skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Can you mark a living at esports if you’re not one of the best you’re doing well?
Esports is vague. But for Dota 2 and LoL you can make a living while being relatively unknown in the space. A good living actually, salaries are insane for those 2 esports.

>You have to win to earn money in esports right?
You have a salary, then if you win in Dota 2's case you take the whole prize money, in some other games you take some of it.

>It seems like the difference in professional athletics is you’ve got a somewhat predictable income at some point.
The info in the article seem to be outdated, any serious esports today give you a stable income. The salaries are actually competitive, team today have big sponsors, and the sponsors pay most of the players' salary, so it gets super competitive between teams to get certain players.

Before this was common, you've seem all-star teams more often, nowadays players have to balance between being in a team that has a shot of taking the world championship and being in the team that pay the most.

Must be noted that one of the biggest drivers of salaries being really high in esports is betting websites as sponsors.
I was curious when I read the name in that Tweet too. It's cryptic marketing for crypto people, so, well done.

Decentralized trust is an interesting concept because at least we know that so far trustless systems have been extremely bottlenecked and inefficient.

Still, I'll hold judgement until there is a repo I can fork. If it's anywhere close to NFTs that's a no for me. High likelihood since it's coming from the same crowd.
> Periodically a few days after a PR has been merged I'll have a discussion with someone and realize some context was never captured, so I'll just add it at the bottom of the closed+merged PR for posterity.
A 2D printer made of 600 strands of DNA that put themselves together
Micro.blog works in a way somewhat similar to that. A very Twitter-like timeline is effectively centralized, but behind the scenes everything is built on open standards like Atom, webmentions, etc., and your "account" is actually just your own blog -- although that blog can be hosted (for $5/month) on Micro.blog itself. It has a web interface a lot like Twitter's, a first-party client and several third-party clients, and in most respects just a much nicer user experience than Mastodon.

On the flip side, Micro.blog has a very different culture than Mastodon seems to[1], makes some very opinionated choices that many people might not agree with (e.g., there's not only nothing like retweets, but likes and even followers aren't public information), and of course, the easiest way to use it costs money.

[1]: Yes, I know there are lots of instances with different cultures, but there really is a kind of left-wing anarchist vibe across a lot of Mastodon; it's hard to explain if you haven't experienced it. Micro.blog comes across as generally more gentle, very conversational, and more Gen-X than millennial, if that makes any sense. (If it doesn't, sorry. Again, hard to explain if you haven't experienced it.)
I've sometimes wondered if these anti maths things, could partly be psyops by a foreign nation state that wants to long term damage STEM in the US.

I really don't think it is. And if it was, it'd be only partly, since apparently lots of this is coming from people inside the US.

But what if there're foreign state controlled FB groups that try to manipulate people in the US, spreading these anti maths ideas? I'd be surprised but not super surprised.

Still, if you were Putin or Xi, why would you not want to damage STEM in the US? And even if you didn't start these ideas in the first place, why not try to amplify them, once they already exist
He wasn't let off. They knew they could not convict him.

Now they have things sewed up better. Pliant judges, extortion, secret charges, secret "evidence", secret "testimony".
One of the major problems is that most of the high school teachers are themselves not very familiar with math, and are more educated in the very different problem of corralling children.

To be fair to your friend, 90 years ago they probably could've had a productive career in applied math as an expert computer. There was a point when calc tricks could get you a PhD, but those days are gone.
I've also never met or seen a murderer in person that doesn't mean they don't exist.

Anyway some of the shops that use Bolt are here: https://www.bolt.com/shop

And the reason that companies like these end up being valued so high is that like Stripe once you integrate them into your backend you don't pull them out unless something is 10x better.
I would assume at googles scale that this has to be violated pretty often, how could you possibly police this well?
Interesting that even though GPT-J is supposedly English model, it somehow generated valid Russian text for the prompt:

>>>Привет,<<< друзья.
Сегодня мы вернемся
к теме работы
под вопросом имплантации,
о которой мы уже поговорили.
Она неизменно вызывает
специальное внимание
мусульманских людей.
Да, эта тема вызыв
Even if you do have infinitesimals, no reasonable definition of 0.99 repeating is anything except 1.0:

Suppose you have a number space with

a) a sequence of approximations 0.9, 0.99, ... (not necessarily indexed by the naturals, just some infinite set that gets bigger)

b) 1.0

c) enough "niceties" like (a-b)!=0 for a!=b, addition existing, yada yada

Suppose that some "solution" exists in that number space for your favorite way of writing 0.99 repeating. One reasonable thing to expect from such a solution is that your sequence of approximations actually get closer to (or eventually equal) it.

That one constraint (that your better approximations are actually better approximations) forces any possible solution to be exactly equal to 1.0.

That doesn't necessarily mean the solution is 1.0, just that if it isn't (and is something infinitesimally different) then one of the assumptions must have been violated. Unfortunately, most of the assumptions were simply describing the problem, so the only real possibilities for failure (if we assume some solution exists) are the foundations of math being fundamentally flawed (it might happen, but that doesn't seem plausible here), or the number space we're considering being considerably less "nice" than the reals (i.e., not nice enough for most of modern physics and whatnot).

You could of course instead say that it's dumb that we can define 0.99 recurring to actually equal something, but that's just quibbling over the names and representations that we're' giving to things -- sequences of better approximations exist, 1.0 exists, and there exists some partial function turning sequences of approximations into their "limits", and calling this particular instance something other than 0.99 recurring doesn't really get rid of the fundamental idea.

All of that aside, you can of course get infinitesimal approximations in other spaces (like the hyperreals), and those infinitesimal approximations are better than any real approximations, but the _actual definition_ of 0.99 repeating isn't equal to any of those approximations -- they just progressively get closer to 1.0.
Seems reasonable, the restriction on installing AGPL stuff on your devices seems odd (how would that influence publicly deployed services?) but it mentions there's an approval process which makes it possible, so... Good enough?
I can't think of an ancient Middle Eastern culture with 4 seasons. Hittites had 3, various Mesopotamian cultures had 2. It really only made sense in Europe to divide into 4.
I understand that AGPL is an attempt to combat software-as-a-service otherwise hiding open source behind a network interface (and yes I know, the FSF's preference against that term).

It's still rather heavy-handed to a point that I would even avoid using AGPL software even for myself. It goes far beyond what the standard GPL demands and might even violate the freedoms to run a program as I wish, and to redistribute the software as I wish.

The standard GPL already puts "restrictions" on the latter, but at least said restrictions only apply if I choose to distribute binaries. In the case of SaaS, I am more comfortable with running a service and making the choice to distribute my source or not. Personally, I probably would publish substantial changes to software regardless, but if the only thing I do is change a line of CSS, I also don't think it's right to force me to have to set up infrastructure to publish my modified source.
This is, at least, an improvement compared to orgs which just use the code anyway in violation of its license.
Everyone is still speculating about this, but most have been leaning toward the no-cost option being a Gmail address (https://9to5google.com/2022/01/27/g-suite-legacy-transfer-gm...). The wording on the Google support page mentioning the no-cost option is still vague enough to have me doubting this as well.

If the no-cost option isn't Gmail, then there's the option of obtaining new Gmail accounts and transferring the data to them manually. Then the ImprovMX option should work.
Ah I see, then it depends if the other shareholder think the offer is fair or not
"This is triggered if the product or service can be accessed over a remote network interface, so it does not even require that the product or service is actually distributed."

Huh? Does that mean that if you do an HTTP request to an AGPL server, your client code must be AGPL compliant? That does not make sense...
These are good points. Just to clarify, I can't speak for semantic release, but the github-changelog-generator I'm talking about will only add PRs (and issues if you want) to the changelog, not commits (so no non-standard commit message format needed). So you can put anything worth mentioning in a changelog into a PR, and it distinguishes between bug fix vs feature based on the tags added to the PR.
If you are aware that BJP wasn't the first party, and that Congress party actually banned cow slaughter in UP, Bihar, etc. long before BJP was born,
then how can you say:

With religion motivated cow protection being one significant platform on which the ruling party ran and won the elections, this has changed dramatically.

You can't really say BJP changed things "dramatically", if Congress was busy doing it 30 years before BJP was born!
It’s like a woke cycle. I’m not sure it’s really about the words, but in some ways, the new people look at the terrible attitudes of the previous people (easy to count on that) and feel the need to disavow it by creating a linguistic line in the sand.. some jump over it, but the others get the sharp end of the stick, culturally speaking.

The advocacy and social signaling feels more imperative than the ancillary social improvements that may be happening either way. It also feels generationally alienating, while some of the “I see things with new eyes” part can happen even among those who don’t even know the words have changed.
Or horizontal autoscaling based on demand.
I was rejected by MIT, Hahvahd, and Stanford :-)

The calculus requirement was not listed as an admissions requirement. The other students were astonished that I didn't simply assume it was required.

Fortunately, physics prof Ricardo Gomez invited me to his office for some impromptu calculus tutoring, which saved my bacon. I owe him.
This is a nice piece on "computer archeology". Given the academic nature of language design (I don't want to say "functional programing" or "LISP" here), it is obvious why it was written in the form of a scientific paper. If this was about the language C, I guess this would have been a blog post!

Note how ArXiV can be used for blogging: This paper is not peer reviewed but "only" uploaded to ArXiV. The site has some credibility barrieres which require invitation, but otherwise anybody can upload. I find this nice, but you should keep in mind this is just some academic variant of blogger.com ;-)
Very well written , thanks! And what I don’t get is how even in 2022 decision makers can take a decision that results in killing of innocent lives somewhere. When there is even the slightest chance of dialogue why don’t they seize it?
Not directly addressing this, but perhaps the point is not to create a model to address every known limitations. No models are perfect. Points are made based on a model, and a limitation/assumption is pointed out. You need to judge given the assumption/limitation if the message made still some-what make sense.

I mean something X being highest right now is a pretty clear statement, it is either true or false, if X is well defined. But then your problem is you want to have Z instead, which hopefully is accounted for every other effect except for the factor you want to measure, such as inflation, GDP, etc. But the more you add, you either makes your Z definition sensitive to these other factors you’re not interested in (such as a peak comes from the denominator, not the numerator), or we really admit we can’t calculate Z for sure, and is now a statistical model (any kind of smoothing including the MA you mentioned is to admit we don’t know the true state but can only observe it with noise.) Now the statement of “Z is highest now” is no longer a true or false statement, but a probabilistic one.

Certainly then P(Z is highest) = 60% or so wouldn’t make much of a headline and can be confusing.

So my point was rather than trying to create a perfect model (which you can’t, and what you learn from it won’t be clear as well), sometimes just deal with the statement and methodology and judge if it is a clickbait or has some merit of truth there.
More conspiracy theories from Lunduke. These aren't technically wrong, but they're not right either.
> Yeah I find the way he deals with "China, India and Russia" pretty irksome and borderline racist as someone who lives on the other side of the world.

The term you're looking for is "cultural racism" (or sometimes "neo-racism" or "modern racism"). As an aside, I dislike all those variants, and would prefer something like "culturism" or the perfectly applicable terms " nationalism, "xenophobia", and "mixophobia" (or, to mention a common highly specific form, "islamophobia").

On the other hand, "cultural racism" seems like an appropriate term when a highly diverse (nationally, linguistically, ethnically, culturally, etc.) group such as "Muslims" gets racialized into a prejudicial stereotype.

Anyway, it is basically essentialism applied to culture instead of race: the ideas and arguments of both are deeply tangled, with cultural arguments often used as proxies for racial ones where the latter would be rejected out of hand. For example you see it pop up in demands that immigrants assimilate, or claims that immigrants don't (or won't) assimilate used as justification for discrimination. It can also appear as a mixophobic demand for cultural segregation. Or, as here, cultural differences apparently used as a veiled form of nationalism.
Except that Bolt has no network effects.

It's literally you drop it in to your website and it improves your checkout experience.

And I imagine they acquire customers by ringing them up and showing them improved conversion stats.
The clients still talk to the official servers which run matchmaking and group up players together. The difference is whether the matchmaking servers tell all the players to connect to a dedicated gameserver or to connect to one of the players.
What do you imagine Snowden is supposed to do? He has exactly zero control over any single detail of any of it. He is under the thumb of a murderous thug. Not speaking up says more than he ever could aloud.
I want someone to make that search engine!
Is there any uptake in AGPL use? Besides perhaps the initial spike near AGPL creation, any popular opensource library using AGPL since?
I assume they do license scanning at the very least.
Oh, gosh.. no

The commit messages are meant to be read by humans
When I was at Apple they were very cautious about this too. It wasn't banned but it was definitely something you had to get approval for.
AGPL is basically a clickwrap EULA instead of a distribution license, it also arguably violates freedom 0 of the free software definition.
The whole point of generational GC is that that your pause times don't grow with the old objects. I think concurrent sweep makes a lot of sense (it's basically free), but concurrent mark has major performance compromises. It's not just the longer barrier, it also adds an extra indirection to all your memory accesses. Full concurrent may be right for some use cases (where you *need* very low pause times), but it comes at a considerable cost.
Safari on ios too. I assume it is a bug because it would be a very counterproductive feature to use when presenting a project. As others have said: good idea, but with no release the risk of forgetting about it is high. I have starred many github projects but only gone back to see progress on few of them.
I tested this model out with Hungarian. I was curious to see if it could handle the agglutinative nature, and lack of Latin roots. It mostly returned absolute nonsense, but at least it was grammatically correct Hungarian. It also properly answered the capital city of Hungary. I entered a prompt about being a Hungarian speaking computer with something to say, and it returned a passive aggressive response telling me that it was the best, and I'm definitely not and that I fucked up. And then it started ranting about selling my family because women no longer need men, and then it switched to Chinese and started negotiating a price for my family. Excellent Black Mirror content.
we're not Google scale, but this works very well with precommit hooks and automatic CI checks that inspect dependencies for know vulnerabilities and incompatible licenses (you know, sonarqube and the likes).

I would assume this is pretty well policed for all existing projects and by default for all new projects.
You have to find a host that accepts content for all other nodes you care about. TheFoss server probably isn't carrying anthing adult. So you do need to host your own
You are only allowed to use imports that are in the monorepo, and each time a library is added to the monorepo, the license is checked.
As an experienced RHEL admin, a few years ago I probably would have said this is very bad advice in any professional context, and you should spend the time to learn it because it will save you one day.

Now, I think my advice would be: Put everything in a container, and learn how to run Docker or Podman (or k8s) in a secure way (ie no root containers, be very careful with volume mounts, etc). Yes, they aren’t as mature as SELinux, but containers aim to provide many of the same benefits that SELinux does (and even more) except in a way that’s much easier to manage. Even better is that these container runtimes often come with SELinux and AppArmor policies out of the box on good Linux distros.
Short version: Square (now known as Block) has a brand called TBD54566975, which has developed a protocol for "liquidity and asset exchange" called tbDEX. The number 54566975 is a Unix timestamp equivalent to Friday, September 24, 1971 10:29:35, which was the end of a meeting between US President Richard Nixon and Federal Reserve Chair Arthur Burns where they effectively decided to take the US dollar off of the gold standard. This ended the Bretton Woods system[1] where various Western countries pegged their currencies to the US dollar, replacing it with a system of free-floating exchange rates. (The actual history is of course somewhat more complicated.) Goldbugs and (apparently now) a lot of crypto enthusiasts consider this to be some kind of mortal sin against the concept of money, and have been telling each other that the dollar is going to collapse any year now every since.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system
As far as I understand it, Snowden wasn't trying to leak any program in particular, he just copied as much material as he could.
Because it's not a payment processor.

It's instead a polished, hosted UI component that integrates with payment processors.

And the valuation is because they have a lot of customers and they clearly make a lot of money.
68EK?
This looks quite cool. But the authors could really use some help with marketing. "Advanced hot reloading" sounds like nothing I'd never be interested in at all. Maybe that's standard jargon for this tech? Never heard it before personally, and I code a lot. My advice: come up with a better way to describe it that doesn't require explaining how it's useful, and a lot more people will try it.
User tip, don't close a Finder window with ^W. At least if that maps to closing the browser window on your system. :-)

Seriously, it warms this old programmer's heart to see the beautiful old-time Macintosh user interface. That was good stuff.
>They don't front-run orders. They still give best execution but they receive a small fee from market makers for sending orders their way.

I really have most serious doubts about the idea that you can simultaneously get paid for order flow and deliver on your best execution obligations - the payment for order flow literally comes out of missed price improvement opportunities for the customer. FINRA seems to feel the same way and fired a warning shot over the bows last year: https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/21-23
I'd guess it's for making really sure that AGPL code doesn't end up in a published service by accident.
Since it's in the news today... Mastodon.
Half of Bolt's thing is "our existing network of customers will be able to buy stuff on your site easier". They can only build a network of customers by having a network of merchants dumping customers into their system.

The article in qusetion literally includes the line:

> Because Bolt’s business relies on having a large network of consumers
Basically the article is just lazy evaluation like in Haskell working with infinite lists. Numbers like Pi, e, sqrt(2) are the programs that generate them. However we use syntactic sugar, or just a compact notation, to represent that program or algorithm. It’s useful to be able to glue all these calculations together, a bit like lazy evaluation, or working with generators. Some programs we have some guarantee, we can probe to arbitrary depths and will have a consistent result, eg Pi. However in general for two random real numbers it’s undecidable if they are even equivalent.
You mean, mostly hidden behind a browser config flags (rightly) defining it as still experimental. It's very new!
What infrastructure are you talking about? You could literally just publish the source tarball from upstream and a .patch file.

Alternatively, you could put in on github/gitlab for free.

This is a particularly low bar, given that you'll need a server to serve the app anyway.
What if you use some kind of Remote Desktop to access your own device? Then you'd violate the AGPL.