skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It seems inferrable, at least in broad strokes, from the other, non-technical meanings of the word. See for example "the court is now in session" or "I had a physical therapy session this morning".
Also the post conflates citations with impact. Citations is a measure of popularity, but impact is subjective. Which has more impact: stable diffusion or research that can better diagnose cancer? The answer to that could be argued either way.
What Happened to China's Mars Rover?
> It's generally a great idea to encapsulate unsafe code into a sound internal interface whenever possible, but this doesn't necessarily require that every single function be its own standalone interface. What matters is that it's clear to the maintainers that the callers (which should best be nearby in the code) are bound by its requirements.

If a safe function has requirements to maintain soundness then it's either an unsafe function or an unsound improperly-labeled safe function. It's a contradiction in terms to label a function safe while also having unsoundness that can be created by misuse of the function.

> Suppose I have a function that internally creates an Option<T> in such a way that a certain invariant is upheld. I call Option::map() on it, passing it an inner function with an unsafe block assuming that the invariant is upheld. The inner function is called nowhere else. By necessity, this inner function is not marked unsafe, since Option::map() requires a safe FnOnce.

The inner function (assuming it's within the scope of the outer function) I would say is still "part of" the outer function. Inner functions are in-effect just more complex scoping within the outer function. They're not first-class citizens. As long as it is impossible for the inner function to ever escape it's scope then I would still consider this safe as long as the outer function can safely accept any input. Again, making sure that all unsafe blocks are properly commented. I would make it extremely clear by putting the unsafe {} as starting at the beginning of the function and ending at the end.

However there's a slight problem here after thinking about this a bit more. It must be solely the responsibility of the outer function that the inner function is used correctly. It cannot rely on the implementation of any piece of code outside the inner function.

The acid test here is whether it is possible that if the implementation of Option::map() were to ever change (while itself still being sound) whether it is possible that it could expose unsoundness without violating the FnOnce preconditions, i.e. without causing a compiler error. If a language (or library) version upgrades can expose unsoundness in your code, then your function is unsound. It's unclear from your example if that would be the case.

In general though I would say this is a poorly written function however and this type of thing should be avoided.

> But having an invariant held across multiple functions does not automatically make your code unsound.

Again, to that I would disagree.

> In certain situations (internal implementations of external traits, callbacks from external code), it is even necessary to have an unsafe precondition pass through the call of a function or closure marked safe.

I would need a more concrete example to look at. However the callbacks from external code example sounds especially fraught.

> All it takes is the recognition that not every single function is its own standalone interface.

I would go even further and say it is an invariant of the Rust language itself that any safe function will never expose unsoundness.
Can confirm. A few years ago and my coworker caught our boss using the spam button instead of delete, even on customer mails discussing (I think) an upcoming project.

He was otherwise highly functional, spoke and wrote fluently in three languages but hadn't noticed the difference between spam and delete.
Nope. ML, albeit ancient, was not even on the map on HN until after Haskell picked mindshare. I mean you could find a post here and a post there, but nothing like Lisp's posts and HN-mindshare.

And, sure, HN was from the start a Lisp-built forum, made by a Lisp-advocate, and thus attracting Lispers, but it wasn't that different on the wider internet.
Cryptocurrencies are pseudo-anonymous means of payment. On the one hand, you do not need to pass verification to create a wallet, and on the other hand, you can determine the source of funds from the transaction chain. Exchangers do not want to deal with “dirty” coins, so they conduct KYC processes and check each transaction.
1Password teams
No, what happened was an article last week had a headline saying one government report said that, but that's because the headline was lying to you and the article said the report was "low confidence". …And the majority of other government agencies still say it isn't, and all the ones with "medium confidence" or higher say it isn't.

If being artificial is why it was bad, why are the later variants of it worse? Are they artificial too?
Do you find that your Matrix integrations with other services are flaky at all? Or have trouble integrating specific features from other types of chat?
If you are an Elixir (or perhaps Clojure) expert, the following doesn't apply. But every other person jumping ship from, for example PHP or JavaScript should think twice.

I think Phoenix is overhyped a lot. The barrier to entry is gigantic. The lack of up-to-date resources doesn't help. It's definitely not as polished as Laravel for example.

And while there is Pragmatic Studio with their wonderful introduction video, there is nothing like Laracasts where there are new tutorials added all the time. Frankly, it's on another level.

Deploying Phoenix is a nightmare when compared to Laravel.

In Phx you have to reinvent a lot of things and often, of course, choosing the wrong path.

Sure try the chat demo apps Phx is famous for but beyond that it's a pain in the ass unless you are very good Elixir programmer and can bug fix and reinvent-the-wheel things out.

Also, Phoenix is bad in environments with bad wi-fi. Think halls, kitchens, factories. So, I wouldn't do a Phx app for some warehouse2customers type of operation a because there are some very interesting out of connection problems, the necessity to constantly ping/"hearbeat" home to the server.

For me it is a pass. The experience with 1.6 and 1.7 rc was bad.

P.S. One extremely important thing, PHP is made for sloppy web programmers (like me). It will forgive and brute-force-work like hell when needed. Elixir is less forgiving and you can shoot yourself in the foot much easier. That's why I prefer PHP - it's much easier to put up some website that works well even on a cheap hardware and then you can PHP-optimize and tinker if you want.

P.S.S. The speed thing is overhyped as well. PHP vs Elixir for web stuff is not as big difference. In Laravel - if you use PHP 8.2 and cache your views, routes, etc. the DB stuff is still the 80% of all of your problems, not the PHP or Laravel.
So 79% of theses houses weren't sold?

If no, prices will likely adjust, unless those selling are not in need for the money.

If yes,

* the headline is either false because of these 79%, people re-adjusted their behaviors in order to be able to afford, which would make it a regular transaction. You can't buy without shifting your current life-style.

* only the rich could buy, further adding to inequality. Nothing can prevent that from happening but state regulation.
> But at the cost of catastrophic destruction of ecosystems and disruption of a climate that made that possible in the first place.

I disagree. We could have wrecked the natural environment even if we had a much inequitable and oppressive society, think Nazi Germany winning the second world war and entering a nuclear race with the US. There is no single "western model of exploitation", there is a whole family of them (in an alternate history sense), all capable of destroying the planet, but with massive moral differences, and your framing loses that nuance.

This nuance matters because your implication is that the environmental costs are a tradeoff for this prosperity, where in reality they are just a direct result of a runaway species with technology. And our proven ability to control this process towards moral goals, such as material welfare for the masses, suggest to me that we can, in principle, limit and reverse the environmental damage, as long as we recognize it as a worthy moral goal.
I stopped using Phoenix a few years ago, but I'd do something roughly as follows:

- Imagine a grid where each cell is a 1x1 square mile based on lat/lon

- When a device moves to a new cell, have it join the phx-channel representing that 1x1 cell. It must also leave the previous phx-channel of the cell it occupied. If your devices move very slowly, have them recalculate the cell/channel they belong to once an hour (for example).

- When an anomaly occurs, send a message to the channel. Every device in that cell will receive the websocket message. You may also choose to send your message to the 3x3 cells that surround just the cell where the anomaly occurred.

- If you need to tell all devices something, use broadcast.

Feel free to change 1x1 mile to 1x1 meters or whatever.
That's always been my read.

"Hello"
"Step back while we take care of things for you"
"Just a few minutes longer"

I don't know the script verbatim, but it always read as very creepy and "This isn't your computer, it's Microsoft's." I would Ctrl-Alt-Delete just to have the pleasure of not seeing those messages.
I was going to also note the Librem 5 non-USA, but they state a 1-year lead time for delivery. (I suppose, it could turn out possibly longer, when talking about durations that big, and considering slippage history.) And a different supply chain would be half the reason to go Purism. I don't know whether that reasoning for not bringing it up is interesting.
Having spent my life during and since university consulting/freelancing at a kinda senior level from the start effectively, I basically never was able to get a full-time role when I wanted one, because I think that I did not fit the hirers' (overly narrow) mental model. This has persisted for decades. I think their close-mindedness ultimately hurts the hiring businesses. (I have ended up creating multiple businesses and have switched to academic research instead.)

I suggest that you work round the problem, rather than expecting them to see sense.
I remember when I got my first Mac (right around the time Snow Leopard got released) and all the programs looked and felt so consistent. Not just those made by apple, but also third party applications downloaded from some random corner of the internet.

What really blew me away (and still does) is that apple somehow got people to care about their Human Interface Guidelines. At the time this was an entirely foreign concept to me. All the windows applications I used had very inconsistent behaviour, even though all the ui elements came from the same native toolkit.

There wasn't even an App Store or a centralised repository to enforce this, and yet people thought it important to adhere to those guidelines.

I think this is the reason why even today iOS apps feel like they have a slight advantage in quality.
All of this comes with significant disadvantages, but there are upsides that are seemingly impossible to achieve otherwise.
Terrance Tao on AI vs. traditional software
More here: https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao

And specifically:
https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/109945628011027107
To note, the discussion is on the EU side.

Yes, process matters in that they need to be reviewable and fixable. Them being good or unbiased is a function of how much scrutinity and oversight there is, but before even talking about biases, we need to know what's happening.

Even outside of fixing the system, in most countries if your get a credit application refused you can request the info that lead to the decision and act on it (update/fix your credit history for instance). Even if you can't fix specific aspects you at least know what conditions block you and deal with it accordingly (no use in reapplying twelve times if you're banned for life for instance, same way you might want to wait 6 months if it's a matter of prescription)

So yes, knowing what, why and how is as critical as the final outcome.
Or rather it discourages people from attempting to apply at multiple places to get the best offer..
Because Firefox allows full ad blocking and Chrome doesn’t.

Chrome is sponsored by another surveillance advertising company, Firefox is not.

Chrome is market dominant and hard to hurt, Firefox is small and easy to hurt.
Should they have evolved it to be cross-platform? What about Apple's Metal API? I don't get why people expect Microsoft to do things that would benefit their competitors.

> The lesson though, is that APIs "succeed", no matter what the quality, based on how many engineers are invested in having them succeed.

Exactly. Microsoft was willing to make things work for them. Something other vendors wouldn't do (including those who are ostensibly "open source").
Wow, fascinating. Thank you for detailing that. Do you have somewhere to follow its development?
PD is used also for VJ-ing. There are other approaches to do that as well but not sure why this one would be invalid.
I’ve experienced in recent years that many of my friends who never cared a single bit about science started to link to scientific papers in order to back up their arguments (usually some form of right vs left discussion). This became much stronger during the pandemic. I’m not 100% sure if they believe that this is factual truth or if it’s just another one of the myriad of argumentative tools they use. But you’re absolutely right that they see it in a completely different way than scientists do. I’ve tried to explain to them that picking one article out of a thousand is just confirmation bias, that anyone can find one article (published somewhere) that confirms anything, and that scientific conclusions need to be replicated, but it’s useless and frustrating.
So how is your interview process better than theirs, since you keep getting these lousy people? I saw many worthless people in the places I worked at before Google, then at Google I didn't see anyone close to that bad, so to me their process seems to work. They were very open about their data around hiring and scoring hires as well, and that data was very clear that the interview they arrived at was the best interview, they tried and experimented a lot and arrived at it.

Alternatively maybe those people were just unmotivated to work for you and spent their internship preparing for Google.
> If you are an important politician, an opposition figure or a dissident of some kind, some unfriendly country might decide to invest lots of money in order to gain access to your data. A six words password (77 bits of entropy) should be out of reach even to those actors for the foreseeable future.

In case you are in this position I fear that increasing password strength is one of your least worries. We saw with LastPass breach that it is possible to install a keylogger on one of security specialist's machine which ultimately defeats any password. IMO you'd better find a specialist or a company you trust to safeguard your devices' from any malicious apps.

P.S a mandatory XKCD's comic https://xkcd.com/538/
Fatih's Workspace
> It's not the EU's fault that you have to click cookie banners. Those banners are only required if a website plans to do malicious things with the cookies.

I just check some web pages from diffrent organs of the EU:

https://commission.europa.eu/select-language?destination=/no...

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/de/european-council/

https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/ins...

They all have cookie banners, some of them are super prominent and annoying. So maybe they as well are doing malicious things, maybe they don't understand they own regulation, or it is just impossible to have a non-trivial web page without a cookie banner in 2023. In either case, the regulation is totally dettached from reality and has become just some ritual.
> To do some good may not justify the harm.

Bread can be baked to feed the needy, or to fill the bellies of soldiers who invade a peaceful neighbor. Who is to blame? The people inventing industrial bakeries, or the people using them to feed their invasion army?
I'd ignore advice from Apple or Big Tech about how to use words. They are not language experts. They are not content experts.

They are infected with the same over-sensitive "inclusivity" reaction that has spread far and wide like a virus. Apple has adopted the widely criticised Stanford harmful words list.

At bottom of this article are link to another page which has the following advice:

"Avoid 'Peanut gallery' and 'grandfathered'". Because they arose from oppressive contexts.

People are not "grandfathers" at their core. Nobody becomes a grandfather because they had an accident and woke up with the unwanted new identity. Grandfathers won't protest in the street about the term used in tech circles. Grandfather is a name describing their relative position in a family tree.

"master", "slave", "sanity check", "kill"... Apple says no to all the usual copy and paste words from the list. The viral nature of these lists spreading around is of concern.

"Fall through the cracks", "on the same page", and "backseat driver"... Apple says no.

- support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/applestyleguide/toc
Are you saying that the tenants in an Airbnb doesn’t constitute “housing people”? Where do you draw the line then?

Airbnb has many problems and is a disgraceful company especially nowadays, but one thing they did well is to add significant flexibility to a legacy industry full of gatekeepers.
Well put but obvious? Am I missing the rest of a thread?
The only thing I can agree is deploying, which is pretty daunting compared to Laravel, but still feasible (unless you have the horrible idea of using mnesia, God help you then) but everything else? I have no idea what framework you've bee using.

>Elixir is less forgiving and you can shoot yourself in the foot much easier.

What? If anything it's the other way around. Elixir does not let you shoot yourself in the foot, it will crash and tell you why exactly it crashed. PHP will chug along and you won't even feel pain even though you don't have a leg anymore. That is NOT a good thing.
> Rust is designed around safety and soundness.

Then why are crates automatically updated from internet ?
This is not safety, this is remote code execution.
A debt contract always has a debtor and a creditor.
It is interesting because I hadn't considered that angle
Seafile works well as a Dropbox clone. Been using it for a couple years now without much issue. My files are replicated to my main computer and I push files from my phone to the Seafile instance over WebDAV (automatically with Autosync in Android) and download specific files through the app.
Input handling was pretty basic back in the day, there wasn't that many different hardware options to support.

For audio everyone was using 3rd party tools like Miles Sound System etc., but even OpenAL launched around 2000 already as an OpenGL companion. Video had the same thing happen with everyone using Bink which launched around 1999.

In comparison using OpenGL was a lot nicer than anything before probably DirectX 9. At that time in DX you needed pages and pages of boilerplate code just to set up your window, nevermind to get anything done.

Advanced GPU features of the time were also an issue, OpenGL would add them as extensions you could load, but in DirectX you were stuck until the next release.
How can we do something about it? I think we as HN community can come up with a solution to make housing affordable again. I'm open.
Thank you for this perspective. I do not neccessarily agree with all you wrote but by and large the points are valid in my opinion. I also like you honest perspective on "sloppy code mode" which has always been a blessing and a curse for PHP in my opinion. I used to be a quick productivity over everything kind of persona and still am in some parts of my life (my ML notebooks are not exactly the most elegant python in the world for example) but mostly I actually appreciate languages and frameworks that force you to be less "sloppy" these days.

That being said, I'm hyped for 1.7 and will dive in later to work on a hobby project :)
When you have an error message you don't understand, at least you can google for it.
If something simply doesn't work, there could be many possible underlying causes, and finding a list of possible errors and going through all of them is much more frustrating.
Yeah, I think citation without reading is pretty common.

You find a lot of citations of Metropolis, Metropolis, Rosenbluth, and Teller’s paper on MCMC but I bet 1 in 10 have read it.

Ulf Grenander’s massive book on Pattern Theory is another, or Kolmogorov’s 1933 monograph on probability. Often cited but come on, did you really read it?

Another I’m aware of is references to the notion of VC dimension in learning theory. Many papers mention a hard paper by Shelah as an original reference to the concept…I saw the same reference given in a book by mathematician David Pollard with a remark along the lines of, “people say this is the same as VC dimension but I confess this paper is impenetrable to me so I really don’t know.” I appreciated the honesty.
This is coming up a lot, here [1] and [2] here. Not a lot of discussion. I enjoyed it, since it was refreshingly hard-core and low-level.

Absurd amounts of actual run-time optimization (as opposed to golfing the source size) are informative and cool and I guess more people should engage in that kind of activity. :)

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35021860

[2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35029536
What will happen to hotel prices then?
> The original message doesn’t even mention it’s a swipe.

The actual message includes a countdown which automatically makes an SOS call if you do nothing.
My "favorite" Microsoft fact is that DirectX and Xbox were codenamed Manhattan and Midway because Microsoft's gaming division just ran on "what codename would be the most racist towards Japanese people?". The dxdiag icon is an X because it was originally the radiation symbol!

And this tradition is carried on to this day in milder form when Western game devs hear Elden Ring is more popular than their game or try to "fix" visual novels and JRPGs without playing any of them.
Living on land is kind of a niche activity that we take for granted given how many species here have perfected the art of legs and lungs.

Many more forms of life either live in ponds, walking ponds (us) or mega ponds (oceans).

Think of it as life coming in two forms: tiny stuff alongside big stuff, or just tiny stuff. The tiny stuff lives in water and in the absence of Europan antelopes, it’s the tiny stuff that we’re looking for.
In this thread: a bunch of fabricated stories about how AirBNB is “actually a good thing”
Yeah but I can't imagine a CVS/Walmart having people just walk in and pay for things with their app and happily move along. I more or less see the mass robberies that are currently happening in various metro areas, particularly in California. They'd empty the store in minutes.
If you are trying to bootstrap, try microconf talks on youtube.[1] Good signal/noise ratio. I still find good informative talks.

If you find a speaker on microconf interesting, follow their talks on other channels.

Newsletters I find useful:

https://marketingexamples.com/ - copywriting examples
https://tips.ariyh.com/ - 3 mins tips extracted from research papers

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@MicroConf