about tooling, I'm thinking about things like build systems and dependency managers. In Go, I don't need to script my own build system like I would do in C, C++, Java, etc. Similarly, reproducible package management works out of the box--I don't need to try in vain to get the right versions of the right dependencies installed to the right locations like I do in C and C++ (and Python, to a lesser extent). Moreover, Go produces native static binaries out of the box by default--I don't have to cobble together a bunch of configuration in every one of my projects only to have it broken by the odd transitive dependency which can't be statically compiled (well, this is probably the case in some Go packages, but I contend that it's far rarer than in the Java, Python, Rust, etc worlds--certainly I've never run into this in my decade with Go). Further still, in Go, I don't have to write CI pipelines to build and publish code packages nor documentation packages.

And then there is the toil reduced by having good performance. I have about 15 years of experience with Python, and almost invariably there's some hot path in the code which needs something between Python's level of performance and Go's level of performance. Unlike Go, Python affords relatively little headroom for optimization--you can't easily parallelize anything or pull some allocation out of a tight loop for a 10x performance gain. Usually this looks like rearchitecting your codebase so that "rewrite the hotpath in C/multiprocessing/etc" is attainable and on top of that you're probably implying significant changes to your build system and/or runtime environment as well as a load of maintainability problems associated with anything that touches the language/process boundary.

By comparison, I think the gains from generics are relatively small.
This was for me the most baffling regression of "upgrading" from Windows 10.

Thank goodness I have an XPS13 with a 16:10 LCD. Now the fixed horizontal bar makes it feel like a 16:9 again. I tried auto-hiding the task bar but that just made other things behave weirdly.
I also hate the question "what do you do?"

Though I've figured out a couple things about it that have be helpful.

First, I realized that most people don't know what a software engineer is, so they are left tongue-tied. Which is easy to misinterpret for rudeness or indifference - but it's usually not. So those "hard looks of negative judgment" could just be hard looks of "I don't know what to say so I won't sound dumb."

Either way I have developed two strategies that usually work to smooth this moment over.

One is to say "I make iPhone apps" (even though I do other things, too). People generally know what that is, are impressed, and say "cool!" and then the conversation can easily move on to other topics ("What do YOU do?" usually lol)

Alternatively I front-load with what my company does. "I work for a company that does smart lighting. I do the software part of it" usually means something to people and they'll respond with whatever they know/have thought about smart lighting ("oh like product x?" "Your company should make a product that does Y") which is, at least, a conversation.
People have been using password protected archives to get around pirated content restrictions since forever.
Facebook has dating functionality
They could validate their users first.

Oh no! Then they can't fake growth.
I've only professionally used WebSockets with Spring Boot and React and I must say: they're perfectly fine?

That is, if you use WS to simply asynchronously communicate events and do out-of-band message passing, they operate quickly, easily and efficiently. I wouldn't use them to send binary blobs back and forth or rely on them to keep a perfect state match, but for notifications and push events they're a delight to work with. Plus, their long-term connectivity gives them an edge above plain HTTP because you can actually store a little state in sockets rather than deriving state from session cookies and the like.

Yes, WebSockets don't fit well within the traditional "one request, one response, one operation" workflow that the web was built upon, but that model is arguably one of the worst problems you encounter when you use HTTP for web applications (not websites, though; for websites, HTTP works perfectly!). Most backend frameworks have layers upon layers of processing and securty mitigations exactly because HTTP has no inherent state

WebSockets aren't some magical protocol that will make all of your problems go away but if used efficiently, they can be a huge benefit to many web applications. I've never used (or even heard of) Adama, so I can totally believe that websockets are a terrible match for whatever use case this language has, but that doesn't mean they deserve to get such a bad rep. You just have to be aware of your limitations when you use them, the same way you need to be aware of the limitations of HTTP.