skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Article does not support the assertion in the title. To be clear, I'm a cryptoskeptic. But by the article's account, ConstitutionDAO never "lost its way." They just didn't raise enough money to accomplish their goal. It seems like the founders acted with integrity throughout and did not make any moves that could even clearly be labeled as a mistake.
I probably would too. And I think that's unfortunate. Such a premise could be interesting to explore, particularly in the realm of an argument by contradiction. It seems unlikely for an adult to find that interesting, but a child? Maybe.

I think the situation would be much better if the worst thing that happened is that people simply declined to have the conversation. But things often escalate beyond that.
It will if it means that the compiler can generate code which uses static dispatch rather than dynamic dispatch - it can be an improvement over using interface{} which I understand is the common way of dealing with cases that need generic behaviour in Go (with alternatives being code generation and simply copy-pasting).

As far as I understand, with interface{} the compiler can't just decide to generate static dispatch based code because there's not enough information to generate that in a generalisable way (the code can depend on information that is only available at run-time rather than compile-time) and it would be bad for programmers who expect dynamic dispatch to be used because they're optimising for something else e.g. binary size or compilation speed.

Obviously generics wouldn't be a performance improvement over using, say, code generation or doing a bunch of copy-pasting (and, given Go's lack of function overloading, a bunch of annoying renaming and some logic to dispatch to those methods which actually might cause more of a performance hit...) but those approaches tend to cause other problems.
I have a hard time following this article because it's so obviously one-sided and ranting.

FWIW the Stockholm Metro is also privatized in the sense that operation, planning and maintenance is done by MTR Corporation, the same company that owns and operates the Hong Kong Metro. MTR also operate a lot of other subway systems in the world, for example Sydney. I don't see any problems inherit in the privatization: Stockholm is excellent and so is Hong Kong.

Tokkaido Line in Japan runs at 187 percent capacity according to a quick googling.
They had an early win getting a effective and consistent UI accross government sites, but digitising the underlying processes is a work in progress. Once you click that beautiful and accessible green submit button, it's not impossible a printer in Swansea whirs to life to print your answers out into the original paper form.
Bad wording on my part. I meant a market for ultra-low-volume fabbing of your own chip designs, not of fixed designs.
> We usually eat our meals at appropriate clock times as opposed to whenever we are hungry, go to sleep at appropriate clock times as opposed to whenever we are tired

Well then you are doing it wrong. If you do stupid things don't blame the clock for it. :D
English could be rendered in a 4x3 font (or even 3x3 font)..

In this test it'll comfortably beat out any other language.

See: https://fontstruct.com/fontstructions/show/325977/4x3_pixel
For folks who are interested. This is actually an already well studied topic! It is called "language complexity". The consensus is that in aggregate (all language artifacts like writing, conjugation, syntax) no language is more complex than any other since complexity on one dimension (say chinese writing for Mandarin) is compensated in another (Mandarin morphology or conjugation).

This is called the compensation hypothesis at least in phonology (how we speak a language)

Pixels per character is certainly an interesting dimension of complexity and I would encourage the author to try to get this ready for publication at SIGMORPHON or something like that!

See https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com//mobile/view/1... for more on complexity
Don't get too invested in the gameplay though, as after 15 minutes the game stops and prompts you to host it yourself.
There seems to be a bizarre race in the contemporary discourse: what else can have a "colonial" sticker put on?

IDK if people derive some prestige from outdoing one another in this regard.
My guess is that this is sales pitch. It will be rolled out to business customers to say "look at our shiny bells and whistles", and contracts will be signed.
I don't believe Go is about to get faster, at least not in an especially unique way compared to past releases.

Historically the Go compiler has been seeing performance improvements every release, so historically, Go has always been getting faster.

When it comes to Generics, the benefits are not so straightforward as simply recompiling with a new binary. I just rebuilt one of our larger services with Go 1.17 and compared it to 1.18 and the benchmarks come out roughly the same after variance. There is a slight improvement, but what's interesting is that we don't use generics anywhere.

My employer has a blanket ban on Generics in Go until at least the next release. I know others that do too. There is also nothing in our code base that is screaming to be rewritten with Generics. We collectively thought about it and no one could come up with anything worthwhile. Internally, we're still not sure when they're even warranted. Sure, there's a few three line for-loops that could be removed, but none of those are in a hot path. Yawn.

If Go generics radically change the Go ecosystem overnight, they will ruin the language. The ecosystem prefers stability and compatibility over features, and it's pervasive and good. I update Java and JavaScript dependencies regularly and it's a fucking nightmare compared to Go.

Lastly, Go had attracted a large community of developers who eschew unnecessary abstractions. It's lovely and refreshing. I can't say the same about Rust or Swift or Scala, where complexity is sometimes celebrated as simplicity when it's really just convenience wearing lipstick.
You relax the location and orientation constraints on the satellite systems. No longer do they need to have a pulley in the plane of the rest of the belts. You may be able to eliminate or improve the reliability of seals now that you don’t need to take rotating power in. You can design for optimum RPM rather than having to accept varying RPM (possibly 0) scaled to whatever size constraints the pulley packaging limits you to. You can use electronic controls instead of electro-mechanical clutches. You can have these systems report status and take control instructions over CAN.

All of this in exchange for adding over-current protection, some wire/connectors, and some kind of control mechanism (typically relay or IGBT).
Hunger is actually fairly modifiable, as intermittent fasters know. If you are used to eat at a certain hour, you will feel pangs of hunger around it, but if you bridge the gap somehow, the feeling of hunger will go away again.
> But as the market exists right now, Rust developers are twice as expensive and the product they deliver is twice as bad.

It's interesting how we have different experiences regarding this. In my experience, it's usually the opposite. And I believe it's mostly because Rust lets you focus more on the problem you're solving, rather than thinking about dos and don'ts of the language.

For example, most Rust projects (or products) seem to have much more polish than equivalent C++ projects (even for ones with years head start). By polish I mean both user experience and the developer experience when one works on the project.

Also, adding user-facing (i.e. UX) polish to Rust projects requires less ahead-of-time planning in my experience.

One reason is that when introducing new Rust code, there's less performance gotchas, and Rust code seems to compose more ergonomically than C++ code... Most of the time at least; there were times that Rust was frustrating. But I think less often probably, _and_ the frustration is compile-time, rather than runtime. Also Rust has a shorter feedback loop due to Rust's incremental compilation really helps mitigate the frustration, so you can iterate faster.

And another is because I've always felt like refactoring Rust code (even with C++ experience than Rust) tends to be easier, and faster to refactor, and I feel bolder while doing it, if that makes sense? Simply because the compiler thinks about various categories of problem domains instead of me, and it tells me about them.

Of course, it's never black and white with any of the above things I mentioned; the situation is grey in both ecosystems. But I think it's a much lighter shade of grey in the Rust space than in the C++ space. And as always, there's always exceptions on either side, too.

EDIT: I quoted OP's full sentence, but then only addressed the last bit. I hopefully clarified in comments below that I wasn't talking about the first part. Sorry about that!
> Hopefully you’re not looping over all the elements in your deques super often, or there wouldn’t be much point in using a deque!

I do this all the time: one thread fills the deque, while another thread consumes as much of it as passible.

A modern deque is just a contiguous (mirrored) array in virtual memory. From the point of view of the algorithms, it looks just like a Vec.
Also interesting is how the phonetics of some languages & dialects can result in faster talking.

I heard that Tamil having much less number of consonants, and lacking the ones that need more stress (I forgot the term for this) makes it much faster to speak. Although Malayalam sounds faster to me, probably due to accent it is spoken.
Ah, the law of unintended consequences again in action. Originally designed to prevent the large carriers grabbing every slot they could, and then not flying them = rules you must fly the route to make sure you are using it = ways to make that cost as low as possible, while jacking up the prices - which people must pay because competitors have too few slots.
Coming soon, the $10,000 short hop...
I find it hard to believe that in most scenarios an ebike is going to replace these trips, as weather, cargo capacity and logistics have vastly different impacts. I see much bigger application for people who already ride a bike, and more improtantly have a "bike mentality", being able to extend their range and potential use-cases. This is an important market, but much, much smaller than short car journeys.
Maybe "collapse" isn't itself a "level of hype", but something separate from hype.

But I agree that this applies to things other than technology. Sometimes it seems like most political movements lie somewhere between levels 3 and 5.
Maybe I'm alone in this by, codegen is fine? After all, that's what generics is at some primitive level. The Go compiler is so bloody fast that recompiling is practically free. And it's very easy to write a code generator any number of ways.
Argentina tried to do this, lost 20 years of maintenance and development.

And remember that you can loosely correlate price with energy usage. Bid at time of use would be energy hungry. I also have exemples of why consolidated actors coming into a new market is actually worse than a govt taking care of the market, and that's make bidding a poor way of privatizing networks.
In defense of complicated programming languages
O that's really interesting. I've been thinking about making something like that myself, didn't know there was an official extention.

I think it should improve the game when you remove a bit of luck with this.
Perhaps the choice of the cryptocurrency that they used and showing how much they raised publicly was their 'mistake' then.
Letting profiteering run wild when it comes to essential public service has rarely worked out well.
My suspicion is that since this has to do with COVID, there is no real limit on what the cost should really be.

As for using the setup for other things, that seems less likely given this expensive setup.
I've taken note to read up more on language complexity - had come across it before but didn't dig too deep!
Kind of similar to this Conspiracy Levels chart that was making the rounds a few months ago[1], including the crucial “departure from reality” tipping point, and the “XYZ as your group identity” level. No doubt promoters of major conspiracies have studied marketing, as they are are adept at generating belief and hype out of nothing.

1: https://m.imgur.com/XY5PAvd
My comment was merely a semantic point, really boring actually.
I don't really understand your frame to comprehend how your originated your first sentence. As far as i can understand you appear to have misinterpreted my reply. With that in mind i suppose your "observation" is completely worthless as well.
In Britain the government solicits bids to run the trains, and what a shambles it is. For two months, the wife was commuting weekly between Cambridge and Edinburgh, and the train wasn't on time even once. And then we move to Edinburgh, also by train, and everyone gets to take the bus from Berwick onwards, because the engine of the previous train had actually caught on fire, blocking the tracks.

It seems that with large, complex infrastructure even switching operators doesn't work, because with a switch you lose all the informal knowledge needed.
And a bunch of F#

https://github.com/publichealthengland/coronavirus-dashboard...
The templating part seems to be somewhat taken care of already: https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/advanced/templates/
Slavic languages are quite simple to pick up because their writing and reading systems are almost the same. You can predict the sounds by the consistent rules of prununciation. Especially with the slavic languages which underwent modernization amd simplification late middle ages when adopting the latin script.

If they got rid of the complex morphology ala English, they could become the ultimate efficient languages.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthographic_depth
This is the idea of introducing a complex bureaucratic layer in order to introduce elements of competition into the system. In principle it can work, but such a system was tried with British rail privatisation and resulted in lots of situations where the incentives for the private operators led to really bad service on key lines for many years.
I skimmed the article and it seems interesting.

On the data side, they have ~7.5 billion total records and they add in 55 million new a day. On the web side, they have ~1 million daily unique users and 100k concurrent users at peak ("concurrent" means "in one minute" is seems).

I'm no expert on the web part, but I'm kind of curious why they went with the design they did for the data part. The design, and the chosen technologies make me think they treated it more like a normal web app, not like a dashboard. I would expect OLAP database, not a sharded Postgres, and the data model feels very OLTP to me as well. Or maybe is that because it's mostly time series and not traditional data model?

I'll have to go through the article in more detail.
Just as in computers, the value of a clock is that it enables efficient distributed computing and scale.

When you mainly interacted with a few dozen people all in the same village, how to coordinate your activities and synchronize with each other was not much of an issue. Everyone lived in close proximity and pretty much had the same culture and did the same things. If you wanted to talk with the chief, you could easily see when he had a bit of downtime and jump in.

However, once you are spread out, this becomes much harder. Imagine if the only way to coordinate a meeting with a teammate was to constantly poll them, asking if they are available. “Are you free, now? Are you free, now?” That basically tie up your whole day waiting for them to be free.

Clocks enable asynchrony. You two can quickly agree on a time, and then you can get on with your other stuff until the agreed upon time.
With the exception of "z - from", all of these are true in Bulgarian. It's just that we use "ot" which means "from".

I think I am going to like central Europe.
Deeper dive into Ethereum 2.0: Part 1
> I mean... do you, or have you ever, collected anything simply for the sake of having that something? Stamps? Vinyl records? Magazines? Bicycles? Video game consoles? Something??

I do. But only digitally nowadays. I hardly own any physical goods. Maybe $10-$15k taken together at most. I realize this puts me close to an extreme end.

As a kid I used to 'play' trading card games - but I hardly played them and mostly just spent a large portion of my meager allowance on buying painted cardboard. With the benefit of hindsight I could've spend that money on things that would have brought me considerably more joy, but I consider that a valuable lesson in itself.

I don't begrudge people their collections. There's still purpose in that. However buying something for your collection is different from buying for the sake of buying.
Prototype the UI before building an MVP
The worst offenders in recent memory are self driving cars, block chain, VR, and “the metaverse”.
How to Speak (MIT OCW) [video]
Maybe GP has edited their comment, but it says "Hey Europe" and we are very definitely still part of Europe.
Here in Finland the companies operating the phone books and directory services still exist, and you can still search people's phone numbers and addresses online or by calling/texting directory services - just no printed books anymore.

(and you can of course unlist yourself)

I'm somewhat interested, did it go down differently in e.g. U.S., i.e. are directory services gone, too?
Do you have the links for those tweets by any chance? I’d like to learn more about this.
> Stylistically, the story deliberately ignores many "rules of good writing", including a paragraph about jelly beans which is almost entirely one run-on sentence.
I lived the no car/short-term rental car life for eight years when I lived in Seattle. I would use bike & public transit to get around the city, but if I wanted to go out to the mountains I would need to rent a car (or carpool with a friend who owned a car).

The truth is it's different psychologically to spend $150 on going out to the mountains instead of the marginal cost of driving out to the mountains in a car you already own. Yeah you can be like but that's not rational with X Y Z reasons all you want but the actual decision experience becomes "do I want to spend $150 today on going to the mountains", which is matched up against any other thing I could do that day for much cheaper, and still have a fair bit of fun. $150 would buy you & someone else dinner at a very nice restaurant! Hell, it would nearly buy a round-trip plane ticket from Seattle to Palm Springs to visit Joshua Tree NP.
That makes sense, but it's a moving target. The company will optimize for the metrics at the cost of everything else.

Private but paid by public funds is always a tricky place to fall into.
Anybody has a good estimate of how much this kind of home fab can cost? I am trying to do this in my own apartment (its going very slowly heh) and I estimate it would be USD100000. USD10000 would be barely believable if I can get that broken electron microscope for the same price he did. ($1000). Seems like the vacuum system would be the most expensive part. Another one would be random consumables (vacuum grease, oil, chemicals etc). I am trying to start with the most trivial part from his videos, which seems to be the wirebonder, and thats already like a few hundred minimum.
Here are the rest of the 25 letter sets, found using brute force with the same 1 vowel per word with no repeated letters trick.

[['brung', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'cylix', 'kempt'],
['brung', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'xylic', 'kempt'],
['jumby', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'clipt', 'kreng'],
['jumby', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'pling', 'treck'],
['jumby', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'prick', 'glent'],
['jumpy', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'bling', 'treck'],
['jumpy', 'waqfs', 'vozhd', 'brick', 'glent']]

I was a little inspired by this thread [0] about the practicality of implementing brute force algs in pure python for solving wordle. Using only built-ins and with a bit of optimisation [1] it runs in 4 minutes single threaded in cpython.

[0] https://twitter.com/eevee/status/1484716294179934209

[1] Instead of considering every possible combination, it discards non-optimal subsets. E.g. when considering o-words, only u- and a-word combos that already cover 10 letters are looked at. This significantly dampens the combinatorial explosion
I like how people blame privatization for these issues, but then if you read things carefully you'll see that at all points the state exercised measures of control over the supposedly private company that not only prevented the resolution of the issues, but significantly constrained the companies options.

This example is just another one in the very long list of cases of this sort of thing happening.

I have yet to see a single example where the market has failed without government intervention being directly involved in causing the failure. It's really quite astounding.
I see posts like this and just think that as far as I can tell DD's recommendations are:

Ads
Ads
Ads
Shitty place nobody would want to eat
Shitty place nobody would want to eat
Shitty place nobody would want to eat
Shitty place nobody would want to eat
Oh look something interesting
Japan has multiple lines that go between the same stations that are privatized. Works perfectly fine there.
A couple of months wouldn't replace Microsoft word never mind Excel, Aws, Azure AD or Azure
Some months ago I needed to implement a basic tcp server in elixir using gen_tcp. I came out with this https://github.com/spapas/tcp-elixir. I'd be grateful if people could take a look at (it's really simple) and point me at any improvements it needs. It doesn't use ranch for accepting connections, what would be the advantage of using ranch in my case?

Thank you
That's a different matter. I don't think the money actually disappears, does it? In a real estate transaction, it simply changes hands. It might be harder to trace, but if there's no trace, it can be assumed illegal.
I offer this only because I'm a native English speaker and found the typo confusing: "first tier brakes" are very good brakes, "first tire/tyre breaks" is when your first set of tyres fails. I'm quite sure you meant the latter, there's a lot of ESL on HN so I thought I'd offer a translation.
Although I'm not a peak rush hour user, I love Seoul's Line 9. It has the best logo, the best station arrival jingle, and the stations are generally clean and sparkling new. Sinnonhyeon station, right in the middle of Gangnam, curiously has an entire unusable mezzanine/cavern level that you pass every time you take the escalators down to the tracks. Seems the station was overbuilt for capacity, but the line itself can't support more passengers.

A public/private partnership seems more the way to go: municipality funds development of the line but lets private sector entities operate it according to agreed-upon standards and performance objectives. That's the way it works in Stockholm, Hong Kong, and many other cities. On the other hand, if it's all publicly operated, then what's the incentive to keep improving things since your only stakeholder is the public and you're a monopoly anyway.
Yep. The article is apparently ignorant of the long history of sophisticated clocks in non-Western countries (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_timekeeping_devices)
Success is a combination of talent and circumstance. It’s always been like that. It’s also why giving opportunities to as many people as possible is so important.
That word is used differently in different jurisdictions, so the argument about it mostly just reduces to a terminological disagreement-- less interesting than it sounds, and generic/repetitive.
Sudden Death of a Young Adult Associated with Bacillus Cereus Food Poisoning
The obvious counter example is Japan's hundreds of privatized railway companies compete with each other in numerous local, regional and national markets.