skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is just Instagram, with photos. Imagine Youtube.

And again I have been saying this since ~2015/16, we dont have any meaningful roadmap for cost reduction on storage, whether that is Hot as in NAND, Bulk as in HDD, or Cold as in Optical Disc. I dont see 2TB SSD dropping below $100 in next 5 years, or 10TB HDD below $120.

Remember when Google promise infinite Gmail storage?
This is true to some extent, although "IDL", "CSSStyleDeclaration", and "HTML" are full-on new words. (None of them have their own declensions because in English only pronouns have irregular declensions.)

However, given the choice between naming a new concept with an initialism like "CSS" or "HTML", a standard English word used with a subtly different meaning such as "attribute" or "tumbler", or a totally-made-up word like "granfilade" or "crum", I think the third is by far the least objectionable choice. The unfamiliar word puts you on notice that it names a concept you're unfamiliar with, unlike "style" or "attribute", which you might erroneously think you already understand.

In this it is similar to initialisms, but initialisms pose several difficulties to communication: they are awkward to pronounce ("WWW" is nine syllables), have inadvertent collisions with unrelated concepts ("CSS" is also the DVD Content Scrambling System, the Congregation of the Sacred Stigmata, the Colorado Springs School, chirped spread-spectrum radio, and dozens of other things), literarily unevocative, and except for thoroughly assimilated acronyms like "laser", they always make you look like you're shouting.

So I don't think it's the nomenclature that accounts for the impenetrability of the text; it's just the unfamiliarity of the concepts it explains.
Sisvel who operates the patent pool is acting on behalf of companies like Philips, GE, NTT, Ericsson, Dolby and Toshiba.

These are legitimate companies who have a long history of involvement in the codec space and so unless you have some evidence calling it FUD is pretty baseless.

But again if AOM has full confidence that there are no patents issues then they should indemnify users so there is a guarantee it will be royalty-free.
This is why these new "Rails killers" are a huge risk. Unexpected U turns every now and then. I wouldn't trust any of them for a real life project at work.
For those wondering what it looks like:

https://www.claws-mail.org/screenshots.php
I’m not defending it, just explaining how it is. I wish OP luck with the lawsuit.
Please tell me how I'd use a map as an analog control navigated by my hands. I'm supposed to feel the dashboard for the directions, feel around for the layout of the exit bridges I'm approaching? Read the names of the road in braille?

As a driver, my hands practically never leave the steering wheel. Media controls happen by the buttons on the steering wheel or voice commands. Climate is automatic. Heated seats are automatic. Heated steering wheel is automatic. The large screen makes it easier to see the directions and layout of the roads I'm approaching.

Meanwhile, when I'm not driving my car, the larger screen makes it easier to update the navigation. It makes it easier to plan out the route. It makes it easier for making any fine tuning to the literally hundreds of different settings on my car, settings I really don't need a dedicated button taking up space the 99.9% of the time I'm not pressing the button.

Note I'm not a Tesla fanboy, I do think some physical controls are good. Having useful stalks is nice, being able to control things like wipers is still useful as they're not quite 100% yet. However, a thermostat is a solved problem.

As a driver, never having to take my hands off the wheel is preferred to physical knobs. And if I never have to take my hands off the wheel, what does it matter if the other controls are physical or not?
It doesn’t seem like this architecture has anything to do with (A)GI, which is not hard to invent - just takes two people and 9 months - runs on less than 100W and doesn’t obviously parallelize like this.

Rather we’ve invented some kind of programming by example that generates absolutely enormous programs because we made all of it have to be the data and code at the same time.
really, liberals vs leftists?

People on the east are just 10 to 15 years from living in Florida as right side as you get. I do think the right is MORE KIND in general.
I had an HP Laserjet something (twenty years or so ago) that just kinda worked with CUPS on GNU/Linux -- but PS / PCL on those things was not complex, and it only had to print black anyway, with no network connectivity or scanning function.

Around the time I was looking to replace it - about 8 years ago - with a colour laser, I'd assumed HP was still popular & 'Linux friendly', but it coincided with a horrendous HP laptop experience (of the 'I am never buying from this vendor again' variety). Forums seemed to have a fair flood of people dissatisfied with HP support on our favourite OS, too -- while Brother was getting very positive reviews, and linuxprinting/openprinting showed consistently good-to-great support across their range.

I picked up a HL-3170CDW (colour laser) at around A$350 - which is comparable to the contemporary pricing for TFA's monochrome HP @ £220. I did a pass-me-down of that model a year or so ago, and went to the MFP version - DCP-L3510CDW (colour scanner, copier, laser printer) - for the same price. Print resolution is the same as TFA (600x600), but scan is at least 4x better. My only complaint is that they slightly changed their toner cartridge form between the models ... which felt like a very HP thing to do.
Indie Hackers, Experiment Faster
I am sorry to hear that you have a need to see stories where the helper is also a beneficiary as being romanticised and not “real”. In my opinion, the acts being “self-serving” doesn’t stop them from being kind. Kindness is enlightened self-interest. Everyone wins. How wonderful. Why does the helper have to “lose” for this retelling to be romanticised?

-

I sincerely hope this does not come off as condescending, and if it does, I am sorry. I hope you are having a good day. Cheers.
QuickTrials | Mobile App Developer (iOS or Android) | Full time | 100% Remote

We’re growing and looking for a talented mobile app developer to join the QuickTrials team. It is a rewarding position where you can help to build a category-leading product that improves agricultural innovation around the world.

Desired Skills:

- Solid experience with Android or iOS

- Java and Kotlin or Swift knowledge

- ReactiveX (RxJava & RxSwift)

- Solid, practical understanding of SQL

It would be great if you also have some knowledge of:

- Flutter

- CI/CD automation experience

More information can be found here:

https://www.quicktrials.com/jobs/mobile-app-developer/

If this sounds like your kind of role we would love to hear from you!
Any Tom Brown fans may be interested in the little known (justifiably) sequel, which takes Tom to Oxford:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/26851/26851-h/26851-h.htm
Was it those little vases on stands and portraits of ill children praying?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4p0uw42cdo
Why would they search specifically for "cancel culture"? It seems pretty obvious that the individual didn't search but instead took the time to try and find anything they could to make OP look bad.
If EVs were the mainstream instead of ICE, Costco would slap a charger on each of the spaces in its giant parking lots instead. Charging would either be free with membership to incentivize you hanging out inside the store, or cost near market rate for electricity.

There would be zero lines to charge, at all.
The thing we’re progressing towards isn’t AGI, if by that you mean is conscious and sentient.

I’m not sure this is actually possible, ie I don’t think we know “general intelligence” exists. The existence of your mind is a trick your brain plays on itself after all. You don’t exist independently of your body.
Malthusianism
Ask HN: Simulation vs. Game
Many who are supposed to be serious people insist our universe must be a simulation. (The argument seems, as far as I have been able to discover, to be "because how could it not be?")

My question is, is there any meaningful difference between a simulation and a video game? I can't discern any. So when somebody says we are in a simulation, what I hear that we are all NPCs in somebody's game.

Because, how could we not be?

To the Greeks, the world was the gods' playground. To (certain) Elizabethans, the world was a stage. To the Victorians, the universe was a clock. Every culture imagines the universe is whatever the hell they think they invented.

Are we NPCs?
If this was my son's computer, I would have a lot of fun defeating it
The major problem with this approach is that you go into the analysis with an opinion as to what is the better solution, then you tweak the weights and scores to match that opinion. This is not data-driven or even rational, it's just a way to express "numerically" what your guts tell you.

Clearly someone who disagrees with you will just tell you you got the weights and scores wrong.

The main value of this exercise is to sit down and think about a problem in a slightly deeper way and try to rationalize why we think solution A is better than solution B. That is good in itself. But people shouldn't mistake a mental exercise for a quantitative analysis.
GoGuardian is an extension tied to the user and installed at login. This extension only runs on chromebooks and does not know which device is owned by who.
> This document is not a protocol design; it's a data store design. The protocol, Phoebe, is mentioned briefly in §5.2 and §7.4

There is a detailed description of it at: http://udanax.xanadu.com/green/febe/index.html

Edit: I’ve added this link in a footnote at the end of https://sentido-labs.com/en/library/201904240732/Xanadu%20Hy...
I would hazard that game engines are an order of magnitude more complex than web frameworks. A better analogy may be game engine vs db engine or web framework+runtime(ex: Erlang/Elixir+Phoenix). If you have performance issues with a web framework you can scale it horizontally to a degree(depending on downstream dependencies like your DB). Games are built to run against resource constrained hardware and so they optimize for specific usage patterns.

There's also the issue that most engines are built to be good at a specific game type and may make trade-offs in terms of how assets are managed and scene complexity. An open-world has much more different requirements than an on-rails shooter. For instance I had to do some pretty heavy retrofitting of one of those engines to handle LoD/geometry streaming and a bunch of other optimizations to make them work well with a large sight-distance game.
I find it somewhat disturbing that this felt like a reasonable approach to me...
It would be interesting to see if measures like this would violate CFAA. Like, was there any click-wrap prior to the MDM? Is the spyware isolated to only the data managed by the school?

Eventually we’ll probably get some court cases, and I look forward to following them.
I find it difficult to feel bad for you.

$69 AUD for 50 down, 10 up, and thats the BEST that i can get.
Ha! My thoughts exactly. If I had more time it would make for an interesting post about all the lessons learned as we navigated the pains of Node.js in all its forms.

Lesson One — Building and Bundling are hard but don't make it harder.

We (by that I mean Peter and Danny) took a hard look at new tools, and, well, they let us down. We reverted a few steps that took us months to figure out. But we learned. And someday we'll make a move to different tooling. But in our opinion, those tools are not ready yet. (Side note: I read a tweet about how buggy SWC is with Next. Anecdotally, although we're stoked for the future of SWC, it remains as a draft PR yet to be merged in the Redwood Repo. We also reverted the primary part of our ESbuild implementation. So the tweet jived for me with our experience.)

The hype is all about speed and performance. But I think the reality is fairly simple:

- implementations become unintelligible spaghetti over time

- everyone has been burnt by having to manage this themselves

- poor implementations lead to diminishing performance

Turns out the existing tools are fairly robust. But to use them we spent an epic amount of time tuning and refactoring. It's complex. But it isn't broken. If you're willing to let good enough be good enough, set a benchmark, hit it, etch it in CI, and call it good.

Lesson Two — Let go but pin the packages

Note: We chose to have @redwood packages include all the dependencies and config and integration under the hood. Redwood apps have very little package overhead out of the box. This means we have to tame the dragon behind the scenes.

The "cool kids" seem to be moving to pnpm (and/or Yarn pnp). I've been burned many times by the monstrosity that is node_modules, but, to be fair, it's also fairly incredible what we're able to achieve. I don't think any one package manager is going to be the cure for what ails us. But I do think it's possible to MakeItWork regardless of what you choose:

- pin your packages because the dependency of your dependency is your enemy

- lean hard into CI; then lean harder

- stay current; give in and let Renovate update

Yarn 3 is a phenomenal tool. (Plus the core team is top-notch.) And we're not even using pnp yet. We do have a long way to go and yes, a faster install would be great and a smaller size on disk and etc. and etc. But, again, I think people have been burned by having to figure it out themselves and finding things unmaintainable in the long run.

---

I'm tired and likely not making much sense anymore. I might have lost the thread, but I think the overall point I was trying to get to is this --> zOMG I'm so tired of talking about build tools and package managers and chasing incremental performance gains and can't we just focus on features that move the needle and have fun again? Oh, and PIN your damn packages 'cause that "^" is nothing but trouble!

Thank you and good night.

:)
That's because the 220V AC is the integral (as in that math you learn in high-school) part of it. That 220V AC outlet actually has 630 V peak-to-peak voltage difference. That's why AC voltage is riskier than its DC counterpart, but that's because the numbers for AC are somehow misleading. Anyone who ever build an AC-to-DC converter knows that after you run your AC source through a rectifier bridge your get 315V at its exit. Then you use capacitors and maybe induction coils to "smooth" it, and that smoothing is what gets you your 220V DC source now.
Is this a solution to a yield problem? Making physically bigger dies is no problem. Wafers are much larger than the individual dies. If the dies are just being laid out flat, there's no density gain.

Multi-chip modules are nothing new. They've been used mostly when either there was a yield problem, or you wanted two different fab technologies. The latter is seen in some imagers and radars.
I'm a huge fan of the Dell WD19TB. Works great on my MacBook Pro M1 Pro (did I mention it's for Pros) and my gaming PC. The only issue I have with it is that the PC will only run video over Thunderbolt if I use YCbCr 4:2:2 with chroma subsampling - so instead I wired my PC monitor directly to the GPU and use the WD19TB for everything else (including video on my Mac laptop over HDMI).

Gets a solid 980Mbits symmetric on the ethernet port, 90W of power delivery, etc. It's a lifesaver swapping just the one cable between my PC and laptop.

Works in USB-C mode too.
Based on the "Compiler Overview" page, they do use LLVM for codegen: https://github.com/ValeLang/Vale/blob/master/compiler-overvi...
Ha, not many stories. He's a nice guy. I worked for him like 1999-2004? Through the 'Up' album, which I think is really underrated. Mostly Real World stuff though, as that has been his primary focus. Some cool parties at his studio, which is beautiful. I remember one when Martha from Martha and the Muffins had just finished producing an album and was moving on.. there was a party and bands.. and then PG got up on stage and took over the keyboard and started playing the beginning of "Echo Beach" and Martha was laughing in the crowd and saying "Nooo!", but you can't say No to PG, so she had to get up on stage and her and PG gave us an impromptu performance of "Echo Beach" which was awesome.

p.s. that video was awesome. Were those 8" floppies it used?
Youtube is showing me this -

Video unavailable: This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Film First Corp

Is the video available anywhere else?
Maybe the things you like about the web happened because of liberalism, not in spite of liberalism, as you seem to think. As you point out, that's true of Wikipedia, but it's also true of the commercialization and privatization of the internet, it's true of the EFF, it's true of the DMCA's safe-harbor provisions, and it's true of the Open Source Initiative. It was ultimately liberalism — Dan Bernstein's years-long court battle for due process — that struck down the US's prohibitions on open-source cryptography, too.

More generally, the internet itself ended up being built in the US, even though adequate industrial capacity for it existed in many countries: the USSR, the UK, France, Japan, and so on. There are a number of possible reasons for that, and the UK and France did in fact build nationwide teletext systems with some degree of interactivity, and the UK also built JANET; but very plausibly the US was the one who built the internet because such a liberal network design was too threatening to the other countries, and it happened to work better than designs like Tymnet (which was also built in the US) and Minitel.

Of course the internet was famously non-market-oriented before the com-priv era, not at all like the Digital Silk Road proposed by the Agorics guys (unrelated to the darknet market, of course).
Yes. It would be re installed at login
Flow typing is purely a static analysis process. The representation of the type doesn't change, just the range of possible values in a scope constrained by some runtime condition.

Some things that might have triggered warnings no longer need to, because if the runtime conditional evaluated to true there's no way the warning could take effect.

Consider this little bit of C code:

void foo(int x, unsigned y) {
if (x > y) {
printf("but it's bigger!?");
}
}

Due to the idiosyncrasies of C if you call foo(-1, 1) the test will promote x to an unsigned and the test will say x is bigger than y. There's a warning in most C compilers for it, because it's the sort of invisible bug that'll wreck your code.

What's annoying, though, is if you do this:

void foo(int x, unsigned y) {
if (x >= 0 && x > y) {
printf("but it's bigger!?");
}
}

And still get the warning. The compiler should be able to infer that the test x >= 0 means there's no fault path any more. Clang 13, at least, still warns.

A C compiler using flow typing would not issue a warning for the second implementation of foo. Neither x nor y change representations. The execution path through your compiler for producing byte code doesn't change. A few of your tree structures might pick up an extra annotation for the provable facts the warning generator can use to improve its output, that's all.
The future is going to be very short.

What this says to me is that there is no general-intelligence task that language models cannot scale to.
I did mean sum types. Thank you for the correction.
Oh thanks! I think this may make the code easier to understand.
I disagree, I've never heard of them so it doesn't give me that confidence. In fact it hurts the brand, it signals that this is not mature enough to be used by Fortune 500 and from the description of its underlying choises, it is a Rube Goldberg machine, one that pulls you in with perceived productivity hacks only to end up with navigating the dozen of libraries wired up in ways to get the developer to not think about them because the battle tested and mature paths are boring and lacking in novelty.

I've been down this path before, where claims of productivity gains to get you an MVP is true to a certain degree, only to have a giant web of wiring that creates implicit and explicit cognitive load, in my opinion, its like taking out a loan for an increasing cost of capital from rising interest and equity , where eventually, you can't hire, you can't debug, you can't reverse due to sunk cost since you've bet your horses on the shiny new trendy thing where you depend on other's opinions and their understanding of the problem which will offer no real benefits to your specific, specialized contexts. This is in fact the problem with many full stack or opinionated frameworks, it ignores the last mile problem.

As I grow older, I realize now the wisdom of choosing boring tech, when I was younger it was quite frustrating but now I see that PostgreSQL + Server side rendered language + Progressive interactivity is still strong for a reason and it is not Luddism or gerontocracy, it is stability from time tested collective experience of all minds. PHP is still going strong to this date.

At the end of the day, all tech stack, architectural decisions are economically constrained by time, capital and labor supply. An overly complex arrangement, especially one that focuses on novelty over what has worked and widely used, increases risks due to unknowns. Specific issues and challenges can be addressed in bite sizes, rarely do they require ripping out the established paths, instead of throwing in a dozen of new, complex dependency and opinion ridden web of tech that is highly novel & guarantees implicit volatile technical debt with false gains that require far more trouble than its worth.
Then why does a PhD include a vow of celibacy, years of silent seclusion to meditate, and the abandonment of greed and ego in favor of beliefs in a greater power?
How large long meandering meetings also jumped along with it.