skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> but if your job or passion is to make pictures a proper camera will always be better

The camera you have with you is better than the camera you don't. A smartphone camera which delivers 90% of the results while being on your person 100% of the time is therefore a strong contender.

> No amount of computational photography will make you a good photographer and if a modern 2k$ camera is the bottleneck it certainly is more of your fault than the camera.

- Posts about trade-offs and the loss of competitive advantage between DSLRs/mirrorless Vs. smartphones.

- Replies that they aren't a "good photographer" because they hold this opinion. And are therefore clearly the "bottleneck" in quality photographs. QED?

This is exactly why photography never evolves (see also film). The community is actually the problem. More specs! More specs! Ignore technological advancement! The camera market shrinks 10% YoY, but no changes, no listening to the market, those who point out the flaws in the strategy aren't "good photographers" who are just bads "bottleneck[ed]" by their lack of skill.

CPU and GPU power has doubled, and power consumption has halved, computer vision has had a Renaissance, use it onboard? Na, that's only what 95% of the consumer and prosumer market wants, let's just continue to serve the 5% and keep the training rolling towards bankruptcy.

If your equipment need RAW, you've just shrunk your market share by 80%. If you cannot post instantly you've just shrunk it by 90%. So fight to be the King of the tiny kingdom that is the remaining 5-10%. RAW is a great facility to have, but it is just that, a facility. When it picks up the slack for the antiquated onboard abilities it is just a crutch at that point.
Plenty of medium format cameras used square shaped areas of film negative and you were meant to adjust the aspect by cropping. Often the viewfinder would provide guides for both orientations.

Calling a more vertical representation ‘portrait mode’ when speaking of stone tablets or bibles is a bit ridiculous. Also ridiculous is the casual hand waving survey of historic mediums and deciding that ‘portrait mode’ reigned large. There are scrolls, frescos, cave paintings, woven works and more that are wider than they are tall. Further, convoluting what is comfortable to look at with full detail for reading versus what replicates the human field of vision is as contrived as the smug reference of anyone who does otherwise as a ‘newbie.’

A portrait mode image is a decision, and it should be a decision made with intent. It is both a technical and artistic choice and if a ‘newbie’ decides to only shoot landscape, they aren’t somehow disappointingly restricted.

Also, if you want to landscape the Mona Lisa, you’d do better to add to the width than to chop off the height.
The average person who hears 'NATO allies' presumes the allies who are members of NATO. I get what you actually meant was some (largely domestic to Libya or at least regional) militias who could technically be called a temporary 'ally' (more like useful idiots for destabilizing Libya) of NATO members in the sense they were provided equipment by a few NATO aligned nations. Saying 'loose affiliates receiving equipment from a few nations in NATO' doesn't have quite the ring to it though.

But I think you know full well what 'NATO allies' is perceived to be by the general populace, namely the allied member nations of NATO. Of course you can simply deny this, and no one will be able to disprove it.
What about a centralized database (i.e blockchain) of all maintainers who get rewarded recurrent revenue in digital money (i.e. crypto) for their projects?

In all seriousness, the author and his project Filippo are on the right track to help bring income to humans maintaining open source software. Another team doing a similar stellar job in the crypto sector is GitCoin and their grants to software devs.
I would guess the general consensus is that you should change the law, but abide by it while it's still the law.
> Google’s documentation and the specification itself contained this bug in example code.

Off-topic, but Google's documentation for _everything_ contains subtle bugs such as this.
Even then it's actually not easy. You embed a youtube video? You host a font on a US CDN? There are TONs of gotchas even for the "free" sites. And then if you actually are running a business online - and want to let folks do almost anything, better get the pop-ups popping!
I would love to know how to recruit a professional maintainer. This is a tremendously difficult skill set.
Too much modern romanticization. Cassius and Brutus chose to assassinate Caesar because his consolidation of power meant they couldn't have grand political careers, it was a fundamentally selfish-act & power grab that we've projected enlightenment reasoning on.

Strongly recommend. 'Caesar, Life of a Colossus' by Adrian Goldsworthy
Start working on GitHub Issues faster
Now, can you prove that the shortest night of the year is adjacent to the longest day? This is indeed the case for all latitudes, but it is wickedly difficult to prove.

Hint: start by setting up an imaginary planet with irregular orbit where this is not the case. Then find what property of the orbit you needed to force that does not happen with the earth.
I feel like many Western folks would laugh or gasp at this, while at the same time, we (especially in the US) are inundated with equally superstitious BS from a young age. Christians will tell you their beliefs are about love and therefore are harmless, but the Bible they claim is both inerrant and an example of the purest love actively glorifies, and even explicitly commands, murder in multiple places.

And then there's the more subtle dangers of teaching people this nonsense: recent studies have shown that children brought up religiously are less likely to be able to tell the difference between fantasy and reality (as tested by comparing mundane stories with stories of wizards, for instance, and asking which one is probably real). And more egregiously, telling children they will go to paradise when they die is disgusting.

I have a personal anecdote on the matter. My dad is a fundamentalist Christian, a young-Earth creationist who truly believes that the primary-school concept of Conservation of Mass disproves all the science showing the age of the Earth (because he has no idea how radiometric dating works, but is convinced he understands it better than physicists and chemists). Anyway, my brother-in-law let him start taking my niece and nephew to church. After a few weeks of church, My niece, who was then 8, was talking to me about something and then said, with a smile mind you, "Oh, well, it'll be good when I die."

I was like, "What? Don't say things like that!" "Why?" she asked. "Because everyone would be very sad if you died." "But why?" she asked again. "They should be happy, because I'll be in heaven with God!" She grinned, and I was disgusted and terrified. I didn't know how to convince her that death was bad without directly contradicting her parent's decision to bring her to church.

Religion, simply by the promise of an afterlife, makes young children happy about dying. That alone should be enough for people to chuck it in the bin, and yet, it's not. (By the way, this is the same reason so many religions with paradisiacal afterlife promises almost always have to outline that suicide is a sin. Because when you convince people that their death will be far better than their life could possibly be, of course they'll want to get there as soon as possible! But then you'd have no followers left alive, so you have to tell them "wait, no, but you can't do that because, um, then you won't get that paradise after all!")

Theistic religions, and honestly any religion with any sort of afterlife, are fundamentally sick. And expanding that to all religions with beliefs in the supernatural, they are all BS and dangerous and have no place in a modern world built upon the efforts and successes of rational and scientific considerations.
Removing architectures because they’re obsolete/maintainers can’t be found, I can see (and the llvm maintainers agree. They removed Alpha at some time, for example), but because they’re proprietary? That would mean kicking out x86, x64, ARM, AMD Terascale, IBM’s z/architecture, etc.

I’m sure clang would be very happy with that.
> It was great until a few months later management and audit happened and it became a huge issue that an ad-hoc script with my credentials was doing this. Management wanted something that was standardized and 'maintainable'

In corporate environments it's super common to experience functional success in parallel to social failure, especially like your anecdote. Most corps/management love terms like "intrapreneur" but have zero actual interest in formalizing + celebrating internal innovations/solutions.
We're not far from 15 minute charge times (and in some regards already there). That's fast enough.
DSLRs take amazing pictures easily. they collect a lot of light, which obviates the need for a lot of comluter magix, they have autofocus and autoexposure and simple basic adjustments you can play with.

what they won't do is pre apply filters to make the colors super poppy and generically "artsy" like the phone will.
Continued maintenance of the software is also included under "support". As are custom feature requests, and sometimes marketing/sponsorship (i.e. the company that pays for "support" can request to be mentioned on the website and in the project documentation). All in all, it works quite well.
IMHO, there is another valid usage: client side css, when a rule is as specific as it can be the !important attribute might be the only way to locally override it.
At least initially (~2005 or so?) we had customers who were given free IB for their HPC clusters ripping the IB out and replacing it with with paid Myrinet installations because they could never get their IB clusters to work reliably.

Although we had the superior product, we could not market our way out of a wet paper bag. Our CEO counted on our (then) superior engineering & expected our products to market themselves. Eventually the IB engineering caught up and surpassed ours, but our marketing never even came close to theirs, so they were the clear winner.
Ask HN: How to make $1000/month on side projects? Any idea?
The whole stacking argument is, in my opinion, a little silly.

Why do we need stacking? Because it allows you to do exposure bracketing to get better dynamic range.

Now the question is, in a high end mirrorless like, say an a7r4, you get something like 12-14 stops of dynamic range (expressing this as a number is kind of ambiguous). Do you really need one or two stops of dynamic range with bracketing? I don't think so.

If you expose smartly you can absolutely make use of the incredible dynamic range.

The only problem I see is on iPhone, it shoots in HEIC which is a great format because it lets you encode much higher dynamic range (and the software support is there to display it correctly). Check out a recent iPhone and take a picture with the sun and something medium-dark and you'll see that the sun is eye searingly bright whereas the medium-dark subject is still visible. I wish there was a flow that lets me produce HEIC images (AFAIK even Photoshop doesn't allow HDR workflows). A lot of the pro imaging workflow is only "aware" of printed end results and low-end digital images like Instagram or JPEG web publishing. Very frustrating in my opinion.
The most interesting idea from the article, that was new to me, was using larger samples available from each parent, to augment and guide the analysis of the small amount of material available from the embryo. Obvious idea after you hear it, but very clever nonetheless.
If an install is necessary, you have already lost 90% of your viewers.
That initial list is a brilliant checklist for before you stake a key part of our architecture on X, answer the following....
reworded to the positive

Does it perform well?
Is it inexpensive?
Is it open source?
Does it lack features?
Does it have a community?
Does it have debug tools?
Does it have maintainers? (or other quality symbols)
It is properly documented?
Does it receive timely security fixes?
Does it show subject matter expertise?
Are we the audience it was developed for?
Why isn't our custom internal solution is good enough?
Is it's longevity understood: Its startup may be dead or sold soon.
Have we been in touch with the maintainer?
Does this solution make sense for a reasonable window of time?
Does it have industry credibility?
Is the community Code of Conduct congruent with our values?
Do our lawyers accept its T&Cs or license?
… which is a CSS utility class library and thus suffers from some of the same pitfalls.

How about something like Ant Design?
Also framing the discussion of whether or not you are entitled to view media or not is a dead end IMO. Rather than do the typical Western philosophy thing and try to define and rationalize “property” or “rights,” let’s look at the world as is, as a system of incentives and rational actors.

If it is easy to watch $(UK-licensed TV show) from America, people will do it and then the production and distribution companies get exactly 0 dollars and in fact will lose money fighting a losing whack-a-mole war against torrents.

If it is easy to log in to netflix dot com (NOTE: netflix, not (NFLX | DIS | HBO | AMZN | HULU | NBC)) to watch $(show), people will do that and you can let Netflix and production companies fight about the beans.
This war is SpaceX's black friday. While everyone else was pissing off using old technology, SX was moving ahead (not counting small launch providers).
""Libertarianism and extreme capitalism" are great for people who are intelligent and driven."

It's good for people that want to rationalize their extreme wealth as "meritocracy" when it's inherently luck of the draw that any of us find ourselves where we are. A real libertarian society entails an informal economy and is what the developing world is trying to get out of. State policy is needed to maintain some kind of social order, a libertarian government is the complete inverse of a command and control economy - both are social disasters.
It’s just like playing roulette and then associating intelligence of the player with the correctness of numbers they chose
All of these are government systems and as such have a lot of "Security Theater" baked into the software for compliance reasons. Any Tyler product has to abide by at probably half a dozen compliance codes and complex laws, such as captchas where they don't need to be.

This is also a big reason why it's so hard for a lot of this software to be improved quickly. Almost every change requires a long and drawn out approval process with various government agencies.
Trading in China Evergrande shares, onshore bonds halted pending announcement
If this is merely subsidized electric, it says nothing about long-term sustainability of choosing it instead of diesel. Thermodynamically electricity is dubious at best - you have 50% efficiency off the top that can never be eliminated - at least with heat engines you have the option of higher compression or temperatures or pressure to boost beyond 50%. Electrical never can.
> I knew exactly what he was talking about- not xenophobia, but legitimately shady software that is common to get from Chinese manufacturers, often from some equally dodgy ftp server or torrent seed.

This so much. Part of the reason we decided against using one microcontroller that was China-only was that their "support" included a pirated and cracked version of Keil.

Uh, no.

As someone who doesn't speak Chinese, I can actually deal with Chinese datasheets, surprisingly (diagrams and hexadecimal generally don't need translation). Chinese support forums are a bit tougher if I can even get to them from outside China.

However, once you start exhibiting some level of casual illegality, that's a full stop.

Hopefully, RISC-V will side step a lot of this in the future by standardizing the toolset on something open-source.
You are vastly overestimating Russia ability to innovate. Russia has basically not innovated since the Soviet Union. Angara rocket is supposed to be the 'next generation' rocket and its adoption has been painfully slow.

The idea that they could just build a reusable rocket is just not in the car.

Mostly what the Russian space program has been doing is announcing one absurd program after another. The amount of power-point designs announced by Russia is comical. They have announced a reusable rocket but like so many of the other projects, its mostly just propganda.
In this 2 minute video demonstrating a Gogoro swap the rider goes from opening their seat to having a fresh battery and ready to ride in about 50 seconds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W34k0nrrDQA
Tools like Photoshop, Ableton, ArcGIS, Maya, AutoCAD, or Matlab rely on widespread piracy to remain the industry standard (also cheaper student versions and university site licenses, but those aren’t enough by themselves), and make up the lost income by soaking professional users from established firms. If large numbers of people can’t affordably access these, they will adopt some alternative cheaper tool and ultimately bleed users, understanding, and activity away.
Musk is kind of bipolar when it comes to these things, he does run the company extremely aggressively in a growth mode leaving little margin for a breather (always charging into something more ambitious), and SpaceX does have a sort of reputation for burnout. Yeah, I DO think Musk was exaggerating the risk to try to get his workers to work harder. (He also pushes himself, which doesn’t totally change the fact that SpaceX workers are often at risk of burnout.)
No cap, there was a translation of Beowulf a few years ago that deadass translated the first word of the saga, "Hwæt", as "Bro!" (like how a drunk storyteller sitting next to you at the bar might say "Bro, listen to this shit" instead of the more staid/traditional openers like "Harken!")
Note I was talking about a conditionall call instruction, which is very useful for, e.g. safety checks.
Incompetent teams and engineering organizations will find a way to mess up both monoliths and microservices. Great ones will pick what works best for their specific use case and be effective at it.

The only correct answer is to not waste time with the decade+ worth of pointless internet debates on the topic.
If you're going to embrace microservices, you need to be VERY confident that they solve real problems that you currently have and that they will result in an improvement to your engineering velocity within a reasonable time-frame.

The additional complexity - in terms of code and operations - is significant. You need to be very confident that it's going to pay for itself.
I wonder if they'll finally come after that one thing we don't talk about, that I use constantly for music and TV shows.
> teams want to make their own choices, dislike code review or overbearing ‘architects’ above them, and to a lesser extent want to use different and newer languages.

I'm not sure this is 100% correct - or, at least, has never been the case in the 20 years or so I've been working with "microservice" architectures. There's always an architecture team dictating the form of the services themselves - usually much more so than a module in a monolithic application. Part of this standardization is usually a set of languages - you can use Python (with Django) or Java (with Spring Boot), but anything else has to be approved by the committee.

That said, I agree with is ultimate conclusion that microservices haven't lived up to their promise. The usual justification for microservices was and continues to be "we can update one component without disturbing the others". I've never seen that actually happen. Every time one component changes, everything that depends on it has to be retested just to be on the safe side (and most of the time, something is found).
Yeah that makes sense, it's an RDMA protocol, and PCIe has wayyyy more in common with infiniband then it does with legacy PCI.
Show HN: WhatsAlysis – Visualise your WhatsApp chat statistics
Not entirely true. Acquisitions they've made in the past few years are focused on making data easier to access by the public.
If companies don't make content available in your country, they don't have a reasonable case for complaining about piracy. You were never a customer to begin with, so no profit is being lost.

Yes, they might complain that they were going to make that content available in your country after they have extracted as much profit as possible through geofencing, which further erodes their case because then they already made more profit than they would without geofencing.
Well, everyone was building tiny RISCVs, I kind of thought "can I make a Xeon+ class RISCV if I throw gates at the problem ?" :-)

Seriously though I started out with the intent of building a 4/8 instruction/clock decoder, and an O-O execution pipe that could keep up - with the end goal of at least 4+ instruction s/clock average (we peak now at 8) - the renamer, dual register file, and commitQ are the core of what's probably different here
Thanks for pointing that out!

I work at AE, and we've actually been meaning to fix that for a while, but for some reason we prioritized making another theme of our blog that looks just like pg's blog (https://ae.studio/blog/victims-of-vimeo#pg) instead of making links that people realize are links.

I think we were trying to not be too promotional or something, but we should probably fix this, and we will now!
I would say that the best part of the scientific method is that you don't have to have blind faith in it, nor take it on the faith of others. You can look around at all the ways people most often get things wrong about the world, and then analyze the steps of the scientific method to understand how they directly counter those mistakes. Not to mention, you can look at all the things the scientific method has been able to accurately predict, vs any other method of understanding the world, and that should bolster its credentials.

Is the scientific method perfect? No, of course not; as long as humans are involved, nothing will ever be perfect. But to paraphrase Wigner, science is and has always been "unreasonably effective" at getting things right, far more than any other way humans have looked at the universe, and as such is the best we've got to understand it.
Please accept that I made no argument for a-priory abstraction and modularization. Personally, I find any abstraction problematic, where I cannot understand from the import statements of the current code which other code will be executed.

But there are the times where abstractions and modularization can make our lives so much easier. Who would want to dismiss the abstraction of the filesystem and work rather directly on the disc blocks?

All I am advocating here is, that everything is a tradeoff, and we need to weight the costs of mocking some stuff against refactoring the code in a way that we can live without such a mock. And I have personally been at the point where refactoring some code into a separate function made it easier to unit test this specific highly complex functionality.
I think it allows you to disable a lot of crap in gpedit.
Dude, getting a PhD is about becoming a philosopher, it's literally in the name. You can't do that but only teach.
macOS is known to be slow. If someone has Asahi running and wants some karma, try running lmbench and post the results.
A very ignorant question: in order to charge faster, why can’t we just charge 200 little batteries in parallel and then operate them in series?
We should all embrace proprietary software? The approach Elasticsearch and other SaaS providers take is anti-freedom and inherently harmful to the "right to fork", which is precisely what makes open source more long-term sustainable and resilient than any garden-variety proprietary package.
I think that has more to do with DXGKRNL coming from Microsoft than any policy that would be applied to other contributers.