skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Using the platform which is best at doing what developers need while also providing a network effect is best for open-source. Why does it matter that the platform is open/closed source?

I think a better analogy is that you could cook an equally healthy meal in the kitchens of fast-food, high-end restaurant, or at home. The tools are basically the same, it's what the individual puts in and gets out that we care about.

Just last night, with just a few lines of JSON, I made it a single click to try out my project on GitHub Codespaces. This is great UX & DX that enables open-source to flourish.
Microsoft added back the YouTube app a few months later.
Gitlab 15.9 Released
I had my 12 year old daughter read the article and after she argued a while I said: Ok, write up your rejoinder and I will post it and see what others think.

For context we severely restrict access to social media in our house, but of course they find ways around this as expected (I don't pi-hole because I want them to learn to be hackers)

-----------------------------------

*Why I think it’s reasonable for me to have social media :)*

After reading the article, I still believe that I should be allowed to have social media for several reasons.

First of all, the article stated that people using social media moderately (half an hour to one and a half hours a day) had little to no decline in their mental health, compared to a large mental health decline in those using it a lot (3-5+ hours a day), and with the limit on my phone, I would be using it minimally, especially because I use a lot of my phone time daily to listen to music (like 5 [REDACTED], which I am listening to right now) and to text my friends, so I would only use it for 20 or so minutes a day, which is very low.

Another thing that the article mentioned is that people these days who do not have social media may feel excluded or left out, and may even miss things because they don’t have social media, which can lead to a decline in their mental health as well. It was also mentioned that not every social media user’s mental health is impacted, especially those who use it in moderation. Yet another point was that people will compare themselves to other people on there.

In case you hadn’t already noticed, I don’t really do that. I do find people pretty, but I don’t usually compare myself to them. Plus, most of them are significantly older than me, so I don’t expect myself to look like them anyway.

I believe that using social media could actually have greater benefits for me, such as being able to record Tiktok dances with my friends, or messaging people on Snapchat. I could also follow my friends and then help support whatever they do (for example, one of my friends has an account for [REDACTED]). Also, studies have shown that when people don’t get to do something as a child/teenager isn’t allowed to do or have something in moderation, they are more likely to do or have it in excess as an adult.
ExtJS was way ahead of its time - while it was most famous for its grid component, the data package, tooling ecosystem (long before we had node) and component architecture was amazing. Its learning curve was tough, but it was so worth it when you got to grips with it.

Jack’s post acknowledges what most of the community felt for years - the biggest mistake was alienating the developer community while trying to chase commercial success. The irony is that ExtJS and Sencha could have been hugely successful commercially if they had approached it differently. Instead the only people building on it were usually people working in large corporations, and even those would never use it for hobby projects outside of work due to minimum purchase of multiple seats to use the non GPL license.

I look back fondly on my time using ExtJS as a developer. They had some of the smartest engineers around working on the framework, a great community in spite of Sencha’s best efforts and I learned a metric ton along the way. Who knows where it would be today if it all went a little differently!
Your anecdote does not disprove the general case. If you walk into a hospital dead broke with no insurance with a chronic but not immediately life-threatening condition you're not getting the same level of care an individual would if they had the ability to pay for ongoing treatment. I've got a couple ER nurses I can rope into the conversation that can confirm that if you'd care to try to continue arguing the point.

As far as healthcare reform goes there's nothing particularly complicated about having a multi-billion dollar industry sieve funds that could be better spent on actual healthcare providers. There is also the minor issue of America's medical bankruptcy rates compared against literally every other industrialized nation on the planet, and the small matter of us having both the most expensive (by a wide margin) and one of the least effective healthcare systems of any 1st world country. Again, what the fuck are you stanning over there?
Small government, applied to policing, bears the slogan "defund the police." "Small government," with a blind spot for policing, is also known as authoritarianism.
> If you're in an industry that is likely to have random drug tests, it may be wise to change organizations/industry

FTFY
I like the BMW and the Tesla ones. I also heard good things about the Polestar Android.

The current OS on the Mercedes looks very laggy and not very user friendly, but if they fixed these major issues it could be quite nice. The high end Mercedes has a huge oled dashboard, it’s not something Apple CarPlay supports.
I make these accounts every so often, use them for a while, and then make a new one. It is just for general privacy reasons.
If I draw a picture with a pencil, did the pencil draw the picture?

My major concern is that this doesn't protect artists - it takes the rights away from the individual creator or user, even if they're using these AI tools, and moves towards the model being the creator.

This is a step towards centralizing ownership of human creative output based on the tools used, rather than the creative work or output.
The bots wouldn't know
You don't have any kids yet do you? If you do, what dreams do you fill their heads with if not that of a happy life?
How would you interpret what their point is?
It looks interesting, but posting it on random threads of HN will make users flag your post and mods ban your account.

The post definitively needs more info! Who are you? How do you pick the kids? Are you the "teacher", an "organizer" or just someone enthusiastic that is related to the project? Programing language? Age of the kids? Have you done something similar before? Length of the course? Why do you need money?

Try to write a long post answering all that questions and perhaps a few more, but not too long. Make a new post, and then make a comment explaining you are the [teacher or whatever], and be ready reply to the comments in the thread.

Some official suggestions in https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
They've found Code Jam to be a pain for a long time now, because the results never align with their ideology. Men (mostly eastern European and Asian) dominate these competitions to such an extent that Google created another Code Jam that excludes them, so women had a chance to win prizes. Also, Code Jam is often won by the same people year on year, look at the leader boards for the previous years.
No but I did go to a meeting once. They had doughnuts.
I’m not a parent yet, but I worry the same thing. It’s also bigger than parenting. I know a lot of folks in their mid-late 20s who suffer from self esteem problems due to social media. In addition to the overt and obvious depression, there is a constant “not-good-enough”-ness and sense of nihilism that comes with having the best of the best in hobbies, the most social, most active, etc., people shoved down your throat day after day.
Most news? Government press conferences? What?
My imaginary kingdom for native language libs that let me interact with eBPF to load balance logic forks.

Then I can put k8s and containers behind me.
I am for the jobs the asteroid will provide.
I think it's overall a good feature, but I'd prefer that it were voluntary. Have HN show you the original headline and the proposed modifications, and let the submitter adjust as necessary.
I'd personally love if manufacturers actually offered upgrades on their older cars. I had an older Mercedes-Benz and I would've absolutely given Mercedes-Benz money if they had a first-party CarPlay solution for my then car.
Google, Apple, and perhaps 2-3 other companies, have the weird characteristic that they are unimaginably enormous, AND the vast majority of their value is actually goodwill.

It's true that Apple makes good devices and Google does good search, but their competitors are good enough.

What distinguishes Apple and Google from their competitors is that we like them more.

Not "we" the technical literati, but "we" billions of users.

As a result, they are SO careful about maintaining that goodwill. But is this careful as in afraid, or careful as in focused?

Google spent time building it, but now seems to want only not to screw up.

Apple is still building. It's always trying to build it, probably because it spent its 1990's adolescence as an outcast.

Twitter and Facebook are similarly large and had similar initial stories, but of late have induced massive distrust. People are there only because they have to be, and they're struggling.

Apple and Google see Twitter and Facebook as examples of what NOT to do with your goodwill.

Apple's growth and technical chops keeps investors at bay. But Alphabet's sprawling failures have heightened criticism, as Google-X and other nice-to-have's haven't turned out any measurable benefit (and measurement is how Sundar justifies his strategies).

So fingers-crossed that Google's quiet retrenchment doesn't result in a Twitter explosion. I'm not confident that switching out Sundar would help more than it hurts (which is the FUD that he lives by).

More importantly, the industry-wide refocusing on AI produces lots of demo-ware, but no business on a scale that could grow Google or Microsoft. That coming implosion worries me.

What's lost in the rush to AI is the question of bureaucracy: how to keep these massive organizations from being self-serving, particularly to the extent they engage with the outsourcing and consultancy that drive financialization.

WFH likely increases bureaucracy by privileging process and work-product over brainstorming and risk-taking, so my bet is still on Apple weathering the storm better than the others.
The MBUX is awful. Unresponsive, lagging, buggy, unstable, anything that could go wrong is going wrong. Looking forward for fixes or more interest towards the user.
I assume the author is referring to the corporate social media full of advertising that makes people feel inferior so they buy what their selling to fill the hole in their sole that they created. There are very different kinds of social media that do not have advertising and dark patterns that do this to people of all ages. How can we encourage children to use these other than setting up firewalls that block them from the former?
No need to cause bad blood.
You're right, it assumes that teaching to an 8th grade level means they've learned to read/write at an 8th grade level.

There's also an assumption that the Amish are more rigorousness in their teaching and that they would make sure kids learn to read at the level expected from them which may or may not actually be true.

Although a few minutes with Google didn't give me a lot of firm numbers, it did return results which suggest that the Amish may be more concerned with making sure their students are literate and that they care very much about ensuring their children are well educated as a matter of cultural identity. I didn't see anything to support the idea that they would perform worse than non-amish children at least. It also mentions that they're nearly all fluent in two languages which is a bonus.

> Yet illiteracy is virtually nonexistent in Amish settlements. Without television and computers, they read more than most Americans. They have a remarkable ability to learn new skills—even complicated ones—and value lifelong learning. Amish parents are heavily involved in their children’s education: they donate the land and building supplies for the school, visit regularly, attend school events, and take turns caring for the facilities.

> In the book Amish Society, John Hostetler wrote, “On several standardized tests, Amish children performed significantly higher in spelling, word usage, and arithmetic than a sample of pupils in rural public schools. They scored slightly above the national norm in these subjects in spite of small libraries, limited equipment, the absence of radio and television, and teachers who lacked college training.” (https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blo...)

> That is one thing that sets our culture apart from the Amish. The Amish grow up writing. And yes, I grew up writing too but in the Amish culture reading is one of the biggest things in their culture. And even as adults such as Eli and Anna in the article; they participate in circle letters with people that have the same background, interests, or anything else that the have in common.(https://edblogs.olemiss.edu/jmswartz/2020/09/04/literacy-and...)
> Coles Online is not available in your country or access has been blocked

What is it that they don’t want us to know in Canada?
The problem with touchscreens in the '90s is that the technology wasn't good enough yet.

"Gig economy" technology is plenty mature at this point. The quality of the technical implementation is not my concern. It is the amount of cost it adds, and the fact that I think most current business models are not sustainable.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Right now I'm weary of growing overly attached to any deal that seems "too good to be true" without a good understanding of how it will become sustainable once they stop lighting VC money on fire. The long-term impact of these things can be bad even if they are cheaper or more convenient in the short term (i.e. Walmart running new stores at a loss to drive out local competitors)
Why does the automobile industry insist on keeping these things in-house when they are clearly terrible at them? I recall an interview with a Ford manager a few years back where they were asked something about adopting Car Play and the response was something like “we have people that can write software for us, so we won’t be using that.”
I am a subscriber. They increased my price a few months ago by 10%. And now they raised it again.
This is very cool.

I wonder if niche arcades could make a comeback with something like this. Imagine global competitions between clubs competing for rank, recognition, and reward.
> Boys are doing badly too, but their rates of depression and anxiety are not as high, and their increases since 2011 are smaller.

Bullshit. These numbers are self reported and show exactly the opposite of reality. Boys aged 15-24 are about four times[0] more likely than girls to die by their own hands, so clearly relying on self reported cases of mental illness is not very helpful and is likely to shift focus away from those groups who most need help.

Everyone who asks for help should receive it, but don't forget to keep an eye on those who stay silent.

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/187496/death-rate-from-s...
Let me break this down.

* In an error correction code, you encode a logical bit/qubit into a set of physical bits/qubits.

* Error correcting codes come in families, parameterized by integer distance d. Incrementing d, leads to a code with more physical bits/qubits, n, but also the ability to correct errors on a larger number of bits/qubits, j.

* If the error probability on each qubit is p, then on a code of size n, there will be on average n*p errors. It should be immediately clear that if p is small, then n*p<j and the code can correct errors that occur, but if p is large then n*p>j and there will be errors that the code can't correct.

* If the code corrects any physical errors that do occur, then there won't be a logical error (value of logical bit/qubit unchanged), otherwise there will be a logical error. In summary, given a p, you have to pick the right sized code from your family so that n*p<j, and you don't incur any logical errors.

* Another way of saying the same thing is that if p in your hardware becomes small enough, then as you increase your distance d, your logical error rate will go down.

These guys are claiming that their p is small enough that the distance 5 code has a smaller logical error rate then the distance 3 code, which is indeed a breakthrough (if correct). No one has done something like this before to my knowledge.

# Criticism

* The results are limited to storage errors. All they are doing is initializing the logical qubit in some initial state and repeatedly doing error-correction on it, to simulate a qubit at rest while the computation is happening elsewhere on some hypothetical other logical qubits. They have not attempted to do any experiments with applying gates to the qubits. Those will likely yield a much larger error rate. In particular, they are only testing a single logical qubit here, but the interesting gates would be two-qubit gates between two logical qubits, which are necessary to do any non-trivial computation.

* The experiment is limited to 25 cycles of error-detection. This means that their experiment shows that their device could hypothetically implement a depth ~25 circuit. As you might realize, useful circuits have depth many orders of magnitude larger, so this continues to be toy device.

The above is what immediately springs to mind, but I am sure the actual experts will soon chime in. My subjective opinion is that the technical achievements of just running the experiment are very impressive. This is a long journey to useful QCs, but this is nice milestone along the way.
The "off by default" applies to developers, I worked with this API about a month and a half ago.

If you press the "X" button (_not_ just click off the popup) it will use an exponential backoff on your device.
> Do people walking on foot carry torches?

I find a flashlight and a small pocket knife are essential every day carry. It's a quality of life issue for me, I want to be able to examine something at any time of day, plus street lights are intermittent and I walk a lot. I live in Oakland, a major city, but still insist on turning on a flashlight when I cross the street. People don't pay enough attention.
This really isn't a HN story.

However, the American consumer funding both sides on the war on drugs for half a century seems a bit insane.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_drugs
Wait around until Woz and Jobs grow up. Then hang out with them.
Netflix has been licensing some top indie games for their offering. Some of them are a cut above decent. Just Kentucky Route Zero, Immortality, Spiritfarer and Into the Breach would be worth the subscription by themselves.

The App Store and Play Store are full of ad free and micro transactions free good ports of popular PC games if you are ready to pay the price. Some are strictly targeting the iPad but others can be played on a phone. I have spent an insane amount of time playing Slay The Spire on mine. They are not really put forward by Apple and Google however.
Do you have any citations for any of what you just said?

Also, the Big Bang "theory" is a theory in the technical sense, in that the overwhelming majority of evidence ever collected is at least neutral towards the Big Bang, to say nothing of the virtually incontrovertible evidence in support (esp. the cosmic microwave background radiation, redshift correlated with distance to virtually all extra-galactic objects, low metalicity in ultra-distant (read early) objects, etc etc etc). It could still be wrong, but we'd need some other theory that adequately explains all the available evidence, and makes several new, testable predictions that are also observed to be correct. The term "theory" is not used colloquially here as a fancy way to say "guess" or "idea" (those are, in the same technical sense, best called "conjectures" or (generously) "hypotheses"). It has a very narrow meaning here, and dismissing the Big Bang theory as "just" a theory really reveals your ignorance on the subject here.
N.B. we do monitor all the asteroids

https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potentially_hazardous_object
I disagree. Sometimes you need to invent things yourself. Mercedes is an absolutely massive company with many subsidiary brands. This is not an automatic bad move.
I believe the previous poster and I were attempting to show that accusations of astroturfing are gross and can be hypocritical.
I'm not convinced that any of that is bad.

>the people who chime in the most about their careers are those whose careers (and relationships) are going the best

As it should be. Only a very small minority of people have careers or relationships worth emulating, and they should be setting examples for everyone else to aspire to.

Lucy is upset because she knows that she can do better. She sees people who are no smarter and no better than her getting much more out of life, and she is rightfully disgusted with her mediocrity.

Personal anecdote- at one time I made 30k a year, and I actually thought that was good. I thought it was good because I made more than my friends.

Then I started hanging out on Blind and /r/cscareerquestions. I got a CS degree and a job paying $70k a year, but felt like a failure because everyone on Blind seems to make more. As soon as I could I hopped to a higher paying role, but still felt poor.

But I'm not complaining now. Peer pressure from social media pushed me to build a great career, even if it made me feel miserable and inadequate for a time.

Is it better to be happy and complacent? I don't think so.
Are we spending on climate change? I see a lot of greenwashing, but it's more marketing than spending.

This said, I think you kind of miss a few points regarding climate change. First, it hasn't happened yet, it's just starting. We are living a mass extinction right now, and that's not a computer model or some prediction; that's a fact: we can count how many trees, mammals and insects have already disappeared (something like 75%). That's not the climate change problem, it's the biodiversity problem. If we magically removed the excess of CO2 from the atmosphere today, we would still be living a mass extinction. Just because of habitat loss (for other species obviously), which is due to how we live. We are destroying the planet, that's a fact, and that's before taking into account climate change. The solution to that? Produce less, consume less. There is no serious technological solution, because technology is the problem.

Then there is the energy problem: fossil fuels are going down (we passed conventional peak oil in 2008, general peak oil is about now, LNG is close) and we don't have serious alternatives. That will threaten our whole society. Solution? Prepare to do with less energy, meaning that we won't be able to produce as much, meaning that it actually helps the climate change problem -> that's fortunate.

Finally, for both of those existential problems, they exist because of how we actively behave (as opposed to a potential asteroid that doesn't care about our actions). So of course it seems like we should do something. But it's much harder than the asteroid: for the asteroid, we should actually spend money building a solution. For the biodiversity/climate, we should generally produce less, which is not compatible with growth.

Somehow we do the opposite of what we should: we don't do anything about asteroids, but we should. We do a lot of stuff that is destroying the planet, and we should not. Because we are short-sighted and looking for profit, not long-term (mid-term, at this point?) survival.