skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If that's all it does then it's a massive success.
> It just regurgitates what we already know.

What about people that do not know much about the topic?
This is exactly what happens. I have listened to a few podcast asking for a 5-star review on Apple Podcast. Most people don't know the difference.
I also started donating €10/month. I figured that I pay a lot more for other services that I use far less often and provide me far less value, so why not pay for this. Also got me to think about this topic a bit more and write this blog post: https://canolcer.com/post/pay-for-internet-stuff/
Hello,

I'm the Founder & CEO at EatKind. This is my first post on HN, and I'm looking for feedback on our latest Chrome extension.

We launched EatKind – https://eatkind.co around 6 months back to help anyone eat less meat, eggs and dairy. EatKind can veganize ANY recipe, dish or ingredient by providing plant-based alternatives to use in place of animal-derived ingredients.

And we just launched this Chrome extension to make it all the more easier for users to veganize a meal. All you have to do is install the extension, and visit any recipe site!

EatKind works in the US, UK and India today. We are looking to add support to more countries soon.

Some of our upcoming features are: being able to favourite your recipes, create a shopping list, integration with online vegan stores.

If you're looking to cut down your meat or dairy consumption or transitioning to a plant-based diet - we would love to hear from you.
FB knows the optimal amount of ads to show a user, and that has to vary between time spent on the site. Someone who just glances at the site could see significantly less ads than someone who a "perma-scroller" for lack of a better term.

I removed the feed completely, but still kept my account so I can still engage with groups, which is the only thing keeping me there.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/news-feed-era...
I may be misunderstanding, but it seems like gptf can only apply theorems from the set you guys trained it on ... in which case I don't see how it could possibly help with the development of a theory beyond its first few statements. Have I got that right? and if so is it something that might be addressed in future iterations?
Fedora and OpenWRT have very different use cases
Some recent papers

[1], look at figures at end of paper. Figure one shows the percent of inventions in various industries that would not have been developed without patent protection, and it's 60% for pharm, >35% for chem, and significant for machinery, electrical. This chart is from 1986, so tech didn't exist as it does now. Many other charts, some much more recent, show that without patent protection a lot of current invention would not get done.

[2] is an interesting one, a recent paper studying the effect WWII had on innovation by making patents secret so enemies could not learn from them. The effect is that without patents making companies publish innovations, follow-on innovation was slowed significantly. So this provides evidence that patents add innovation by letting competitors learn more quickly.

[3] - patents in the UK : "We find evidence pointing to a positive association between patenting and innovative performance measured as turnover due to innovation, but not between patenting and subsequent employment growth."

[4] "We find that patent approvals help startups create jobs, grow their sales, innovate, and reward their investors. Exogenous delays in the patent examination process significantly reduce firm growth, job creation, and innovation, even when a firm’s patent application is eventually approved. Our results suggest that patents act as a catalyst that sets startups on a growth path by facilitating their access to capital. "

[5] "Using unique data on all first-time applications filed at the U.S. Patent Office since 2001, we find that startups that win the patent “lottery” by drawing lenient examiners have, on average, 55% higher employment growth and 80% higher sales growth five years later. Patent winners also pursue more, and higher quality, follow-on innovation. Winning a first patent boosts a startup’s subsequent growth and innovation by facilitating access to funding from VCs, banks, and public investors."

There's hundreds more papers - go to google scholar and search and learn about it.

Now, as to your statement, "Please provide some evidence, other than your intuition, that the patent system is necessary and useful, over no patent system.
reply". Do you have any good survey papers or wide scale evidence to support that a patent system isn't necessary and useful? Anecdotes, blog posts, stories about this or that company are not solid evidence, since those all ignore the totality of evidence.

[1] https://www.nber.org/papers/w25383

[2] https://www.nber.org/digest/jul19/wwii-policy-kept-patents-s...

[3] https://www.nber.org/papers/w19089

[4] https://www.nber.org/papers/w21959

[5] https://www.nber.org/papers/w23268
I'm pretty much in it for the baby pictures and vacation photos at this point, but those are starting to thin out as my friends and loose connections are moving on from the platform.
Agree, however a large majority uses C++ as what I call C+, which is basicaly "C with classes" with a bit of C++11.

To the point that we have the Orthodox C++ movement, and educating people to move beyond "C with classes" that keeps being taught around the world is a common discussion subject at C++ conferences, and ISO C++ papers.
I saw an HN comment recently saying that CSS is Turing complete; this sort of example makes me wonder if there's a formal model of side-effects and ability to do things like interface with I/O including NICs in order to make web/db/etc. requests?

Or maybe it doesn't even need (a separate) one, because all a Turing machine needs is some other 'networking machine' to be looking at some designated area on tape (I'm describing DMA essentially, I suppose)? And maybe what else happens externally in response to what's on the designated tape area is uninteresting/completely arbitrary and doesn't need to/inherently can't be formally modelled?
So if Facebook disappeared tomorrow do you think the same people would say, “oh well, I might as well get my medical information from the New England Journal of Medicine”?
No one made the claim that open source universally don’t fall victim to dishonesty. We were discussing the rate.
Moreso that Apple bought exclusivity of TSMC/ASML's process about a year past everyone else. Similar to their microdrive exclusivity they bought for ipod.
The Greatest Toy Man You've Never Known
My process is:

1-Store the information very quickly, without typing any additional text, so no tags and no annotations

2-Retrieve the information based on some word I might remember from the previously saved text or based on an approximate date

#1 happens a lot so I don’t want to spend time annotating or tagging information (ie click save and forget…)

#2 is much less frequent and when I really need the info, I can spend a bit of time to craft my criteria for a search

Making #1 laborious or painful is a nonstarter for me. Anyone else on the same boat?
The use case: Make an animation, where the text appears starting from the end - for example if you stylize it as vertical text falling from the top.

I think the example shows quite clearly the problem really comes down to dividing the string to logical parts (atoms, grapheme clusters, however you want to call it).
I can't read the article as I'm in the EU but Criminal podcast had a great episode about lottery rigging.

https://thisiscriminal.com/episode-160-hot-lotto-3-12-2021/
FB is an ad business. Changing their DNA to something else is very hard to do.

I had hope that Libra (now Diem) would bring them into personal finance. There are hard problems to solve and the industry is ripe for disruption. Every FB user could have a FB wallet. Remittance, Marketplace, loans, etc.. So many things possible across the entire globe. Not just in the West. They could eat PayPal's lunch.

Instead, Zuck turned his focus to the Metaverse. I really don't get it.
That's not true, public companies can survive on profits and their investors then enjoy dividends. The market just figured out that growth is more lucrative than dividends for specific people, and there is less incentive to make sustainable companies.
Obviously you can create a blockchain that allows edits. Git is a crypto tree technology and it allows rebases.

But the whole point of Bitcoin is that no one should have the authority to reverse transactions or print new coins. And all of Web3/Eth/NFT crypto shares the idea that this technology is useful because it removes the need for trusting a central authority (you trust the code and the distributed network instead)

The idea is that you have the coins and NFTs in your own wallet and no one can take those away from you. So if you are going to add a layer that allows transactions to be immutable you are literally describing a bank or a credit card and there is no need for crypto.
Doesn't he have a response on his website? I swear I read it at some point
Show HN: How Do I Type That Character?
> Nothing says low-effort group think than the claim that "NFTs don't work".

NFTs are based on crypto currency - a scam.

* You get a mined crypto, one with body that's essentially a fancy IOU.

- Alarm bells begin to ring. Who enforces the IOU? The anarchist collective?

* You download the funny art, by clicking the link.

- Air sirens start to blast. How do you know link is secure? Could someone else already got there and download the picture? Is there a way to limit the download number. If no, they can't guarantee a single owner. If yes, can you authenticate. What if link expired? Etc.

* You proudly display your art. Someone right click and save as.
They now have your art for $0. Or for hell they might steal your real asset or even the NFT used to verify you own it.

- What is your recourse? Who will believe you own right to online pictures? What court considers NFTs real asset?
Ask HN: Examples of Great Corporate Speeches?
I’m looking for examples of speeches that did a great job at rallying employees behind a cause.

When I think of speeches the ones I come to are most political or military. When it comes to companies I’m at a loss. Surely that is to some degree that the stakes are often not as high and the communication is private.

All that’s be the case… can you think or any examples?
Lutron Caseta switches (which I use for my mains) have two buttons. One on top for on and one on bottom for off. They also have a little dimple so you can feel which is which without looking. It gets a little more complicated if you have a fan or dimmer control but the user experience is still pretty good. Is it as quick and easy as a physical switch? No, but it's about as close as you can get without having a physical switch that actively toggles when it's triggered remotely. I don't know if anybody makes a switch like that. It would be nice but for me personally the Caseta switches are more than sufficient. I've had zero usability issues and no complaints from the wife.
Recently: "Why is there no theory of the just riot?" [0] (204 comments)

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30115410
Actually, there is a simple explanation – Podcasts app now shows the review popup inside the app itself. iOS devs can control when to show it and most probably they do it right after you submit a 5-star review to a podcast. If you've just submitted a 5-star review there is a good chance that you will submit it to the app itself as well.
That's why review examples in the article are not about the app itself, some people think that they are reviewing a podcast.

Note that you don't even need to update the app to enable this popup review feature, this can be done with A/B tests at any moment.
What is there to know about Tiktok? A feed of videos, one after the other, apparently with an excellent recommendation algorithm.

Further, who cares what you find problematic? People don't work for you.
It is done only if the supreme leaders decide to push for a fork. They did it once, and it is not clear what criteria they used to do so.

Should we expect that the core dev team will push for a fork again?

If so, what is the threshold for future scams? 100M? 10? If I get scammed of $100k don’t I deserve my money back?

Are we going to create a fork for every dispute, or are we going to just ignore all disputes?

The whole thing does not work.
Take this as pure speculation, but my gut feeling says that this might be due to the tendency in the infrastructure/cloud side to move towards Kubernetes and similar solutions. Classic massive vms fleets are a thing that, in my opinion, has been and will continue decreasing and perhaps,
there are no challenges that might appeal to someone in order to create a replacement for something mature that works and has a big company as RedHat behind. Again, pure speculation from my part.

Me personally have used Ansible a lot in my carrer until 2 years ago, where I moved back fully to the Kubernetes world, and yes, Ansible can be used there too, but I prefer to rely on more native solutions. Funnly enough, during the last months of that period, I started to write, as a side project, a “clone” in Golang introducing improvements and new features but I finally abandoned it as I moved away from that vm/ssh world.
My biggest issue is that they don't interoperate across browsers. The idea that I would use a single browser is crazy. I don't use a single browser on one device on any of the devices I use. If the browsers treated themselves less like silos, people would be more encouraged to use them for this sort of note taking.
I'd argue that $5/month is quite high. Not because Signal isn't useful, but because the actual incurred cost per user is much, much lower. Of course, not everyone is going to pay.
But if Signal were to ask users to pay, say $10 per year, i'm sure there'd be a lot more payers.
Unless you plan on doing the building yourself, building is more expensive than buying.
I'd do this in a heartbeat if they would get rid of MobileCoin first.
Most startups probably start as a cocktail party idea, so although the author is correct, he underestimates the value of the concept.

Also, whilst it is intuitive that someone without expertise in a field is easy to get everything wrong, it is more interesting that often experts also get everything wrong. Sometimes this happens because the problem may affect an expert's field but belongs to another field, or the problem just exists from someone else's point of view.

In Greece we refer to people who always know everything better than experts as couch coaches. :)
I was waiting a long time for the possibility of easily paying for signal. This reminded me that I should also start to pay for my FOSS password manager. Both are easily worth a few bucks a month and I couldn't live without them.
What about the DAML smart contract language? It's currently being used to digitalise the world's largest stock exchange (Hong Kong) and the Australian Securities exchange
This post further discusses that article...
It's not clear to me that privacy-preserving ads do actually perform worse than intrusive ads. Maybe advertisers spend less for similar impact.
NASA does not decide that. Its the US Congress who will decide. This is just NASA and the Biden plan for whenever it will end, but they wont actually decide. They can just make it harder for the next president and congress to extend it to not work towards extending it.

How to dispose it was always gone be by dropping it into the ocean.
GNU C Library version 2.35 Released
Laptop Zenbook 14X OLED Space Edition
Love this just because I empathize with struggling with js worklets!
What it *can* do is very different from what people *actually* do with it.

Most of the people I know who own one tell me they mainly use it to look at the time and answer their phone without taking it out of their purse/pocket.

When I ask about the "gee-whiz" features, the typical reply is , "Yeah, it does stuff like that but I don't really use it". In other words, they're more for iMarketing and iBragging than iUse.
That's only really true if you are talking about specific houses and locations, while keeping everything else unchanged.

In general, houses are just as desirable as they were a few years ago when they were half the price. All that has materially changed is the supply and cost of credit.

The same thing works on the downside: broad price falls are not due to mass desirability changes. They are due to credit becoming harder to get and more expensive to repay on a monthly basis.

Finance 101: asset prices move inverse to the discount rate.
I think the correct thing to do would have been to pivot away from user data and ad targeting as business model and start offering premium, paid services. For instance Facebook could have very easily been Slack for businesses, as well as an enterprise internal social network. Another thing would have been to start offering appliances for private hosting of individual Facebook instances. Finally Facebook could have also started competing in cloud and leveraging its massive infrastructure for other companies to use.
I might be wrong but it seems like these could have replaced Facebook’s current revenue model with stable, reliable recurring revenue while also resolving its longstanding PR problems.
The value is as an additional line of QC. If you think about it as "hiding statistics" then there is no value. If you think of it as the last step in the production process, then clearly the cars making it to the customers are of a higher average level if the bad ones get rejected.

It also lets Tesla play with the numbers of shipped cars, because cars returned by dealers don't count as shipped.

But look at the recent HN story about the Tesla without a brake pad.
I didn't even mention Bezos. My point is that it's a bad look for everyone involved, regardless of the legality or financial considerations. It says "anything is for sale". Which of course is exactly what America is all about, but I don't have to like it.

If Bezos wants to celebrate a Hawaii themed birthday at Versailles I'm sure he could bribe/pay the city to close it for the public for a week and fill it with tiki heads and palm trees, and it would make financial sense and be perfectly legal. But it would still be degrading for the French people.

Not saying this is quite that bad, but it's the same idea. Money should not be the only consideration.
There is something else going on around FB.

Almost all activity online has shifted away from the Social Graph to a Content Graph. Almost nobody wants to see what their friends are doing online anymore. In a lot of ways it can be cringey. People just want the latest, catchiest content. TikTok and Youtube are the OGs here, but it's everywhere when you start to look. Twitter timeline changes being an awkward but working example. Discovery > Static friends list.

The entire premise FB was founded on is eroding. This isn't just Apple privacy and some regulatory strangulation. It's seismic to the business. The reason most people are still going to Facebook is incompatible with their primary activities online which is: consuming content from people-you-don't-know.

Facebook is where you find out your highschool friend is super in to a MLM, your uncle has drastic political views you don't share, and that your historical social class and network is largely irrelevant to your life a decade later.

They are doing everything they can to try to move in this direction, but the more they push it the less useful Facebook is for the average user. Instagram's discovery page is a prime example. But Reels are less good than TikTok, and whatever they are doing for short form video in Facebook is surely a hopeless game of catch up. This is classical innovator's dilemma.

The very idea that Zuckerberg straight up said they need to copy the competition harder is incomprehensible considering the resources they have.

They are going to try to do a few things. One is to anti-trust Apple (in the media at least), and the other is to hand wave (Metaverse).

The reason the Metaverse was such a non sequitur is that it is so clearly a last minute thrust coming out of the C-Suite. If you've ever worked at a highly visible tech pubco, you've seen this happen before. Weak quarters mean that product announcements get pushed up. When it is as all encompassing as the Metaverse announcement, you know something is up.
How is this comment not appropriate? Does it need to say something more thoughtful? Accusing his companies of selling smoke is a very valid accusation.
On the other hand, consumers haven’t stopped spending. So that 60-100B that consumers might have spent on Facebook advertised businesses will probably end up elsewhere, like their local economy (or Amazon…probably Amazon)

So I would argue it’s just a shift. Similar to what has happened with the pandemic and restaurants. Consumer restaurant spend didn’t disappear, it got reallocated to electronics, vehicles, etc.
"in just one day" after more than a year of work.

Its a good story; but ruined by the click bait evangelism "you can make it big in your pajamas too!" tone. I wonder how many actual facts there are here and how much has been "reinterpreted" to fit the narrative purpose, which was obviously the real goal of the piece.
> USB wifi cards are unstable and unsuited as access points, so for stable connection, SBCs require a separate access point

Luckily there are popping up various sbcs with pcie these days, so you potentially could get more stable setup with those.
Why pick on the states at this point.

It is utterly absurd there is not more a push to legalize at the Federal level.
Cuz there are millions of people buying nft's?
And the investors probably have some insurance or clause where they add another $€¥ against interesting valuation as a convertible or something
Okay, but my original question remains.
Would be interesting to see AlphaZero in this contest, but I don't think it is open source

[1] How AlphaZero Completely CRUSHED Stockfish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dT6CR9_6l4
LG smart TV stops working till owner accepts updated terms of use
The law takes intent into play - a case of note was https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/16/business/citibank-revlon-... - the ruling basically said "normally, this would be a reversible mistake, but the particulars indicate it wouldn't be".

The fact that the "owners" of the code fixed the code before it was exploited would come down heavily on the "illegal/fraud" side of things if it were litigated. If, however, they knew about it, and there were cases of it being done, and explicitly did nothing it possibly could be argued to be intentional.
> If Mark Zuckerberg saw what Facebook is today and what fuels it back in the early days I'd suspect he'd be disgusted by it and the direction it's trying to drag people into (Metaverse).

I suspect Zuckerberg's morals didn't change much. What makes you think they did?
I think that's the opposite of what the parent says: first build the thing and only then factor it out and reinclude it.