skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For comparison, pulled up a computer that's running Windows and has Edge installed (which will be indicative of a large part of the population that doesn't care much about the intricacies of their installs):

Edge: almost 500 MB
EdgeCore: almost 400 MB
EdgeUpdate: about 20 MB

In the grand scheme of things, 20 MB is indeed nothing, because many browsers out there (that cannot be uninstalled without crippling the OS in some regards) are already pretty bloated, use bunches of plugins anyways and just generally have untold amounts of cruft in a variety of other software (e.g. just compare MS Office vs LibreOffice and look at how much space professional software like Photoshop or Blender or whatever takes up).

What i'd like:

- to optionally be able to maximize the browser size install to minimize the amount of data that would have to be fetched over the network (e.g. one bundle for Python, one for .NET/Blazor, one for Rust, one for Go etc., based on what you need, maybe just all of them), the same way that plugins work
- to have these bundles support being toggled (or even downloaded, if allowed) on a case by case basis, as they become necessary (e.g. enabled in daily driver device, disabled and not installed in a Firefox/Chrome/... install inside of a Docker container for testing)
- somehow have the industry force everyone to slow down - e.g. you'd have new updates for all of these come out perhaps once a month instead of every other day, as you already do with front end plugins and needless updates of JS bundles
- so, since CDNs were crippled and browser caching is impossible for common resources across different sites, re-introduce that mechanism in some capacity with these bundles that'd be installed locally
- enjoy the ensuing hell that'd be like the Java Applet idea which was brilliant for rich content but had untold flaws in regards to sandboxing and other things (similarly to how Flash was later also killed off, really torn about that one)

So obviously we cannot win and will never have that.

Alternatively:

- build more static sites
- realize that you can't implement everything you need without JS
- reinvent your own minimalist framework/library, badly; though hopefully use something like Svelte or Alpine.js for cases like that

What we'll realistically have instead:

- unique bundles of resources for every site, no caching across sites, no proper ways to utilize CDNs in a cross-domain context due to fears of being spied on
- fast development velocity with lots of updates, continuation of needing to download hundreds of KB or even multiple MB of JS assets to keep browsing the same content in almost the same way
- the problem will only be made worse by developers pursuing larger WASM bundles, like Blazor in .NET, with few advantages for developers but many disadvantages for everyone else
- this problem generally will not be regarded as serious, because most don't care about how much bandwidth they waste, a la Wirth's law
> He can’t see why worry, and wonders what sins he committed to deserve this asshole Chinese (given the Engrish) reviewer...

That's entirely uncalled for.

Yes, there are a lot of Chinese researchers in the field, but instead of mocking them, imagine how hard it is to conduct almost all your professional work in a language almost entirely different to your native one. Learning, say, AI to a level high enough to review papers is hard enough, but now you have to also learn a whole language just on top and in your own time. And when you trip over it, you get a mouth full of abuse.

I know I couldn't submit a paper to a Chinese language journal, let alone review one. I couldn't even do it in German, and that's basically the same family as English and I was taught some at school.

Be nice to ESL people, they work incredibly hard and people don't give them enough credit.
> The next great search engine will emerge from a niche and conquer one segment after another from there. It won't be a massive general search engine that shows up one day (which is what the Google watchers have been waiting for forever - that new behemoth comprehensive competitor is never going to arrive fully formed). There's a decent possibility consumer Web search will be a later stage addition to said new niche competitor, consumer Web won't be its primary or initial target. They'll add on general consumer Web search as a "we might as well" offering once they conquer enough niches.

I love this because I want it to be true. However, iirc Google wanted to sell itself to Yahoo! for a million dollars and about five years later again for a billion dollars.

I know there are quite a few millionaires here but for me, five million dollars would change my life. I can’t imagine being able to turn it down.
Beautiful and interactive visualizations without a single line of code
Not if you’re hungry.
Gell-Mann amnesia effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnes...
You know how sometimes people outside a domain can make the most interesting comments specifically because they don't know enough to dismiss what they're saying out of hand? I find people who map out what they don't know while strolling into unknown territory tend to be the most interesting. They forge ahead knowing they don't know everything and don't waste time defending points that don't hold up to expert scrutiny.

It's a too-rare trait on HN, and I think the flip from OP's optimism to cynicism with more exposure leads a lot of people to dismiss the whole place.
The principal step will be to move on from keywords and indexing, which are now a legacy technology, almost 26 years after Google started it all.

Returning blue links is a thing of the past, as the Web of yesterday is long gone. Blue links always were about surfing i.e. following hyperlinks just for the sake of it since the main premise was most of them were of high quality and quickly proliferating.

All that is gone now and the links are a promotional thing how to get paid in one way or another. This is why Google results have been deteriorating, regardless of tens of trillions of archived pages on the Web. Google has lost the principal ranking signal years ago.

The next huge scale smart information system will be based on dense vectors (a few hundred dimensions) such as in AI but the key will be much bigger scale, of (tens of) billions of vectors. Contemporary AI works won datasets 4-5 orders of magnitude smaller, getting bogged down in gigantic transformer models such as GPT-3 with 175B+ parameters that take weeks and millions of dollars just to train. One might wonder what is innate knowledge of such a huge model, and it is not much as one can see for themselves as GPT-3 is now open (until Apr 1).

The future will be based on embeddings that are NOT contextualized i.e. no separate vectors for different senses in superpositions. Such systems will not be based on ads nor tracking as the resources required will be orders of magnitude less than what is currently required at Google.
Unfortunately, in today's job market, the first (seemingly only, sometimes) gate is what keywords are in your online resume/CV for the software to find, and hand to a human recruiter. And, in my experience, the human may not know much more than the grep-equivalent, since if they had those technical skills, they'd probably be doing that, not recruiting.

So, yeah, making it machine readable will help. This does not really negate what you said, but is another perspective.
Hey, maybe it will stabilize.. surprises happen :)
We have much better ways to make food than cows. If you're hungry you don't go raise cows. You go farming. Much less space needed for the same result, it's much quicker and with way less risk.
I have meant nasal sonorants.

The terminology is not uniform. There are many (typically in older literature) who call [m], [n], ... nasal plosives, in opposition with oral plosives [b], [d], ..., because the only difference between them is the open nasal path.

It is true however that having an open nasal path means that they are not really obstruents so they should not be called plosives according to more modern classifications that partition the sounds into obstruents and sonorants, where plosives belong to the obstruents.

However here I do not know how many are familiar with the more recent linguistic terms, so I tended to use more ancient terms.
Aka the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect:

https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/
You have not really given us enough information to suggest the best solution. For example, is this because you host many websites for other people who all use your custom nameservers? Either way, if you are hosting many sites with custom nameservers, look at what AWS does for its nameservers for route53. Theirs are set-up like so:

ns-1271.awsdns-11.co.uk

ns-522.awsdns-02.net

ns-433.awsdns-03.com

ns-1870.awsdns-03.org

In your case, you'd likely want to each domain used in your custom nameserver configuration to be registered at a different company. In this way, you no longer have a single point of failure.
It’s free to visit their homepage. Why split hairs?!
Which is spectacularly inefficient. (If you wonder how that could be, here's a hint: your home is not an isolated system)
The Amiga had analog RGB output that was used by everyone because high resolution text (640x200) was unreadable with the composite output. Composite was okay for playing video games (inevitably 320x200), but few actually did that. One RGB monitor that worked (and much better than composite) was good enough.

That was in August 1985, about three years after the C-64. The Atari ST came out a few months earlier, and had excellent monitors, the problem was you really wanted two of them, one for high resolution (640x400), non-interlaced black and white, and the other for RGB low resolution (320x200) color. They were not compatible with each other.

In the PC world you started to see digital RGB EGA with 64 colors about this time, but until VGA monitors came out there wasn't really anything to compare to the Amiga / Atari ST in the color department. VGA was released in 1987, and of course took a few years to become common. An amazing number of PC video games were still CGA (four color low res digital RGB) at the time, but that of course all changed a few years later when VGA became standard.
Presumably the code base didn't just have a single author (who is also no longer around). Git blame is amazing for not only tracking down who did what, but also seeing how the code base evolved.
That shouldn't matter unless the organization gives a clear expectation of the commitment level the volunteer would need to provide. Most places prefer any/all volunteers they can get (remember it's free labor and typically spawned by a person wanting to do something good for a community)
Thank you very much! :-)

(It's my talk, FWIW...)
Because Google is the best you're going to get with ad-supported search.

If you're willing to pay for search there is an alternative emerging: Kagi. It's not a Google competitor, though. It's a niche product for people (like me) who are willing to pay a significant amount of money for access to a search engine whose creators make money by providing value to their users rather than by providing their users to advertisers.
Building a Reliable Second Brain to Write Less Code
Greeble (Psychology)
That doesn't make it a libertarian position.
> Still, we are the apex predator of this planet, thanks to our sole distinguishing feature, which is our intelligence and ability to cooperate.

Indeed, people seem to overlook the fact that superhuman intelligence already exists as human organizations. A company has the institutional knowledge to create things that no individual human could ever come close to, and many of them have the narrow focus of theoretical "paperclip maximizers." These organizations even have the ability to use there superhuman ability to improve themselves, and do to a certain extent, but they don't create the cartoonish runaway feedback loop people imagine. Reality ends up being a lot more difficult than handwaved fiction.

The idea of an AI apocalypse has become the quasi-religious dogma of certain groups, but it overlooks the real issues we face. I suppose when you see something everyday, it's easy to ignore its extraordinary nature.
It's about floating in air.
Normally I'm a Mac/Linux user, but last time I tried Windows it hid all the icons by default. They used to show them in older versions but they do not anymore, probably because everyone including the OS vendor itself uses it as a dumping ground for product tie-ins and clutter like that.
It would have to be the DOMINANT approach for that to happen.
we’ll all be hungry when we turn the entire planet into a desert
I vaguely recall part of an interview with Warren Buffett, where he was talking about tech investments. At the time he was interested in cloud providers and not interested in search. He said that "search is winner-takes-all," while infrastructure-as-a-service is not. Maybe that's part of it.
I had to spend hours training Instagram not to show me endless pictures of hot shirtless guys when I go to the 'explore' feed. I follow one or two pop singers who sometimes post sexy photos, but for the most part I just follow people that I really know. I'm not sure how my feed ended up so sexualized. My theory is that Instagram notices that I spend longer looking at hot guys when they do appear than I do looking at other kinds of photos. (I am happy to stare at hot guys, but it's not what I'm actually looking for when I go to Instagram.)
Please, let's not get bogged down in a discussion about heat pumps.
> And yet, here you and I are expressing our opinions and having a discussion.

You and I haven't said anything controversial.

> Care to link to any real cases[...]

Nolan Bushnell got cancelled because Atari was allegedly sexist in the 70s, and got an award revoked for it. [1]

There's of course the infamous dongle joke fiasco at PyCon. [2]

James Damore got cancelled for the Google memo, and got fired for it. [3]

These are just a couple examples, and you could argue about whether or not these people are actually in the wrong (for the crime of having the wrong opinion), but they clearly don't deserve mob justice attempting to ruin their careers.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/games/2018/feb/01/nolan-bushnell...

[2] https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/21/a-dongle-joke-that-spirale...

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%27s_Ideological_Echo_...
> The speaker does not touch at all the details of why all of these were superseded by supposedly worse and more complex systems, "What went wrong?"

I did the talk, FWIW.

I didn't much because it would have turned it into a very different talk, and frankly a rather depressing one.

The real answer is very simple:

They were superseded by cheaper systems, which could be built and maintained by less-skilled and therefore cheaper people. And possibly also used by less-skilled people.
The author appears to mostly randomly choose from a menu of Slavic options, both wrt etymology and geography. For example “smrt” means “death” across Slavic languages, yet Czech is randomly chosen to be mentioned in the article.

Similar problems with Croatia vs Serbia vs Yugoslavia are discussed in others’ comments.
Can you give some practical advice also with that soliloquy? Are you saying we shouldn't develop native mobile apps but stick to web-apps ?
My statement was too strong. By "knew" I meant that it was pretty likely that strong cosmic censorship wouldn't work out [1]. In addition, I think QFT and GR are both probably broken in some way given that they're incompatible and that no one has coerced one of the theories into working with the other. That feels like evidence that the problem is not as simple as just rejecting QM or GR to me. But again, calling that "knowing GR is unphysical" was too strong a statement.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_censorship_hypothesis
Once again, the attempted cover up is almost always worst than the original issue. Okta could have come out and leaned into the process issues they found, how they are improving, etc... and probably walked away with increased trust. Instead, they have strung out a bad situation and look worse every day.
There are elitist traps in here, somewhere.

First, that a lot of people are too uneducated, stupid or uninformed to be responsible for the moral viewpoints. Hence why all blame should be foisted onto the "villainous leaders who manipulated."

Second, that your (our) moral viewpoint is the advanced... and the contrary presumably degenerate or primitive.

That kind of empathy isn't well received. It's condescension. At its worst, it's dehumanising... no moral agency.

Also, take note that they think the same things about you. The reason why you hold your foolish moral viewpoints is because you have been mislead, lied to and manipulated by media, university and Hollywood elites.

Idk if shame is useful, or legitimate as a way of mediating all this. But... I'm quite confident that condescension isn't a helpful posture. Better to start by recognising the actual opposition of viewpoints. Argue in earnest. Etc.

Ie: I'm not mad at you. You're not smart enough to know right from wrong. I'm mad at the people who spoon-fed you your stupid opinions.

It's not actually an empathetic posture, imo.
> How the commons - which exist outside the purview of private property

Ah, but that's the crux, isn't it? Because even the implication of this sentence is that that nature of "private property" and "the commons" is socially constructed - what can be private, what cannot be. If it is socially constructed (as it clearly is), then the scope of private property becomes a matter for public and political debate, and really with no limits. Should land ever be private property? Should resources in the ground ever be private property? Water rights? Should anyone be able to own a home?

Libertarians (and many other people) may feel that the answers to such questions are either (a) obvious and/or (b) dictated by the rest of their political philosophy, but the moment you open the door to the possibility that there are some things that remain "in the commons" and other things that do not, you are forced to face the social construction of private property as a concept, and with it the question of what it should really be.
> My favorite HN example, while not about the humanities, is the conversation about Rust vs. Go before and after the Discord article.

What differences did you notice? I can't really remember any.
I do not know much about EV's. Can you steal power from the car by only having access to the charge port or can you interface with the cars computer through this port? I know that some people power their homes with their car but does that require doing something with the cars computer or does the car have default and secure settings one can or should change?
You really think DDG gets 2% as much traffic as Google? There's no chance
This is all imagined retrospective. Jared never actually turned down a PR over a right join or the like. Maybe if the OP had ever used a right join Jared would have shrugged and said "not how I would write it, but it works and is understandable" and moved on.
Yep. Just be kind to people and most everything else takes care of itself with time.

The less you’re affected by negativity from other people the more confident you become in yourself, which really becomes self fulfilling.
I got into the humanities the same way I got into programming. Something caught my interest and I started tugging on loose ends. I do think it makes you a far more well rounded person.

The thing is that you're steeped in the conclusions of philosophy and sociology whether you are aware of it or not. Actual study of these subjects pulls the wool from your eyes and allows you to confront what you've been taught to assume.

A logical positivist, as you're probably likely to end up if you dive headlong into STEM and just absorbing assumptions from your professors and peers, might say something like 'the only meaningful things are the things that can be measured objectively' vaguely echoing the 'atoms and void' of Democritus, without even considering what what meaning is and where it comes from, or what a "thing" is, or what measurement is, or what objectivity is, or whether objective reality can even be assumed to exist. Why should we even pursue meaningful things? Can we measure what's meaningful? And so on.

I don't have good answers to any of these questions, the point is rather you could probably fill a shelf with books and dissertations on each of these subjects. But you wouldn't know that without at least dabbling in philosophy.
Partly. Not just them; in a way, MS was an outgrowth.

MS DOS wasn't written in C. MS BASIC wasn't.

But Windows was. And they didn't have a good direction for Windows until they got OS/2 3 in the divorce from IBM, and hired Dave Cutler et al from DEC to finish it and make it work.

OS/2 and NT were built using tools developed on (and for) UNIX. Mostly, C.

Win NT is the next generation of both DEC VMS and OS/2, and it was built using the language that was being honed on, and for, VMS' rival on the PDP-11 and VAX: UNIX.
I have a feeling Cloudflare is going to be a new entrant into this space in the next 6-12 months.
i'm following zig's project from HN and i often see cross-compilation and c/c++ mentionned.

Why is zig often mentionned in that context ? it seems that cross-compilation and C can be achieved using llvm/clang without a lot of problem ? What is zig accomplishing in that matter that makes it so special ?
For another example, [this story](https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/north-korean-... ) describes another zero-day that was allegedly found to have been exploited for weeks before discovery.

Apparently the timeline was:

????-??-??: The bug was discovered and exploited.

2022-01-04: Earliest identified exploitation (according to the linked article).

2022-02-10: Google TAG discovered the vulnerability.

2022-02-14: Google Chrome was patched.

????-??-??: Hopefully most folks have updated by now, such that that particular attack isn't getting anyone anymore.

According to the article:

> Google’s Threat Analysis Group (TAG) attributed two campaigns exploiting the recently patched CVE-2022-0609 (described only as “use after free in Animation” at the moment) to two separate attacker groups backed by the North Korean government.

Generally, "use-after-free" vulnerabilities could be prevented by using more secure memory-management systems. To be clear: this is easy to do, programming-wise; presumably the vulnerability was able to occur because the software-design favored performance over security.
I think there may still be a quality issue. Every then and again I change my search engine to Bing. Bing works perfectly fine for most of my searches. However, every few hours there’s one search that reminds me “you’re not on Google” because I don’t get the results I expect. I tried DDG as well with a similar outcome, although it doesn’t perform as well as Bing for me.

I realize I am a sample size of one, but I run this exercise about twice a year, and sadly always go back to Google.
There's plenty of food to feed everyone on this planet. The problem is not the production of food, but the distribution.

Destroying ecosystems and species rather than solving that problem seems a little .. well, short-sighted at best.
I can't tell if this is trying to demonstrate how HN users don't have a solid grasp of social sciences via parody, or a genuine post.
It might be worth distinguishing between the author and one of his characters.
Yeah Google does this already though
Google Discover is the closest they have to this.

As a side note, I'm a publisher and Google Discover traffic alone has made me about $1k in the last week alone to just one single article by itself
Zsh_codex: Use OpenAI Codex in your terminal