skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In JS there are a pair of Stage 1 proposals to increase support for richer/more complex keys in collections like Map: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-richer-keys

Strings seem really easy for composite keys and "deep comparison" for objects, but you could do more like C# actually does under the hood which is compute simple hash numbers (getting back to the article's point that computers are often faster with number calculations than string work).

C# does most of its equality "magic" with GetHashCode() (surprisingly not Equals() and obviously not ToString()). (Relatedly this is why C# linters will yell at you if you override Equals but not also GetHashCode. Equals seems the more "useful" override but GetHashCode is the actual work horse.) Most implementations of GetHashCode (even for deep comparison situations) are generally starting with some random prime constant XOR bits of all the data and return the integer you have left after all the XORs. You can do the same thing in JS today if you wish. Modern .NET now has a nice System.HashCode helper class for doing it quickly with a lot of good best practices baked in (a strong starting constant, for instance), so it's easy to forget the bad old days of writing all those XORs by hand, and .NET has always had GetHashCode a required method of System.Object so "recursion" of hashcodes is guaranteed to be simple. But those things aside, it's still really easy to compute hash codes by hand in JS to use for comparisons than to use string manipulation, if you put your mind to it.
Hiiele!

X-Tee, the protocol that allows information sharing between goverment systems, is also a horrible pice of XML and SOAP with some crypto sprinkled on it.
Interesting, thanks for the insider take. I honestly would love if they went with Rust.
> Pascal's Wager itself away

I was not familiar with that term. Still, I think I disagree that a firm conviction based on perceived and/or veririfiable facts and/or experience will get subdued because "it's rational to not have this philosophy".

In case of a conflict between rational cost/benefit estimate and perceived truth I would think that truth should win at least as often as cost/benefit.
> As I mentioned in my first post, conflict which is evenly matched should not be regarded the same way as conflict which is not.

This was covered by the paper. You are talking about Peer Victimization without bullying. Bullying is a form of peer victimization in which there is a power imbalance (size, numbers, status, etc).
Memegen predates Google+. And there were lots of people loudly saying that the emperor has no clothes, but the VP in charge didn't care and many mandates forcing people to work on G+ were issued anyway.
Pay me enough money and I'll work very hard trying to disprove the laws of thermodynamics.

I'll tell you it can't be done, of course, but if you insist I'll work hard at trying to do it.
It's mentioned right there in the friggin article.

> The crypto entrepreneur was thought to be a big donor to Democrats but now acknowledges he gave equally to GOP
Heroku: DNS Propagation Delays in Common Runtime and Private Spaces
The current state of anything under active development isn't old, sort of by definition.

I take your point, but in my opinion nothing currently happening in the space gets remotely close to "revolutionary" , and maybe not even "cool" for some peoples value of "cool". It's more the same-old-same-old, chipping away at the broad array of problems.

So if you really want to us an automobile analogy, it's not like it's IC vs EV. It's more like steam powered vs. early electric (they predated IC's!) and nobody has come up with an IC yet. Or the right road system to use them on.
I cannot relate, not a familiar feeling.
I'm presenting an outdated and simplified version of the process, because yes, you're correct in the short term. The process happens asynchronously where the bank gets to loan out the money now and sort out the backing money later.

But it has the same _effect_: the government controls the maximum money supply and the creation of money.
GIMP is the only software whose UI makes me feel completely stupid. Every 1-2 years, I install it, fire it up to crop an image. I stare at the screen, right click a few times, then I close the app after admitting total defeat. It's been like this for 20 years.

A few years ago, I found out that Irfanview runs under Wine. It's a great feeling to understand the UI of a program.
The main problem with these LLMs is that they hallucinate information. For example, I asked about famous people from Chicago and it told me Barack Obama was born in Chicago. Of course he was born in Hawaii, but if you relaxed your eyes until the words on his Wikipedia page all blended together, you might accidentally think he was born in Chicago too.

The problem is, GPT-3 doesn’t have a knowledge graph of the world. It’s all just statistical guesses.
Even on Quay the centos7 tag hasn't been updated in 2 years so it's clearly not getting any of the package updates. Yay, security!
There was also the thing from a few years ago where people were logging in and seeing other users' camera streams.

This is probably the most blatant false advertising I've seen.
The models do vary, but according to brita all the models with lights are based off of the lid opening.

https://www.brita.com/support/faqs/replacement-filters/

Brita® pitchers and dispensers have three different styles of filter indicators—Pitchers WITH Max Fill Line, Pitchers WITHOUT Max Fill Line, and sticker filter indicators.

Pitchers WITH Max Fill Line

The filter indicator lets you know when it’s time to replace your filter. It activates when the lid is opened for 5–8 seconds (based on size of reservoir) and measures water use by counting the number of times the reservoir is filled.*

Pitchers WITHOUT Max Fill Line

The filter change indicator lets you know when it’s time to replace your filter. It is activated each time you pour, and measures water use based on 8 fl. oz. pour
Tesla sells its chargers at Best Buy amid move to make its connector standard
I’m a math major. I learned category theory in school.

I think of category theory as an easy way to remember things. If some concept can be expressed as category theory, it can often be expressed in a very simple way that’s easy to remember. However, if you try to teach math using category theory from the beginning, it feels a little like trying to teach literature to someone who can’t read yet.

Anything directly useful from category theory can be expressed as something more concrete, so you don’t NEED category theory, in that sense. But category theory has the funny ability to generalize results. So you take some theorem you figured out, express it using category theory, and realize that it applies to a ton of different fields that you weren’t even considering.

The effort to reward of category theory is not especially high for most people. It did give us some cool things which are slowly filtering into day to day life—algebraic data types and software transactional memory are two developments that owe a lot to category theory.
> their abuse of BSD

It's perfect by legitimate to prefer copyleft, but I struggle to take seriously the idea that a license can be abused by following its terms, particularly when the reason people put stuff under permissive licenses is to let anyone do whatever they want with it without giving back.
I do not think it means A/B testing and such is going away, but that public testing is going to be more widespread about things most people will probably be interested in.
Sometimes its no fault of anybody, its just the length of the queue. E.g. green card renewals, simple, used to be done in 6 months or less. Now it is assumed that it will take 24 months. This i90 has no burden of proof or stuff, its just simple pay fee & get new card. So, sometimes applicant thinks rightfully they are stuck in there for ages, and USCIS has no saying in hiring new staff or implementing new laws or changes.
Gimp would get more donations if they put more effort into making it approachable and accessible. It's a problem with community-driven projects in many contexts: it's so worthy that criticism is stifled, even where this would lead to improvement and needed growth in the community.
Seems like related issue was in Aug 2022: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32572906

and might be fixed:
We just deployed a workaround that brought our site back up.
1. Find your DNS Target in heroku. It should end with .herokudns.com

2. Lookup the historical DNS record to get the IP addresses. You can find historical DNS records here: https://securitytrails.com/dns-trails

3. Replace your CNAME record in your DNS provider with A records that point to the IP addresses you just found.

Your site should come back up shortly. We plan to revert back to CNAME records once Heroku gets their DNS issues sorted.
No, anywhere in a moderate climate will do.
It's also great for depression; it's just a lot harder to get depressed people to exercise than ADHD people[1], so compliance is worse.

1: Though it's by no means easy to get ADHD people to exercise; most cardio is boring and there's also: "I'm behind on all of my work and personal projects, and you want me to set aside time for recreation?"
Yeah, it does feel more filter. I think that's a good thing. It seems like a search aggregator with some logic, it is a search aggregator with some logic and says it's a search aggregator with some logic. That other chatbots get taken as conscious entities by the naive isn't a good feature for either the providing company or for society.
The Internet's Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz (Full Movie)
In Android, I use Keepass2Android Password Safe app by Philip Crocol. As far as my experience goes, it is quite smooth and for the most part it is able to fill out the login form properly.
You are suggesting that A/B testing is going away rather than this being simply an addition to widespread testing.
Hi, I didn't vanish. I have a busy life. And HN has Guidelines [1], and you may want to re-read the last two:

> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

> Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills.

You appear to be violating both of those guidelines.

You assert that my comment "does not engage with the topic". I disagree. I think I analyzed the submission, and found parts of it worth discussing.

Why did I make the comment I did? I should have taken more time to establish myself, and I'm sorry I opted to quickly highlight rather than to explain. Allow me (now that I have a moment) to explain.

It's a puff piece.

Despite being a puff piece, does it make any actual claims? Yes. Hmmm - maybe it would be interesting to identify the actual claims.

Are any of the claims actually falsifiable? Yes. Hmm - maybe it would be interesting to point out the claims that are actually falsifiable.

Do I think any of the falsifiable claims are demonstrably false? Yes. Hmm - here they are.

Am I sure that they are demonstrably false, and do I have the evidence to back that up? No. Darn. I can't say they're definitively false, but I can at least highlight the two that I have the strongest belief that yes, they are probably wrong.

Hence the only thing I added to them: "I think both of those claims are demonstrably false."

I'm sorry I didn't have time to go find the primary sources that would back up my belief.

1) Our Trust & Safety team... remains strong and well-resourced...

Wow. If you scan through the comments complaining about my comment, I don't see anyone who seems to have any problem with me pointing this one out. We've all seen the articles about the layoffs, firings, and resignations. I believe a recent one identified that there is exactly one (1) person left, doing an important moderation job, in a major market...? I wish I had the reference at hand, to show a primary source.

2) ...impressions on violative content are down over the past month...

If you scroll through the comments, I think you'll see some interesting discussion, including bringing up the Overton Window, and someone even provided references. (Great username, trs8080!) So, it appears folks on HN thought it was worth discussing. I'm glad to see their discussion. Maybe it would have happened without me pointing out that section, but maybe it wouldn't.

Cheers.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Back in the 80's, I was programming in Fortran on a VAX 780. I had converted a complex eigenvalue-eigenvector routine from Algol to Fortran, and, after verifying that it worked, decided to see how much bounds checking added to the runtime. I figured since so much array referencing was done that this would be a worst case scenario. In that particular situation, it added about 30%. I decided that this was well worth it and kept array bounds checking on in all my code.
You're absolutely right that I've never bought a new house because exactly as you note, the floorplans of new construction are built to maximize profit and wow naïve buyers when touring the house.

That doesn't change the fact of my statement: The way we design houses is worse for our psychological health. Therefore, there is an opportunity to improve our mental health by designing them different. There may be economic problems in the way of that opportunity, but the opportunity is still there.

By "opportunity" I don't mean "easy thing we can do" I mean "understood problem that is possible to solve".
The potential gains from cost saving is always capped at total cost. The potential gains from increasing revenue are (typically) much larger.
> What have they been prioritizing ahead of that?

Gnome integration and Wayland as far as I can tell from its roadmap. So basically staying functional under the ADHD driven development model that is the Linux desktop environment. A bit hilarious that Gimp now has a hard time staying up to date with Gnomes Gtk when Gtk was originally an UI lib for Gimp.
I wonder if there could be a flag to tell the compiler that you don't care about getting the exact distinct panic message for each bounds check, please optimize it. I suppose the assert is a flag, in a way, but I mean something more global and automatic. Maybe the compiler could emit a single shared basic block per function that just says "out of bounds access in function foo".

We've learned to accept that when you turn on optimizations, you lose some lines and variables from your debug info. This is a pretty similar trade-off.
Django does this by storing the state in the database, starting the main Django in a thread that can be restarted on code change [1] ; It does not keep the state in memory.

https://github.com/django/django/blob/e34dfad0a310c616c7b62e...
Sadly that's well beyond my memory now. It was pretty formative for me though because I learned a lot of networking and programming and unix stuff so that I could write a TCP-over-HTTP tunnel to a home server just to bypass it. So all in all, great success to be honest.
yeah, i'm not trying to say it's a good idea. but the parent asked why, and the answer is essentially because we're lazy, it's easy, and it works often enough that we can get away with it.

i figured the article we're all commenting on would be evidence enough of why it's not necessarily a good idea.
"a crime"

I'm surprised by 'DeFi' nerds who promoted cryptos to escape government interventions during bull markets, but who invoke state institutions like justice when they have lost everything.

Crypto wasn't dead to me until I saw that post.

I hope governments won't do any investigation into this, as it's what anyone who gave money to FTX invested for.
$188 without storage and bandwidth.
Appreciate the explanation! Thank you for taking the time.
Why do companies like Google and Microsoft not get more aggressive with these semi-criminal-orgs? Couldn't they massively raise the cost of being in this business by by making an example of a few?

Brainstorming:

- Sue them, aggressively.

- Looks for exploits in their own systems and publish their code, making it worthless.

- Publish lists of their owners and employees and/or ban them from Google/Microsoft services.

I'm sure folks here could think of more/better ideas.
In today's NYT Dealbook, SBF claimed that "unspecified third parties" were behind the "hack" around the time they went bankrupt, that they spent "thousands of hours" on compliance, that dealing with the CFTC is "too much work", that they had "too many boards" overseeing their work (internally), and that customers might be made "whole" if FTX were recapitalized like Bitfinex was. Also, he claims he took all the money FTX/Alameda loaned him and then used contributed it back to them so he's super duper not sure where all the money is. (This last bit by itself isn't usually illegal; law firm and accounting firm partners do this all the time when they first buy their stakes, but FTX appears to have double- or triple-booked this money: first when received, possibly again when loaned out to SBF, and again when recontributed back to the company.)

He claims he has no hidden funds, he's down to his "last credit card" and last $100k in his bank account.

I expect many of his statements today to be used against him in court. Assuming he hasn't "died" by then.
Released under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 license and streamed over webtorrent.

https://webtorrent.io/faq
One data point: Website and iOS app is working here in the UK.
Holy cow. I’ve been on HN forever and I assumed when the reply button disappears it’s because they don’t want flamewars or whatever. Thanks!!!
Is there a scenario where you would be willing to interpret such a parent’s pacifism as naivety?

There are many extremely complex issues that do not have obviously right or wrong answers.

Being bad at something is not the same as being a bad person.

How would you describe the difference between a parent who actively abuses their kids and a parent who loves and provides for their kids, but fails in some area along the way?

You’ve gone right back to a binary stance here.
Total profiles, or actives?

I agree that moderation is a chokepoint. And that it scales two ways:

- Moderating users, which argues for smaller instances.

- Moderating instances, which argues for larger instances.

That is: there are presently about 18,000 Mastodon instances. At 1k profiles each, this means a maximum Fediverse size of 18 million people. Note that 18k is an order of magnitude larger than the peak user limit.

Twitter sees, roughly, 200m MAU (monthly active users). Facebook sees 3 billion.

Mastodon at those scales would break both in terms of instance size and number of instances. With an even balancing, you'd have ~ 15k instances of 15k members, or 30k instances of 30k members. The overhead of moderating instances at that scale would be large, and some intermediary tier to offload that workload would likely come into existence --- effectively a hub-and-spoke hierarchical network.

The alternative would be something like present-day email, in which long-lived early-established mailservers are (mostly) grandfathered in, and increasingly draconian rules against new servers, TLDs, or even national-level (BGP) blocking comes into play.

Note: I've been on Mastodon since 2016. Played in email antispam space for a while as well.
I would agree that the US today is far less equipped to deal with rigorous debate of ideology. I don't agree that cancellation was not part of how the KKK was defeated, or that it is not an appropriate tool to have in the toolbox.

Rigorous intellectual debate has it's place. You have to definitively disprove something at the start. But at a certain point in time, giving them any more spotlight does more harm than good. There is a certain portion of the population that will be swayed into ridiculous viewpoints no matter how thoroughly they have been destroyed in a debate, no matter how much evidence has been piled in front of them. Rigorous debate of flat earthers rarely convinces the flat earthers they are wrong, and doing so in a public setting provides them more opportunity to spread their misinformation. We would gain nothing of import by putting a bunch of flat earther's on national television and debating them.

Nor would you gain anything by platforming a KKK member and debating them on stage today. There's no advantage to be earned by doing so. But, at the time, when they were at the height of their power and had many people believing in them? Certainly. They had a way to preach their message regardless, the reach to spread the information to a large audience. Being able to argue against them and destroy their message was important.

But cancelling them was also part of the process. Boycotts were a SIGNIFICANT part of the effort in defeating the clan. You can find many, many, many historical references to them. Here's a small sample:
https://thecatholicnewsarchive.org/?a=d&d=TCT19221207-01.2.6...
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27502105
https://academic.oup.com/chicago-scholarship-online/book/214...
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...

The American Unity League in particular spent a large amount of time and effort organizing boycotts and other methods of cancelling the KKK. It was important and it was effective.

edit: I would like to note that I do not believe that people should be cancelled simply for having differing viewpoints. I do think that we have white nationalists and others who should be cancelled for continually espousing racist hateful rhetoric and agitating for violence against others. I do not think that someone should be cancelled for stupid twitter jokes they made a decade ago when they were 20 and had yet to learn better, but now do.
> They weren't at a casino. They lost the money in trading markets.

Yes. They've gambled away the money that didn't even belong to them in a game of chance.

It's a casino, but with other people's money.

> And a moment of due diligence would have so informed anyone considering investment in anything

Ah yes. It's not the criminal who's at fault. It's all the people who didn't think this was a criminal.
Our Incoming CEO
> I don't know, do they? I can't really address a comment like this without you being more specific.

I tried to convey that by pointing out that you are exercising free speech to eliminate someone else's free speech. That seems contradictory to an environment where free speech exists.

> Sure, this is a fine principled stance to take. However, if this is a principled stand rather than one based off situational politics, doesn't that apply to other forms of speech which are used to stifle speech of others?

> Hate speech is one example. The people who advocate against cancel culture generally aren't in favor of more restrictions on hate speech.

It seems a little disingenuous to just lump everyone that doesn't think cancel culture in together with those that like hate speech. I don't support hate speech.

> Money in politics is another. If political advertising is protected speech, doesn't a billionaire having the ability to outbid me for all ad inventory in the lead up to an election stifle my ability to freely voice my beliefs? Either the billionaire's ads aren't free speech or they are free speech and are being used to drown out the free speech of others.

I don't know the answers to this, it does not seem black and white and seems like a more complex scenario but an ad market does not seem like it is exactly similar to a free public forum. But yes, it seems bad if that's what you are asking me.
> The problem is that non-photoshopped photos do not represent reality either.

> A lot of edits are about approximating perceived reality rather than deception.

I agree with the first, but disagree with the second.

Anyway, another interesting thing is that many cell phones have a filter by default that removes skin imperfections, so now almost all photos by non professionals are "photoshoped" by default.
Whatever you want to say it was, I thought it was pretty fun to watch.