skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If Republicans in the early 1980s had taken Barry Goldwater's advice and done to Jerry Falwell and his ilk what punks and metalheads typically do to neo-Nazis when they show up at concerts (kick their fucking asses) we might not have to think of Lauren Boebert as anything but a gun nut who owns a theme bar and looks like she ought to do porn. In such a world, Mike Pence wouldn't have been Vice President of anything but his local NAMBLA chapter. But, no. Conservatives just had to give the Christian Right a nice sloppy rimjob.
SimpleHash (YC W22) is hiring back end engineers to build NFT APIs
This isn't very compelling to me.

SourceForge went bad ... and everyone left. That doesn't seem like a bad thing and there's no reason for me to think any given site / service will or won't go bad too. I expect that for any number of reasons I might need to move from one site to the next.

The rest too is kinda hollow to me. The fact that they're for profit doesn't upset me. I figured they wanted to make a profit when I signed up even ... not sure how that would surprise anyone now.

Co-pilot, I personally don't feel there is a compelling reason to leave github due to that either.

Maybe I'm not versed enough in some of this but as a rando dev I'm just not having any problems on github these days ...

I'm not saying the author is wrong or right or that I'm right or wrong, just that I'm not finding that article very convincing.
And remaking the scams of current banking
The world will end. For some people. Because of idiocy. That is a big deal that is not solved by "going outside".
The finer parts of git and other day-to-day tools seem to almost always be picked up on the job. I've seen this confusion of git/github before, but the one I always notice is when I'm interviewing someone and they say they have node on their resume but don't know that node isn't just a webserver, they really only used it as an express server and many didn't even know that it could touch the filesystem.

It's usually not a problem since they tend to already know javascript and can get things working by referencing the node api docs, but it's still really funny to me every time it happens. There's lots of stuff people don't know until they know.
After reading through the rest of the post, I do see your point. When I last tried it, I thought that most of the email formatting should be done with git format-patch and then git send-email should be used to actually send the email without having to answer any questions.

That would address one of your concerns about saving the email on disk and also ensuring that the headers have the correct contents.

If the project's contrib document contained information about what settings to use for format-patch and send-email, then the process would be much more seamless. I haven't looked at the kernel (or subsystems) documentation on that. The git project itself doesn't seem to contain that information though.

Regarding your other point about using your email client to handle sending the emails, git does have a utility called imap-send that would allow you to upload the patches to an IMAP folder, which, I believe, would allow you to then send the messages using your MUA of choice instead of git send-email.
>>If you want to make it illegal to run a coal plant because you feel like it’s your duty to force some pain on the citizenry for what you perceive as a higher calling

>Nobody wants what you described

Do you think everyone hear has the memory of a goldfish or are you just lying to us without a care in the world?

We can literally go into any HN thread on the subject of coal and see tons of comments to the tune of "this will cause people a bunch of pain but outlawing X, Y and Z or taxing them to create the same effect is necessary in order to get off of fossil fuels therefore it is necessary for the greater good". I don't disagree with the premise that it's gonna hurt but just turning around and saying "nobody's saying that" when it suits you is beyond bad faith behavior.

People like you are just as bad for progress as the coal lobby is because you undermine the people telling it like it is.
Think about what you’re saying. Democracy is hard so let’s throw it all away? Do you realize where that leads?
Productivity matters for sure. I'd say it must be in the top 10 things professionals like Newey care about. It's certainly in the top 20 or at least the top 50.
GitLab is built on JS and renders a white screen without JS. Enabling JS at all taxes my Core 2 Duo machine, and opening GitLab to a few thousand line file (or worse yet, opening the pull request diff view) taxes my top-of-the-line Ryzen 5 5600X machine running Firefox. GitLab is just badly written.
Sure they're going to make more money from me (as a generic user) than value I will derive from them (on average over the population of users). Otherwise they go out of business and we use other available alternatives.

But you know what? Even after copilot my code is still there, for people to make money from (as both GH and random people already do), to learn from, to cut up and rehash, to reference, to write (much) better versions of, to generally advance humanity. I know this is the root philosophical conflict between free software and open source but I wanted to state my view since this is a call to action and we'll be seen as betraying some ideal for failing to comply.
>There is no democratic vote, with or without proxy, before the appointment of the Commission.

Err, yes there is. The directly-elected European Parliament first elects the President of the European Commission, and then has to vote to appoint the entire Commission.[0]

And before they do they they hold hearings with each of the different commissioner-nominees to evaluate their suitability for the role, demanding that people are replaced or given different portfolios if they are not suitable.

Nominations for the role of President must take in to account the results of the election,[0] and the European Council nominates somebody from the largest party in Parliament. I wish that Parliament had stuck to its guns in 2014/2019 and rejected the nominees that weren't spitzenkandidaten but hopefully the new proposals tabled by Parliament creating transnational lists for Parliament will change this.[1]

[0] Article 17(7) of the Treaty on European Union

[1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220429IP...
This is a topic that I've thought a ton about, from the perspective of being an entrepreneur. I have a full time job right now but even for side projects or any product that I may choose to sell in the future, I've decided that it's not going to have a service at it's core. If it has a service component it can't be in the critical path for the software to work. I.e. I might host a gem server or something for paying customers but not an API server.

I just can't square my own working style, my need to do things outside of work, and my desire for ownership of the things I work on with the idea that I need to be on-call forever for a thing. It's just too much stress.
New Microsoft Word Comments Weirdness
> How do you justify that?

I don't think people, even here, understand how simply large and growing the market is for software development tools.

https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-04-0...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hillennevins/2021/11/24/the-par...

You're only better off using GitHub today in the same sense that a turkey being fattened up for Thanksgiving is better off today than one living in the wild.
And? It's Congress' job to make policy and pass laws.

They can and should take advice but the whole point of democracy is that the policymakers are democratically accountable.
I find it valuable that they spelled out their motivations and agenda for creating this language, which will help prospective users to decide whether they need to take this language seriously or not. This helps attract users, and arguably the main value of any language is how well users can interoperate with it.

Folks can freely create anything, but it might be a shame for such efforts to go to something that only few people will use.
I agree. I've spent the last 10 years focused on trying to help us get better at being emotionally honest with at least ourselves. I had focused mostly on tools for the masses, but lately have been refocused on making tools for leaders and then let leaders change culture by example, as so many of us learn what's ok to feel and what feelings are ok to say from our parents and other authority figures.
> The rules are in the constitution

The Ninth Amendment basically says "this isn't a list of all the rules".

There's no right to poop in the Constitution. Do we have one? If Congress banned pooping, how would the court rule?
Someone making the median household income in the US can absolutely afford to set aside 10% of their income.
The Deck is an x86_64 device, basically a tiny laptop in a handheld form-factor. The Nintendo Switch is closer to a phone since it's an ARM device
How would I know? I wasn't there, and I don't have a crystal ball nor a time machine.

If you check the Wikipedia link in my previous comment you'll see that it was actually a whole epic constellation of events and forces and personalities and masses of people. Not quite the Mahabharata but still pretty epic.

The particular thing that Gandhi's "arc", if you will, achieved was to demolish utterly the rationale for the British Raj in the first place: that Indians needed outside governance. The non-violent movement showed that Indians were the moral equals or even superiors of the British, and Gandhi knew it.

Winston Churchill: What do you think of Western civilization?

Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.
And as I said in reply to a sibling comment: Then you are effectively maintaining 2 codebases. Also, I'm not aware of any SPA framework (at least the big 3) that even offer an escape hatch to do something like that. Maybe with SSR and some special logic you could but it would be painful and ultimately not worth it.
GitHub has a formidable monopoly on source code hosting, thanks to network effects alone. I don't think there's a realistic case you can make today along the lines of your first bullet point that could convince a career-minded developer to switch away.

Direct competition against GitHub is barely worth contemplating; the practical path I see for replacing GitHub must be more indirect:

1. Some nonprofit foundation spins up a GitHub alternative focused on transparency and strong data privacy protections. This alternative has only a small fraction of GitHub's most crucial features.

2. A major FOSS project---which values the principles of the new alternative over the practical benefits of GitHub---switches away from GitHub.

3. Satellite projects reexamine their use of GitHub and slowly start switching over as well. The new hosting service incrementally adds features in response to demands from the growing userbase.

Steps 1 and especially 2 will require motivation by philosophical arguments, even if I agree that the linked article's execution wasn't perfect.
I will probably keep using it too.

1. I have such a nice python executable notebook setup with the hydrogen plugin.

I have a lot of personal automation for my 9-5 job here. Turning it into polished CLIs is too much effort and there's too many one-off cases, it's best just to have a kernel running.

I also do leetcode practicing here :)

2. I have another atom window always open for my personal knowledge base which is just a directory of well-named markdown files. I don't need your fancy better tooling. This is more than enough.

I tried to switch to vscode for the above but I don't like the notebook plugin and it kept crashing when opening up very very large markdown files (sometimes I copy paste logs wholesale). Also I often find it pegs a cpu at 99% and I just don't have the energy to debug my fucking text editor.
I'm having trouble understanding why it would necessarily be comparable to a traditional electric motor in efficiency. Whether or not it's "technically" an electric motor, it's operating on completely different principles. The first things that come to mind are there are no moving parts to generate friction and heat, and it requires much higher voltage. Wouldn't those aspects alone swing the efficiency one way or the other?
I have used Copilot in its free phase, and have made substantial OSS contributions to various projects as well as shepherding my own projects (a few of which have attained a degree of success). Building an AI model off the community's code and selling the model (and code generated by rearranging statements and patterns found in the training data) back to the community is odious.
Puredanger/developers-conferences-agenda: tech conferences's date and CFP
Isn't there a couple of Democrats in the Senate (who also happen to be anti-green due to blatant conflict of interest - why the hell is a senator with financial interests in coal allowed??) who refuse to allow the majority to do away with the filibuster that forces the need for a supermajority? So nobody has a majority?
You’re seriously here to make the case that these basis points on the numbers that move real human beings around like pieces on a chessboard is why HN foams at the mouth over cyber-money?

The energy cost is debatable (energy displacement is complex), the ASICs used to mine BTC are keeping someone’s Verilog sharp, and scams? There are 17 payday loan places in a 3 mile radius of my house, not counting pawn shops.

This is not enlightened humanitarianism.

Everyone on here knows an annoying asshole who rubs it in everyone’s face that they’re generationally wealthy over a speculative bet in 2015.

I fucking hate intellectual dishonesty. Especially from smart people.
I am not above UAE to apply anything to them, and when interacting I'll interact in common ground, if possible and necessary.

Are you above them? You both have humility when faced with whoever you consider inferior - LGBT people that are so oppressed people think Amazon should consider them in their decisions, and presumption against your superiors: UAE asserted themselves and you can't even admit you'd change them by force if you could. But you can't.

Cry more.
I see a system that encourages school shootings and at least in theory tries to compensate by having a police force enforce the law and maintain safety. That police force has been exposed as incredibly corrupt when it counts. Politicians have decided that they don't value inclusiveness, that they would rather abandon people and deal with the aftermath than address the problems that lead up to school shootings in the first place. They have also given up on having a respectable police force.

Your comments ring hollow because you haven't provided any evidence or counterargument that the police fulfilled their duty properly and that the deaths were at least unavoidable the moment the shooting started.
> Therefore, money should be shared.

Isn't this sort of the expectation of these free services? They provide a service to you for free, and in exchange they are able to collect data from you, store it in a database, and do things with it.

I fully expected GitHub to do something like this (minus Enterprise repos that pay big money), and it's why I stopped using them. I instead use gitbucket, which is a free and open source self hosted thing.

I also expect GitLab to do something similar. It is as they say in the crypto world.

Not your wallet, not your crypto.

Not your source control server? Not your code. Legally? Might be, but that doesn't matter. Do you have lawyers?
The advantage of crypto over cash is that you can keep redundant copies, or keep portions of a key in different places so there's no single point of failure. It'd be pretty silly not to have backups.

For most people, a friendlier ideal is probably social recovery wallets, as advocated by Vitalik. You can restore access much like centralized services can, except instead of relying on a big company you're relying on your circle of friends and family. You can also include a company or two, if you want, without the company being a single point of failure.

https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/01/11/recovery.html

Reversing charges is a different point, which could be accomplished pretty simply with 2-of-3 sigs if there's market demand for it. At the moment, scaling issues have kept crypto from being used much for retail payments anyway (though that's gradually getting fixed).

As for freezing cards, that's something we have to do a lot because we hand over full account credentials to everyone we pay and just trust them to keep those details safe and not abuse them. I've replaced two credit cards due to fraud, and it was a hassle. It boggles my mind that we've had public key cryptography for fifty years and we're still not using it for payments. Never mind blockchains, just upgrading the banking system to use public keys would be a huge improvement.
>" That said, they're saying they're only providing publicly available data to ICE, but if it's publicly available and non-identifiable, why does ICE even need it, and why wouldn't they be able to get it themselves?"

From the linked Intercept article:

>"Homeland Security Investigations, the division of ICE that purchased the Coinbase tool, is tasked not only with immigration-related matters, aiding migrant raids and deportation operations, but broader transnational crimes as well,..."

One possibility is that ICE could use this to trace the source of remittances being sent back to undocumented worker's home countries. The wire transfer fees are known to be extortionate and there's many crypto exchanges that see an opportunity in disrupting wire transfers for remittances.[1] If this happens then I could see this of being of interest to ICE.

As to "Why wouldn't they be able to get it themselves", it's probably just pure convenience. It's probably more attractive to just spend tax payer money on some expensive off the shelf solution

Incidentally I found this paragraph from the linked Intercept piece pretty damning:

>"The Coinbase Tracer tool itself was birthed in controversy. In 2019, Motherboard reported that Neutrino, a blockchain-analysis firm the company acquired in order to create Coinbase Tracer, “was founded by three former employees of Hacking Team, a controversial Italian surveillance vendor that was caught several times selling spyware to governments with dubious human rights records, such as Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan.” Following public outcry, Coinbase announced these staffers would “transition out” of the company."

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/paymentsweek/2022/04/27/mexi...
The idea is they'll eventually get purchased, or have a profit and dividends. But if you're growing so fast it makes sense to focus on that over profitablity. Most investors would rather have a 1.40, next year than a dollar today.
Thanks for saying this. A lot of the crypto peeps seem to think that we'd all carry around cash if we could, and it's simply not true. People don't use much cash anymore because it's not convenient. There's a reason cash went away for the most part.
They have no obligation to actually show up. Many miss more votes than they are present for.

Also, most sessions only run a few hours, and many more are pro forms, where the minimum quorum show up (I think this is something like 15 or 20), open the session and then immediately close it.
LTT just made a video covering similar points - https://youtu.be/LFQ3LkVF5sM
You mean your name and bank account number?

Those are basic for doing business. People share them with everybody they deal with.
If congress disagreed with this interpretation, they could pass a law explicitly ruling it out. The power of the supreme court in this regard relies on the fact that congress has great difficulty passing any law at all, and thus whatever interpretation given by the supreme court is likely to persist.

>If you look at the conservative majority opinions, you’ll find that indeed, it’s about the relevant legal issues, ie. what the law actually says.

The dissertation focuses on that. The actual reasoning might be based on something else. The court is strongly interested in projecting an image of being neutral, and of only going off of the wording of laws, rather than involving their own biases. Thus, the majority opinion should be read as an attempt to assign such a motive to their decision, whereas the dissenting opinions attempt to assign the opposite motive. That is, they attempt to suggest that the majority ruled this way because they are insufficiently worried about climate change.
You Need to Update Windows and Chrome Right Now (security patch roundup)
The Right Way to Sauce Pasta (2021)
> with or without proxy, before the appointment of the Commission.

Of course there is. The commission is chosen by the countries elected representatives (and confirmed by the directly elected EU Parliament)

The downvotes are justified
If instead of random
hashes, you could generate wallet keys based on biometrics or some other aspect inherent and unique to an individual this could work. But you would be leaking a lot of information for others to reverse engineer your key.
Decentralized just means that you can roll your own if you want to.

IIRC coinbase is just selling a chainalysis tool. ICE is stupid, they aren't going to be able to convert a blockchain into a graph of transactions that lets them track payments from one wallet to another on their own - they are going to buy a tool off the shelf to help them do that.
My team has a shared knowledge base CLI set up via kb: https://github.com/gnebbia/kb

It’s like a group-maintained collection of cheatsheets. The git sync is buggy but I’ve made it work.
I have a degree in computer science and a couple decades of experience with software development for, and deployment on, the internet.

I think the metaphor of comparing internet bandwidth to pipes/tubes carrying water is perfectly apt. It seems like a very simple, direct and effective way to describe issues of bandwidth, connectivity, congestion and overall infrastructure.

I've never quite understood why we all pretended like that was a bad analogy. I guess just because it came out of the mouth of an old, white Republican.
Read the post of mine that TacticalCoder was responding to.
It is a choice at the software later. And who is making that choice? It's the initial people who actually write that software.

But what if that system is now affecting many other people, or the entire planet in a significant way? Should they have some voice over that?

Under a traditional governance regime the answer is that that is at least possible to change. It may be difficult, but it does not violate the laws of physics and can happen in less time than the heat death of the universe. But we can now write software that makes it functionally impossible for anyone to make that choice, even potentially the original designers. That is an option that we did not have before. It's in some sense the essence of trustlessness.

In some cases, this might be the right trade-off. For example, beyond the blockchain, this is also a way to think about encrypted communications. It is a very significant new power that we can now wield.

But it must be wielded carefully, and that doesn't seem to be happening.

So yes, blockchain applications don't need to be irrevocable. But the ability to make them so is something that could have a very significant implications—potentially negative.

As a somewhat tongue in cheek example, but with a little bit too much reality to be comfortable, this irrevocability might allow you to "create" a paperclip maximizer DAO (incentivized at the social layer, with humans doing the work).
> If I'm just reading static text on a web page, theres'a absolutely no reason why I should need javascript to just read it.

100% true if the site is privately funded. In most other cases JS is required for ad integration and analytics.

I don't like it, but I understand that funding is required and ads are the simplest way to get there without getting into the whole micro-payment and paid subscription mess.