skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To be fair, if you exclude the ones that are garbage, you basically have React, Vue, and Angular. Of those three, React is the clear winner in terms of market penetration, but there are certain things in both Vue and Angular that blow React out of the water.
If the War Comes
Our main differentiator today is a much quicker time to go live - which usually boils down to us providing more hosted UIs out of the box, guides focused on B2B use cases, and libraries that are more centered around organizations.

Anecdotally, pretty much every startup we talked to that tried to use Auth0's organizations either stopped pretty quickly or ripped it out due to API slowness.

If you've used their org support, I'd love to chat to hear more
Too Much Magic? (2022)
I don't understand: I am using Flutter just fine from vim and I have never even tried their IDEs. What do you mean by "disable"? What "bloatware" were you forced to install in the first place, and how is it running?
If someone pointedly asked me this in a meeting, my off the cuff response would be "bastion hosts, probably".

if the named service completely integrates with whatever access control a company uses (radius, SAP, whatever) then there shouldn't be any reason to not use this in lieu of concentrators. At least you lose that bottleneck and point of failure. For larger and more geographically disparate companies, i could see this being an even better proposition, but only because this is merely the second time i've seen tailscale at all.

All i know is i've used wireguard recently, and it took me a few tries to get it to do what i wanted. a decade ago i was trying to get some corporate VPN software working on Gentoo, and i managed to cobble enough correct settings to get it working, too. I don't wish that on any user.

I loathe setting up a dialer to connect to a VPN, and even worse is the 3rd party app "ssl VPN" junk - most of the ones we've tried just lose settings on my computers, to the point where dark fiber seems like a better investment of my time.
> Under the leadership of new Antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter, the Department of Justice is beginning to get much more aggressive. Here’s what Richard Powers, the head of antitrust criminal enforcement, just told the American Bar Association’s conference on white collar crime. [screenshot of a vaguely threatening tweet]

> That's a big deal

I'll believe it when I see it.
Honestly, just buy your books elsewhere. Stop treating Amazon as your go to site for everything, its not actually that great.
Rewards sites that are actually good at this, and cancel prime, you don’t need it.
They discuss this here: https://tailscale.com/kb/1139/tailscale-vs-zerotier/
Like when they said multiple times "Windows 10 is the last version of Windows as it will be a rolling release" and then pretended after they never said that in order to satisfy some product manager's desire to release a new version so they could add it to their resume.
>How does this system take workers' interests into account? Some may be interested in doing the job and then go home. Them making decisions could end up looking like they vote for whatever their politically interested friend tells them to.

How does democracy takes the voter's interests into account? In your example you describe a hypothetical employee who doesn't have interest in how the workplace is run, then ask me how his lack of interest is represented as an interest? What's wrong with having the interest of people who are interested in the outcome represented. I don't understand your point.

>What happens when a majority emerges composed of workers that are very interested and workers disinterested in workplace politics that they can make disfavorable decisions about the resulting minority?

Then that would prompt them to become interested? I have never met anyone in all my years of working who exhibit the apathy you describe. People become apathetic when their voices are not heard.

>Such company could face the risk of hostile takeover by new hires if there were a need of quick hiring to fulfill for example the needs of big new customer.

You could solve that with some probation period before voting or something like that. But why are you assuming new hires are hostile? Why will new hires take over? They are not a foreign army nor would they be a homegenous group with a malicious agenda.

Look I know hacker news is a hostile environment for these ideas. OP wanted a different perspective and I have given it to him. We can iron out details but overall high level thinking, I think is sound.
> like using Trump instead of governor or a matrix of policies.

And if they used Governor, you might complain that they didn't use Statehouse. And if they used that, you might come up with another reason.

My guess is that they used Trump AND Biden because they were the only politicians on the ballot in each of the states they studied. Many states didn't even have a Governor race in 2020 (the year they studied for election and murder).
You can extend Unbound lookups with Python.
C++ is also hard to read, especially after introducing lambdas.
> A great deal of Amazon's store has moved from the old "customer obsession" principle of the early years to a new principle of "revenue obsession."

I am finding this to be increasingly true of the web in general and it is getting more difficult to locate things (books, products, whatever) of high quality value. Do you want the best search results or the one that can be most easily monetized?
Mayor Breed moves to close JFK Drive to cars permanently
Mr Dildonic it's definitely not illegal, the poster is a troll
They limit it to auth providers, so I don't know if that'd be the best thing.

https://login.tailscale.com/start
Sure, but you can get great use of it for a long time, as long as they judge the viral growth outweighs the possible revenue they could get.

I'd be more worried about the VC funding they've taken ($15M according to crunchbase). It may take years, but eventually, somehow, VCs will need to get their money back. That may be an IPO and then public market scrutiny, it may be acquisition, but if the company is a going concern, the VCs will want ROI.
I think the assumption behind the post you're replying to is that this will happen regardless of what you are paying them, that is, there is no actual stable "market rate" that can be precisely targeted.

It may seem this cannot happen, but in a system experiencing rapid inflation it's what you'd expect to see. This doesn't have to be on a macro level. The endless tide of VC + crypto funds have created a form of (hyper?) inflation inside the tech industry in which wages are spiralling upwards without any fundamental link to increased value. It's simply a bidding war in which those who fight for closer access to the flow of inbound money can always outbid other firms, regardless of how much they pay, because there is no "market rate", just "whatever this guy currently makes + 20%".
Great article!

Although, I would say that this merely shows what is possible with the database level security. It might be useful for an internal db with less complicated permission system.

Authorisation Libraries on application level are more scalable and more maintainable than this database level security. Also, just by reading the application code you can tell the expected behaviour...
We have to be careful with multiple infinities when one takes place after another, and in this case the "<" between two infinities is what I've highlighted as odd.

Indeed as you've illustrated the union of countable sets is countable, but unions aren't appropriate when order matters. The use of an array instead of a set data structure highlights this difference. The negative temperatures in the post begin after +∞. Because ordinals are an extension of enumerability we cannot simply drop ∞ into an array location and still call it enumerable. Speaking from turing recognizability / recursively enumerable languages there is no way for a machine to accept negative integers after all positive integers have been input.
My impression as an outsider was that eBay is pretty close on that front if you pay with PayPal.

From what I've heard, PayPal aggressively sides with the buyer, to the point where there are all kinds of scams you can run as a buyer.

Also, the risk isn't zero. https://www.newsweek.com/man-buys-7000-camera-amazon-receive... There are others, but that's the one that stuck in my head.

> Everything else that people complain about is a function of selection vs curation: the more selection Amazon adds the more likely there is to be low-quality junk. I'm sure if they aggressively curated stuff, we'd see HackerNews stories get 1000 upvotes with headlines like "Amazon won't list my startup's products!" and people will be screaming about how it's not Amazon's job to censor or to curate, they should just be the "Everything Store", and let intelligent consumers like us decide.

This is an over-simplification of the issue. I don't mind that Amazon sells crappy products; I buy some of the crappy products because I only need them to work once or for a week.

What I do mind is their total lack of competence in stopping people from passing off shitty products as good ones. I don't even know where to start the complaints on that. Inventory comingling resulting in people getting fake products or even empty boxes. Recycling ASIN's resulting in a shitty product inheriting a good product's reviews, or even inheriting reviews from an entirely unrelated product. Allowing user reviews, and then doing such a poor job of policing them that they're actively unhelpful due to gaming them.

They're basically digitized Walmart, except they allow people to use their brand to pretend their cheap crap isn't cheap crap.

I'm at the point where I only buy from Amazon if I'm intending to buy cheap junk, because I don't feel like dealing with the hassle of figuring out which items are dropshipped at a 10x markup and which are legitimately worthwhile.
> My gripe revolves around the fact that the author has no relevant training in the matter, but signed a highly controversial paper along with an ophthalmologist.

Rand Paul? :)
Einstein was a bad example. What is true though is that intelligent people choose not to risk their health and safety by living in poverty.

There is this narrative parroted by the ultra-rich and corporations that life is much more livable for the poor in the modern era (because we have microwaves), but that is simply not true.
For me, Flutter & Dart were badly needed solutions to the traditional way of developing Android apps. There's really no need to do the "native app dance" anymore, it's costly unless you really want to target a specific Android device.

Having said this the article does bring up an important issue, in particular, it's tougher to find Dart developers and you would most likely need to spend 6~8 months for a new team to get into the groove...BUT

React Native is a giant mess. It's clunky and slow and throwing Javascript/Typescript at everything has been problematic and it's clear that the performance lags behind Flutter by a large factor.

If I had to choose, I would take on the tool that offers the best development experience and a large chunk of that comes from the debugging, and it just so happens Google hit the nail——NullPointerException is one of THE biggest risks of using other toolsets.

So If I had to bet here, I would put it on Flutter/Dart. It is essentially a love child of ES6/Java/Typescript and it just hits so many pain points coming from React Native.

I really do think React will become the Java Swing of our generation, yes you've done everything right but it seems you need to keep up with new trends and the usage of hooks is really annoying and unintuitive.

In fact, here on the web front, I think Backend-as-Frontend where we persist application state in websocket will be a game changer. On the mobile front, Flutter clearly scratches the itch for both newcomers, react native developers but also backend-as-frontend really gets rid of the need to maintain two separate code bases (one for react and the other for backend).

I think a web app that loads via Backend-as-Frontend framework that Flutter talks to like a regular joe REST API will be the paradigm shift.

I would love to hear what others think of my views as I'm curious as to how my bets will pay off.
Almost exactly my story.

I also found the API limited regarding writing extensions to improve the support for my favorite language, which is not one of the few they focus on.
Google is not at all a reasonable proxy for the rest of the industry. It has an almost entirely parallel infrastructure that bears little resemblence to what everyone else learns and uses. Google has notoriously high training times for this reason and always did.
It ties to OAuth logins (Google, github), that doesn't fit soo well with "just share login", although you could make a dedicated Github account just for it I guess.
There is also Cloudflare Zero Trust (Teams), which is free for 50 users and accomplish the same thing (Wireguard = Tunnels), with a lot more years of "trust" and security behind it.

However, it's very cumbersome to setup, nowhere near as easy as Tailscale.
> How about aircraft or shells or covert actors spray some "thing" that shorts out electrical insulators 1000x more often than normal.

Dropping anti-radar chaff strips is a very good lo-tech way of shorting transformers and power lines. I can't find a link, but IIRC the USAF discovered this accidentally when training missions led to power outages in nearby towns.
Many people would consider some of the ones you ruled out as "garbage" as great, while considering React/Vue/Angular as garbage.

React is the clear winner in terms of market penetration as that is what happens to projects with the largest marketing budgets / corporate hype.
> chain drive which for all it’s maintenance and fiddliness

Belt drives already solve this problem. A lot of single-speed e-bikes come in belt drives. Zero rust, zero maintenance, zero oily pants.

That being said, I don't know if anyone has managed to put gears on them yet and their gearing ratio tends to be really high.(power intensive). So, they might not be great as a non-electric bike on steep slopes. I ride my belt-drive ebike without charge on flat surfaces pretty comfortably though.
> I suspect we would have heard if they had achieved net energy gain.

I dunno, Skunkworks doesn't traditionally like to publicize major breakthroughs until decades later.
I tried Nova and it's wonderful. Unfortunately, it just can't compete with JetBrains.

Creators of Nova/Panic - please extend updates for 3 years and I'll purchase it. Once it is mature up to PyCharm levels, 1 year subscription is fine.
You're mistaken, I think, because one of your assumptions is not necessarily true - that wrong/useless results are a bad thing and slowing us down.

First, the notion that "wrong" research is bad. We have to remember that literally the best results science have to offer are in fact wrong today, and have been more wrong in the past. What science produces are models of reality, and while they may be highly accurate at predicting reality they are not in fact reality. They are wrong in some way. So we can't just throw out all of the wrong results because then we would have to throw out all of the results. Instead of going down this path, we can instead be content that some research is wrong, because the scientific process is one of continually refining those results. Also, we note that despite everything literally being wrong, society, technology, and engineering still make progress. Being wrong does not mean being useless.

Second, the notion that "useless" research is bad. The thing about usefulness is that it's hard to quantify, and it's also not a static property. Sometimes research that is useful in one era is completely useless in another. For example, deep learning wasn't very useful until the era of big data and limitless compute. Before then, people could make guesses as to the usefulness of this research, but no one really knew for sure how useful it would be when it was brand new. Should that research not have been done until it was more useful? I don't think anyone would argue that. How then, are we able to determine ahead of time how useful a research project will be? If we knew how to do that, then it wouldn't be research, would it?

So really, if you aim to cut off the bottom half of research with the intent that it would increase the sum total knowledge of humanity, you have to show how you:

1) identify the bottom half of research before it's conducted

2) quantify the "useful" research potential of a project, and how do you intended to squelch useless research while allowing useful research to persist unimpeded

3) intend to separate "wrong" research from "right" research

4) fund useful research while passing over useless research

I think the answer to those questions would basically involve re-inventing the scientific process.

I mean, just think of it this way: research that may turn out to be useless at least has the positive value of showing how something isn't to be done. This has the positive result of allowing someone else to try a different method, which may be equally useless, or may be the key to unlocking new knowledge. I think it's impossible to get the latter without the former.
I think p5.js is emerging quickly among artists!
How close does an anti-proton have to come to a proton to become annihilated?

And, when a ball of matter and anti-matter collide, will they completely annihilate, or will the initial impact blast them apart such that parts will stay intact? Does initial speed matter? Would we be able to partially annihilate a proton?
For those unware, the magnitude scales used to measure earthquakes are logarithmic, with released energy increasing by a factor of about 32 (10^3/2 to be exact) for each step. Thus, the 9.1 earthquake from 2011 released about 500 times as much energy as the one from today.
Happy to help. Also, when I hear people advocate for "always be on Standard time" vs "always be on Daylight Savings time"... well, I don't think it's a simple matter of which is better or preferable per the individual's preference; when we hear these sorts of positions from people, we should also take into account their location within a times zone. The sun rises/sets about an hour earlier on the eastern border of a U.S. Timezone than on the western border. If you're in Seattle, then you and I are in the same Time Zone, but your sun rises about 20 minutes behind mine (and I'm even on the Pacific Coast! Not even inland!). There was an article on here the other day indicating that living on the Western end of a Time Zone is detrimental to one's health. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30690135
I didn't mean to say I'm unimpressed with Starlink as a whole. It's a cool piece of technology. I just wanted to say that the issues they're facing are truly serious and have had huge resources thrown at them.

Meanwhile, I assume it's far easier to take out Starlink than Bayraktar. In no small part because interference was part of the threat model when Bayraktar's hardware and software were being designed. And they can get a lot of results for less effort with Starlink.
Honestly, as an ex-Googler (10 years), I have to say it's never that simple to explain why some tech is adopted or pushed at Google and it's never so top-down and unicausal.

Often it comes down to certain engineers having outsized voice and influence combined with them having a preferred hammer and then hunting around the organization looking for nails. IMHO that's what happened with Dart & Flutter.

I saw it happen in two PAs, and the second time it involved literally rewriting an entire shipped product on a platform I worked on. Slowly and tortuously, rewritten from a JS/HTML application to Dart/Flutter on "native" (i.e. not web or android or ios target), and only a few months after said product launched. To me this was classic Joel Spolsky "Things You Should Never Do, Part I" aka "rewrites considered harmful" alarm bells, but who listens to me, I'm just a grouchy old engineer.

One promise was that it would be faster (because "native"), but this was frankly based on a lot of untested assumptions and biases and was never correct. V8 and the Chromium rendering engine have (low estimate) hundreds of thousands of hu-man hours of optimization put into them. It's actually really hard to beat. Chromium has a pretty decent accelerated rendering stack, and boatloads of work went into getting it optimized for smaller SoC type devices (work often done by friends / coworkers of mine, actually).

And switching to Flutter meant having to jerry-rig (or worse, rewrite from scratch) basic things like accessibility (screen reader, magnification, etc.) or virtual keyboard that Chrome (or at least ChromeOS) had solutions for and we had just spent over a year making work for our product. Flutter delegates down to Android or iOS's implementation of these features, and as we were neither, we had no such thing. So it had to be built.

So the net result was either rewriting things that had already shipped, or, more commonly building awkward translation layers and bridges between the two platforms so that both things could run at once. a) waste of engineering hours b) source of bugs c) was happening instead of dealing with tech debt and improving or evolving the existing codebase.

The one upside was portability between Android and our product, so the same feature/app could be written for both... which I would accept as the only compelling reason to justify what was done.

I could go on, but I'd probably give away internal secrets or something, and probably piss someone influential off or burn some bridges.

My overall point being: test your assumptions and don't use some tech just because you a) like it or b) wrote it.

Also I don't really understand why Dart even exists. In the 21st century, there are very rarely serious problems to which "we need a new language" or "we need a new operating system" are the correct answer.
Another way to look at this is: what would a judge believe?

Software developers independently come up with the same solution to common problems all the time! We even have names for it: algorithms, design patterns, etc.

If the same person both reverse engineers an existing implementation, and then writes a new one, then that kind of incidental duplication could look like copyright infringement, and the only defense is the developer saying they didn't do it. That's pretty tough to prove.

A clean-room approach solves this problem. Parallel re-invention of the same solution can easily be proven because the developer genuinely never saw the original implementation in the first place, and a lawyer examined the reverse engineered specification to ensure no copyrighted material was contained therein.
don't sleep on shapr3d which is also very awesome
> Is it possible to create economic value with out using energy?

Of course. Find a cheaper way to do something. For example, create a motor that is more efficient. It might cost you energy up front, but presumably the reduction in cost would more than make up for the cost (otherwise why would someone do it?)
Sure, but then... why the peddles at all?

I guess I just can't see a reason anyone would ever choose this drive-train over any other for any purpose.
No built-in support for C/C++ (or even Rust).
I'm happy to see them try, but rationally, I just don't understand why Panic is even trying. The trade-offs are just too steep. They won't ever have the ecosystem of open-source, Electron-based editors. And whatever you gain from being mac-native is just not enough of a benefit for almost all development.
Once again I wish github would allow the ability to limit who could open issues and PRs in order to do development in the open with a trusted/vetted set of collaborators without being subject to every zero-effort bug report from users.
Just last quarter I migrated my home tiny poor stack (9 nodes) from Zerotier to Tailscale and this blog confirms it was a good call.

Performance and stability especially on SMB shares and ARM based SBCs is so far way better than on zt