skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The RAM usage is tied to the size of the reachable set, plus some slack filled with garbage that depends on how you tune the garbage collection thresholds.

By today's standards, the RAM usage isn't necessarily huge.

Here is the TXR Lisp compiler recompiling stdlib/compiler.tl -> stdlib/compiler.tlo, as seen in top:

PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
11488 kaz 20 0 17800 14804 2964 R 98.1 0.7 0:07.07 txr
^^^^^ ^^^^^

On the order of a bash session. It's a lot of RAM by 1982 standards at the institution level, and even 1992 standards at the consumer level, but today it means nothing.

You can easily see a Bash process a footprint on that order.

It could be reduced by tuning the garbage collector. One way to do that is to build for less memory use (useful for embedded). Here it is with txr rebuilt using #define CONFIG_SMALL_MEM 1 in config.h:

PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
12838 kaz 20 0 11964 9768 3140 R 99.0 0.5 0:10.39 txr

Bash footprints for comparison:

$ ps aux | head -1 ; ps aux | grep bash
USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
kaz 1093 0.0 0.1 9288 2132 pts/2 Ss+ May15 0:01 -bash
kaz 2833 0.0 0.0 8904 1992 pts/0 Ss May15 0:00 -bash
kaz 3509 0.0 0.2 10532 4988 pts/1 Ss+ May15 0:28 -bash
kaz 7898 0.0 0.1 8968 2212 pts/3 Ss+ May20 0:00 -bash

Lists are used for everything: the compiler produces a list-based assembly code which is used from then through assembly. There is an optimizer which divides it into basic blocks, which are objects put into a graph, but the instructions still being lists. The peephole pattern matching is done on lists. The compiler does not bother using destructive append (nconc) for stitching together fragments of code; just straight garbage-generating appends. Same with most of the other rewriting that happens later.

In a computer in 1960, your compiler would be capped to the physical memory available. That would be the RAM use. The garbage collector would have to be called whenever the memory is exhausted, or else the show would stop. A successful compilation would demonstrate that the compiler needed no more memory than what the machine has. The closer its actual usage would be to the available memory, the longer it would take, due to the frequent garbage collections required to stay afloat.

I'd say that given people's expectations today, shaped by experiences with everyday software, they likely greatly overestimate how much RAM you need for Lisp compiling.
QQQ is down 23% ytd so they underperformed the Nasdaq 100 by 2000 bps. that is objectively “a lot” especially for a mega cap.
Why is this a webpage? It would be a little more useful as a local program that actually just runs the command for you instead of having to copy-paste everything to your terminal.
Looking for a Mac version too :)
There are at least three within a short walk of my apartment.
I feel that social networks are best done in an descentralized way: Like IRC, and Usenet on its own time. There should be no "winner" or local entity that tries to milk profits out of it.

Because exactly as you said: Facebook "won" the social network game several years ago: Everybody was in there. From there the only thing it could do to try to milk more profits was to bring it down.

Instead, we've got IRC or Usenet that, years and years after their "peak", they are still going well and good. Gone are the "ethernal septembers" and most of spam. And the protocol and networks (that matter for the people using it) are still in there.
I've thought about this a lot. I think that overall, malloc/free/new/delete are already so hard to use that if you added more stuff, it would create too much cognitive load for the programmer. The result would be that the hints the programmer gave you would be more wrong than the malloc's best guess.

I think this is a generally applicable lesson. Programmers overestimate their ability to statically optimize the dynamic behavior of their code, especially relative to a runtime that can access and act on dynamic state.

This comes up in the database world as application developers desiring to "pin" certain tables in memory. Experience has shown this to be an anti-feature: As the schema and workload of a database system evolves, these pinning decisions can become obsolete, starving more relevant tables of buffer space. Dynamic decisions, even made by simple heuristics like LRU, are an empirically winning strategy.

The failure of Itanium/EPIC and the "sufficiently smart compiler" to beat traditional OoO execution is another example from a different computing domain.
> I think that desktop browser users expect that their tabs generally won't get reloaded

But they do get reloaded. There's absolutely no guarantee provided, and browser tabs will get swapped out of memory as necessary (eg opening lots of new tabs or apps).

This is easily solvable though: let me pin tabs that I really need to persist.
> It was designed for scalability and availability more than anything.

yet its really not great at the first, and I'm strongly suspicious about the latter claim. Its very simple to make boneheaded decisions about networking that makes thing fragile.

In terms of scale, you have a limit of 5k nodes. given how fucking chatty it is, it costs a lot to run loads of nodes.
Yeah I can, the The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia, and Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta collectively and individually do not have the power to imprison people. There is no determination they can make under the law that results in people or corporations going to jail.
> > When they're not grid backed, which is what we're discussing here
>
> Are we? Or is it just your deliberate narrowing of the topic for convenience?

This attempt at a table turning shows that you really have no understanding of the mechanics of this discussion.

Yes, that is exactly what people excluding you are discussing.

I have no interest in engaging with you, because you've made clear that you have no understanding of the material.
But that's like not native and so unhip. I'm convinced the whole push to get away from mobile web to native app is solely for the personal data hovering for the vast majority of apps.

For example, a friend just downloaded the Wayfair app. Why is that necessary? She saved a couple of items, and now the app relentlessly notifies her about things even with notfications off. Doesn't happen with a mobile website.
If you’ve not seen it you might enjoy https://youtu.be/d2lJUOv0hLA
> TV sets are not a given anymore

Everyone I know has at least one TV. You can buy a 58" TV at Walmart for $298. That's less expensive than an Xbox or PS console.
Likely an absence of an incentive to investigate alternatives along with the fact that an infinite number of fixed point combinators exist in addition to social capital/inertia. One of the two people who is regarded as originating combinators even though the K combinator is Peirce's Law (1885) and the S combinator is Hypothetical Syllogism published the first fixed point combinator as the Y combinator (Curry 1930) and by association has been promoted as "the" fixed point operator (example). Also, Ω is a Greek (Unicode) and not a standard Latin (ASCII) character. The X combinator is similar to Ω in that they are the shorter basis and fixed point definitions respectively at a cost of a small number of additional steps in some proof applications.
Congratulations! I've seen some Factorio and Satisfactory players' videos about this game. Looks really impressive for such a small team.
That explains why things have been a bit ... slow ... today.

Good luck with the public beta! Love Kagi.
It is an empire built on old people impulse shopping.
You really don’t know what weight is the right weight to balance time and gripped size. Multiplying them together sidesteps the whole issue and puts time and size on par with each other regardless of the individual unit scaling.

The whole point of benchmarks is to protect against accidental bias in your calculations. Adding them seems totally against my intuition. If you did want to give time more weight then I would raise it to some power. Example: geometric mean of (time x time x source size) would give time much more importance in an arguably more principled way.
The README says it uses GitHub protected branches, so I'm not sure if it does get around the paywall. That would be great though!
That paper is only about the reasoning behind taking the geometric mean, it doesn't have anything to say on the "time + gzipped source code size in bytes" part.
Big discussion earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31581719
I think that the stock market's rise since the 90s has been a very particular kind of inflation. It's a classic case of benchmark hacking.

At some point, journalists and media decided that the stock market indices are a good indicator of the economy. It's convenient. They don't have to actually investigate anything to see how the economy is doing - they just look at one number.

That's been the economy's benchmark for decades. I think that around the 90s, regulators started to bias their behavior based on this observation. These are people who tend to lose their jobs when the economy crashes and fails to swiftly recover. Nevermind that the stock market crashing doesn't necessarily mean that the economy crashed. But I think they realized that if they make choices that result in the stockmarket going up, then they get to keep their jobs (or they even get praised for being oh so smart).

So. We have a kind of inflation. It's really a case where the benchmark that is being reported as "the status of the economy" is being actively hacked by regulators. Given any opportunity to intervene, they will carefully finetune the intervention with the singular purpose of making the benchmark look good.

So. We have been getting poorer since the 90s while the stockmarket has been skyrocketing in a historically unprecendented way. These are two sides of the same coin, and that coin is that the purpose of modern monetary and fiscal policy in democratic countries is to elevate the stockmarket even if it makes everything else go to shit. They do this because they know that then, journalists will report that the govt is doing a Great Job and the regulators get to keep their jobs.
I mean, I'd still call it a Canadian institution, but it's not good.

> Since then I’ve travelled a fair bit in US cities and a little in Canada and the only real difference I can see is that Canada has a Tim Hortons on the corner.

Depends where you go. There's probably more of a different cultural feel in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. e.g. Café Olimpico is a Montreal institution that feels quintessentially Montreal. (And the US has places with very different cultural feels to each other - of places I've visited, Honolulu isn't very similar to Billings - but I'm less familiar with the US than Canada.)
It would be very interesting to see that map for the rest of the world.
Awesome! It's so cool seeing you post this here, because I've been excited about this game since I learned about it a few days ago. I hope it's successful!

As a question, what games inspired this one? How many hours have you put into factorio?
I think I once read a comment on here that the command-line parsing logic of ffmpeg is Turing-complete. It's probably telling that I can't remember if that was meant as a joke or to be taken seriously. And I say this with nothing but admiration for the tool.
Hawkish Bank of Canada announcement fuels rate hike expectations
Sure, and you should get some money for your tech in that cellphone chip. But that doesn't mean you should be able to extort some % of a car just because it's got the chip in it.
Slab | Software Engineer | REMOTE (Worldwide) | Full-time

At Slab (https://slab.com), we believe that knowledge is the foundation of any organization's success. When a team's collective knowledge is more accessible, that team's potential is limitless.

Our product helps teams easily create, organize, and discover knowledge across the entire company, from non-technical to tech-savvy. Each day, thousands of customers rely on Slab across their entire workforces, including Asana, Benchling, and Fivetran.

You'd be joining a team of thoughtful and experienced engineers, distributed worldwide across North America, Europe, and Asia.

Stack: React, GraphQL, Elixir [1], Phoenix, Kubernetes

Apply here for Software Engineer role: https://jobs.lever.co/slab/1c6fae7c-980e-4875-be9f-76ae1ebfa...

[1]: Why we use Elixir: https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2020/11/17/real-time-collaborat...
What is "dedicated"?

Consider a great engineer, one that can innovate, be a leader, inspire others. If he one day realises that he is not the best he can be while he spends 2 hours commuting every day, and therefore moves to another company where he does not have face obstacle and can focus more of his energy at the problem at hand, does it make him less "dedicated"? To whom?

I think you are confusing dedication with something else.
Merged! Thanks for the addition, looks like an interesting talk with some good real-world lessons.
Thank you!

Trucks not needing roads was actually our "feature". You just build things and logistics network will figure things out. This goes hand-in-hand with the free-form mining (also our big feature), since that would be impossible to do with roads.

However, we do hear many people wanting roads, especially later on, it is on our list of potential additions.

Vehicles having no collisions is a technical limitation. Path-finding on dynamic terrain on a large grid, with constraints on vehicle size (small trucks fit under some buildings, large excavators wont) is just too hard to solve with vehicle avoidance. Even with local avoidance vehicles would get stuck too much. One-way roads are probably the answer. Maybe some best-effort local avoidance could be done to minimize it.

PS: I have rewritten the path-finding code 3 times. It's quite complex...
I think you can actually.

In Pennsylvania for example, https://pennsylvania.staterecords.org/licenseplate

There’s a form to fill out. Looking at the instructions it’s E or F, so in theory if you can fulfill one of the reasons in F, I suppose you don’t need the owners information.

Outside of the US, you can also request similar information - Ontario for example.

http://www.ontario.ca/page/uncertified-vehicle-record
Everybody realizes it's wrong. The issue is not a lack of understanding. The issue is the lack of an alternative.

People will not pay a penny for the vast majority of the internet, whether they be social networks or just plain websites. They won't donate either or do "micro transactions", not at the scale in which ads currently deliver revenue.

So for the vast majority of the internet, no ads = no money. And it ends right there, hobbyist bloggers aside.
Starlink satellites are dependent on Hall-effect thrusters to maintain orbit, so the constellation will quickly burn up if Star link fails.
Aggregation is also optimised quite a bit via SIMD and map-reduce. They are as fast as the “where” predicates. Multiple field keyed aggregation is not as optimal yet. I would also suggest our demo site (free and fully open) to see how queries that you use work.

Cleanup is semi manual for now. Time partitions can be removed or detached via SQL. We’re working on automating that.
so if you painted a picture today that had sentimental value to you, so you would never sell it, but someone offered you 1 billion dollars for it (therefore making your net worth instantly 1 billion) would you suck just because you wouldn't sell your picture and give away the money?

Because that's not too far off from the vast majority of billionaires who simply can't/won't liquidate their potential net worth because it would have negative consequences.
It's not that I'm not understanding that they aren't profitable. I'm well aware that they aren't profitable. I think Uber is a terrible business. That doesn't make them a Ponzi scheme. A ponzi scheme is defined by the Revenue model, not by profitability. We don't call all unprofitable businesses ponzi schemes because they are unrelated concepts.
If you stare at this text without blinking while rapidly rocking back and forth in your chair, you actually start seeing Zuckerberg's face.
Researchers Find Missing Link Between the Brain and Immune System (2015)
Especially since his results confirm most of what the original thread claimed. A couple of the inputs did not reliably replicate, but "for the most part, they're not true" seems straightforwardly false. He even seems to deliberately ignore this sometimes, such as when he says "I don't see any bugs" when there is very obviously a bug in the beak of all but two or three of the birds.
She’ll rematerialize running for the next available CA Senate seat.
Beancounters gonna bean count. Our company feels that contributing $20/month for a mandatory smartphone plan is generous. They pretty much laughed when people wanted to be comped for Internet, or be able to take their work chairs home during COVID.
That framing is worse because it hides an assumed conclusion, i.e. that there are rules of composition.
This is somewhat fair.

I guess my speculation stems from a lack of substance to poke holes in?

Even going line by line beginning with the first real paragraph we find they launch into a classic straw man of rejecting the "industry claims that crypto-assets an innovative technology that is unreservedly good". Nobody with a whiff of tech acumen in crypto thinks or says this. Additionally, anyone not thoroughly anarcho-Libertarian also gets the need for guardrails to squash scams.

A scattershot of the other tangible claims in the paper feel pretty similar.

"Append-only digital ledgers are not a new innovation. They have been known and used since 1980 for rather limited functions." <- true, but the also can be said for the evolution of AI models and we see where we're finally at with those today.

"Blockchain technology cannot, and will not, have transaction reversal mechanisms because they are antithetical to its base design." <- quasi true depending on the chain, but also we can approximate reversibility with clever escrow-like transactions (I'm actually building this full disclosure)

"Financial technologies that serve the public must always have mechanisms for fraud mitigation and allow a human-in-the-loop to reverse transactions; blockchain permits neither." <- unequivocally stating blockchain tech can't mitigate fraud in ANY way is silly and reductionist. Deciding human-in-the-loop reversibility is the pinnacle of fraud mitigation is also pretty wild considered how much effort and resources developers just on HN put into removing humans from their process execution loops.

"Finally, blockchain technologies facilitate few, if any, real-economy uses." <- partially true in the present tense (similar to how everything has to be adopted before it reaches mass adoption), but glaringly narrow minded if considering potential uses. Anywhere there is asymmetric trust and power between transacting parties one can imagine the possibility of an application! Not to say its necessarily the best use case, but the lack of effort of consideration seems intentional.

There's more, but I hope this provides some context to my initial post
I'm not a fan of books like that because it doesn't teach you real-world usage. You can't be thrown into a standard clojure project repo after reading that book.
i meant, going forward from here.

in the past, we had great returns due to increasing population, plus productivity increases and in large part due to dividends. all three of those are severly decreased going forward for the next 100 years.
I know the "best" way to stop this kind of privacy violation is good consumer protection and privacy laws, but I wonder if we couldn't also regulate the downstream market. I.e. make the sale and resale of personal data, as Cd00d is describing, illegal. It seems pretty proven that the humans doing that buying and selling aren't going to stop doing it out of civic responsibility or moral disgust
I have zero faith in FB being able to deliver on the metaverse and more importantly, on hardware. They bought their way into VR and we still don't know if they will screw it up just as badly as they have every other hardware product they've attempted.

Google is king of web, iffy on software, and decent on hardware (when they commit).

Apple is king of hardware/software and sucks on web (it's really embarrassing at this point, I want to pull my hair out when I use almost any of their web-based tools, consumer or developer focused)

FB is decent on social for now but they haven't innovated in forever, they just buy up things like IG/WhatsApp/Oculus , I'm not convinced they are capable of producing anything interesting internally.

Maybe my comment will age badly but I'm not at all worried about FB "owning" the metaverse or anything like that, they have a terrible track record.
what is Facebook Mobile and how was it disruptive?
>I take it you weren’t alive in the 1980s?

Depends on which side of the life begins at conception/birth debate you're on ;)

I took your suggestion as suggesting the fed should bump the rate up to nearly 10% in one go, with no warning, which isn't what they did back then.

I also think the artificially induced recession wasn't even necessary. It's more likely that Regulation Q reform is what actually ended that inflationary period.
Right, just like the Linux kernel and OpenSSL.
 Just because something is free doesn't _automatically_ mean you are the product. That said, I agree in this case - lots of free scammy apps are free because they make more money that way than selling the app.
Depending upon the nature of the artifacts that's not necessarily the worst abstraction for modeling deployments (still think that deployments are the big elephant in the room that k8s doesn't solve either when it really needs to be better standardized as a profession IMO but that's another topic). ArgoCD arguably makes this work more intuitively and it's one of the most popular K8S ecosystem components today.
so long as we're dogpiling Slack, let me add in my complaint: You can't mute Slackbot, and Slackbot sends a LOT of dumb and pointless messages about channel management. At work they're constantly adding thousands of people to "watch party" or other random channels, then archiving those channels later on, and I keep getting notifications from Slackbot about them.

I was trying to keep Slack notifications unmuted in case my manager needs something from me, but I was just getting too much useless crap from Slackbot. Finally I had to mute it completely and tell him to call my cell if anything comes up
You might want to put your contact details in your profile
Hey, I think it is an interesting concept and open to to ideas. Thanks for your ideas, my engineering brain would just love a picture of the physics
Seems like rival shopping is on the margin and recouping the location service tracking costs feels unlikely or at least untraceable in terms of tying it back to an ROI.
Trying to make my point or just confused. Not really sure how to read that.
The future of FB/Meta is WhatsApp.
> If some of the many who have reimplemented the same thing on a new platform instead set out to create something new, maybe something new would appear on the scene.

They do, and novelties do appear. But then they usually fail to gain traction because they require users to migrate to them. Hence, interoperability wins in the long run.
Amazon is also the most advanced logistics company on the planet. Literally off the charts, to the point that benchmarks do not even include them due to the huge gap from the competition.
I never had a phone number for anyone I chatted with on IRC. Same with ICQ.