skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes you are. No google product emerged because there was no product vision from the researchers, the execs, the engineers, and any of the PMs who read about it. It would have leaked out if the researchers had some grand product that morons at the top squashed.

Google is a massive company and cannot keep a lid on anything like this. There is no evidence that there was anything there as shown by both the lack of rumored products and the lackluster also-ran release of Bard.

This type of arrogance is extremely common in any research positions (both academic and industry) because people are trained very early on that it’s not their job to suggest how these things might be useful. Papers are not reviewed for applicability, grants are not based on it, dissertations are not graded on it, and on and on.

It’s systematic arrogance trained into researchers by the institutions.

Look at Alan Turing and many of the other big names in CS. The same arrogance is in all of their writings, speeches, etc but that’s expected because it’s academia. A researcher’s role in an R&D department at a corporation is not as disconnected as academia, and the researchers should know that.
LCDs have PWM-dimmed backlights, so if your laptop isn't set to maximum brightness, you're probably staring at a flickering surface too.

Perhaps a simpler explanation is just contrast? Both OLEDs and CRTs can produce much higher contrast than LCDs.
Signal to noise ratio. When the admin of a server thinks the ratio of another server is too low, the admin will block it.

What's the definition of too low? Up to the admins of that server.
> Similarly, I think many humans would like to differentiate between, "resumefinal.docx" and "resumeFINAL.docx"

I strongly disagree. Those sound exactly the same. If you had a physical filing cabinet and asked someone to get a document from the final folder (which is supposed to be the human-friendly metaphor we're using here), they would happily open a folder labeled FINAL, and be quite confused if you had distinct final and FINAL folders.
I had absolutely no issues with hosting my own mastodon, I pay $7 dollars a month for a VPS with backups. I'm the only user that can register on my instance so it's just me.

I'm `@aj@s.aj.immo` and I can follow and have conversations with other mastodon users of various servers seamlessly. I was just doing it this evening in a thread while tagging four different people on four different servers. When people tag me in posts it just looks like `@aj`

This is the right way to do this stuff in my opinion.
To me it seems like disposing of the object being destructured is the natural solution. But I can see where others will disagree.
Does this work as desired?

"$(dirname "$file")"

Is $file not actually quoted here? Since the quoted bits are

"$(dirname "
")"
This tries to sound profound but it really just misunderstands basic sum types. In Rust/Haskell/etc you're free to return multiple values if that's even potentially useful. If you have a function that can completely fail, partially fail (in this example, opening a file but then something else fails), or entirely succeed, you can encode that in the type system. In Go you cannot define this in the type system, you just have comments explaining how it works and hoping both that you implement it correctly and callers of your code read and understand them. If your code does return both files and errors in some cases, chances are callers are going to handle it incorrectly, especially if, say, the caller is responsible for closing files/responses/streams/etc.

In Rust/Haskell I can write a type with three values like Success(file), PartialSuccess(file, error), or Failure(error). Callers must then handle all of these. In Go I always have four cases for a simple function including those three and the final case of neither file nor error. Most Go callers will not handle the case where err != nil and file != nil and often the case where err == nil and file == nil will cause a panic and crash the program.

There was a tradeoff for this, but in this case the tradeoff was entirely in making the Go compiler simpler at the cost of making the Go language weaker and Go code more error-prone.
I’m reading on a tablet. Counter opinion, I like their website. I’m neither a designer nor a user of sketch.
TerraUSD: South Korea 'cryptocrash king’ Do Kwon jailed
I don't know that anyone, including RMS, is suggesting outlawing selling software.

But some, including RMS, are suggesting all open source software as an ideal and goal and possibility for a realistic society. How we get there is a different question; I think RMS would suggest as a voluntary political movement -- of people and organizations choosing to product open source software and boycott non-open source software. Have you seen free software advocates suggest outlawing non-free software and if so where?

Anyway, I was replying to someone saying -- but how could programmers have jobs, if all software was open source? we can't all work in academia.

So I think it's clear there could be lots and lots of programmer jobs even if all software were open source, and not just in academia. I'm not sure you're following my "enterprise" example. There might be a company that produces Widgets, and sells Widgets, but they have developers in-house to produce software that helps them make widgets. There are lots of such in-house programmers.

Now, many companies might say -- but we don't want you to share that software, what if our widget-making competitors got a hold of it, they could compete with us better! I think we developers know it doesn't really work like that -- the software can almost never be used as-is, the other company will always need it's own developers to adapt it. But that also doesn't mean it's useless, parts of it may be useful -- including by those in other industries.

But either way, the issue isn't "losing potential companies", it's the worry that it will make us less competitive if we share the "special sauce". But it seldom works that way.

But sure, some companies business models depend on proprietary software. It's clear the ecnonomy/market woudln't work exactly the same. Perhaps software engineers could no longer count on 99th percentile compensation (although I'm not even sure of that), but that's different than saying it's incompatible with software engineers getting paid, on a wide scale.

I do agree that we should be talking about free houses and free furniture, sure -- but the difference in software is that it can be copied infinitely at no cost. If I produce a chair, if you take my chair i don't have it anymore. If I produce sofware, literally everyone can have it at once, without having to manufacture extra copies at significant prices that must be paid by someone. That's why it's different than houses or chairs. I'm interested in non-capitalist houses and chairs too, but there's no reason we can't discuss free and open source software -- which after all already exists and is a major existing thing in the software ecology -- until we've solved free chairs and houses too.
Were we ever NOT there?

https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-copyright

"Can AI Art Be Copyrighted? It has long been the posture of the U.S. Copyright Office that there is no copyright protection for works created by non-humans, including machines. Therefore, the product of a generative AI model cannot be copyrighted."
A close to impossible task, if anyone can do it's probably Heikki though.

Unfortunately I expect this to go the way of zheap et al. Fundamental design changes like this have just had such a rough time of succeeding thus far.

I think for such a change to work it probably needs not just the support of Neon but also of say Microsoft (current stewards of Citus) that have larger engineering resources to throw at the problem and grind out all the bugs.
Now that's the cloud provider with the worst customer support. I've never been able to reach anyone there.
I love SDF--good nostalgia for the way the net used to be. Just bought 5 more years of MetaARPA-level membership a few days ago.
I want my entire desktop surface to be a display. 4*8 feet more or less.

I also want a 0-width bezel, so they can be tiled seamlessly. Why? I want an entire wall to be a display.

I want, I want, I want, ... :-)
Two thoughts:

* As I sort of mentioned, I suspect that the others may actually do a better job of compatibility than WSL1 because they're on unix-likes already so there's less fundamental differences to try and make compatible. For example, fork() is already cheap, and unix-likes already have filesystem performance like Linux.

* A binary compatibility layer is less important to begin with since you're already on a unix-like. For example, sibling comment says postgres didn't work; FreeBSD already has postgres as a fully supported native package, so you're unlikely to care how it runs under the Linux compat layer.
Mountainous regions that aren't totally arid
No one's forcing people to categorize themselves. You can be on a non-specific server, or you can be on one for a particular community—but even then, nothing precludes you from talking about other things. It may be the case that instance pickers/lists/descriptions aren't clear enough that you don't _have_ to limit yourself, but there's nothing forced about it.
Nobody owns rust, except as it may exist on their server. This is basically like asking why (e.g.) rust, and rustcode, and rustnews are all different subreddits and why don't the same links appear in all of them. Because they're different. If you want to see all of them, you subscribe to all of them.
Tech is only a small part of what I’m talking about. I mean more that the standards have risen significantly as far as the quality of art style and polish, and the sophistication of gameplay and metagame depth.
> "This drug is known to be poisonous and at the prescribed dosage it would be lethal. There is no no success of this drug treating any disease including cancer." I can't imagine anyone signing up after that.

People were quite literally drinking bleach to try and cure COVID. People already vastly mistrust the medical system, they would sign up gladly because the friendly guy at the local herb store told them about it and then blame the doctor for when they die from it.
I think you could definitely get into a loop where you have two values chasing each other around, offset by some number of cycles, where all their positions are full, and they keep evicting each other when they get to the array where they hash to the same index. It's certainly not an idea situation but you can limit the likelihood of it happening by keeping the load factor in check, and probabilistically all these chains should eventually terminate.
Mass federation is the best solution to resist mass surveillance and censorship. I never have a problem picking an instance because I just create my own instance whenever I want to use different SW. In a few minutes I can usually spin one up. and I have a few running on my SBC sitting here on my desk. I rarely ever block anyone as unfollowing is good enough.
Oracle Joins Amazon, Microsoft, Google in Hyperscaler Club
Would be fun to see this turn up as a case study for two identical assembly lines driven by motors. One on the “fast” frequency and the other on the slow.

In my imagination, the specialists are brought in only to learn that the RPMs in one motor were juiced because someone didn’t practice cable management
If what you seek is a small set of key takeaways, succinctly described, skip to the Conclusion. It's about two pages, and seems to summarize the author's findings and predictions.
You can just split infrastructure into a separate company which does not sell power itself. That what the EU forced almost everyone to do. Basically you end up with a publicly owned monopoly which owns the power lines and a bunch of companies which basically make their money from hedging.

The outcome is that countries which adopted the model tend to have lower energy prices than those that didn’t and have it’s a government regulated monopoly (more or less) like Poland. In theory having a lot of participants competing on equal terms should result in higher efficiency longterm.
> I grew up in a time when David Duke was allowed to speak on campuses.

College campuses are not major or important platforms.

> Major media platforms didn't exist outside of antenna TV.

Cable news has been huge and important for 40 years. Before that (and today), there are thousands of widely-circulated publications with dissenting opinions that reach millions of people.

There's no reasonable argument that information is censored since it became essentially free to publish on the web in the 90s.
1. that fact is not disputed in the article

2. hours worked, and "working," have legal meaning, which, again, is not disputed by either party

in america, if you contract with a fellow to work, and you find the work unsuitable, you can discharge him quite easily. but you still owe him his wages!
Problematic users do tend to congregate on certain servers because they keep getting banned from better moderated ones. Eventually they find the ones that won't ban them, and now well moderated instances have an easy target to block them wholesale. That's how you end up with instances like explodingheads.
There's absolutely nothing stopping browser vendors from implementing ActivityPub. I don't think the browser is the right place, but browsers also implemented automatic RSS feed detection for more than a decade so it's not exactly unprecedented either.

Browsers don't need to care, anyway. There are some problems that need solving (notably, following/interacting with users on other platforms) but there are ways to do that. I'm not quite sure why nobody has come up with a good standard for a web-activitypub: URL handler, but once everyone agrees on a format adding support for cross-server stuff should be easy.

Web browsers can access webmail clients and mailing lists just fine. They even have mailto: as a means to cross the federation gap. All of these problems are implementation issues, not conceptual impossibilities.
Do they only block 127.0.0.1? If this truly is a security improvement I would like to see an explanation why they don't block 127.0.0.0/8 instead.
"Don't tell me what to do"-ism?
The article has everything to with an FPGA accelerated NIC connected service though. Did you perhaps misunderstand what's going on? Because your comments make it sound like you've missed the point.
I also want my Roku box to be able to display PDF files. I'd even pay for it.

and a pony.
The very next video Youtube recommended did a great job of critiquing that video, in my opinion, digging deeper into the statistics and showing how the 1% are skewing those statistics significantly and hiding declines for poor people, as well as other stats such as mental illness, things are getting much worse, especially in richer countries, and those stats are being ignored by people trying to push that the world is only getting better and better over time.

https://youtu.be/OoIcsj9ysvs
While the headline implies it's talking about LCD displays, it actually refers to LCD panel technology. The innovation is in the backlight technology behind the LCD panel, so LCD displays still have an exciting future ahead of them.
I have a 12 year old LCD panel. Do OLEDs have similar longevity?
one my wonder about what could this be:

> routes" (procedures, mapped to URL patterns, that execute logic such as accessing models (cached or queried)

A "route" that executes logic such as accessing models responding with an output based on what mime type was requested, can set a layout or template for the view ...

changing the name to "route" does not change the pattern that you are implementing here.

Rails Controllers are doing exactly everything that you describe here with the only exception that there is a big table that keeps references between a URL and the controller method associated with that URL.

I am not saying Rails is better than what you build, but just noticed that a lot of what you describe as a "route" is matching what a controller is doing.
That's not really the point, no one is claiming this is supposed to be for general purpose workloads. If you know you need this sort of relatively small, super low latency cache, then this is a great solution, but those usecases are very niche - though so are most applications where an FPGA is the appropriate solution.
And yet, a large number of helicopters from the FSU military industrial base (which I think we can say is what Russia has: it has the upside investment in the cold war, which paved for its capacity to build these kinds of weapons) have indeed been shot down. So either, they lack sufficient numbers of these defensive units, or their maintenance has proved a problem in the field, or there is some locally overriding mechanism.

Or, perhaps other munitions continue to prove effective?

There is the sense "out there" in the commentariat that some systems used in this war are sub-par: not top of the line. I personally cannot believe any nation state a year and a half into a war it is palpably losing (or at least "not winning") in terms of achievement on the ground, manpower and public perception would deliberately hold back a technology which worked this well.

If they are digging into old stocks of tanks, then they are not capable of fielding new forms of tanks at sufficient volume. If they had the new stocks of tanks and they worked, they'd deploy them to great effect. The tanks problem, I would suggest projects into the helicopter problem. Where are the evidences of this system defeating ground to air missiles?

Russia does not have command of the air. Why is this?
> this is a solved problem, I don't understand why languages (...) insist on not having sane Option, Either, Try etc types.

This is not a "problem" as much as a conscious philosophical stance:

Errors don't actually exist, only conditions that you dislike. All the error handling you need is if/else. Everything else is unnecessary emotional baggage on some conditions that should not pollute your language. And even less so, gasp, your types (!).
Ha ha, this gave me a good laugh
I noticed a pattern of college educated people starting artisanal businesses. I know a person with a legal degree that is baking pastries, for example. That's just one person of course but I think it's getting quite common. If you look around here in Berlin, there sure are a lot of very well educated expats running all sorts of small businesses making coffee, craft beer, donuts, sourdough bread, whatever. They've given up on the white collar careers they were trained for.

It's not just a Berlin thing. It's happening all over the place. I bought some regional wine in the Netherlands when I visited my family there. In a small village from a tiny business that produces wine locally and sells it on local markets. I should add that the Netherlands is not known for its wine production. That's a completely new thing (thanks to global warming). This is far away from the big cities. The same market featured all sorts of local produce. In the US you'd call it a farmer's market. Expensive produce made by people with decent educations aimed at people with disposable income.

What's an artisanal business, it's a business model where the added value is in something being done with a personal touch and craft. Mostly without a lot of automation. People pay extra for that sort of thing and the people doing this stuff tend to enjoy what they are doing. The whole point is quality, craft, and tradition. As volume production for highly automated/processed stuff scales, prices for that drop and demand for the artisanal stuff increases.

Just an observation: automation is a race to the bottom and it merely serves to enhance the value of stuff that is harder to automate. We automate the boring, low value stuff first. That creates more capacity for doing the high value stuff. Which as the wording implies is great for economic growth.

Related to this is the re-shoring of manufacturing jobs. Now that automation has lowered the price of doing things locally with fewer workers, it no longer makes economic sense to ship stuff half way across the planet. Plus people like the idea of locally produced stuff. Americans want US made cars and phones. Germans like their German cars. Etc. Yes, a lot of that manufacturing uses less people to produce vastly more goods. But that's just causing them to grow faster and employ more people.

That's why there is a labor shortage instead of mass unemployment. Despite macro economic circumstances, a few years of lock down, etc. This stuff is just fueling economic growth. The whole economy is shifting to emphasize qualities such as being locally produced, sustainable, etc.
Judging by how easily shoplifters are convicted, it would appear you can just "know it" when the crime is property theft. No one gets off the hook by claiming they "accidentally" stuffed a bunch of expensive goods in their coat and walked out the door; no one should get off the hook by claiming they "accidentally" refused to pay their employees.
This article is remarkably light on actual tech, and full of PR blah blah.

Basically,this new Russian system is a magic shield against missiles.
`with` blocks in Python become very ugly when nested, I'm glad it's a single line personally
In order to use and understand the word kindergarten I need to understand and speak at least one German word. That's knowledge of German, even if it's a tiny bit of knowledge. The fact that some English speakers aren't aware of their knowledge of German doesn't make kindergarten no longer a German word.
It's amazing that pixel density has been stagnant since 2014, when the first 5k TV (low ppi) and 5k desktop displays (>200 ppi) were released. It's 2023 now and it still takes a kidney to get 5k >200 ppi, and we only recently got the 6k >200 ppi option for 2 kidneys. Pixel density, however, is stagnant.

I expect the industry realizes 6k is basically the stopping point so they're intentionally approaching it very slowly.

Edit: Updated with ppi specs to draw focus to pixel density of desktop displays.
At this point, a luggage should just come with built-in BB gun.
Reaching Everest base camp is nowhere close to as risky as seriously trying to climb it. The record is 800 people per year actually reaching the summit and ~3,000 people making serious attempts.

That’s a tiny market, and yes companies do get involved but it’s not the sole source of income for any significant business.
Peanut butter is still fattening as fuck and it's omega-6 to -3 ratio approaches 2000, if not more due to processing.

Almonds take a great deal of water to grow, are a leading cause of broken teeth, and have an omega ratio 200+. Brazil nuts are also close in hardness and omega 6. Pine nuts are also extremely calorie dense and not particularly healthy; walnut pesto is great btw.

Walnuts OTOH have a ratio closer to 4. Pistachios, walnuts, cashews, pecans, and macadamia nuts are healthy in moderation.

Walnuts and cashews must never be eaten raw. The outer coating of the cashew apple is also haptenic.
I want my Roku box to play AAC.
I read this as "an apple co-founder selling some type of ranch dressing that will turn into a fruit jam"
2Post2Furigres
There is no reason why you can have a single public (state owned) company which owns and maintains the wire and a bunch of companies which generate/buy and sell power to consumers effectively renting these wires.
Result covers the very common case where there is T or error but never both. Having a decent type system doesn't prevent you from returning both. In Go I simply cannot have something as simple as "A or B, but never both or neither" as a type.

>However, Go believes you cannot make that assumption.

This is trying to twist a weakness of Go's type system as a virtue. In Go I always have "A or B, including neither and both". I can have that in Rust or Haskell if I want, but usually I want "A or B, never both or neither" and rarely "A or B, sometimes both but never neither" which Rust and Haskell can do but Go cannot. This comes from Go using product types as a poor replacement for sum types.