skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I know it goes against everything people are being taught today, but not all opinions are equally valid. I will hesitate for a little bit since I know for a fact I do not have all the answers, but eventually my internal firewall will start marking things as "drivel". To be perfectly honest, it is this weird insistence that I not only have to agree with someone's opinion, but act on someone else's belief that I almost automatically pull back and say no. This is not how a conversation works. So thanks to those vocal individuals I mark the use of word "toxic" and automatically dismiss it as a person with no arguments.

<< If your daily experience differs so drastically from the reported survey results, how would you tell if it was the survey's data that was inaccurate or your own anecdata? Alternately, if you think the results are accurate but that the people who responded to it are out of touch, how would you be able to tell if it wasn't them but actually you?

And here I do not have a good answer that would scale. The dismissive approach works well on an individual level. I think experience ( and knowing that surveys have all sorts of flaws ) helps. Now, anecdata has its own obvious issues, but at certain point anecdata becomes data.

<<I think it's worth considering the fact that calling an issue "stupid stuff" and saying a "regular person" wouldn't care about it is essentially a self-reinforcing confirmation bias.

You might be right on confirmation bias. Still, I challenge you to defend the proposition that focusing on making a given piece of software work or adding features is less important than "toxic" behavior. As a user, do I care that, say, notepad++ was created in an environment that was not "toxic" or that it does what I want it to do and that it does it well? To me, at least, the choice is simple and not controversial at all.
On this scenerio each page has a starter machine and some components might as well. So you can in fact nest state machines.

Totally undeused concept I've been trying to implement since the VB6 days.
The point he's making is that you can't just say "money is excluded from the argument I'm making" and still be anywhere relevant to reality.

People dislike copying because for most people it's an attack on their income, either by taking their recognition (eg copying "free" images from a photographer) or by actually taking their income (eg copying paid art).

If you exclude financial arguments you exclude the vast majority of people who share their work.

To bring this around to code, most popular licenses allow copying someone's code with proper attribution, so clearly copying is okay as long as you don't take recognition from a work that isn't profit motivated.
From a quick skim, it seems to me that at least in Linus's interpretation, his interlocutor is requesting changes to the way the kernel does things in order to accommodate/maintain Rust's "there is no undefined behaviour; in cases where circumstances conspire to make behaviour undefined, terminate immediately" philosophy even in kernel Rust code. He then figures that if he said he is not willing to do that, the other side would respond with something to the effect of "but implementing the Rust philosophy in full means you get safety, and you surely can't have a goal more important than that", and therefore leaps to talking down the importance of the safety that Rust actually guarantees, to argue that it is not actually so great that all other objectives would be secondary to it.

If his initial interpretation and expectation of the Rustacean response is in fact correct, the line of argumentation does not seem per se wrong, but I do think that it is bad practice in adversarial conversations to do the thing where you silently skip forward several steps in the argument and respond to what you expect (their response to your response)^n to be instead of the immediate argument at hand.
> One might respond along the lines of: "why are we investing in ways to operationalize a concept of 'superiority' in the first place?"

Becomes sometimes it's important. The efficacy of modern medicine is not uniform across ethnic groups. To deny this fact would effectively be to deliberately withhold treatment from some groups of people. Does that seem fair and just to you?

- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2594139/

- https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/pharmacogenetics-p...
Remaster classic games with Nvidia RTX Remix
> Asset voting gives no guarantees whatsoever

I'm not sure what guarantees you require a voting system to provide. Do you not agree it is better than plurality voting?

I suppose you could say that it's not "guaranteed" to solve the spoiler problem, because if you vote for a candidate who claims to have very similar policies to another candidate you like, they might turn around and betray you and re-assign your vote to another candidate you are completely opposed to. However, the fact that candidates might talk one way but act another way seems to be an issue that's common to all voting systems, and therefore out of scope.

> At this point D'Hondt-method is tried an true.

Any electoral change that requires an explanation of the form "First we calculate the quotient with the following formula..." is doomed to failure in a world of misinformation and vested interests trying to undermine confidence in elections. You're right, though, that in the US it would be wise to advocate for Jefferson's method, and brand it that way.
An episode of The Office (US). In that episode Pam, who is pregnant and has contractions, would not go to the hospital before midnight because "the healthcare provider will not pay for more then two nights."

That wasn't even the main plot line, just something that was casually brought up and unchallenged by anyone.

UK doesn't need that kind of crap. No one does.
I know. The thing you’re objecting to is fundamental to our process of coming to know.
Rewrite the kernel in Rust of course, which imho ought to happen sooner or later
What a stupid article. To be honest I was impressed considering this is less than 1 year of work.
It was kind of hard on Russian people, though, considering they had so little say in how things were done at the time. Not as hard as Stalin, or even Lenin. But it seems like if more had been done, we would not be in the present fix.
Ah, thanks to you and aendruk's sibling comment.
Where we pretend that groups like the ACLU didn't have to go to court for that, and that it's always allowed for everyone and it's never a huge problem.
When it's at the behest of government, there's a word for that.
And yet it mostly launched with games that I could play on my 5-year old $200 GPU that I probably couldn't even sell for scrap at this point. People really overestimate how much of a GPU you need to play a lot of these games. Sure, if you have a 4k monitor and you want to play at 144hz then sure, but at that point you've spent $2000 on the monitor, so what's $500 on the CPU.
> Why is this person handwriting in print instead of cursive?

Perhaps they want it to be readable? :-)

> Is it what society has come to?

Thankfully, yes.
This mindset is pretty outdated, the most popular games now are all free-to-play. I suggest checking out Fortnite (although I personally don’t suggest actually playing it), CoD Warzone, or Overwatch 2. For pre-teens (or almost anyone else for that matter) wanting to try out the free games their friends are playing, a $300+ console is a huge barrier. That’s why they play on their phones.
I have used Emacs for decades and TIL about undo-tree. Thank you!
yeah, i've read it. they're requiring people to write statements on whether/how their research advances the stated goals of the society in this area. next year, they will make it part of the scoring rubric for submissions.

here's the thing: "anti-racism" is being used as a motte-and-bailey argument. it's basically dogwhistling an intent to promote present discrimination (c.f. kendi) even if they're using a different definition that doesn't explicitly state that, because it's how that term has been widely used and understood. but when people take issue with it, they can be like "oh our definition doesn't say that." and ngl i find it pretty disingenuous.
That's great for them. I dont use it to justify no safety.
No, not the thing itself. Humans are fixated on the thing itself. I couldn't care less about the Dorkchain, but what role it plays in the greater scheme of things. Be it bad or good from your individual perspective.
Yeah but for whatever elite Stanford rich kid CS grad strawman you have invented for this uh... person experiencing laidoffness, have you considered that this imaginary person probably kept their job and the try-hards like basically all of the rest of us got the shaft? These are unlikely the spoiled brats you're envisioning.
Wasn’t that the whole point of microkernels/minix vs monoliths? With drivers being in the kernel can you even restart the modules?
Why do you think you know this? What do you base it on?
This sounds like Shi’ite inheritance math.
This looks really nice and I think I'll try it soon in my home server. Out of interest, do you have some blog posts on the "how it's made" side of things? I see some toml files for configuration so that would point to core being written in Rust, what else? Thanks!
Facebook and, more arguably, Google.
> I can raise you book burnings and gulags and death camps galore.

Yes, the famous events that come from letting everyone speak: book burnings and death camps. If we could just burn enough books, we could keep books from being burned forever. If we silence enough people, we can keep people from being silenced.
OMG, how have i never heard of musicforprogramming.net? I've used my own playlists (takes time/work to curate, and sometimes end up being too "peppy"), as well as things like lo-fi hiphop (which is actually ok, but sometimes too sleep-inducing...sometimes)...but this music for programming is amazing! Thanks for sharing!
Doesn't it all depend on the implied subject of the percentage? If you're thinking in percentage of total ingredients in the bread, then yes maybe it's an abuse of the notation. But I believe the intent in this case is to express each non-flour ingredient as a percentage of the weight of the flour. In that case it's a genuine percentage relationship.
I sometimes wonder: why do we so badly want artists to be able to make a living of their work?

Don't we want art that is pure and that is made by people like us (when we are not trying to make money), instead of by people who live in some completely alternate reality?

Copying has been a thing since the beginning of evolution. I'm ok with people making money through selling art, just don't bother me with human-made laws around copying.
> The situation is bad enough that the Snap employee said they’d considered quitting since then.

So, only bad enough that an employee might consider quitting? That... really suggests it's not a particularly bad situation.
> It will be written to on every kernel update and every initramfs update at least, which is what.. once a week on average?

Which distros actually use the EFI System Partition that way? I've usually only seen the ESP used to hold the bootloader itself, with kernels and initramfs and the bootloader config pointing to them stored either in a separate /boot partition or in a /boot directory of the / filesystem.
As a layman who hasn't done any kernel programming. Linus sounds pretty reasonable here. We can't have the kernel crashing because of a panic.
So in order to prevent book burnings we must...burn books that advocate book burnings?
That's all very well but the Rust-in-Linux advocates are advocating for #2 and fully agree with Linus on #1. So attacking #1 is attacking straw.
Is there a formal specification of what “what” and “how” means in this context? I’m familiar with your description, but it appears subjective to me because the phrases “what the output should be” and “how to generate the output” are poorly defined.
Yep, it goes both ways! You can paste or edit text that you want to edit on the Classic Mac in to the web browser as well
Yes, autopilot/FSD isn't there yet. Otherwise, Tesla is on a great track and growing like mad. How is he over promising with Tesla? Yes, Semi/Cybertruck are late, but it seems they are about to come to market. Meanwhile the Model Y is growing like mad, might have delayed the new models.
You find it maximally disgusting that someone would acknowledge that there are a lot of people lying about being hurt, so they can steal money. Got it. I acknowledge that you feel this way.
They built that in a year. Most companies can’t even complete a basic software implementation in that time.
It protects against the leading 70 percent of CVEs, which are due to memory safety issues. This is all Rust has ever claimed to solve and it's all I've ever seen anyone cite when advocating for it.

If these people are insufferable to you, that I can't change your mind on. That said you might want to get used to it since major areas of industry are already considering C/C++ as deprecated (a paraphrasing from the Azure CTO recently)
My first websites were built like this. I'd design PSDs and then slice them into images that I'd place in tables. I completely forgot about that approach!
It was experimental unveiling for attracting talent. The article is more "cringey".
Eh kinda it is supposed to be superior because it doesn't have secret backdoors, fewer security flaws, more features usable by a wider audience...

The first one I think is pretty important, as the saying goes if the cure is worse than the disease its not worth it.

Security flaws is arguable, not enough people have an incentive to work on free software, not because it doesn't get used, but because companies themselves haven't and aren't built to contribute back. We could have solved this fairly easily, just not in the software world, but I digress.

Lastly, more features, by which I don't mean in the sense you are probably thinking i.e. the narrow mindset popularized by MVP thinking "can it do X". More in the sense, "can you do X in Y manner". If you have ever used software and thought "why does it do this stupid thing or take so long" etc., its what I mean. Corps often build MVPs and "working" software that is otherwise horrible, free open source software is often used and improved by end users. Technical users, often, but they wear a user hat as well. Users can complain and request things directly.

It can produce bloated software as well, but when you don't have a budget you can do things like refactor. It will take a while but it can happen, where I think often corp software is held back by layers of deadlines, product owners, and BAs - the users are so far at the end of the chain the software they learn to live with is an absolute nightmare. They use it for some business reason, not because the software is in the least bit good.
Which is worse?

a) Having poor communication skills.

b) Describing people as toxic.
Dead authors don't get money for new books. If people are buying the books, who gets the money? Assets have value dictated by their money generation over time. Assets can also be owned by companies. Should the a book owned by a company suddenly be out of copywrite because the author dies? Should a movie made by hundreds of people be free at some point when the writer or director dies?

Should a house be open to the public after the owner dies? Should it go to some government?

There isn't any sort of consistent logic here. Once you think about assets, companies, multiple people working on something etc, it will never make sense to think someone dying means all their work should be free unless they own it and make it free in their will.
Eh, I personally wouldn't be so hard on someone because of language. Words don't have definite meanings on their own, it's our general agreement that makes them meaningful. And the meaning of words are often overlapping, shades-of-grey kind of deal, with even more subtle differences in individual understanding of them. Language is hard.

Moreover, polite explanations may bring enlightenment, but aggressive scoldings are almost guaranteed stop people from accepting your words, even if they're true, because in order to accept their truth, they have to accept the unpleasant implications of your words.

I think learning should generally be as pleasant as possible. Putting the work in is hard enough as it is.
Seems pretty mild to me. Where is the personal attack?
Current compiler optimisations are written with current hardware in mind, while I doubt that older optimisations would become pessimisations on newer hardware, so I'd compare the performance of the best C compiler from 2004 against the performance of the current best C compiler on today's hardware instead.
No, it wasn't. That was the second gen bot which isn't fully operational yet. The first gen model walked onto the stage without support.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but Rust also has no built-in mechanism to statically determine “this code won’t ever panic”, and thus with regards to Linux kernel requirements isn’t safer in that aspect than C. To the contrary, Rust is arguably less safe in that aspect than C, due to the general Rust practice of panicking upon unexpected conditions.
Nuance is awesome. Loneliness comes from people being pidgin-holed into general categories that don’t fit by prejudice or location. Nuance might help them find likeminded people around but the search would be slow, difficult, and time consuming without the web. Help people seen the nuance in you and you might end up a happier person.
I wouldn't say the Rust community parallels the C++ community in any way. The rust community is more like the insufferable Haskell/FP community who, despite producing very little measurable commercial value continue to look down on everyone else.

Indeed, there's a lot of damage control going on in this thread walking back Rust's guarantees of safety despite that, up until this point, being Rust's only real selling point. It seems like every C/C++/Go/whatever repository has at least one issue suggesting a complete rewrite in Rust.
Yes, you can define your own panic handler in Rust.

https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/panic-handler.html
It's an unproductive pedantry to expect every mention of the generalisation to be followed by a full disclaimer about exceptions and edge cases.

People say "it's raining" without having to add "except under roofs".
> Weird how many large OOP codebases there are to find oneself working on and how few large FP ones.

How on earth is that weird when OOP is a hundred times more popular than FP?
> and since you benefitted from it,

We're getting now to one of the bigger problems with the philosophy you're describing: What's "you" here? Is "you" people in the same genetic category as the people who benefited from redlining. Those who happen to look like these people, but share actual no genetic ancestry (say, because they were immigrants) or perhaps do not share the privilege (say, because they were born poor or had other disadvantages) might take exception. Push them too hard, you become the oppressor.

There's then a Kafkaesque attitude that manifests that says, "I don't care what your protestations are on this topic, nor will I hear your case, you belong to X [ where X is social group, economic class, identity group, race, or whatever ] and you should accept sacrifices for the great good. Full stop. If you deny it you're the enemy."

That's one reason why many people view highly "corrective" actions in the realm of social relations or economic re-organizations with a strong amount of terror. We certainly have strong examples of terror manifesting in the 20th century in completely separate parts of the world and at massive scale - always for the greater good.
Except, the person he is responding to doesn't make those claims - though I haven't read further up the chain - only downwards.
If you have
Cargo cult worship of OOP runs deep in the workplace.
>Is permanently exposing yourself to a level of emotional stress that results in a semi-permanent depressive state really worth the money?

Yes.
Well, it's explicitly giving an advantage to submissions that engage with these diversity goals.

Favoring research of understudied populations makes a lot of sense and is necessary.

Favoring researchers based on their own personal diversity metrics is controversial.

Favoring research whose findings support specific diversity-related desired outcomes is dangerous (and the policy may do this in practice).
<img src="xyz" alt="Handwritten post">

Thanks for the info!

I'm with the author in that this is a nifty trick, similar in some way to the map element (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/ma...), but it's one of the least accessible web pages I've ever seen.
I bear this because in my opinion, software development has insufficient regulation and standards. I've seen enough bad software that im glad that someone is enforcing some standards regarding worst-case behavior, because this is something that is neglected too often.

Its a bit sad that Linus needs to replicate individually what other engineering disciplines are mandated to by regulations. Look at car, train or aviation safety, they are decades ahead.
Don't smoke, don't drink, do exercises regularly, try to keep learning and challenge your brain. Find one or more hobbies that relax you and good, honest friends who like you for who you are.
> (on Android I still use a Chromium fork for now)

What chromium fork is on android and actually better than Firefox for android? I use Firefox for the best possible experience on android and would like to be aware of another option.
The white suprematists found it more effective not to explicitly state their ideological goals.

There are plenty of academic legal societies very interested in “states’ rights”, “returning to the constitution”, “memorializing the Confederacy”, etc. I don’t see a important distinction between an explicit statement and dog-whistle so thinly veiled that everyone knows what it stands for.
Tobii's UI stuff is lame. But it is possible to make good UI for eye tracking. It requires rethinking how UI should work.

What everyone has been doing so far is like slapping a touchscreen on a desktop operating system. Doesn't work! You need to redesign all the interactions for touch, like the iPhone did. Change how scrolling works, how selection works, how menus work. Redo the foundations. Eye tracking requires the same treatment.

Touchscreens sucked before the iPhone. Eye tracking can have an iPhone moment too, but someone needs to spend years rethinking everything first.
RCV creates a path for new parties to form, while preventing existing parties from being taken over by extremists. This leads to parties becoming more representative of their voters (and gives more people a reason to vote).

Term limits just change the balance away from elected politicians (who can build up a reputation for integrity and competence) and towards the unelected party machinery, who inexperienced politicians are more dependent on.

(Of course, for life-time appointments like supreme court justices, term limits would be an improvement, you're right).
> The point he makes is BS.
> Yeah, DUH!
> Well, if Linus doesn't realize

Bordering the hypocritical... And I got the impression you missed his point as well.
Non-English native European here - now I'm curious, what's the correct pronunciation of Okefenokee? I found a video [1] which pretty much matches how I'd expect it to be pronounced

[1] https://youtu.be/TMzoTPWBQ2Y