skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not really weird at all, that's actually what happened with IE. It wasn't that IE was lacking but people used it anyway, IE was doing really cool stuff but in it's own way.

AJAX is one example, IE introduced XMLHttpRequest back then and it took 15 years to become a standart. So people built their cool websites around IE features that were not actually standards and once Microsoft screwed up IE people found out that you can't switch to alternative browsers because websites were built to support IE.

As the IE experience degraded(has become famous for crashing and taking the OS with it) and there was a room for improvement, Netscape become Mozilla and they introduced actually good browser that later will become Firefox but because most people used UI, web developers had to accommodate IE by writing IE specific code everywhere. That's where the hate for IE comes from, it wasn't fanboys hating IE, it was developers hating IE because they had to write extra code all the time.

Firefox may support some Chrome features but how sure you are that Google will keep making a good browser? For many, Chrome is already a degraded experience for what it was and it is actually very nasty in favouring Google properties and tracking that can be a disaster if switching away from Chrome becomes as hard as it was with IE.
> How does Apple control communication on an iPhone?

They control what messaging apps you are allowed to install on your iPhone.
I'd go further and argue that in general reversing a string isn't possible or meaningful.

It's just not a thing people do, so it's just... not very interesting to argue about what the 'correct' way to do it is.

Similarly, any argument over whether a string has n characters or n+1 characters in it is almost entirely meaningless and uninteresting for real world string processing problems. Allow me to let you into a secret:

there's never really such a thing as a 'character limit'

There might be a 'printable character width' limit; or there might be a 'number of bytes of storage' limit. Which means interesting questions about a string include things like 'how wide is it when displayed in this font?' or 'how many bytes does it take to store or transmit it?'... But there's rarely any point where, for a general string, it is really interesting to know 'how many characters does the string contain?'

Processing direct user text input is the only situation where you really need a rich notion of 'character', because you need to have a clear sense of what will happen if the user moves a cursor using a left or right arrow, and for exactly what will be deleted when a user hits backspace, or copied/cut and pasted when they operate on a selection. The ĳ ligature might be a single glyph, but is it a single character? When does it matter? Probably not at all unless you're trying to decide whether to let a user put a cursor in the middle of it or not.

And next to that, I just feel to argue that there is such a thing as a 'correct' way to reverse "Rĳndæl" according to a strict reading of Unicode glyph composability rules seems like a supremely silly thing to try to do.

I'd much rather, when asked to reverse a string, more developers simply said 'that doesn't make sense, you can't arbitrarily chunk up a string and reassemble it in a different order and expect any good to come of it'.
Financial experts advice the Fed…very noteworthy news :(
After hiring several great developers with <5 years experience, I am inclined to agree.
This is such a lame argument. You want it to be true but have no evidence that it actually is true.

A lot of the Chrome team's "standards" have problems with accessibility, workability on mobile, security[0], privacy[1], or just battery life. Some are neat experiments that are or only will be used in the wild by advertisers to track and identify users.

Because the Safari/WebKit team doesn't have to chase users for revenue like Mozilla does they can afford to be more conservative with what Google "standards" they support. Being able to offer a tighter privacy posture or efficiency is part of the iOS/macOS sales pitch.

[0] https://github.com/WICG/webusb/issues/50

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/16/22387492/google-floc-ad-t...
some kids learned how to get someones email from git log and use it in git config?
Neither because they both plagiarized Yevgeny Zamyatin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_(novel)
Neither of those things stops the GP from specifying who can use their code, only from classifying their code as FOSS if they do.
I think there's a point you may have overlooked: The outside of any container holding radioactive materials becomes more difficult and dangerous as time passes. Even a sealed container.

Storing containers accessibly but yet securely and designing them such that they remain safely sealed for 100 or 200 or 300 years, yet can be handled then, is a very big problem. AIUI a more difficult problem than finding stable rock that's been undisturbed for a long time.
Correct, in the event of a collapse of civilization record might be lost.

But under such a scenario, how would some future civilization get contaminated? What are the chances that they'd dig hundreds of meters deep in an area with no valuable resources? The proposed scenarios in which nuclear waste may harm humans far into the future are exceptionally unlikely. Contrast the remote possibility of this form of harm with the millions that die each year due to fossil fuel pollution (and many more that may be harmed by climate change).
What didn't he like about Python?

There are things about Python which are ugly, but the language is nice for being flexible, lacking surprises, having an ethos favouring readable code, and having a comprehensive set of libraries that are easy to use.

Python's famed readability takes a dip when you use libraries like Pandas or Tensorflow -- which awkwardly glue a whole new language onto Python -- but standard library Python is very common-sense and readable.

(Also, Python's OOP is awkward with object.f() meaning something different from f(object), when really they ought to mean the same thing. In Pandas, you sometimes have a function with the same name as a method, which behave subtly different from each other.)

Academic functional languages don't have most of those, and academia has no right to complain given that they've done little to rectify this.
Yeah this. I’ve got three kids, my mother and (spit) my ex wife on my Apple One sub. Couple of domains and two apple fitness users, storage and Apple Music for all is a bargain.
Malone is vaccinated. He's against vaccine mandates.

The surpreme court seems to agree with Malone as well.

Should the surpreme court be deplatformed?
> As an academic, it must be soul destroying to see the world dominated by ad-hoc efforts like Python.

I dunno that I see it that way. (I am a PhD student in programming languages, likely going to end up in academia.)

In many ways, yes, Python is "bad". It lacks an expressive static type system, it has some bizarre rules about scope, and there are other idiosyncrasies that, were I to build my own language from scratch, I would seek to avoid.

But in many other ways, Python is very good. The standard library is phenomenally complete, featuring functionality for the vast majority of common use cases. I also find the documentation to be pretty approachable, though that sentiment seems to not be very well-shared. As for the language proper, the lack of a type system does irk me somewhat, but I use mypy to get back some of those guarantees so it's not as bad as it could be. I find the syntax mostly pleasant, and the module system is usually intuitive. Some of the things they've added are very nice features: I like that multiple consecutive string literals are treated as a single string (useful for splitting strings across lines); I like f-string formatting, too; the use of underscores as numerical separators is great (though not unique to Python); the overall design of the language, while truly odd at first, is relatively consistent and powerful (e.g., everything-is-an-object, iterators/iterables are prevalent, classes can be modified dynamically [which is maybe not always a good thing, but it's a neat tool for the power-user], etc.).

Again, it's not a language I would build myself, but as far as languages that exist, it's not even close to my least favorite.

I think it's also worth considering the space of programming language design in linguistic terms. Natural (human) languages are amazing because they constantly evolve through regular use. New terms are inducted into lexicons constantly, and new grammatical rules can be generated and regularized among a group to give the users their own characterization separate from other speakers of the same language. Natural language is beautiful.

If we look at individual programming languages as separate languages, they do not exhibit the same properties. They are pretty much static, except when a new major version is released.

But if we look at programming languages rather as dialects of a single common language (easy to do when we consider "Turing-complete languages" together, for example), then we see each language as a new manifestation of the unique ideas of a group of people, similar to a dialect in natural language. There are new idioms and expected constructions. The capability of expression remains constant, more or less, but the minor connotative differences are many and varied.

All this is to say: Python is not "should destroying". It's just another way of looking at the same system. One from which we can learn things when we seek to design new programming languages, certainly, but I don't think its idiosyncrasies inherently make it so bad as many portray it.
"Software freedom" doesn't really make sense when the software's function is "using someone else's software". You're stil at the mercy of the server (which is why remote attestation is even interesting in the first place).

If you want to use free software, only commect to Affero GPL servces and don't use nonfree services, and don't consume nonfree content.
NO YOU DON'T SAY!!!!
If trans women are women why are you calling them trans?
Like... \r\n
The engine is HTML. No more is needed to give me the information I want, though CSS and images are certainly nice. JS would be more like the infotainment system: Sometimes nice, sometimes annoying, sometimes dangerous.
I think repeating accurate facts is an important thing. Because the random complaints in incorrect and bizarre negative anti-vax claims pass by without someone addressing them often.

What is real and true matters. There's lots of things that are hard to decide, but we know that they're not millions of hidden deaths from getting vaccinated, and we know that there are millions of people protected from dying because they got vaccinated.
Makes you kinda wonder what kind of emergency this is? I mean they tried setting up fully staffed field hospitals in the beginning but they were closed—most without seeing a single patient.

Whatever the hell society is doing right now, it ain’t to protect hospital capacity. If hospitals were truly falling apart we’d have done something to fix them.
Underrated! Yes, prime the 'shower thoughts' pump.
he's saying the media "shouldn't spread misinformation". this is very far from censorship. This is the Surgeon General Surgeon Generaling.

Censorship is when the government makes it illegal to publish information. It is NOT when a given media outlet decides not to publish something. Large and small media outlets around the world make the decision not to publish lies as a matter of daily practice - that's their choice.

Others decide to publish lies, and they are free to carry Joe Rogan.
It definitely matters for M1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brookecrothers/2021/02/21/this-...
There is no stigma these days for not starting a family kids and men can privately retreat into video games and pornography. When confronted about their selfish* lifestyle the above comment is convenient cover but it is not backed by solid data. I'd take birth in this past decade over birth in my decade any day.

*I'd argue that not having at least one child and possibly adopting others is selfish assuming one has financial means. For example, while I thought I wanted kids, upon reflection what I really wanted are mini-me's. If I could buy a clone I'd do it immediately, but child roulette?, no thanks. My selfish lifestyle had made me very happy so far and that feels like a character flaw.
You can start here for age adjusted death rates by US state.

https://www.bioinformaticscro.com/blog/states-ranked-by-age-...
There are unicode characters that reverse parsing order themselves. This has been the basis of a code injection attack, analyzed in [1].

[1] ``Trojan Source: Invisible Vulnerabilities'': https://trojansource.codes/trojan-source.pdf
Their huge China derived revenue is an increasing problem for Apple from a company stance perspective. They have to increasingly walk a tightrope between servicing that market, kowtowing to the Chinese government, and upholding the values of a California based US Company.
I'm the founder of https://ayvri.com - is it safe to say you're a user?
Some people view Fauci through this same lens.
I mean the first 15 scams should have been that
The statement doesn’t said people need to buy a new phone for every new phone, it says that you will not have to buy a different charger when you buy a new phone.

For example, now my phone is the iPhone 11 with USB-A to lightning cable and charger, if I buy “X Android phone” with fast charging, it has USB-C to USB-C , then I’ll need to buy a new charger for my office charger because I have only USB A charger for the iPhone.

EU want to stop that this situation will happen in the future and they want to force brands to use only one standard.

I’m not saying that this is correct (I think that imposing a standard can damage the future development) but the statement is not “completely false”. You’re reading it wrong.
Free software doesn't really work in a networked untrusted world.
Depends on the recovery cost but yes I agree they are probably a better solution.
This is an image taken on Jan 6: https://i.insider.com/5ff6467a6d61c10019cce0e6?width=1000&fo...
Soviet Union was a brutal dictatorship with an elite class operating under the guise of communism. Same goes for any notions of it being socialist. Under no circumstance was the means of production owned by the workers in the USSR. Also most folks pushing for socialism are pushing for Social Democracy.
I'm sure they'd change to better headlines to avoid getting downranked.
So sorry metalised, not much you can do and no legal recourse/appeal as you have agreed to the TOS. FB will not help much either.

The a lesson to be learned here. Zinga learned that with Farmville in other circumstances. If you can, don't build on the top of some other companies, a FB, an Instagram, Pinterest, or a Gmail/Maps. Rug pulls do not happen solely in crypto.

There are exceptions of course: build something good on the top of salesforce and if you get traction (=paying customers) they will buy you.

More and more posts on HN are written to show how evil those companies are (Amazon to their third party merchants, Google or Facebook to their users), but you have choices in life, simply build a different model. The lesson is: don't build your whole business with faceless companies, even worse if you don't pay for the services. What do you expect in return?
Prime Video Uses WebAssembly
> but the US is unique in that it controls the world reserve currency and can directly print the debt away

This doesn't seem like a real option, though. The United States doesn't simply print money, we issue debt to increase the money supply. If we just started literally printing new, unbacked money we'd immediately lose our reserve currency status and it would likely be the end of US global hegemony. Maybe the end of the US, period.

Meanwhile, using our standard practice of issuing debt to pay for it wouldn't work here because that would be exactly counter to the thing we're trying to do: reduce our debt.
Except they were fixed and fixed quickly. The MobileMe team had a battering session with SJ once..

I don't think Steve Jobs would let a 'Your battery is under 10%', 'interruptive' notification stay this long on a phone.

If you took out a screenshot of system preferences from OS X tiger or something and compared it to today, see how easy it is to find things on that one. Even with simple things such as the wording of 'General' vs 'Appearance'.
Dam, this is awesome, concrete feedback.
I'm only realizing right now how crappy the titles are, going to address this asap.

WRT the handwriting: I may end up switching to a typed format since its supported in workrooms and everything is remote nowadays anyway.

My thoughts with watching the failures: it helps to see what doesn't work during an interview.

Ex. So many people jump straight into coding before even thinking about the problem or asking clarifying questions. This is a big red flag during interviews. It might make the value prop clearer if I add some commentary over the failures to explain what went wrong and why.

I'm still trying to suss out whether it makes sense to post the failure vids, so thanks for pointing that out
Fleet Below Deck, Architecture Overview
I can't find the quote from the official. Do you have a link to his exact text?
Yeah, just because it was mandatory doesn't mean people followed through. I live in a very progressive city and we still had many people refusing to follow mask mandates at the height of pre-vaccine pandemic.

People ripping down mask signs, spitting on people, arguing at the doors to a store, etc.
Turkey did a 1,000,000:1 conversion a while back. Before that you could almost say that the local currency was millions.

- "How much is this book?"

- "9 million"

- "Here's 10 million"

- "And one million in change, sir"

OK, so that only worked up to a certain value. No one would say their rent was "1,000 million". In that case, the currency was billions!
If you care about communications platforms, Facebook what you should care about.

Future concerns about what Apple might do in future are nothing by comparison.
The idea is cool, but why would any major service support this? The whole point of every startup these days is to grow to the point where they can hog all the users on to their own proprietary platform. Interoperability is anathema to the modern way of thinking.
I have an issue with using ID.me for government websites, because it is a privately owned company. Online authentication at this point seems as important as USPS service and warrants being owned and developed by the government itself.
Call it "meta currency".
ISPs to display broadband nutrition labels similar to the labels found on foods. This will help consumers compare price, speed & data.
The internet however had to overcome and deploy worldwide physical infrastructure to succeed. Crypto does not. Roll-out isn’t even remotely comparable due to relative barriers to entry.

Everyone who wants crypto can have it, now. And could have had it on day one.
In Venezuela and Argentina you can absolutely buy goods at the store with cryptocurrency, if you whisper low enough to the owner. In El Salvador the government mandates it be an option. Money is money where it's accepted, everywhere else it's not. That's not really a point at all.
There has been such thing[0] and it unlocked affordable mortgages in a country where in the past years (decades?) it was basically impossible to get (and thus, climb the housing ladder).

[0] https://www.marval.com/publicacion/creditos-en-uva-como-alte...
Quarter after quarter Tim Cook just mic drops these earnings.

Remember all the “Apple is doomed, Tim is a bean counter” comments when Jobs handed over the reigns?

Yea. Ok.
>The panic response _is the lie_

You're right. I think I meant that examining my body's responses can give me a quicker realization of "something is wrong (meaning my anxiety is out-of-proportion)" than examining my mental processes can; because I can get trapped in that anxious loop of thinking about thinking, and worrying about worrying. So it doesn't "lie" to me, that way.

But the only way to truly get over anxiety is like you say, you've got to realize that all of it is exaggerated and false, and you've got to just "let it go." It really does get easier. The pandemic has made it harder again and I resent it.
At least in my area, I have heard of people being turned away from hospitals (where they are going due to covid symptoms) because of their vaccination status.
And what browser engine you're allowed to use and, thereby, the extent to which you can control your web experience.

Then there's the App Store being both a point of control, a burden on developers, and highway robbery with Apple's 30% cut.
> You will pass out in 15 seconds

You can easily hold your breath or stay underwater for longer than 15 seconds.
No, but people there have options thanks to it.
How to respond when close friends are using my idea in an incubator?
Forewarning: I am going to keep this relatively vague and detail sparse. I do not want to blow up my colleagues' spot and I am looking more for interpersonal/professional advice in how to broach the topic with them directly as friends, without bringing in outside influences.

Last year, I was discussing ideas with a set of friends. I brought up an idea am confident I originated (at least within the context of the discussion). At the time, two of those friends were workshopping a startup in an entirely different domain. A few weeks ago, I found out that my friends had been accepted to an incubator with a prospective idea that, though not the entirety of what I had discussed, was essentially the business proposition/revenue generating portion of my idea, by itself.

Upon hearing their idea, my first thought was "didn't I tell you exactly this idea?" but I played it cool and did not bring up that I had originated this idea prior nor that I discussed it with them in presumed confidence. I would like to meet with them in person to broach the topic but I don't know exactly how I should do that. The relationship between me and these others makes me believe that they were not acting out of malice or trying to swoop the idea from me, but maybe genuinely thought they'd arrived on this idea on their own. I know from my own memory that often things can pop out that you think you came up with that in reality you lifted wholesale from elsewhere. That said, I know from notes I kept long before the meeting that I had this idea before discussing it with them and that I did not come to it mutually through that discussion.

I have no belief that I could compel them to stop and I am not sure that that is my goal in the first place. More so, I am hurt as a friend and a colleague that they would take the idea without credit or forewarning and I feel I must broach the subject as a matter of personal principle. I have not had experience with such a situation before and would appreciate any ideas that the HN community is willing to provide.
It depends on your SLA. Under 10ms 99.9% of the time is pretty tight. Even if the migration takes a second, you'll meet your SLA for the hour.