skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I run a big CRT monitor with one terminal window and bitmap fonts. I've never had an error using this setup, except when something tries to use a character that isn't in my font and I get a �. This is rare.

I've also programmed FPGAs to act as serial terminals and had zero problems perfectly displaying bitmap text. If you get something you can't perfectly display, chances are you don't need to display it so you mark it and throw it out (or you have a bitmap version handy).

Due to these experiences, stuff like this seems like a major case of 'too much complexity'. Why is this sort of fancy text rendering so important (for a english speaking and writing person that can pretty much do all work and hobby projects in ASCII)?
.NET 6 currently supports WinForms/WPF if you target Windows specifically [1]. Most API gaps are filled. And .NET Framework compatibility mode [2] might Just Work (tm) for your dependencies.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/frameworks#...

[2] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/porting/#net-fr...
a multi-billion dollars market with a few millions users is not a dead end

this isn't playstation level success but it's a joke to say it's a dead end
Jeff's Lounge, a cybersecurity-centric Discord
> Suppose I choose to personaly "censor" and stop paying attention to Facebook, Whatsapp, Twitter, reddit and that crappy podcast on Spotify, after I understand they're just cesspools of ignorance, childish memes and tribalism.

There are a lot of stuff that is ok for you to do personally, but that large companies doing at scale becomes problematic.

For example, you do facial recognition every day. As you walk through the store, you recognize friends and people you have met before. However, if a company sent bots with facial recognition everywhere, that would be problematic.

I would also bet that your close friends and people you invite into your home, tilt very heavily toward the same racial background and sociology-economic status as you. That may be ok for you, is very problematic for a large company.

In the same way, you “censoring” something is not a big deal. You can also ban entire authors from your home and it still would not be a big deal. But when a large multibillion dollar company with millions to billions of users does it, it is a big deal.
I was three years deep into my engineering degree before learning that many of my peers would attend office hours regularly. I was shocked. Like you, I was under the impression that you only attended office hours if you missed a lecture or something similar. I had always assumed "I don't get it" wasn't a valid reason for bugging the instructor.
I really loved learning Python maybe ~20 years ago. At the time, I had been super into Perl and was also learning a bit about PHP. Python was such a breath of fresh air. I use Python some in my day job, and it just can't get over how painful it is. Far too many production bugs that aren't caught by linting, far too slow processing for big data work.

Despite my dislike, it certainly does excel at being a glue language, hence why all of our data scientists use it with numpy and various ML libraries.
That's not true, there are a lot of breaking changes here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/compatibility/6...

The problem is that Microsoft can never avoid the temptation to fix things that weren't that broken and leave it up to you to find the bugs later. Even a theoretical "non-breaking" change like adding some more constructors broke some of our code, previously, you could add ILoggerFactory really easily and it found a single default constructor in LoggerFactory and just worked. The new overloads cause most DI systems to look for the constructor with the most parameters, some of which are not available, and then fall over.

MS need a better system for updates, every version has brought us a lot of headache although I can't really see us using anything else, which would be an enormous amount of work.
What you suggest is actually more readable than the if block, especially if the variable names are meaningful, which is why it's better. It's more obvious what's expected to return. There's no need to claim shortness as a virtue of good code; generally speaking it's not better to write less code. Unless you work for an organisation that code golfs everything there should be no expectation that code should be as short as possible.
You're not censoring anything - you're exercising your judgement. Who would have a problem with that? Not me!

But, have you ever been convinced about something, and then changed your mind? I have.

In order for that to happen (a change of mind) it is useful to have full/better information available. But if there are forces at play (eg coordinated FAANG efforts, see Alex Jones) to supress information, the possibility of finding that information is removed. You are making reasonable decisions, but you do not have the full facts. You do not even know that you don't have the full facts.

This is not a good state to be in!

The messy noise is not a bad thing. Even if you want to stick to what you know, others will trawl through that information and will uncover some gems. I mean, its not like governments and corporations don't conspire together for whatever purposes. They plainly do and we see evidence this with lobbyists, pre-prepared bills waiting for the right moment, the well-emunerated advisory roles provided to ex-politicians, etc.

The point I am trying to make, is that whatever your position is, you want all information to be free and for people to exercise their judgement. Reason will prevail. But de-platforming, etc is terrible! Don't plead to be kept in the dark by the government!
It seems perfectly readable to me, honestly. It might be confusing to newcomers, but I don't see a problem with it.
If anyone from the GitHub social media team is reading this, you have a bug on this and other ReadME pages that causes high-frequency strobing in some browsers. It's likely to trigger photo-sensitive epilepsy. Please contact me at the email in my profile for more details, I've been trying to reach you for weeks.
The usage, and resulting culture, of Python has changed a lot since 1999 when that was published. I think the language and ecosystem could have been improved without abandoning this principle with specific efforts, but I'm not sure those efforts would have been helpful overall. They'd have likely impacted the growth/success of it.
No offense, but I think you're being a bit dismissive: if a students doesn't learn a thing it is because they didn't try.

There is a middle road you are not calling out: if you make math (or any subject) approachable in your teaching style, you can get students to want to learn, try to learn.

I'd say that is generally true for pretty much any subject. Why does someone try to learn history? Probably because they somehow became interested in it. A good teacher will try to make it interesting.
It adds up. It's right that we have gotten used to all of the other stuff, but it adds up. It's fair to be very critical of new additions.
That doesn't make sense to me. In a group of 90 people there can be more than 9 of them who strive to learn. I get not making classes an "easy A", but making an intro class that difficult arbitrarily seems against the entire point of education.
> 7. In a few hundred years we will look at today's science the way we're looking at religions today

This take I find particularly hilarious because if you look back at the science from a few hundred years ago.. it is pretty recognizable as science! Newtonian physics.. pretty good! A future where we think of today's science as akin to religion is a world where Newtonian physics is obviously seen as the same.. that seems wildly implausible!
Switch to Nim and programming will be fun again.
> the mechanism is that the student works all the problems they can and then asks in office hours or review session about the problems they couldn’t do

As someone from outside that world this line strikes me as truly weird. Yes, if I struggle with a problem I may well be aware that I'm struggling. But what about the ones where I think I'm doing fine, but I in fact have the wrong answer? Short of bringing ALL solutions to be checked in office hours how would someone even know?

Does it really mean that the answers are given but the working of the solution is not? That would seem more reasonable at least - is that what's meant here?
Movie soundtracks are about as memorable as they've always been. Most producers cheap out when it comes to the music, so you get a "cookie cutter" soundtrack of the day:

* The tinny, mostly brass in the 50s and 60s.

* The mostly silent 70s, or faux disco.

* The primitive, nondescript synths of the 80s.

* The "nouveau orchestra" of the 90s.

* The "deep bass sound" of the 2000s.

etc etc.

You'd be hard pressed to tell the musical difference between "Treasure of the Sierra Madre" and "The Grapes of Wrath". "Taxi Driver" and "The French Connection". "Rain Man" and "Splash". "Sixth Sense" and "Seven".

It's always the same for music, tv, movies, etc: Every decade has its gems, but most of it is crap.
Opera browser now allows emoji-only web addresses
It's shame that US or EU don't run open DB for journals that every university should be able to publish as back-up. Also they could create some tools to make research more productive that's free to use.

That we have to rely on single person effort that's risking their freedom to do so is fucking insane.
The poster says buy S&P ETF and walk away not stocks.
Shorter duration videos = more samples to train the recommender.
Java Servlets - these are backend services. Those run fine even today and are 100% supported by at least 2 (there must be more, but I have not checked) app servers that I regularly use.
The walrus operator, the `match` statement, the f-strings etc. these seem like just syntactic sugar. Also note the type hints are optional. So these changes are opt in: you can still write the Python of yesterday. But, if you can afford to take it up a notch, you can write the Python of today. I don't see Python getting harder for the newcomers, instead I find it getting better for the ones who have invested deeply into it, and I quite enjoy it.
People are going out again, but not to the office
I have been working in Elixir lately and enjoying it quite a lot! Keeping an eye on Nim as well..
Historically speaking, I think this has been one of the best things an average person could do within the context of a stable, safe, free, and productive society, but I don't think this kind of generic advice is really persuasive in the different and more turbulent world that exists right now.

Additionally, because of many societal conditions, right now many people think they need to hit on a moonshot to have a good life. And given the direction that inflation and many other things seem to be headed, it's harder to argue that they're wrong. Slightly increasing your financial floor matters little if the floor is still dirt.
Same here. I personally feel that ability of successfully google should be something we test for!
Governments disagree. e.g. https://trafficsafety.ny.gov/tips-pedestrian-safety
I suggest reading up Market Maker [1].

In most scenario (assuming good demand for the stock you are buying and a functional market etc.,) a market maker, looking at their order book, buys 7 items from A. They sit on it until they are able to dispose off them to a buyer. In effect, you, as a buyer is buying a stock from market maker.

Most of the equity market is not P2P but mediated by market maker. They take the liquidity risk (i.e., holding a bad stock if demand plummets) and are rewarded for that by making money off of every transaction through bid-ask spread.

Of course I'm greatly simplifying as an equity order goes through a bunch of intermediaries but Market Maker play a central role here.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketmaker.asp
Before people start upvoting this because they think conspiracies are at play and the title is salacious, read the abstract: they're proposing a statistical test and validating against countries with known undercounting. This is a methods paper:

> We suggest a statistical test for underdispersion in the reported Covid-19 case and death numbers, compared to the variance expected under the Poisson distribution. Screening all countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) dataset for evidence of underdispersion yields 21 country with statistically significant underdispersion. Most of the countries in this list are known, based on the excess mortality data, to strongly undercount Covid deaths. We argue that Poisson underdispersion provides a simple and useful test to detect reporting anomalies and highlight unreliable data.

A lot of countries aren't counting Covid deaths because they're poor and don't have good health systems. The title should really be changed to something less click-baitey, like "Statistical method for detecting undercounting of Covid-19 deaths"
Unnecessary comment. Marked for deletion.
Ha ha, three times was a charm for me and Calculus I.
How does a peer-to-peer exchange work? They match you with someone and then you find some way to do a swap, potentially cross-chain?
Ask HN: Why doesn't HN let you add post text after a submission without a URL?
If I didn't put any text here during submission, I wouldn't be able to afterward. Why?
Yes I know. But the change makes it clear you shouldn’t impede continuing traffic (including pedestrians walking down the pavement), and you should consider the pavement part of the highway (which it is), rather than a separate part of the road which automotive traffic is allowed to cut through with impunity.

Obviously cars should always give way to pedestrians in the roadway, the alternative is running them down. I don’t think we need a Highway Code rule to make it clear why that’s a bad idea.
You cite emotional and wisdom/perspective growth, can you opine on that further?
Person emailed the abuse@ on a domain I owned asking if I wouldn't mind selling it.

Negotiated a price in a non refundable medium.

Received funds and generated transfer code with the registrar.

They continued my legacy of aging this domain with a parking page veneer.

....domain appears available again, and it is reasonably catchy for a name.

Repurchase domain and repeat I guess now.
I wonder if there are any meaningful differences between an individual's comment section (even if on a public-facing service such as Twitter), where that individual chooses what to censor, versus a corporate behemoth like Facebook choosing to impose censorship on all users of its Messenger - where the mediator of communication decides what to censor, regardless of what the participants want.
Same here. I love mechanical watches. It’s clearly a dead end road for their original purpose but I love the creativity in pushing the limits of what is possible with mechanical means. It’s a bit steam punk and romantic.

I’m really excited in see what comes next with more companies going in-house as ETA/Swatch restrict the sale of ébauches movements. Companies like Rolex have even started using lithography in their movements: https://watchesbysjx.com/2020/11/rolex-daytona-movement-4130...
> Let other people say no for you.

Wow. Upvoting because this is such a succinct and powerful way to say this, and I’ve never heard it before.
i. e. It’s not our job, domain, or in our interest to reject ourselves from a job we’re interested in before applying
They look interesting, but they are being discontinued with a few other product lines as intel refocuses their efforts. Do you know of other alternatives?
Getting Chrome "site can't be reached" error
> Currently, no Android devices on the market ship with the Virtualization module — not even Google’s own Pixel 6 — but this is set to change with the upcoming Android 13 release. In fact, Google is currently testing its new virtualization tools on the Pixel 6; if you build AOSP with the target aosp_oriole_pkvm, you’ll find that com.android.virt will be automatically inherited. I don’t know if Google will enable pKVM on the Pixel 6 series with the Android 13 update, but there is evidence that Google plans for Android 13 to include the first release of the pKVM hypervisor and virtual machine framework.

Original blog: https://blog.esper.io/android-dessert-bites-5-virtualization...
I think you deserve an answer, even if people are downvoting you:

I guess you are not completely aware that you just said that my friends are stupid because they accept to be mistreated by someone who's selfish an lazy.

But guess what, friendship in not only a two way street, it's also usually a non overlapping set of different personalities.

A friend is that person that has those qualities you miss, that kinda completes you, and vice versa.

And is that person that accepts you for being you, exactly you, not some imaginary version of you.

What I miss in something, I compensate with something else that my friends miss.

Easy as that.

Rest assured that if they wanted me to call them more, they'd tell me.

p.s. If you don't accept as a friend someone who doesn't call you as often as you do, you have a simple choice:
find people like you.

My friends don't mind and after almost 30 years, I don't think they will suddenly start.
You hand out practice problems for an exam because you want students to do the problems, not because you want them to read the solutions; the mechanism is that the student works all the problems they can and then asks in office hours or review session about the problems they couldn’t do.

That's so ridiculous it's hard to believe anybody could say that with a straight face. First of all, to a first approximation nobody goes to "office hours". I mean, this is Real Life we're talking about here - your instructor's "office hours" are basically never (ever) going to be at a time when it's actually possible for you to go even if you wanted to.

And if you do go, is your instructor going to be capable of explaining things in a way that makes sense anyway? How many of us have known math teachers who are simultaneously A. perfectly competent to solve a problem and B. completely incapable of explaining how to solve the same problem to somebody else?

Never mind that all of this requires that you find your instructor approachable / friendly / whatever enough that you'd feel comfortable going to their office and interacting with them individually in the first place.

Basically, "office hours" are not a realistic solution to anybody's problem, with rare exceptions.

Review sessions? Great, except for now the feedback loop between "do homework problem and get stuck" to "get explanation" is on the order of days. Yeah, that's effective.

I don’t think it’s bad to include solutions, but I would never say that not doing so makes it “impossible to study.”

That's because you're too myopic and unimaginative to consider that not everyone studies and learns the same way you do.
Remember when Blackberry succeeded in the market by calling their text-messaging device a "two-way pager" even though, technically, it was a mobile computer with modem and not at all a pager?

Chances are you'll fare best by hiding your earth-shattering new paradigm behind a veneer of familiarity. Then nobody has to know you have deep insights no one else has.
> where all opinions are valid

I think a good point to make regarding this is that no opinion can ever be valid or invalid. Facts can be valid or invalid, and must be supported by evidence to be valid, but opinions just exist. One can be proven, the other can't.

You can personally think someone's opinion is stupid, or amazing, or whatever adjective you want to throw in, but it can never be "valid" or "invalid." Saying someone has an "invalid" opinion is just joining into the tribalism that people so love.

I personally try to ignore most people's opinions just to "filter out the noise" as you said. I try to drill into the facts, but that can be very challenging, because even factually accurate data can be misrepresented into an opposite opinion.
> The whole thing really boils down to "all X are inherently bad" because that's what all 'criticism' shorn of potential solutions boils down to.

That's not true, because critical theory is about social systems, not essential properties of human beings. To take the "white supremacy" thing as an example, one of the key points is that the US transitioned from actual racist policy (slavery, redlining, segregation etc), to race-neutral policy, and race-neutral policy does not undo the damage that racist policy causes to black people's economic and social conditions. That does not translate to "white people bad, black people good" when presented without solutions; it describes a situation that is not essentialised at all to people's ethnicity, but came about as a product of historical dynamics between two racial groups and their economic and political interests (slavery existed for economic gain of plantation-owners, after all).

You have to be able to separate group conflict from group membership to be able to interpret this stuff correctly, and I don't see that happening in many analyses, including your own. This leads to both the conservative interpretation of "CRT is about white people being inherently bad" and the liberal interpretation of "as a white person, I should feel guilty for the suffering of black people". These are both bad interpretations; the whole problem/solution model lies at the policy level.
Real world single-party systems are just the opposite, in way - at least when they're not at their most dysfunctional. One perk of joining the party is apparently that you are trusted to explore mildly "dissident" ideas for your own benefit, and even discuss them among party members in a quasi-democratic way, without this being considered "rocking the boat".
It explains more, than what I have discovered. And sadly that makes NH another "shit place"(no offence to moderators), where bots can thrive and where I have no intention to invest(and care) and where for me HN is just another nicotine patch, that is replacing FB.
The uptick is real.

It's an uptick despite reduced driving.

A 45% increase in deaths per mile driven is no joke.

Further, you're also ignoring advancements in medicine, emergency services, healthcare systems, rules (e.g., cities in the US have drastically reduced max speeds), safety focused street design changes, etc. that mean that the odds of a pedestrian dying have reduced in general.

Comparing broadly to 50 years ago is not very useful.
There's a great talk out there by Camille Anna Paglia (possibly in
conversation with Jordan Peterson) where scathingly she talks about
the takeover of universities in the late 60s by small-minded bourgeois
careerists, authoritarian aparachik clutching little red books. They
(according to Paglia) were quick hijack the authentic projects of
humanist social critique (Fromm, Habermas etc and also civil rights
movement) as their own, to mininterpret, distort, weaponise and turn
them to serve personal ambition.

Small-mindedness is a dangerous. I think it was Emma Goldman who said
"the greatest violence is ignorance". Wilful ignorance, a la
Bradbury's 451, is therefore wilful violence, and Bradbury is right,
some people delight in it.