skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Would love to know what other people think about the overall design and comunication stategy of Charm.
On one hand I already knew who did this project even before the image was fully loaded, youtube content seems interesting, and branding is very strong but I also feel a bit overwhelmed by all the brands shouting at me. they have Charm Cloud, VHS, Soft Serve, Buble Tea, Lip Gloss, Charm, Wish, Bubbles, Glamour, Harmonica, Gum, Skate, Glow.
Nice way to collect email addresses.
RU's hope was their network of saboteurs would smooth low effort special operation invasion =/= spies keep tabs on military preparation pre invasion. Status of UKR war materials was well know. As was US training UKR troops who demonstrated willingness fight and had opportunity to gain experience in active Donbas campaign. TW meaningfully upgrading military capabilities would be even more transparent, without spies PRC still has lot more ELINT and survelliance satellites covering island 1/150th the size of UKR with even more limited areas that could be used for training / preparing. At the most basic level TW will need to visibly pour a lot of concrete to build up infra. Will saboteurs factor in a potential PRC invasion? Sure, but it won't be alternative to rationalizing a cheap a cross-strait campaign that can't be half-assed unlike a jaunt across paved roads on a land border by confused soldiers who thought they were on a training exercise. And that TW can't be easily supplied. PRC isn't gambling on TW or US being pushovers.
Though one is a television show and the other is valid expression of the political will of a country with deep financial troubles.
If resentment from rendering existing accessories obsolete due to changing connectors is the root cause of the delay, maybe Apple has been secretly waiting for the EU legislation so it can deflect the blame? e.g. "it's EU forcing our hands so we have to change."
> what good reason is there to believe that a constitution conceived over 200 years ago (when the US had roughly 1% the people, ~1/3 the land, legal slavery, an early-industrial / agrarian economy, etc., etc., etc.) is useful today?

What good reason is there to believe a politician today could do better? Or are you simply trying to use slavery as a cudgel to get people to not argue with you? Politicians today are a ruling class that are worth hundreds times more than the average citizen, receive better benefits like healthcare, can use privileged information for financial gain, are often large land owners, etc. Nothing has changed - at all. If anything, it's probably gotten worse at scale.

> Even if we agree that "free speech" and "free association" are reasonable universal rights (and I think we do), what these concepts mean in practice must necessarily evolve as technology gives us new ways of speaking and associating - and we will _always_ have to deal with the difficult question of what to do when someone, through exercising these rights, deprives others (intentionally or unintentionally) of the ability to exercise theirs. This balance necessarily changes as our methods of exercising free speech and association change.

Political interpretation by the lunatics in a post-mcarthy world are the reason that people think the bill of rights should be flexible. "But the founding fathers never talked about the internet!" is a very pathetic excuse from a very pathetic ruling class that currently controls this country. Any violation of the freedom of speech no matter the medium is a deprivation of rights. We have chosen to interpret it differently. Once you start opening this can of worms up you get all sorts of problems with what is intentionality, what is association, does "free speech" include things I don't like, etc. Right now there are plenty of politicians on every side of the spectrum who'd love to ban everything they don't like.

What I guess I am saying is people are the problem. Greedy, slimy, humans. The world is no more complex at it's core than it was 200 odd years ago. We have made it complicated by spending time finding gotchas instead of treating the constitution as a series of unquestionable meta-laws. Fix the politicians. The document is fine. To use your analogy, allowing simple amendments would be like changing the entire PR review process because a handful of malicious engineers refuse to ever follow the rules. Just fire the engineers!
This will probably continue to happen. Google/FB etc. used content that was created by others to monetize them but kept the profits away from the content creators. This resulted in a lot of original content going away (See the death spiral of the local newspapers) and getting replaced by clickbait, algorithmic content, misinformation etc. I don't think there is room for the same amount of growth going forward and this is simply the market adjusting their P/E multiple to account for the lower growth rate (FB is being hit harder because of the Meta overspending debacle).
This is exactly why voluntary individual action tends to be really ineffective at stuff like this, absent massive cultural support (e.g. consistent, widespread shaming and shunning those who defect). It's one of the main reasons government is, in fact, useful—it can be impossible to get out of these kinds of holes even when a large majority want to, without someone to make everybody play by the rules.

The core problem is exactly what you noticed: that you can be personally paying, in relative terms, a large cost, while having no meaningful effect, and while others are choosing not to pay that cost and doing much better than you. When the world where you defect is functionally indistinguishable from the one in which you stick with it aside from that you'd be happier in the former, it's hard to justify continuing.
Even extreme primitives may know about aneutronic fusion without having usefully achieved it. Anybody not primitive probably knows better alternatives.
Very cool.

Pedantic but suggest title rename to say “SF Bay Area” or “inner SF Bay Area”. SF is just a small portion of the coverage area.
Hah well, I get what you're saying (I mean, I got it before this). It's not always easy to find what you're looking for in docs, and it sounds like you really look to cross-references to help you do that.

My counterpoint here is the Google protocol buffers docs for Python [0]. Again I don't want to come down too hard on others' work, but just this front page isn't that helpful to me. For one, I don't need everything prefaced with `google.protobuf`, I know that's the package I'm looking at, and for another, the needless `google.protobuf` prefix and the attendant wrapping make the sections on the left really hard to scan.

But let's get into a specific module: timestamp_pb2 [1]. There are a grand total of two cross-references that aren't to the Python docs (which are KeyError and bool, which like, not the most helpful of cross-references). That's not a great showing.

If your argument here is that "RST nudges you towards explicitly denoting relationships between different parts of your documentation", I'm not seeing it, and I would guess these docs get a fair amount of traffic.

---

My argument here is that you're seeing features in ReST, and extrapolating characteristics about ReST docs based on those features, while ignoring real-world considerations (like developer motivation, for one). I'm sure ReST has features that seem like they would encourage doc authors to use cross-referencing more. But the docs I use are barely cross-referenced, I use DDG/Google searches for this, and pragmatically I think this is the experience of most people.

[0]: https://googleapis.dev/python/protobuf/latest/

[1]: https://googleapis.dev/python/protobuf/latest/google/protobu...
Apple said it has paused gambling ads in App Store app pages
I did notice in some cases frames getting delayed in the hyper demo but otherwise it works really well. This is an interesting approach!
Good. I was thinking about buying iphone, but this was the ultimate thing that made me not buy it.

I just hope Apple doesn't decide to screw it up somehow. Like making sure only pricey apple chargers works. Then it wouldn't matter at all.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how we can lay the blame for corporations cutting corners on completely unrelated legislation.

I get that there can be unintended consequences with passed legislation, but these seem too disconnected to be relevant. As in, there have been substandard USB-C cables since USB-C first came out.

The existence of those cables can't be laid at the feet of requiring Apple to use USB-C on the one remaining device they offer which doesn't use USB-C.
What's Telsa?
Yup, a house is housing first and an investment second.
What do you mean by this? I don’t want to abuse the back button
This isn’t about what you think, your opinion does not define what’s moral. Morality is defined by what the public as a whole agrees with. Today, the public is okay with blocking ads. The public is also okay with showing ads and paid plans too. Therefore, again, this is not a moral issue. But if it was, both the common (public and advertisers) and public expectations alone demonstrate that the less moral choice is to try to show ads to people against their will when they’re consuming content unrelated to the ads. The advertisers have always known this and they are free to not pay for ads and not support the content, but they choose to because ads still work well enough, for better or worse, despite ad-blocking behaviors among people who care enough.
It's keyboard dependent, but the same for all DEs.

On mine it's copose-/.
Over a decade, I’d say?
He has written other excellent articles. Check more at: https://beej.us/guide/
See also this fork of the project: https://github.com/OLSF/libra
That number is pulled from deep inside somebody's bowels.

The one spare cable per two devices attach rate seems pretty high to me. One, because people won't necessarily buy apple-branded cables when they can buy cheaper third party ones instead. Two, because a lot of the people who are sufficiently deep into the Apple ecosystem that they would buy original cables probably have a bazillion of them lying about anyway, because you get them with the Apple TV, and the Magic Keyboard/Mouse/Trackpad, and the airpods, and all your old phones, and probably some other devices I'm not thinking of right now. So the actual revenue from cable sales seems awfully inflated.

Then there's the counterfactual: Whatever revenue they do get from cables, they wouldn't lose it all. If you consider the people who buy Apple-branded Lightning cables instead of third party cables, I'd hazard guessing that most of them would still have bought Apple-branded USB-C cables if the devices used those. Apple sells USB-C charge cables (like the ones that come with the iPad) for the same $19 as the Lightning cables.

Put the two factors together, and I can't see the economics of cable sales being the driver for something as fundamental as the ports on their flagship products.
Yes, I pulled the numbers from the link you cited. I'm just saying that the nuance here matters a lot, and isn't captured by the headline number.

Barring some dramatic change in technology, we'll probably max out wind generation in the western US in the next decade or two, and it isn't a good solution for the most densely populated parts of the US. Solar isn't growing nearly as quickly (and of course, has the base load problem).
> where it is part of policing by policy and norm

Except that's just not true. The US has thousands of mostly independent police departments. Some use civil asset forfeiture (fewer, now that the supreme court has stepped in). Many don't.

What a small town in Alabama does has no connection with what the SFPD does.
As someone that deeply detests Apple and would never give them money, I will admit the lightning connector is superior in durability, inspectability, and safety than USB type C in virtually every way.

The real crime here is that Apple insisted on patenting the design and keeping it for only themselves, forcing the rest of the industry to adopt an inferior connector and ultimately force it on them too.

Classic Apple.
TIL Mt Diablo gets cold
I'll save you all the bother of signing up. The dataset is currently 45 rows. Not worth looking at yet.
Norwegian prices, no sign in required: http://konsulentpriser.no/
Not at all. It was an old connector that needed to be replaced. What I'm suggesting is that as a brand with that level of public recognition there is No Good Answer. Every option sucks in some way.

And the same is true again now for USB-C, "just switch to USB-C" is not an answer that sounds good for most people, and Apple is still paying for the bad will from customers from the 30-pin connector transition. The USB-C transition is only going to add to that.
> Cheap energy from fossil fuels have done more to lift people around the globe out of crushing poverty than any company you think is above "unbelievably harming" the planet.

I would actually argue that cheap energy has been one of the dominant factors in _creating_ poverty in the first place. It seems extremely unlikely that we could sustain the current global population without cheap fossil fuels, and other modern technologies. This created extreme dependency and contingency. The ideology that cheap energy is an unalloyed good, lifting people from poverty, assumes that unfettered growth on human population is always a good thing. Also, who is deciding what poverty is? The north american indigenous people certainly do not seem to view modern life as progress.

With 7 billion people on earth, I speculate that the absolute amount of human suffering has never been higher than it is at this moment both in material and spiritual terms. How do we celebrate that there are "only" one billion people living in poverty when three hundred years ago, there weren't even one billion people alive? And we are now living with the potential for suffering and mass death on a scale that would never have been possible without these technologies.

All of this discussion also takes a completely anthrocentric perspective. If we consider that the suffering of animals, and perhaps even plants, has any meaning, it's hard to see modern life, facilitated by cheap fossil fuels, as anything less than a catastrophe. So, yeah, I am with the parent commenter.
No one is confused. As I said.
The schoolbook formulae for most linear algebra operations are written using scalar products, e.g. for Ax as scalar products of rows of A with x.

On a computer, such operations should almost never be implemented with scalar products, because the speed of a scalar product is limited by the latency of the FMA operation, not by its throughput. It is possible to accelerate the computation of a scalar product by ordering the elementary operations in a tree, but that complicates the program and it still does not reach the maximum speed of the hardware.

Except for vector-vector operations (i.e. for level 2 BLAS or greater levels), it is possible to change the order of the loops so that the scalar products are replaced by AXPY operations (whose result vectors should be kept in registers, to not be limited by the memory transfer throughput), which are not limited by the latency of the FMA, like the scalar products.

Except for vector-vector operations and matrix-vector operations (i.e. for level 3 BLAS or greater levels), it is possible to change the order of the loops so that the scalar products are replaced by rank-one matrix updates.

Most of the computation of a rank-one matrix update consists of the tensor product of 2 vectors.

Therefore, a matrix-matrix multiplication can be computed either by scalar products of the rows of the 1st matrix with the columns of the 2nd matrix, or by the tensor products of the columns of the 1st matrix with the rows of the 2nd matrix. The second method is much faster. The result of the tensor product must be kept in registers for the duration of the computation, so large matrices are partitioned in small blocks, i.e. submatrices, which are multiplied directly (an additional complication that increases the number of nested loops is that the small blocks that can be multiplied directly must be grouped in larger blocks that can be kept in the level-2 cache memory and reused for computations).

For matrix-matrix multiplications it is less important whether they are stored in column major order or in row major order, because when submatrices are brought into the L2 cache, the matrix elements will be gathered or scattered to be in the best order, before being loaded into registers repeatedly.

For matrix-vector multiplications, it is better to have the matrix in column major order, in order to compute the product by AXPY operations between columns and elements of the vector, and not by scalar products between rows and the vector (computing AXPY operations with shorter parts of a column at a time, so that the result vector can be kept in registers).
It is completely just a way to protect from bot traffic. I don’t think we even send a validation email. If you want, you can type in a dummy address, no worries
I fully agree. The parent wrote "before changing directory", so I assumed we are talking about the case where changing directory was necessary.
This feels like an arbitrary line to me. The host expects the ads to be rendered, and that's my problem. The advertiser expects their ads to be viewed, but that's their problem. What's the distinction?

Is it that I'm only in an implicit social contract with the person serving the content I want? Then it would be morally fine for me to block ads as long as I trick advertisers into thinking I didn't- the host only cares about whether they get paid. And what about on YouTube or Instagram, where the advertiser is the host? Google expects me to view their ads, not just render them, and I'm definitely in a social contract with them.

Or is it that they are allowed to stake a moral claim on the content of my browser, but not on my attention? Then I'd be allowed to block full-screen ads that force me to find an X, or autoplaying ads with sound, as they are forcing me to give them something they have no right to. And if I had an attention deficit disorder or a shopping addiction, all ads would be in that category. Even without such things, every ad accesses my attention without my consent, even if it's just the attention required to ignore them.
My old job had 5 day-a-year first line support. It was fun, sometimes. There was this one time the customer was explaining an issue over email and I asked for a screen shot. I kid you not, they printed their screen, scanned it, and then emailed that to me.

We weren’t allowed to touch the “I can’t access my account” tickets because that usually involves some kind of identification process where getting it wrong could result in huge legal liabilities. But all the other stuff… bugs, people just confused on some process, or whatever. Those were fun.
The number is probably overinflated as all hell, but the article does arrive at that number as the lifetime total, not yearly sales.
> Overall, the outlook for the overall economy has darkened. The Fed has raised interest rates five times this year and is set to do so again next week and in December. Chair Jerome Powell has warned that the Fed’s hikes will bring “pain” in the form of higher unemployment and possibly a recession.

Those hinging important economic decisions on the "Powell Pivot" are going to have to wait longer. There's no way a pivot is happening into a combination of positive economic growth like this, strong jobs market, and sky-high CPI increases.

There are maybe three factors that will cause a pivot:

1. Inflation falls to match the Fed funds rate

2. A rapid housing market decline starts to cause disruption throughout the rest of the economy.

3. The bond market starts choking.
Hey, Damien here, author of the article! Real happy you like it!

We initially thought about running tokio in wasm (they've added support for WASI recently as well IIRC), but elected against it because we found it just moved the compile time problem from one compilation target to another.

So in the end we decided to go with the second option. So when the guy in the example `.await`'s, context can go back to the runtime. But inside wasm this is not tokio, this is our own shim to the executor running on the outside.
And I guess you could have a grep/regex function for filtering :)
So I had an iPhone 4 which i ditched quite quickly as I thought it was a junk phone and went Android for a while. Picked up again at iPhone 6 when I was paid for some work with an iPhone 6 Plus and have had iPhones since. So that was 2014, 8 years of Lightning ports.

I've had 0 lightening cables break in any capacity.

While the USB-C cables I've had for Headphones, iPad, Asus Keyboard, Corsair Mouse, and a few other little things. I've had to replace 5 cables.

I love the idea of having 1 cable that I can use for everything. But no matter what anyone says, the lightning cable is superior in terms of physical connection.
I teach a software development undergraduate programme. We have our students use Linux for all development. We have them do no configuration whatsoever, unless you count installing a couple of packages from the package manager and a few vscode extensions. Works just fine out of the box.
I learned Java in the 1990s and heard that there would be CPUs with Java. Today, My Raspberry Pi has such a chip. JDK gets installed with one the distros I use. I can run Java on a variety of platforms if I want.

The reasons I avoid Java:

* too many large updates in the past for vulnerabilities.

* two large corporations extinguished Sun Java.