skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>users don't really care about these things

I think they do implicitly. Employees definitely care when their 5 year old mid/low-end machine slows to a crawl because each chat & business app takes 600mb+ of their precious 8GB of RAM.

It'd probably help if Electron was "dynamically linked" instead of each app vendoring their own version
I've never had the other apps freeze for 10-30s when loading for the first time during the day because it decided to index the whole project. Or completely freeze because I have 2GB of XML files in a directory I didn't even touch.
> It's easy to add data sources, but they still have to be programmed:

And do they need to be programmed in go and compiled into the app? Or can one write a shell-script or python-program and collect from their output?

> I'm not really sure what you mean by "optimized parts"

If you modularize a software to the point that the parts are working independent of each other, then you are able to replace them per demand. For example, you can use a different UI, which is better for your workflow. Or use different sources which are only relevant for your personal circumstances. etc.

We have this with email, where mail-servers and mail-clients are independent parts of the ecosystem. Where open protocols like IMAP allow for scripts and external programs to work side by side with your client to attach missing functionality.

This level of modularization is missing in most of those aggregator-tools I've seen so far. And I think it's doing more harm that benefiting the users. For example, what if your app is saving its entries via IMAP, and your UI would load it via IMAP to present it in an optimized interface? It would mean your timeline could also be filled by all other mail-capable sources, while the data in your backend could also be customized by any IMAP-capable tool, like filters, etc.
Nice work!

This would be an awesome enhancement to Pocket- which already extracts web page texts into a lighter format - I'd probably read everything through that
To test whether crows know and can analyze the contents of their brains...trained two birds to peck a red or a blue target on a panel, depending whether they saw a faint light."

"[Researcher] Nieder kept varying the “rule,” with the birds told which color meant what — red = saw it, or blue = saw it — only after the flash. That required the crows, Glenn and Ozzy, to keep monitoring their brains; they had a second or two to figure out what they had seen and tell Nieder by choosing the corresponding target.

While the crows were solving these tasks, the researchers were tracking the activity of hundreds of their neurons. (Crows’ brains have 1.5 billion neurons, as many as some monkey species.)

"When the crows reported having seen a faint light, sensory neurons were active between the flash and the birds pecking the color that meant, yes, I saw that. If the crows did not perceive the very same faint stimulus, the nerve cells remained silent, and the bird pecked, no, I didn’t see anything. Ozzy and Glenn’s brain activity systematically changed depending on whether or not they had perceived the dim flash.

"During the delay, many neurons responded according to the crows’ impending report, rather than to the brightness of the light... The birds were aware of what they subjectively perceived, flash or no flash, correctly reporting what their sensory neurons recorded..."
This is a problem at every org scale as well. We have this issue with a 1000+ developer org where we still can't give our PMs and other non-developers read-only access to the gitlab issues because it would be another 200 headcount worth of full-price licenses. It's basically the sole reason we can't utilize most of their jira/confluence alternative product line and still keep issue tracking and docs mostly outside of gitlab.
Including this couple's 15 years of infertility, 3 miscarriages, cancer diagnosis, and months of surgery-related constant pain. If I believed in a benevolent god I think I'd have to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume this wasn't their plan. "It feels like a prank" is probably the nicest way you could put it.
I made a comment here about a book the other day and the author responded. I found that I was more fair, thoughtful and neutral when I replied to him than when I made the original comment. This isn't always the case but I think that personal interaction with the creator tends to make criticism more measured and humane.
The rationalist community[1] has a pattern for this. Make a public post with the title Contra <PersonX> on <Subject PersonX Has Written About>. Write out your debate arguments in public, but be generous around the uncertain boundaries of the argument. Invite the original author (or others) to steelman the position: "X is arguing for Y, but that seems to contradict Z. If I've misunderstood, please correct me." Always link to good rebuttals from your original post.

From good-natured participants, the dueling blog posts format can be delightful to read.

[1] - I first noticed it in Scott Alexander's Slate Star Codex, but I've seen many others use this pattern since.
I'm not a DBA, and maybe you're not a DBA either, so this question goes to DBAs who may be reading: aren't you always better off killing the bad queries instead of rebooting the whole box, if that's an option? (ie: aside from times when the entire host is screwed, load per core is >50, metrics aren't getting out, you can't ssh in etc)
Nothing... as opposed to the large sum of money NuScale must have spent to get this article on the economist: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
I'm an atheist, and I've attended years of AA meetings. I've never even remotely experienced anything like what you described. But I live in a big city on the West Coast.

AA reflects the character of the people and culture who are implementing it... If those people are judgy religious assholes, then I can't expect their AA meetings would be much different. But it would be a mistake to assume that your local sample defines the entire movement.
If a company shows support for the Ukraine, then they are giving aid and comfort to the Ukrainian military who was shelling civilians in the Donbass region for the past decade.
People talk too much about "certificates" as a good thing, but they're just a means to an end. The two major goals you're trying to solve with SSH:

(1) You want all of your authentication to route through a single point of control where you can enforce group-based access control, MFA, onboarding/offboarding, and audit logging.

(2) You want the actual secrets that allow you access to an SSH server not to live for a long time on anyone's laptop, because it is effectively impossible to ensure that, on a sufficiently large engineering team, nobody's laptop will ever get compromised; there's just too many of them, and developers do weird shit so the machines can't be ruthlessly locked down. You want people to have SSH login secrets for exactly as long as they need them for a specific server, and no longer.

Certificates solve the problem of having dynamic access control to SSH servers without having some weird system that is constantly replacing authorized_keys on all your servers; instead, there's a single root of trust on all the SSH servers (the CA public key) and a single place that mints valid certificates that enforces all the stuff I mentioned in (1) above.

It's worth knowing here that SSH certificates are nothing like X.509 certs; they're far simpler, and you could bang out an implementation of them yourself in a couple hours if you wanted.
Now I feel bad for crows. They're in the same MALIGNANTLY USELESS boat as humans.

>
“For the rest of the earth’s organisms, existence is relatively uncomplicated. Their lives are about three things: survival, reproduction, death—and nothing else. But we know too much to content ourselves with surviving, reproducing, dying—and nothing else. We know we are alive and know we will die. We also know we will suffer during our lives before suffering—slowly or quickly—as we draw near to death. This is the knowledge we “enjoy” as the most intelligent organisms to gush from the womb of nature. And being so, we feel shortchanged if there is nothing else for us than to survive, reproduce, and die. We want there to be more to it than that, or to think there is. This is the tragedy: Consciousness has forced us into the paradoxical position of striving to be unself-conscious of what we are—hunks of spoiling flesh on disintegrating bones.” – Thomas Ligotti
I didn't say that HN threads were mostly negative about renewables. But the people who comment about nuclear in them are by and large attempting to launder anti-renewable views, and not doing a very good job of it.

I mean it's really not hard to say something positive about nuclear without attacking renewables, or environmentalists or various other basically unrelated issues. But you wouldn't think so from most HN discussions. Feel free to survey the comments here as an example.
Two counterpoints: 1) the kind of people that use open-source libraries are one of the most plugged into the world political discourse parts of the population (BTW I am not sure that this is unequivocally a good thing, this "discourse" is just another brand of propaganda at this point) and 2) If some random open-source maintainer from across the ocean starts lecturing me that I am guilty of not overthrowing Putin or, worse, wipes my hard drive, I'm not going to be moved by this, I'm just going to think that this person is out of touch and be really annoyed.
Saw them last month + System of a Down + Helmet + Russian Circles.
> The problem is that Google has become so pervasive that even if you don't initiate any contact with them or use any of their products/services, a bad review on Google can have a substantially negative effect on your business. It's a real problem.

If this is true, it's because your would-be customers listen to what Google says. If people trust them, it's probably because they are the least bad option for gathering information on a lot of companies.
It does look much nicer than `git add -p` and manually editing patches in an editor which is what I am using right now. The question is whether my muscle memory will agree if I switch ;)
Super excited about this. I've been using cljfx (https://github.com/cljfx/cljfx) to build a few apps and it's so developer efficient.
It’s not the expectation, it’s the reputation of the project. If a project does dumb stuff like taking down existing documentation, that reflects poorly on the project. It shows poor judgement and unreliability.

I don’t require them to be smart and professional, but they should be or will lose users. Thanks to OSS, I can just fork. But being OSS doesn’t mean you can suck and be random and still stay useful to people.

Of course if it’s your project, you’re free to do whatever you would like.
The "S" in laser is for "stimulated" but nobody pronounces it to rhyme with "bracer".
How would a solar power station in space work?
Why Academia Needs Debate
SEC Statement on Proposed Mandatory Climate Risk Disclosures
Lightning connectors don't have enough pins to replace all that USB-C connectors do.
> such smaller vouchers would not be an equitable program as they would need to be topped up with additional funds in order to offer the full cost of admission to a number of lower cost private schools.

If a smaller, constant-amount voucher is “not equitable”, is a $0 voucher more equitable somehow?
Hi sweetheart
I am very happy about that. Nice that you get the “reading pull” and thereby gain the benefits.
Best regards from the Alps,
Renato
I’d rather they do. Focus that energy into productive action rather than just signaling.

It’s like those people who do 50 commits instead of one to look busy. Just put that mental energy into real stuff.
>my own usage of it in the correct form..

>your reading comprehension really is below-third-grade, isn't it?

wow, your desperation has no limits it seems

thank goodness I never suffered an American "education"

>Only to the extent that you persist in crashing into it

so I'm to blame for you biting off more than you can chew

>So, no, you lost again. Now grow up PDQ, or POAD

stubborn little madam aren't we? no thank you
Some say he escaped into the Los Angeles underground.
> Go find any popular article that makes factual claims. Then, read comments about it on some high-quality forum. Almost always, you will see comments that are deeply problematic for the original thesis.

> How much should these comments decrease your confidence in the original article? I claim: Not much, at least on average.

> First, if everything you read has devastating criticisms, you should expect them to exist.

Without explicitly commenting on the world in which we live, it seems to me that all the hypotheses are consistent with a world of low-quality discourse, in which many of the factual claims we encounter in popular articles are wrong (in possibly minor, but possibly major, ways). You should always evaluate your sources, to be sure—and the value of an anonymous comment on even a high-quality forum is fairly low—but a factual refutation of a factual claim should, I think, be given very high weight, even if most such claims have such refutations.

(The author seems further on to be pointing out perhaps the futility of refuting a 'headline point' when the headline will be fleshed out in the body. With that I can more easily agree. Of course, as is the way of such things, I was more eager to make my slightly contrary point than to finish reading the essay.)
Criticising the silent majority when they try not to be silent anymore with "youre not taking any risks, so stay silent" is a bad take.
You seem to have only added links to your own written content, that's a no-no. Read the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Specifically:

> What to Submit: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.

Is what you're submitting something "good hackers would find interesting"?

I submit links in the hope of sharing some novel/interesting information with others, and to spawn discussions around a subject I find interesting.

> but beyond that does it really translate into commerce and connections for people ?

Sometimes, for some people, it does. But still, rule #1 is that it should be interesting, then the commerce and connections (from HN and other sources) will follow automatically.
The issues with customer service have been terrible for a very long time. The introduction of phone IVR menus that have labyrinths to prevent the caller from reaching a real person is also somewhat common with many companies. Then come chatbots, which are universally stupid, totally useless, and a big waste of time (anytime I see a company with a chatbot I think that a CTO doesn't exist or is clueless or just got a nice commission from buying it from a vendor).

There are sites that list phone numbers of companies and provide information on if or how one can reach a human. I'm not associated with this company in any way, but I've heard of it a long time ago and it's still around: https://gethuman.com . I'm sure there are other services that help with shortcuts on reaching a person who can help. In the worst case, do a "Tell HN" here with the name of the company and you'd more likely get a real human helping you out! :|
Pretty sure that rug wouldn't have prevented downtime.
What did they move away to?
Because our policies are being construed by environmentalists with a Communist or leftist agenda instead of scientists and pragmatic leaders.

Renewables are much less cost-effective if you take into account the energy storage needed to make them work. And even then they're ineffective because you essentially need 100% backup capacity for an indefinite period of time for when the wind doesn't blow or the sun is obscured by clouds. Current energy storage systems can only provide enough power for two days at the most.

We're being led like Lemmings into the ravine by these environmentalists. It's time we scientists and engineers took charge.
Just fuels my cynicism about "free" offerings. Sooner or later, companies decide they want to monetize as much as possible.

I'm not saying it's unfair. But it makes me less interested in trying things just because they are "free".
I generally don’t refer to a repair subsidized by my car insurance as free. Do you?
I think I have a mild and slightly morbid obsession with Swartz. It just seemed like after he died, a lot of the web went downhill. His death is a marker for the death of a lot of dreams about what the web meant, and about people exercising autonomy on the internet.
Was the trigger sequence found by analyzing assembly, or did someone actually manage to trigger it in the wild?
hmm. RSS worked pretty well for something that needed salvaging, as you say.

the mess was created by vendors who wouldn't work with each other.

i stepped back after 2.0, people could've done anything they wanted.
I only see two options, bad faith or childishly naive, so I suggested the more flattering option. In either case it's tiring to argue this 'gotcha' strawman - no one here on HN believes that things just materialize.

But I do think it's bad faith, because I doubt burrows picks the same kind of pointless argument about semantics when someone offers him a free sample at Costco, or a free beer, or is confused when reading the Washington Post online, even though it says 'Post' right there in the name, and that the printed New York Times doesn't really tell you the time, and that Fox News is not about foxes at all (even though it absolutely should be).
I took a look at the first site in responsive design mode and it looks like the "Branches" menu, which aims to be in a fixed spot, is getting pushed down by the extra content. the actual protest message scrolls up with the rest of it and does not get in the way of anything. Seems like a simple UX bug that could be fixed if you send the developers a bug report.
This is really disappointing.

I've always encouraged small non-commercial hobby projects to use GitLab. It just seemed like the right thing to do.

If you're familiar with Paradox Interactive Studios games (Crusader Kings, Hearts of Iron, Stellaris):

- Star Trek: New Horizons (127,000 current subscribers)

- SW:Fallen Republic (97,000 current subscribers)

- Kaiserreich (774,000 current subscribers)

are (/were) all hosted on GitLab.

A lot of the people who contribute to these projects only do so intermittently (so high member count to work done ratio) and are usually doing this in their formative years so would be likely to continue to use GitLab when they enter the working world.

There is absolutely no money available as game publishers prohibit it. And even if they tried to sneak in some Patreon donations there's no way that's going to cover $19/m/user!

Honestly, GitLab really seems to be falling far behind in their outreach. Their Open source programme is behind GitHub's and they don't have anything for Non-profits.
First off, I'm really grateful for the service Gitlab has provided to date, both to the open source community and to Git users at large.

Having said that, I think they're killing the golden goose.

At one point, Gitlab's competitive advantage was relatively generous free access to private Git repos. This generated a lot of goodwill in the days when GitHub didn't provide private repos even for personal use. I'm guessing that Gitlab now views its competitive advantage as the CI / DevOps experience. Still, it feels to me like they could limit that feature specifically rather than limiting even public projects to 5 users. Right now, GitHub's offering is suddenly looking attractive again for anyone who doesn't want to fill out a separate application (annually!) for each of their open source namespaces.

I'd think it's to Gitlab's advantage to keep these users. Right now, the current policy effectively chases them away. The only projects I imagine staying are those that really take advantage of the CI, but... is that really who Gitlab wants to limit their userbase to?
Im doing everything minus taking time to relax. I’m in a constant limbo between “relax” but not fully committed by the stress of wasting productive time. This turns into a waste of time that’s not productive nor relaxing that is just procrastination. If I could figure out how to fully relax I’d probably be available for productivity for longer and I’d enjoy my free time more.
Many hosting services have a control panel to do this on VPS. Some hardwares like Synology also have web interface to do this.
Elixir. That's it. There's a reason Discord and WhatsApp run on the BEAM. It does real-time with the least pain.
The answer depends on what You are trying to prove.

If You define this poem as ordered list of words that can be interpreted trough cultural and local context, then it existed even before it was written down.

If You want to go more realistic way then this poem exists only through my memory (partly as memory and partly as an emotional association) and will disappear with my demise.
This is fascinating. This kind of design that most players don't ever consciously notice, but which improves the unquantifiable "feel" of a game, is the most beautiful part of game design for me.

Would also like to note this tweet:

> one tidbit: it took HAL quite a while to accept that moving to 3D would require them to up the enemy density—no matter how many times Nintendo would request it, HAL would send them builds with sparse stages, in part bc they felt bad about swarming Kirby with hordes of enemies

That seems indicative of a major design barrier for games moving from 2D to 3D. Compare the often tight and crowded environments of water levels in Super Mario World to the vast emptiness of Super Mario 64's Jolly Roger Bay. The 3D leap is tough.
Speaking for myself, I'd say it's one or more of a couple of things:

1. I find something that I find interesting, and speculate that perhaps other people would find it interesting as well. So I share it here in the hopes that somebody else will enjoy it. There's no expectation at all of getting anything "back" from this interaction other than a subject sense of self-satisfaction for doing something I consider cool.

2. I find something I find interesting, and hope that maybe a fascinating discussion will be sparked by sharing the link here, from which I may learn interesting new things I did not know. A good HN conversation is one of the most wonderful things on the Internet, IMO.

3. I have some "thing" I want to promote - something related to my business, or maybe a philosophical or ideological position I want to advocate for. I may share something here that promotes that agenda in some way.

Out of those three, number (3) is by far the least common. I rarely post anything that's blatantly self-promotional (even though it is allowed here, as long as it's not to excess) and don't post extremely ideologically slanted things terribly often. Most of mine fall into (1) and/or (2) for sure.

but beyond that does it really translate into commerce and connections for people ?

Occasionally yes, in my experience. But I personally consider that about the least important reason to use HN. YMMV. shrug
I think as these things become more noticeable, the Electron team will make more active attempts to share resources amongst Electron "sessions". But this whole thing rides on the back of Chromium, and I have a feeling they aren't as communicative as the NodeJS and V8 developers are.

Hopefully I'm wrong and in the future Blink will be more optimized for Electron.
Is the usage "pancake lens" for some type of lenses in photography a similar usage or does it imply something different.
I can almost guarantee in some dark corner there is an organization still using ksh.
I know because I have encountered this for different, otherwise defunct shells.