skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nonsense. There are billions of Android devices sold and customers don't seem too bothered by its fragmentation. They continue to buy Android devices en mass.

So it seems fragmentation has many problems but that alone won't prevent people from using a device. I think the author believes that a critical mass of Linux desktop users will create enough interest in polish and solving problems for end users, so therefore believes if everybody was using the same desktop there would be more polish (or something).

I would counter that the desktops have plenty of polish. He says he loves the Linux Desktop and doesn't offer much criticism besides there's too much choice. Nah, they're already great and we don't need to abandon great desktops.

Instead, I believe other factors are at play. Familiarity, inertia and monopolistic competition to name a few. Those are powerful factors and much more so than abstract fragmentation.
This thinking implies nothing is worth doing unless it has a clearly articulable direct business value whereas a lot of technical debt simply doesn't. When the only people affected by a problem are people who have already spent their money or people who have no autonomy it's unlikely the decision makers will decide to investigate and fix it. If you're lucky you can convince decision makers that there is an impact to hiring or efficiency but in my experience these arguments are extremely challenging to make in the face of other stuff that decision makers feel directly impact business, and for good reason. I'd say this is a big reason autonomy is crucial when it comes to cultivating a curious team because without autonomy you are limited to things that can achieve consensus in an environment where people inherently have different interests to attend to.

I feel like the "20% time" paradigm where one day out of the week is left up to the developer to schedule (within reason) is the right way to balance the conflicts of interest and still leave room for people to be curious.
> but the owner's refusal to allow users to move that taskbar to the bottom of the screen

You're going to need to explain that one.
I the US that inaction is called "thoughts & prayers". Somehow that absolves politicians etc from actually having to do anything constructive.
That's really interesting. Let me know if you'd want to talk to me or Michael sometime about it. With the models we run currently, you'd really have to have a GPU to run locally and get a lot of utility. I'm curious if you have some thoughts on how to run these large language models on edge devices.

I'm wilson@ our website (trying to avoid too much spam from bots).
Yes, but I'm not sure what the current percentage is or how fast that change is happening.
I think it's fine as long as you make sure the company in question is one of the many that post fake job openings. Then it's simply justice.
Don't know about Deluge but Transmission client has been banned on some trackers.
Imagine there are 100 doors. You pick one at random. You have a 1 in 100 chance of getting the right answer.

If the host opens all the doors that contain the booby prizes bar one (in this case 98 goats) and leaves one door remaining, plus your original guess, it's pretty obvious you are unlikely to have guessed correctly on your first try.

Scale it down to 3 doors and the host always revealing a goat and you have the same situation except there's a 1 in 3 chance you'll win by sticking with your first guess and a 2 in 3 chance if you swap.
You said it's "dishonest to mention." The author is the mentioner. If the mention is dishonest, then it necessarily follows that the author is dishonest.
There is some similarity and there were some inspirations from Gmail to be sure. For example, there were many users of Superhuman or Front who really disliked the fact that they wouldn't be able to use autocompletions in their email client (we work on Superhuman in the browser and Front support is coming soon).

We do find that we are able to predict significantly more text than Gmail is able to.
Yes, it does matter. It has excellent throughput and latency for certain classes of systems, while others are impossible to build. Rust may not impose this constraint while meeting its goals.
Yes, I grew up in Moscow, USSR: while growing up not only I (or my family) did not have a car but none of people I knew had one. At the age of 20 I had about dozen car rides in my lifetime. It sucked: even when I lived in my parents flat close to the city center and a subway station, going anywhere was at least an hour in one direction. I've spent 2 hours every day going to and from school. Could go to movies/clubs on weekends with friends though. I moved to my own flat that was a 15 min by car from the center but it was 45 min just to get to the subway via transit (either by train or bus) so my life was essentially 3 hour commute to work and shopping for food every couple of days in the nearby grocery store. Going anywhere else was too exhausting and you cannot stay late because the transit stopped at 1 am (subway, buses and trains even earlier), the only friends I could hang out were the ones with cars, others living in similar situation (far from subway) were just too far to visit.

I now vastly enjoy living in my own house where closets are bigger than my flat's living room and driving anywhere I want. Everyone I know in the city is less than an hour away. I shop for groceries every two weeks and sometimes on the way from work. My commute is 20 minutes a day. I visit more different places in a month than in a year of living in the "walkable paradise".
NDGT had an interview or youtube once about public speaking, I couldn't find the video anymore so paraphrasing.

> Not anyone can become great at something, but everyone can become better. So you don't have to learn to speak like all those famous people out there, just practise so that you can be better than you were.
Here's how I finally understood the problem intuitively:

If your initial pick is correct, then switching loses 100% of the time.

If your initial pick is incorrect, then switching wins 100% of the time (because you picked wrong, and host will reveal the other incorrect door, leaving only the correct door to switch to).

So switching always inverts your initial guess. Well what are the odds of picking incorrectly on your initial guess? 2/3. Switching wins 2/3 times.
> This is dishonest nonsense: estimates hold that at east 60% of mining energy consumption still comes from fossil sources.

Ah so that number keeps going down! It's nice that you all hold Bitcoin/Proof of Work to such high standards that it cleans itself up so fast. I really doubt any other industry can do that or has such great metrics, so keep up the great work everyone.
>Ukraine gave Russia the nukes it held within its border. Looking back probably not a great idea.

This is a popular factoid, but it often leaves out the fact that Russia had the codes to use the nukes, the ability to maintain them, and that other countries (like the US) wanted the nukes out of Ukraine.

If they had kept them, it is far from clear that they would be a nuclear power today.
> engineers like complexity

Is that really true? If it's descriptive, then I'm not an engineer (and I may well not be). I don't like complexity at all, in any form. I want the least complex solution to any problem that will work. However, I've mostly given up on decomplexifying, because it's mostly a waste of time. Software becomes complex because getting something done fast, right now, "this time", because, "we're in a hurry this sprint" by duplicating code will always win over trying to modify something to be reusable. If you try to spend time fighting complexity, you won't just be fighting the complexity inherent in the existing system, you'll be fighting your coworkers who've given up on fighting complexity and just get their tickets into a done state.
I would switch. The question is what happens if the door is the prize?
> I don't understand the needless fascination with "crushing windows."

That was the common sentiment 20+ years ago when Steve Ballmer, then Microsoft CEO, declared that "Linux is a cancer". Today I'd say it's not the case anymore, especially so since they were forced by market laws to fake some form of friendship with Open Source, not to mention having ruined Windows with all versions from 8 on.
Windows is pretty much crushing itself these days.
This is what I thought at first but simulating it out, it’s not true. The strategy of switching doors works 2/3rds of the time but only if you allow picking the opened door (when it has the prize). That’s easy to see since it works whenever the prize isn’t behind your first choice. Conditioning on the opened door revealing a goat gives that strategy only 50% chance. After all, the opposite situation happens 1/3rd of the time and has a 100% success rate (since you can see the car), so this other case (opened door has a goat) has to have a 50% chance to add up to the unconditioned success rate. It’s still unintuitive to me though.
If you switch, your odds of winning are 2/3.
Use Case: You pay more to get a reliable service for the same price regardless of weather conditions.
> it's worth remembering that bank transfers within the Eurozone area are free and practically immediate

In theory. Many banks are not using this system and stayed on old SEPA wire transfers: charges split between sender and receiver or covered by sender, 3 work days to process, ability to pay more to speed-up the process by two days etc. It's slow and/or costly.
> I get the impression your problem is more about the people, not the platform.

There's one structural difference: Usenet had no engagement metric but replies. Modern replacements measure and implicitly optimize for view counts (the lurker experience); both Reddit and Hacker News sort and surface posts based on a karma score/like count.

I think this difference led Usenet to implicitly optimize for high-effort posts. The stereotypical Reddit "in-joke" thread has no place on Usenet because the principal reward of karma is entirely missing. Instead, posters are implicitly rewarded with attention when their posts garner replies and discussion.

On one hand, this encourages real content and discussion over superficial "updoots to the left". On the other hand, it also encourages flamebait and high-effort trolling, which a vote-scoring system can silently suppress.
> Apache-2.0 is designed to allow people to proprietarize Valetudo and use it in closed-source devices.

At the time, the idea behind that was that _maybe_ this would make the vendor pick it up and provide a cloud-free stock experience.
In that case, it would've been fine-ish if they'd monetize the work as it would still be very much beneficial to everyone.
That sentence in the docs is not directed at those. You can't reason with corporations.

Instead it's directed at that crafty kind of individual that would sell pre-rooted robots just because there's money to be made. Those people that purposefully refuse to share knowledge so that they can monetize it.
I am aware that it won't stop them either, but at least there's an attempt I guess.

Given what I've learned in the process, I can't say for certain that I'd pick the Apache-2.0 license again but it is like that now. As far as I'm aware, re-licensing would require asking every single contributor for their consent. I'm not too fond of doing that tbh.
The thing about Linux is that it’s hackable and you can customise it to your liking. I’ve been using it for about a decade and the only thing it can’t do is run iTunes so I have a virtual machine for Windows stuff. It’s worth having a separate Linux box where you can tinker with new software and customisations without those changes affecting your daily driver OS. I found that over time the more customisations you do the more the OS breaks down and starts to get buggy. Having a dedicated box for tinkering is essential and you can just do a fresh install when you’ve made many irreversible mistakes.
it was a feature - they served ads during loading screens
I don't know man. I think you're going against Hanlon's razor with this belief. LeetCode type problems may do the things you're saying, but I'm not sure that's the intent.

Personally, I believe the reason companies do LeetCode type questions is because everyone else is doing them and no one can agree on a better way. Large companies want a hiring process that scales and is relatively uniform and LeetCode questions meet that criteria. Is there a better way? Probably, but figuring out what that is takes time, effort, and investment and most companies don't want make that investment for something they may get wrong.

Basically, most everyone knows LeetCode is shit, but as long as everyone else is doing it, there's little incentive to change. If everyone is doing the same stupid thing, at least your company isn't falling behind. If you decide to do something different, there's a real possibility you could spend a bunch of time and effort only to make things worse.
No idea about China, but in US “they” can, using a secret sentence from a FISA “secret court”, legally prohibit you from absolutely anything, and if you complain to anyone you go to jail.
We still have an original iPad at an older relative. It's perfect for Solitaire.

It also used to be usable to load a weather page but turns out Safari doesn't know the certificate authority since it's such an old version. I guess such an old Safari is a walking security risk too.

It would be nice to be able to put Linux on it.
Yee I won't burn bridges :)) I still act normally around them :))

Ye parents maybe? Nahh doubt it. My siblings are like totally opposite to me.

True - I need to take take a good hard look at my life.

Oh thanks!!!!!!
I think GPOS in this context stands for General-Purpose OS (as opposed to embedded).
What I mean by end-to-end encrypted here is during transportation and at rest (not that it is never decrypted in memory). As you are pointing out, it obviously has to be in memory as clear text at some point. But that is being done on a private VPC and only very briefly.
Probably at least partially just that! As I said it was my subjective perception.
At least in the UK, I found that salaries for Chemists were depressingly low - PhD grads would earn around 30k GBP which made it hard for me to justify studying for so long.

I really liked Chemistry but ended up moving into software instead.
Well if you don't switch then your odds of winning are a simple 1 out of 3. Switching inverts your initial guess, so instead of losing 2 out of 3 times because your initial pick was wrong, switching makes you win 2 out of 3 times when your initial pick is wrong.
> i honestly don't like their icons and paddings around the objects

Under Appearance is "User Interface Zoom."
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecosia#Business_model it's basically Bing with some revenue sharing from the ads.
That’s not the rule from the question in the link nor in the original game (the game’s rule isn’t quite the same as the classic problem, it’s even messier). Your proposed rule doesn’t uniquely extend the original, it’s just one of the possible generalizations.
https://www.ida.liu.se/~tompe44/lsff-book/Vernor%20Vinge%20-...
I think in plain text. I've got UNIX on the brain, and it didn't come with X Window.
The government that was in power from 2017 to 2022 put a moratorium on new reactor construction there and promised a full phase-out, and although the newly-elected government promised to reverse this, it likely has done some damage to S. Korea's civilian nuclear capabilities.
Huh, it used to be easy to find via Google. It's amazing how much search has changed over the years. If I had more time, I'd dig into the source and post it here. I guess I can't back this up right now.
The problem is there is no decent software that runs on linux; I'd switch from Mac to linux if I could run Ableton, Adobe_products.* or Affinity_products.*

And no, I don't want to hear about the software XYZ that is almost just like any of the above, because they aren't even close.

If I just wanted to browse the web, and work in a terminal, then linux is great.
> look at it from the perspective of users

It sounds like your perspective is that users don't get any value out of social media?

Why do people post photos to Instagram? Why post updates to Facebook?

You can take photos for your own benefit (like writing code for some non-GitHub-related benefit, e.g. work) and also share them on social media for your own gratification. You can live life for the fun of it and also share it on social media for your own gratification. (leave aside that social media is net-toxic, it's still worth it to understand the motivations of those who engage with social media).

Don't want to engage with the social media aspects of GitHub that they're adding (because social media is net-toxic)? Fine. Disable the achievements. They (smartly) built in that disable switch. But don't presume that there isn't a large portion of GitHub's userbase that won't get value out of this.
If we are talking about the US and not like places like northern Europe, then they have a lot of existing capacity for fossil fuel production. The cheapest way to produce energy would be to just add more renewables and use that fossil fuel whenever that weather isn't optimal. Batteries might be competitive to fossil fuel in places such situation as highlighted by the financial advisor, ie when they can discharge fully each day of the year at the maximum price point.
I had this problem beaten to death in my probability and statistics courses in college.

To make the problem much more obviously intuitive, simply imagine a thousand or a million doors instead of 3.. and after you make your pick - the host reveals all doors except one to be "failures". Your choice was very obviously 1 in a million, and because the reveal procedure that followed is conditional - if the "success" was behind ANY of the doors you did not pick then it WILL be the only door left in front of you.

It is only a 50-50 IF the revealed doors were opened randomly. In this case, sometimes the "success" would be revealed by accident - and so IF you do happen to find yourself in a position of only having 2 doors left THEN it was more likely to happen if you had actually chosen the "success". So arriving at that situation at all is the conditional information that alters the probability of your original choice - but in this case from 1/3 to 1/2 instead of 2/3. (this is how the probabilities in "deal or no deal" work btw)

Even knowing the solution, it is a good reminder about the power of information derived from systemic processes. the information leveraged in the processes that lead to circumstances is just as important as the circumstances themselves.

The key general point that bypasses most peoples intuition the first time they hear the problem is that the revealed box (or door, etc) is not chosen at random but by a conditional process. The condition is that the host reveals a "failure". In order to pick a failure, he must leverage knowledge about where the "success" is, else he risks revealing it by mistake. Because knowledge of the "success" is embedded into the decision process, more information about the "success" is revealed to the observer which allows them to improve their position.
True I'll consider therapy :))
Nah definitely the latter - my parents and siblings keep telling me about my situations since it happened already like 20 times.
That's a reasonable choice of priorities to have, but it's the opposite of Rust's. Rust prioritizes (1) safety, (2) performance, (3) ergonomics, in that order. There are other languages that make put ergonomics before performance but they are generally unsuitable for Rust's niche.
Yep, as long as it's vaguely a "question", the smaller communities have very different tolerances to opinion-based-ness. It's subject-focused, and the quality is generally pretty high (StackOverflow is a different beast though, due to sheer scale)
Some robust metrics for administrative capacity and performance would be good, but it is not obvious how that would work. It is bothersome that much of this analysis ends up being layers of questionable conclusions.

For example, the idea that the US has trouble with subways is often justified by reference to the LA subway and the NYC Second Avenue subway. Closer inspection, though, reveals that the LA subway was put off for so long in part because it was known that it would require much tunneling through rock which would be very expensive. In the case of the NYC Second Avenue subway the initial proposal was made roughly one hundred years ago and was rejected as unreasonably expensive to attempt because of the extensive complications. The subway plan was raised again and again over the years each time being rejected as unrealistically expensive. Then recently it was decided that improvements to tunneling technology would finally make the Second Avenue subway possible, but unfortunately when completed it turned out to have been unreasonably expensive to build. Instead of taking into account the context and nearly one hundred years of analysis concluding that the Second Avenue subway could not be practically built people instead conclude that the cost overruns are part of some mysterious malaise that has settled on all infrastructure construction work.

It could easily be the case that American administrative capacity is not in decline, but society has become more complex. Certainly the move from paper records to digital media has greatly improved administrative capacity across almost all commercial industry and government.
Britain was wealthy when it left. When it joined the EU it was the poorest member joining.
So would you be okay if a company “illegally” used and distributed GPL software?
> The article misses another important aspect

I don't think that's a fair claim, considering "Part I" is in the title.
Thanks :)) Yee definitely will seek some help :)))
Their availability sharing is top notch, too.
> For carpets, I don't think these tiny vacuums can compete with the powerful standard ones

They never did. Even the best vacuum plugged into your standard 120v receptacle will have trouble removing all the crap that's accumulated in the average carpet. A small, battery powered vacuum can't either.

They do help in reducing the amount of stuff that accumulates in between hand vacuums. Back when I had carpets, because of my wife's allergies, I'd vacuum with the "old fashioned" vacuum every weekend. A Neato would run every day (and would have to be emptied every couple of days, it picked so much stuff). Then I'd actually _wash_ the carpets every month. Every single time, even with all that, the water would come out black. This helped, but ultimately we had to move. You can never really clean carpets.

If anyone in your family has allergies, get rid of carpets if you can. Just because they may not be displaying symptoms that are really obvious right now, doesn't mean they aren't having a constant allergic response.
OK, cool, thanks—I wasn't asking to nitpick, but because I really wasn't sure whether it was a mistake, or a neologistic/jargon usage I was unfamiliar with.
Those clips are painful.

DeGrasse Tyson interrupts Rogan right before important words - punchlines. For instance, in the first clip, Rogan begins “what’s interesting is that the town is -”, and DeGrasse Tyson takes that moment to pattern break: “wait, wait, wait, have you seen that they did Starry Night in bacon?!”. Rogan blinks, stunned. His point about the town lost forever.

Regardless, it’s possible to be well prepared but not interrupt the person you’re talking to right as they get to the juice. I would suggest Sean Evans and Nardwaur as examples from the other side of the fence - interviewers - who are unrivalled in preparation and give their guests a chance to speak.
I do not see their sales numbers, but based upon their actions it's pretty clear where their top sellers are.

That and Apple has a notable history of dropping standards they no longer feel are current to push new standards. Even if those changes very clearly abandon current and active users.