skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Webpack allows you to get some dependencies from global window but IIRC it is tricky to set up.

That said if it were a web standard then webpack or one if the newer bundlers could figure it all out automatically based on your dependencies.

The problem is “who is the source of truth”.

A hash comparison system “get me the library that hashes to xyz” might work, and then you pick your “provider” as a fallback but the browser can pull from cache if the hash matches (even if it came from another provider)

Just thinking of that the problem then is which to cache. How to know “React” is important? I guess browser
could keep tally and keep the most often requested ones cached.
Ask HN: Why the obsession with note taking?
If there's one thing absolutely guaranteed to get a gazillion comments on HN, it's a post about either 1) note taking software, 2) note taking methodology 3) a combination of the two.

I'm kinda fascinated by this, in large part because I'm sucked in by it too. I can't count the number of apps I've tried, or the dopamine rush when installing a new one.

What's this about? Do we all secretly believe we can be truly better people if we can just get this right? Or are we just endlessly curious about what everyone else does? Tell me, I need to understand myself better!
I’m not saying remove a URL; that would of course be wrong. I’m saying not to have used it in the first place.
You clearly aren't writing c++ :D
Long desk. Wall to wall. That's my ideal desk. My laptop and monitor, some stationery, a printer and some books.
http://man.openbsd.org/pledge
I think it's controversial because you have a really good point but your example kind of goes against your point rather than supporting it.

'===' is a single operator in JS, just as '==' is. It's only superfluous in terms of character count (which barely matters at all), as opposed to token count or actual complexity.

I'd argue that in the important metrics, '==' is actually more superfluous, in that it has a broader scope of functionality than '==='. When you use '==' to do an equality check you're essentially invoking something that does the check, but also does a bunch of implicit type conversion and checking between types, none of which you actually care about at all.

I'm also not a fan of 'defensive programming', I think people fuck a lot of perfectly good code up trying to read the tea leaves about how other devs are going to poorly interact with it in the future. But using '===' is like saying "I just want to check equality". It's not adding something for the sake of defense (other than the single character), it's removing something useless for the sake of removing something useless. Which is a good thing for maintainability and bug prevention yada yada, but it also feels nice to do as a dev.

That's why you see very few people arguing against '===' as a best practice, because incentives are mostly aligned in this case. It's not really like a lot of the other examples where something is seen as a 'best practice' in spite of being something that devs hate doing.
Yes! And I blame OOP.

People are taught that everything should be a magical black box, designed so well that after implementing it - you never need to change it, only add to it along the predefined extension points. So if that's true - even modifying the base classes in your own system feels "wrong", never mind the "other people's code".
That's amazing! Last year was the first year that I sailed, and I just fell in love with. I live in Croatia, so Adriatic sea is my first sea to sail. And I really started seriously consider to sell my flat, buy a sailing boat and just live.

Captain I wish you calm see and happy voyage!
I think this is good for music. I don't think people should think of Spotify as the only place that music exists. It's the new (better) "radio", but good art is often to be found in escaping and rejecting constraints, centralization, and default ways to do things. So, I'm glad that Spotify's very nature is bound to piss people like Neil Young off, regardless of the particulars of this case.
Rails 7 and JavaScript
>I think a lot of the controversy is an appearance of being disingenuous by claiming that she’s not trying to be sexualized

What if she's like that anyway, and thus doesn't have to "try" and is correct in saying that?

Some women dress like that just fine on their own, enjoy enhacement surgery for certain parts and so on, and they don't have to do it for some audience...
On the surface I agree with you. I don't want to see HN be taken over by culture war stuff or by reddit drama posts.

However, the 'hacker' angle of HN, with regards to the subject of working towards success, or 'hacking success', makes the discussion of the antiwork movement very important.

HN is a mix of mindsets, but within it there are a lot people trying to redefine what success is to them, or get out of the 9-5 grind. We talk about 4-day work week trials, passive income, and so on. A lot of those discussions are compatible with the ideals of the antiwork, or work reform, movements.
The reason Substack has "content guidelines" is because they want to make their own laws. If they only followed the law, they would only need to remind users what's illegal and what's not.

And so they have to go to great lengths to explain those laws that they are making, and why they exist, and how they're enforced, etc. And of course they present them as necessary and reasonable, and "the only way".

> We will continue to take a strong stance in defense of free speech because we believe the alternatives are so much worse.

They are not defending "free speech". Free speech is exactly that: let people say anything. Hate speech. Porn. Wild conspiracies. Praise of terrorism. Anything.

They are promoting a version of "speech" that is deemed acceptable in their own social and business circle. That version includes none of the above, but currently accepts antivax.

My guess is that will change.
It's basically the digital equivalent of body shaming. And this sort of thing will feed into biased AI algorithms, and shape the world of "acceptable media" in the years to come. It may seem harmless on the surface, but the ramifications run deep.
Please at least eat some form of green vegetable. Steamed brussels sprouts with maybe some salt or a bagged salad without dressing if you don't want to significantly add calories. I don't think an all-potato diet is going to do your guts many favors.
Got it on my feeds. Excellent.
If you don't understand why it failed, you might do more damage with your repair, or you might have to replace it again in a week, rather than five years.

As for being "obvious", I don't understand that sentiment. A broken piece pretty much by definition does not look the way it should, so unless you know the exact design of every piece by heart before starting the repair you're not going to automatically know what it's supposed to look like, in the general case.
It sounds to me like she picked one source of expert opinion over another, rather than ignoring 'experts' entirely. In that case using her judgement well. Perhaps as a society we need to get better at verifying 'experts' really are? And not letting them prescribe meds if not ...
> have certain amounts of time which they need to take in order to tie voltages high or low, to either read or output a bit.

When you overclock you add voltage which helps with this which goes a long way. You would often hit thermal limits first, so heat dissipation is a major factor.
"migrant-infested German metropolis"? WTF is this trash?
Can starlink provide services worldwide in the middle of the ocean? If that happens I can see a lot of digital sailors coming up.
(Disclaimer: I have never used k8s, so cannot assess the factual accuracy of this piece.)

If Kubernetes hasn’t yet incorporated this article into their documentation somewhere prominent, they should. This is an excellent, and crucial, piece of documentation: providing a mental model and explaining key design decisions. All complex systems should have a document like this one. As a newcomer, this is what I want to read first.

Bravo, author. I hope you get rewarded.
Harsh words, but true. +1

The best thing for most people to realise is that "life's not fair, deal with it".
Well, the permissions requested on Android seem kind of excessive for an app like this.

Found some privacy policies:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jonathandata1/2022_beijing...

https://my2022.beijing2022.cn/app-config-extra/protocal.html...
What a character! Like some straight out of some cyberpunk novel.
You can see an example of what I am referring to here:

https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/148397479113276211...

Believe me, saying something like that is far more controversial, and will generate far more hate, than showing off some artificial boobies in a tech video.
I don't really support to ban anything that could be seen as sexual, but if you put it out, some people will always judge you on that merit. It will also net you attention and can overshadow your other feats.

Should she be condemned for that? I don't think so. But the engineering feats alone will never be the focus as a consequence.
Where did I go wrong in my analysis?

You say free speech is a tool that serves a purpose. Then you imply that the purpose of the tool is to push the balance of power toward the individual. The goal in pushing the balance of power to the individual is to have an equilibrium between the individuals' and the government's power. This equilibrium is characterized by an increase in stability. It seems fair to summarize this as "free speech is a tool that serves the purpose of increasing stability".

You conclude: "It's possible for something in a given situation to be more important than free speech." I think it's implied here that this "something" is (an increase in) stability. If stability is more important than free speech, it implies free speech should be restricted in order to achieve stability. In other words, censorship should be applied in order to achieve more stability.
Is this what they call a red herring?
I've now had time to Google, it's The curse of LISP. http://www.winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html
> Is it the same fight? Is explicitly pushing boundaries because you want to be seen as sexualized and have the right to do so the same as trying to push those boundaries while claiming not to aim for sexualization?

Naomi Wu never claimed not to aim for sexualization. She talks about it pretty frankly. She uses the handle "sexycyborg". She's obviously aiming for sexualization.
> The NearlyFreeSpeech.NET member site you are attempting to reach appears to be temporarily unavailable.

https://archive.is/XvE2X
My favorite talent of hers is galvanizing people so crisply into “decent” vs “self-important and looking for an easy target on the internet”.
> Everyone I've ever talked to that listens to JRE thinks what they say on it is generally correct.

I have tuned in reasonably regularly. I think what they say on there is generally what the person saying it believes to be correct.
Obligatory callout to the classic: Ninjas are sweet [1]

1. http://realultimatepower.net/
See:
https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/139660466709473690...

There's more, but again, until/if I can explain it more fully, it's on me.
I dont think you reached the core of the problem and i agree, that missing trust is an issue but not the primary one.

IMO cognitive deficiencies and the lack of education for counteraction and awareness are to blame.

Even on a non-profit platform, some sort of ideological mindset may seek to dominate debates by any measure. Same outcome, different motive.
>"Quite often one needs to take a more direct approach because these misogynistic policies are so ingrained that people actually believe them to be natural. "

I strongly agree with this. No one would dream to complain if the Louvre posts a male academic-led MOOC lecture about the Venus of Milo [0]. The pathology of this puritanism isn't harmless disagreement over which art is or isn't in "good taste"; it's the undercurrent of diminution of and disdain towards women, as Wu is very right to call out. The wild disparity between how censors classify male sculptors and woman sculptors is precisely how bigotry works -- tacit, implicit, unexamined. Men get the benefit of implicit respectability where women are suspect. Any constructive discussion about this will of course push sexists far outside their comfort zone.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKsdb8dq7fo ("La Vénus de Milo par Ludovic Laugier - Musée du Louvre")
We live in the age of shipping. Immediately. Not in the age of carefully considered best practices, architectural considerations, or sound engineering. Even top notch companies ship broken software, so it's not even about money. It's about speed.

The problem is not with developers, it's in crappy foundational computing layers.

NPM is somewhat the result of JavaScript itself being so bare bones. The cost of this community-based pseudo standard library is enormous: fragile, insecure, unstable. This doesn't mean we have to drop it, it means perhaps we do need a JavaScript standard library. Possibly mixed with NPM vendor packages that take responsibility of large clusters of functionality as a single dependency that is maintained over time.

Almost all software now requires very frequent security updates and we even dispose physical products like smartphones because they no longer get security updates. Instead of accepting this reality, why is nobody working on a foundational software stack that isn't this damn insecure to begin with?

Almost all websites on the web do not meet accessibility standards. And then we beat developers over the head in needing to learn proper accessibility best practices. Which doesn't work. Progress is near zero. So we might as well ask: why are our tools so primitive and bad, why do they not lead to accessible UX by default?

We complain about performance, or the lack thereof. But the problem is mostly in the stack itself, crappy and slow abstraction layers.

I could go on, but I hope you catch my drift. In development, you need to take the lowest common denominator. An average "bread programmer". We expect this person to personally dodge the many gaps in our crappy computing layers and it's far too easy to go wrong. This single individual is expected to be a top engineer, architect, security expert, performance expert, accessibility expert, and so on. And they also need to ship tomorrow.

We basically expect 28 million software developers to all be super heroes. They're not, they keep making the same mistakes not because they suck, instead because we have computing layers that suck. No amount of "awareness" will fix that.
I think removing from their platform whoever Neil Young tells them to would be much more of a special relationship. Do you really think Spotify is inclined to deplatform any podcaster because of threats from an artist? That’d just encourage more and more threats to remove whoever the next artist doesn’t happen to like.
> the context of Europe is nonsensical to begin with as tea doesn't grow in Europe

It does grow just fine in India which was mostly controlled by Europeans at the time. As much as all of this seems bizarre to you it's still a historical fact. The Chinese government (wanting to maintain its global monopoly) banned the export of tea plants. In the 1840's a British botanist Robert Fortune (commissioned by the East India company) travelled to the tea growing provinces of China, disguised himself as Chinese and illegally smuggled several tea plants back to India. After replicating them in greenhouse he introduced them to the Darjeeling region in Northern India.

To be fair tea was already grown in India before 'the Great Tea Heist' it was just different kinds of tea (e.g. Assam) and Chinese teas were more popular and much more expensive (largely due to Chinese monopoly on trade, western ships were only allowed to trade at specifically designed trade ports).
For any Westerners here who seem to have a hard time understanding why this is wrong:

Look at an even more women-oppressing culture such as that of Afghanistan under the Taliban. Women are required to cover their faces in public. Why? For "modesty." What it boils down to is that if women show their faces it could have a negative effect on men (sexual attraction).

A lot of people where are shaming her for being essentially immodest in her quest for female empowerment. A face is not immodest. A boob is not immodest. It is not sexualized because it is just a body part. It takes a man to do the sexualization, so the sexualization isn't the boob, but a man's who is doing the sexualization. A baby does not sexualize the boob (it's food). They get conditioned to it by society and culture as they grow older (a culture that sexualizes it).

Sub out face in Afghanistan with boob in America and you'll see it's the same picture. While we should pat ourselves on the back for being so progressive as to allow women to show their faces in public, we haven't quite gotten to the point where it's ok to show boobs in public. And yes, some women prefer to wear burkas, just as some women prefer to hide their boobs in public.

The point is that those restrictions on women shouldn't be dictated by the actions or effects they have on men. Instead, men should either change their viewpoints or control their own sexualization so that women don't have to accommodate. These immodest views come from those who sexualize women, and because that's out of the control of women so they should not be forced to accommodate something out of their control.
It's probably basic stuff that has to be in most Chinese apps, but I found the list of illegal words really interesting:
https://github.com/jonathandata1/2022_beijing/blob/main/ille...

It's a mixture of spam filtering ("... for sale", gambling, drugs/weapons) and swearwords, that you'd expect to find in western apps as well. But there are also a lot of phrases about the CCP, dissidents and Tibet/Taiwan.
I find that usually there's just one person (or a very small group) with a vision, motivation, and the skills required to take the project in a good direction and keep maintaining it. Contributions from others tend to be fixes and features of limited scope, essentially drive-by contributions, not enough to keep the project going.

Funding would help ensure that those who have the skills and motivation and vision can keep working on it.
Hello! The best way for this would be to open a "Filter update" issue in the github repo: https://github.com/xvello/letsblockit/issues/new/choose. I'll make sure to add a link from the view filter page.

I was confused because the "People also ask" section is correctly hidden, and I had to google about this "People also search for" thing that pops up when you bounce back from a search result. Thanks for the pointer!

As I've seen the `eob_` id prefix on other contextual blocks, I think I'll go with a more selective filter: `google.*###rso div.g div[jscontroller]`. It hides every "smart" blocks inside organic search result entries. Deploying right now!
France, Denmark, Germany.
This is one of the most confusing titles I've read in a while.

Good thing they managed to find all the monkeys!
Social Engineering is marketing speak to make [swindle, con, defraud, dupe, etc]
to make it sound fancier and more palatasble-

This is handy when youa re selling your consulting services.

One of our consultants will con ..
We have sone of the best con artists ....

The term itself is a con.
I have no opinion on Rittenhouse, but I watched his trial as a non-American for the show.

It was mind-boggling, to me, the argument on the iPad zooming feature[1]. This was three people — with no technical knowledge at all — arguing about a technology which, ultimately, could influence the rest of the life of a fourth person…

How often does this happen and is not recorded by a camera?!

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf7xCMFBv5c
That is a very broad brush you are painting with.
I would strongly recommend using minizinc ( https://www.minizinc.org/ ) or Essence ( https://conjure.readthedocs.io/en/latest/essence.html ) (other systems exist too), which provide higher-level interfaces to SAT (and other system) solving.

You can view these as compilers to SAT, much like "no-one writes in assembler", most people don't write raw SAT either :)
Thanks! You may be correct in that this application could be better achieved with a simple signed message—this is my first time playing with ZK proofs.

The main issue is that the circuit is simply hashing the coordinates and the resulting hash is being used to identify the treasures. So it is already fairly similar to the scenario you describe, but in an ideal ZK system it would not even reveal a hash of the coordinates, only verifiable knowledge of them.

For example, I _think_ it might be closer to true ZK if I had hardcoded an equality check with exactly (5, 10) coordinates into the ZK circuit, rather than using hashes to support a variety of coordinates (but then it wouldn’t be as general purpose). Perhaps there’s another better way though!
On their website I couldn’t find any statement about their effectiveness, nor any certification.
Youtube has been recommending this video to me for the last two weeks and I never watch her content. They sure don't seem to have a problem promoting the clickbait before the blowback happens.
If you equate somebody being refused to post content on a website to some sort of deviation from democracy and freedom I would encourage you to live in Russia or China for a few years. It'll re-calibrate your understanding of freedom and democracy.
The fact is, nothing like valgrind, asan, etc. can catch more than a fraction of memory usage faults. The only reliable way to avoid shipping them is by construction: write using contructs that can't have any. This turns out to be possible.

Rust and numerous other languages build this into the core language, but it is not the only way to get there, as much as Rust fans like to insist otherwise. But you anyway can't get there in C.
Surely the title should read "Neil Young requests Sportify remove his own library from the platform after voicing his displeasure with another content creator"
I use a wide variety of greetings, most notably: "Ahoi", "How you've been?", "What's cooking?", "What gives?", "Beautiful day today, ain't it?".

Having at least one extroverted person in the call helps though, sometimes it's weird if no one replies.
VS Code fork without Microsoft telemetry and licensing
> There were arguments before Rust 1.0 that people will simply try to emulate classes. But nobody actually bothered, because traits provide enough functionality that you don't actually need to have classes to actually write maintainable and understandable programs.

It's not only traits. Traits (well, traits objects) are used for dynamic dispatch, traits themselves are used as composable interfaces, and structs + impl blocs are used for basic classes.

My point was that your example, implementing a trait that may or may not use a weight for barking, is not making the program better. It's making it more complex for no good reason. Here's what your program could be: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...

Adding traits doesn't make the code better. There's only dogs that are barking. You don't even need to have bark() be a method, a plain function will do.
> puritans or religious nutjobs

They absolutely are still active and doing write-in campaigns about this; that's where FOSTA/SESTA came from. The ability of evangelicals to sway elections by having a large number of people in a pulpit filter bubble is greater than that of tech in the US.