skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If I owned YouTube with the goal of maximizing profits, and I did not have any self imposed ethical constrains, I would focus on controlling the market of hosting videos. The technology needed to operate a video hosting is widely available and been so for the last few decades, so the only way to prevent competition and keep a market dominance would be to make sure that competitors can't compete. Keep users on the platform or else the users will end up on any number of competing platforms, splintering off the user base into more and more fragments.

This is kinda what's happening already. Most major websites stopped hosting their own and instead publish on YouTube and embed it

As such they're selling their users' tracking which I hate, but they love it for the extra income and exposure their videos get.

Hosting videos is not hard at all. But this is not the reason why nobody hosts their own anymore. YouTube's very dominance is what keeps it dominant.
I find it really offensive how people who served as a govt employee gets lauded by the state and media. Its just stealth nationalism and then they wonder why the far right get emboldened?

I find the desperation in this what-uppity to be appalling and contemptuous because ego boosting medals, media recognition is worse than a decent wage.
I don't think it is unpopular at all. I started writing some emacs plugin in the past, then ported the whole thing to the browser, and since then I have a hard time thinking in any other terms as byte stream, even though I like to call it buffer.
exactly, places hard on these kinds of things are just red flags indicating that here we value obedience over creativity, being process driven to cover myself than being pragmatic and do what is sensible.
Yeah, they figure they're going to be broke by the end of the week anyway, so might as well spend some money on the lotto and at least have the dream that they might win. They don't see a downside, because they don't see a way out of their situation.
I don't have any aversion to Advil, you're missing the point.

I'm not saying Advil is dangerous, I'm saying people significantly overestimate the risks of vaccines.

If you're concerned about vaccines but not about other common drugs, you're in need of some risk calibration.
My statement was made without position on politics nor did I mention an administration or my own personal predilection to a given affiliation. Believe it or not I voted for George W Bush. But you might want to be careful before you drown in that pool of hypocrisy you just waded into. You see in our country there is this little thing called the first amendment, and while science journals have governing bodies they are not in the purview of the governed. There is nothing to say that what anyone prints is true, your party made sure of that when they eviscerated the fairness doctrine. Additionally, science journals and businesses paying for printing articles is a tradition as old as time and one that respectable science journals have worked around using a system of rating known as impact factor. Far be it from me to inform you that pay for play journalism is one of the factors that lead to bad ratings from the scientific community. However, everyone is entitled to a free press and that includes pay for play shady journals owned by big tobacco. But do NOT lay the blame for that at the feet of science. We've done what we can to ensure journalistic integrity by rates and measures and its not a perfect system but we're not and have not been willfully pushing misinformation out the door. Pay for play is, has been, and will continue to be a blight on science literature because we do live in a society that has freedom of the press. Anyone is entitled to print anything regardless of factual content. Respectable scientific journals at least have a system in place to punish those who abuse the system. So at least educate yourself on the basis of journal integrity while you reply to my comment on a machine that was built entirely on the edifice of science.
Frankly, fuck the web. It's a warzone where Google throws its weight around to enhance the ability of advertisers to make our lives terrible. I was more interested in WASM as a universal VM for all platforms, but it doesn't fit nearly as well for that as it could because of some of the strange decisions this web-focused committee made.

At least Java was also designed to run on not-the-web.
If you intend to use this, reach for the AppImage version. The AUR installation script appears to be broken, and the Flatpak version of the app is feature-incomplete (and, yunno, a Flatpak).
The southernmost point of mainland Europe is 6.6 feet north of the 36th parallel
I'm not sure which museum in Everett you're referring to. Up north in Everett there's the Boeing Factory with their associated corporate Future of Flight museum, which is fairly small. Factory tour is extremely cool though, I've done it at dozen times with visiting friends (pre-covid) and it was always neat.

And then south of Seattle at the Boeing Air Field is the Museum of Flight. I don't believe it's associated with Allen? Museum of Flight is alive and well, and I highly recommend anyone visiting Seattle swing by and spend a few hours there!
The saddest thing to me is that most people in the UK don't care about this. The only free speech that actually needs protection is offensive speech, and no group of people or political party would go near any of this stuff.

The only chance any of this stuff could be reformed is off the back of a party with a huge majority ramming it through without much discussion or input from the public. Which is to say it could happen, but it won't be any kind of vote winner or manifesto promise. And it wouldn't be very democratic.
… for someone who is capable of succeeding at Harvard, FAANG, or consulting.

For the vast majority of the population, getting into Harvard isn’t possible. The admissions statistics show this, and there is already heavy selection bias in those who apply.

The author clearly learned to learn at Harvard, and has the raw materials to catch up from “procrastinating” in undergrad at Harvard.

I get the message. I do. But I also think a lot of our institutions and organizations are run by people who can’t get into Harvard or FAANGS, and they set up systems to give them a moat or competitive advantage that prevents raw talent from overtaking them or throwing them out. Power and influence can be achieved by force, intimidation, regulation, or inherited / collective wealth.

So bucking the trend is cool, but I think there is a limit it what it can do without frustrating the wrong people. Some (See Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg) are able to operate in a new field and set up a whole new thing, but most, who aren’t smart enough to get into Harvard, will see this advice and take it as an excuse for not being able to get into Ivy League schools or work at FAANGs. There’s a huge benefit from going there, seeing the competition, and knowing that one can play at that level.

I guess I’m commenting because I think it’s circling around this thing I’ve been thinking about, which may be more broadly applicable:

1) be careful who you put on a pedestal.

2) look for people who are gate keepers / influencers in your life. Are they fair to you? Should they be in that position?

3) to keep yourself from being limited, diversify the people in those roles in your life. Similar to Scott Adams, being top 80% in two areas is much easier (and potentially more profitable)than being top 1% in one very narrow field. You also are sort of carving your own way and playing in your own space.

Sorry for the comment length. I think the headline is sensationalist, but the content did make me think.
The child wasn't seeing something that wasn't real. The child was looking at a different light. The miscommunication occurred because neither realized that they were looking at different lights.
Three cheers for ostracizing your userbase and shrinking your development team down to an authoritarian handful of members that doesn't care about your opinions!
That wasn’t my point.
Peak efficiency is at about 40-50mph, at least for Teslas:

https://forum.abetterrouteplanner.com/uploads/monthly_2018_1...
Surely being eaten by a shark is better than torn apart by a hyena.
The stv.tv part would have been a clue.
TFA had a quote about them being overpriced on Amazon. Translation: people are indeed scalping them.
I don't use YouTube at all :P well once in a blue moon but I try to avoid it.

Though it's just that I don't like the video format in general. If there was an ethical decentralised platform I probably wouldn't use it either.

However the way video has been centralised online is a big problem IMO. Imagine if every blog you read you could only get through Google.
Thinking you can just buy 2 of everything is poor engineering practice. That's almost never practical. Engineering is about balancing reliability with other factors, not just over designing things.

Then again, maybe you're right, and you're the first person to come up with this idea.
No one has linked https://xkcd.com/624 yet? It's straight on target.
I think what makes thing succeed or not can be subtle (and therefore it's easy to disagree with). Ultimately, I think WASM will succeed because it's a uniting force among communities. Rust people are behind it, Microsoft and C#/.NET are behind it, people in the Go, Python, and other communities are behind it, and the browser vendors are behind it.

Java applets were things that were slow to load and didn't interface well with the rest of the web. People can talk about how you could technically connect things until they're blue in the face, but Java didn't provide a good experience with HTML. It was its own thing just like Adobe Flash.

I think that comparison is important: Java applets and Adobe Flash were these separate non-HTML entities that felt proprietary and didn't play nicely with others. Maybe something might be open-source, but Java applets felt like they were trying to usurp the web. JavaScript augments the web rather than usurping it - and WASM similarly fills that role.

I think that WASM will succeed where others haven't because it has been designed by the parties you need to get on board to make it succeed. Java wanted to create its own little world against the wishes of the vast majority of developers and users. Flash created its own little world against the wishes of most developers (though most users didn't mind). WASM feels like a neutral target that most of the community can get behind.

While WASM might not be perfect or anything, it does seem to unite a lot of different communities. It doesn't feel like Sun is coming along and imposing Java applets on everyone so that they can better sell Java to enterprises. It doesn't feel like Adobe trying to lock developers into expensive Flash tools. It doesn't feel like Microsoft saying, "Silverlight is our Flash! You should use that!" It's something that engineers from lots of different communities are supportive of and that works with the web rather than trying to usurp it.
Yes, the entire app is in the front end. It's not talking to a server to get new words of the day or checking answers. When you click the link and the game loads, it just loaded everything you needed to play it now, tomorrow, or some day in 2025.
I think they're safe enough, personally... But most people need some risk calibration.

Popping NSAIDs multiple times a week on a regular basis is definitely not good, and yet the same people who do that are often afraid of vaccines.

People are seriously clueless about relative risks.
No. Folks in rural areas get drunk all the time and go shooting. We just don't have fiber connections all over the place to hit accidentally.
Totally agree. There's an inherent tension between protecting the freedom of speech and the potential harm that speech might cause. The current incentive structure motivates people to say the most click-baity outlandish things without worrying about any of the consequences. Fact-checking can never catch up with all the crazy sh!t people come up with. That's why censorship feels like a tempting "easy way out" for combating misinformation.

Maybe one mitigation is to make public figure / media accountable to the avoidable damage their speech end up causing? E.g., if I listen to your anti-vax radio program and consequently decide not to get vaccinated, before catching the disease and dying, then my family can sue you for damage as long as it can established that you have purposefully misled / failed to assess the potential harm.

After a few class-action lawsuits like this, public figure & media will probably be more careful when they want to spread misinformation.
> Sometimes there is information that does need to change hands, often there just isn't

This really cuts to the point of what I’m trying to express. The general model of meetings is that they are there for exchanging information. One issue with this is something you’ve pointed out, that people feel compelled keep the meeting but there’s no information to share. So there’s just nothing.

There’s a second issue. There are things you can do through talking with another person that aren’t just sharing information. If you only see meetings as a way for information to change hands, you can’t see these options. I find it hard to put into words, but I’ll try to give some examples.

You could change how you feel about something by talking about it. A concern that is too scary to fully think about could be spoken about so you can face it. There’s value in talking about it that’s separate from the information sharing or even the problem solving.

You could generate ideas. One person creates space and the other fills it by coming up with new ideas.

You could understand something better by explaining it (see Duck, Rubber).

You could set an intention. Having the memory of telling someone you’ll do something may make you more likely to do it (separate from them holding you accountable).

You could practice what you’ll say in some other situation. Maybe one sided practice, maybe role play.

All of these are a sort of “talking as doing”. It’s a very different gear from “talking as information sharing”. I’ve found it can be really hard to get people to change those gears. It’s odd. It’s not like they’re directly resistant, they just seem unaware. It’s like someone holding their lunch in a park wondering where we’re going to eat. Here! Go ahead! I don’t want to hear about you being alive, I want to see it!
If Google priced Premium to replace the very small revenue they must receive for adverts (at least for the small amount I use YouTube), that would be one thing. But they're asking for a lot more.

Two parents w 6 Google logins between them (2 personal, 4 work entities) and 4 kids, each w a personal and school account.
This would require 14 YouTube Premium accounts. Um...no.
Currently running Gnome from a Wayland session with Nvidia's 510.39.01 drivers without issue. It's not Wayland that's not ready yet, it's the ecosystem around it.

While the first commit on the Wayland git was in 2008, it's client and server APIs weren't considered stable until 2013 and then DE support for it only really picked up in 2016 since they were built around X11 from the beginning.

If you were an Nvidia user then your options for DEs were limited to the ones that supported EGLStreams and you didn't get XWayland hardware acceleration or support for Webrender in Firefox until Nvidia started support DMA-buf in June of last year. Nvidia didn't support GBM until October of this year but it had an annoying memory leak which caused issues with programs not wanting to launch of launching as black squares. On top of that, the code that compositors and XWayland used to detect whether to use GBM or EGLStreams didn't work at first and XWayland windows launched as transparent so they needed to be updated. It wasn't until these beta drivers, which came out this month, that I'm able to do everything I'm supposed to be able to do in a Wayland session and the major hurdles in Wayland adoption on Nvidia have been removed. Kwin already removed it's EGLStreams backend because it never worked well to begin with and the drivers will only improve from now on.
How do I work around Vercel's 4KB Environment Variables limit?
> The file containing the encrypted content will then be added to the Deployment

I don't think this is a good idea. Please convince me otherwise.
Reminds me of that "War is a Racket" essay that was posted here a few days ago:

https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

A trillion dollars wasted in a World War lined the pockets of a few thousand people, that at the end, urged the government to intervene because 'the allies' were about to lose the war and wouldn't be able to repay their loans.
Is escaping WASM container theoretically harder or easier?
I'll be honest I'm not a fan Joe Rogan at all. But this response has given me a new respect for him. Actually measured and pretty reasonable.
> The maximum win rates part is normally clear by the game (for example, for Roulette or Blackjack you can see odds)

That's the AVERAGE win rate.

The maximum win rate is "if you make more than $10,000 in profit, we'll throw you out", and I've never heard of that being made explicit.

The point is that if you're going to throw out people who win more than a certain amount, you're not actually offering a fair game. There are secret rules that you haven't been told, and they very clearly bias your overall odds. You certainly shouldn't be able to advertise "you could win big!" if your policies make that impossible.

---

There's clearly precent in other industries, too: If a grocery store advertises a sale on milk, they have certain obligations to offer a rain check if they run out. "According to the Fair Business Practices Act, it is unfair or deceptive if a store advertises goods without intending to sell them or to provide reasonable amounts of the advertised products without providing notice that supplies are limited."

Casinos are advertising the chance to "win big" but have no intention of ever actually paying out.
Newpipe is also youtube reverse engineered, as is yt-dl/dlp. No need for closed source.
Got a link to a story about it?
There’s no concept of a pre-approval in FAA land. You build an airplane and flight test it in experimental category to gather real-world performance numbers to put into the required format for the operating limitations and pilot operating handbook and get certification of the package based on demonstrated data.
Why is clearly a personal judgement. What is something other, not the person, and we can even possibly feign objectivity and share a point of view of the matter.

Like the saying goes, nobody likes a "whys guy."
Hey quacked, what sort of job role do you have? Sounds cool.
Oh that's excellent, thank you!
The HPs are usually AMD SoCs. They ship with a Debian derivative thin client OS or Windows. I have a few running Debian. They are great for home servers; fanless, can support a lot of memory and usually two M2 modules.
That’s exactly how I wound up with a Nvidia 3080 and AMD 5950 in December 2020. Microcenter is great if you’re near one.
That was my experience. Somebody posted a clone here very early on that let you play as many times as you liked. I think I did 3 or 4 in a row and never went back. I still wordle every day, though. Sometimes scarcity is nice.
Midwest checking in. I see stop signs shot up all over the rural place. Are you pretending that you don't know what a redneck is?
If I need none of those, but need variable refresh rate for higher FPS in games, and if I trust my system because I use none flatpacks or snaps, then why not let me continue to use X11? Why not just integrate Weston X11 backend into Xorg and then let application developers to drop support for X11 completely, while letting me keep using X11? Do we need an IPv4 vs IPv6 battle again? Moreover, those «program X uses Wayland, but bla-bla-bla... set this environment variable to use X11 backend» are frustrating.
The article doesn't say that, thankfully, I was looking for that error as well: they carefully note that its because one side has a fixed money supply, the other does not.
This makes me recall the time I was riding on the bus, and there was a little boy (maybe 4 years old) with his mum. The little boy was proudly reading the numbers off the other buses he saw drive by.

"7, 23, 5, 86," the boy proudly stated. Then a bus numbered "5X" came by.

"What's that?" The boy said, pointing in confusion.

"That's the bus number!" his mom said.

"X is a number now?" the poor kid asked in a painful tone. You could just hear his understanding of the world crumbling around him.
Reading the article, I felt like I was back in 1996 reading about the Java bytecode compiler and the JVM plugin for the browser. Java had such great promise for web page-hosted code, that would be portable, performant, and safe. Why would one think WebAssembly will succeed where Java failed? (Well, Java did not exactly fail, but its purpose and typical usage radically changed over the years.)
No, it is, how hard is it to hire 3 elixer devs at given quality and do an elastic sprint as 6.. 3 years from now. And what is the chance the dependency chain hasn't rotted.

The million means you arent scrambling . Hiring in niche stuff even for 1 person stinks. Replacing/maintaining dead frameworks is 10x+ worse than writing the original.

When you can find and just drop someone in the same/next week and it's not all cruft... And you're sure that'll be true next year too... That's boring code. Super destressor for everyone as folks can easily scale up / down, take paternal leave, onboard junior /senior folks same-day, etc, and not worry about ecosystem churn.

Ex: It's a world of diff when we hire folks to write our django pieces vs GLSL engine, and both of those ecosystems are big. Just django is the way bigger and thus more stress free. When you go down to niche langs with niche frameworks.. unless there is a good reason, I don't want to be in that company nor bet on it 2-4yr from now. For us, we do GPU everything, so careful parts of our stack are weird and constant careful effort, and we try to limit it to just those.
If only there was an alternative to the finders of artifacts bearing the cost of preserving them.
And which one was that?
I think the shared puzzle and mystery aspect is what made it take off. You could gloat or moan very easily and everyone who played knew exactly what you were trying to guess and could compare.
The Death of Wordle
You don't know the cost of having these policies.
I can say that it captured my social group precisely because 1) the clipboard-based sharing works just as well in our private chat as it does on Twitter or Facebook and 2) the total lack of ads, monetization, or growth-hacking gimmicks meant that people felt comfortable sharing their results without feeling like they're spamming their friends.
The stats aren't going to juke themselves!
You have to judge people, but if you make all of your judgements on the basis of who's gay or furry or whatever you won't be making your judgements on the basis of stuff that actually matters. You can only have one set of criteria and every item competes with the others for weight.
Some advantages that Steam will still have:

1. Steam provides a system for user accounts and profiles

2. Steam handles payment securely for both buyers and sellers

3. Steam handles social networks/friend list/multiplayer

4. Steam allows you to have all your games in one place

5. Steam is a platform for reviews

6. Steam has its own internal economy/marketplace
https://astronaerospace.com/

Their website is long on promises short on details. No pictures or videos of their purported prototype.