skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can anybody explain to me what dbus is for, and why I sometimes have to start applications using "dbus-launch" because otherwise they can't connect to dbus. Or why sometimes when I login on other systems using "ssh -CY" I cannot even start applications like eog (eye of gnome) because dbus is in the way, but somehow mysteriously they DO start when I run them with "strace -f"?

Seems to me that Linux systems are starting to see the downsides of a microservices approach.

Edit: thanks for all the replies, yes, I get that dbus is for sending messages between applications, but what is wrong with e.g. UNIX domain sockets?
Outside America, this is true. Inside America, if you are unaware of pronounced regional cultural differences arising from the settler groups that form your ancestry and local culture, you're either ignorant, or not American.
If your revenue is based on $155m in donations then yes it is basically everything. You think that can't go down by $10m in a year?
Just opening a file with default settings.

"hey, looks like you're opening a C++ file, would you like to download our C++ plugin?"

and other infinite amounts of similar popups.

Then I type (, it chooses to insert a ). I didn't ask for this.
The backend search service for https://flights.google.com/ is implemented in Lisp.
Also Clojure decomplects inheritance and interfaces.

It gives you protocols to define a set of related methods, without any restriction on the underlying data structure.

It gives you defrecord & deftype to define composite associative data structures, which the fields in an object are.

Then you can combine these in various ways, giving you all sorts of polymorphic code.

Clojure even has multimethods for cases, when a single operation should happen different ways, depending on some aspect of an arbitrary data structure.
Someone defines a transformation function from arbitrary data to some other data to dispatch behavior over, then anyone can add define behavior for new dispatch values.

Why not copy these approaches?
Good point on nuance on a technical level, i.e., debunked != failure to support relationship.

However, on a practical level, people throw this around as if it were empirically supported (which doesn't seem to be the case). If there have been hundreds of studies failing to make the connection, I won't take the bet that it will eventually get validated.

On a meta-level, that's also a weird quote.

> But the fact that contexting has not been empirically validated should not necessarily be construed as a failure of the theory

Pick any theory. If you can't validate it, and plenty of people have tried to validate it, then that's a failure of the theory, right?
Thanks for the elaboration, i meant i fail to see the distinction beyond intention. Since determining intention is error prone and unreliable giving the benefit of the doubt might still be a beneficial strategy. Even with you giving a good description of the problems that incurs.

I think it boils down to what kind of costs are at stake. False positive for negative intention leads to conflict and breakdown of cooperation, while entertaining a passive aggressive person increases the burden on you in favor of continued cooperation and additional information.

While a direct stop is beneficial for short games, reducing false positives is beneficial for productive long games and comes at only temporary costs.

Or differently put, while stupidity is not always the better explanation then malice, assuming stupidity first can be beneficial regardless. If people are then unwilling or unable to fix stupid it becomes another discussion. But those false positives sum up quickly.
Phone/computer apps actually reduce the blue substantially and visible, unlike the nearly-transparent lenses in the article.
Agreed. In fact now that I am trying hard to recollect posts describing an ideal remote work setup, every single one of them advocated for a separate room for your home-office.
> It could be more performant

No, it almost always is. The designers of a generic library can't anticipate the use case, so can't make appropriate tradeoffs.

For example, compare `std::unordered_map` to any well written C hash table. The vast majority of hash tables will never have individual items removed from them, but a significant amount of complexity and performance is lost to this feature.
Yeah, because the only way to achieve performance in 1980's C on 16 bit platforms was to litter it with inline Assembly, thus UB based optimisation was born to win all those SPEC benchmarks in computer magazines.
I'd love this as a wasm library.
And demand being artifically inflated by investors (ranging from boomers / gen-X ers who have extra money to Saudi oil barons) who buy up houses with the intent to rent them out or whatever.
yes it would be difficult to succeed when one rounds up a militia of torches and pitchforks, vs an opposor equipped with muskets.

an inherent right to defend ones self includes ability to equip to do so effectively
The Individuals with Disability Education Act requires the federal government to cover up to 40% of the cost of educating students with special needs.

If you've ever had a an internet plan that promises you speeds of "up to" $FOO, you can probably guess how IDEA goes down in practice. In my state (California), the Feds reimburse about 10% of the cost, which leaves the state and local governments on the hook for the rest. In practice the allocation is also weird for the federal money, since it doesn't take into account that students have different needs with drastically different costs (e.g. an IEP for a kid with shitty handwriting vs a kid on Home & Hospital who has personalized 1:1 instruction+care all day)
The "community notes" on Elon's tweet says that would be against social media / user generated content app rules for both Apple and Google and could get the twitter app banned.
"D-Bus provides a software-bus abstraction that gathers all the communications between a group of processes over a single shared virtual channel. Processes connected to a bus do not know how it is internally implemented, but D-Bus specification guarantees that all processes connected to the bus can communicate with each other through it." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Bus
That's an excellent and fair point. Perhaps "resilience" is the wrong term for abused folks and it could be said as "ability to continue functioning at their usual level of dysfunction". I've seen enough examples of ostensibly well raised (typically younger) adults being hit really hard by adversity that I think there's something to it. Maybe confirmation bias or perhaps those individuals had overprotective parents that shielded them from developing a lot of skills. That sort of dysfunctional parenting can be harder to recognize in adults.
I tried to get access to FORTRAN and it was just way too expensive and required machines that I would not have been able to get close to. C ran on anything from Atari STs, IBM PCs, Amiga's and any other machine that an ordinary person could get their hands on.

The other mainstream language at the time was BASIC, comparable to the way PHP is viewed today by many.

And with the advent of the 32 bit x86 era GCC and djgpp as well as early Linux systems really unlocked a lot of power. Before then you'd have to have access to a VAX or a fancy workstation to get that kind of performance out of PC hardware. It's funny how long it took for the 386 to become fully operational, many years after it was launched you had to jump through all kinds of hoops to be able to use the system properly, whereas on a 68K based system costing a tiny fraction that was considered completely normal.
I'm not the person you responded to. I don't think "Rah rah Apple best Linux sucks" is a good characterization of his comment though. "This looks interesting but Linux has historically been a worse touch experience than iPad" is a better paraphrase, and I think the sentiment belongs in this discussion (because any entrant to the tablet market is competing with the iPad, whether you like it or not).
dbus is a mechanism that allows different processes to communicate with each other.

I think (but I'm not sure) that it's primarily used by Gnome and KDE.
I suppose this ultimately stems from that fact that if a program is ugly, everyone hates it, but if a program is insecure nobody knows, and if they find out they don't care.
That's from 2013 though.
Fwiw, while I haven't heard "poozle" very much as an American, I've heard it enough that my mind instantly went to the unfortunate definition when I saw it here. Meanwhile, I've never heard the NZ definition at all before.
I raised two special-needs sons who likely qualify for a diagnosis of ASD but never got a formal diagnosis because I homeschooling them, so I didn't need an official diagnosis to accommodate their needs.

Human children are raised for many years and a large part of social stuff is learned behavior. Some things can be explicitly taught to people whose brain wiring disinclined them to innately pick it up on their own.

Girls are socialized differently from boys and it seems likely they are just expected to "get" social things even if they don't. They either get someone to explain it or they try harder than boys to cover up their deficits because it's more socially unacceptable.

Not everything can be taught. Some social difficulties can be rooted in things like a lack of prosody or lack of ability to tone match can be extreme priblematic and cannot be fixed, at least not that I know of.

But some things can be explained and to whatever degree it's learnable, if girls are simply more expected than boys to learn it, it's not unreasonable to suggest ASD is likely underdiagnosed in girls.
DBus is yet another message bus, but this time for a few desktop applications. Made famous by BlueZ's requirement of DBus and by it being the only Linux userspace thing that made it into Android before they completely rewrote the userspace stack for the phones.

A ton of "desktop linux" components will attempt to use DBus for inter-process communication because it's easier than a lot of the alternatives.
3 Situations Where Cross-Cultural Communication Breaks Down (2016)
For generations the kill kids and now that those kids aren't available to take jobs and work in the prime of their lives, there's suddenly a problem?
Ummm, keep at it? This will be a protracted fight, as we are wrestling with human nature. It is difficult for us to say no to easy energy, and so easy to ignore the long-term costs. We need to strengthen our connections as people, and one component of that is enough of us trusting our representative democracy above a certain threshold so that reasonable regulations are enacted and enforced for as long as is necessary.
I think a lot of people would benefit from getting some counceling in their earlier adult years, although on the other hand they may not be ready yet / not see any issues yet.

I'm late 30's and same btw.
If you catch them at the lowest level you end with N different exceptions that are coupled with implementation.

I only need different exceptions if I am treating them different.

Oh! And you typically catch it next to the failure ( maybe wrapping it in another exception) out in a global exception handler
When you make a brick from the Sargassum, does it release or hold onto the CO2?
A pointer is a valid C++ iterator.

> but you trust it to optimize all that garbage away?

Yep, if you learn about compilers you learn what kind of optimizations are easy and hard for them to make. The kind that just flattens a few levels of nested definitions are easier.
>running xeyes and seeing whether the eyes move above the target window

Or running xlsclients
It is similar functionality to https://docs.snowflake.com/en/developer-guide/sql-api/refere..., the `async` flag more specifically. You submit the query and are given the job id. A background worker runs it like a normal query, but the caller can go about their business while Postgres handles it for them.
Problems in P are about deciding whether an input passes or not, where there exists a 'turing machine/algorithm/black box' that will tell you if an input does, or does not pass in a 'fast way'.
A simple example is graph coloring. The box contains a graph, you pass in a color for each node, and the box checks if there are no adjacent nodes with the same color. Note that this box has an input (the coloring) but also a sort of parameter (the graph) you can create many different instances of this box by just changing the graph.

You could also add another parameter, call it K. This will be the maximum number of colors you can use. It is still easy for the box to check if a coloring fits this criteria.

For problems in NP, there is an underlying set of boxes in P. The input to an NP problem is a set of parameters that describe a box in P. In other words, any input for an NP problem corresponds to a 'fast box'. The NP problem then asks, "is there any input this fast box will accept". Such an accepted input is called a witness, because it proves that the box created by the input to the NP problem is solvable.

In the graph coloring example, instead of having a graph, a number of colors K, and a coloring to check, you now have: a graph and a number of colors, and the question 'can we find any coloring'.

We transformed a 'check a solution' into a 'find if a solution exists'. A key element here is that someone attempting the NP problem gets to look inside the box, figure out how it works.

In your example of 'you have to guess the number I thought of', you need to hand the guesser a box that will check that number. The guesser can then look inside the box to see how it works. So a simple comparison with a fixed value allows the guesser to 'read the hardcoded value from the source code'.

Do note that the box in P has to be fully deterministic.

In an NP problem, an input describes some parameters
If incrementing a counter in a URL got somebody sent to jail this absolutely should render evidence acquired this way inadmissible at the very least.
From my experience with embedded coding you are correct. Most stuff lives and dies enclosed in a single call chain and isn't subject to spooky action at a distance. And stuff that is I often firewall it behind a well tested API.
I will not be taking out a loan to go to school. I have seen too many people fall into the pit of debt, and with the current political climate with the older generation completely comfortable screwing over younger generations with false promises of success, I prefer to be financially solvent when I graduate. If my country cannot do this, then it is a failure compared to Europe.

So, that means either financial aid, or a scholarship. Are there any scholarships for low income white guys? My guess is no, because we are assumed to be on top of society already. I'd be considered an older student too since I'm in my late 30s.

Based on my own cursory search, there are no real opportunities for me to reach higher education without putting myself into potentially life-ending debt. I'm even in a state that's renowned for CS (Washington) and I have not found anything.
> with lots of undefined behavior at the corners.

What behavior is undefined in incrementing a pointer between a begin and end range?
Lost me at "anti-science adjacency". A religious nut scorned.
Yes. Germany actually had to demechanise the infantry during the war due to the lack of fuel.

Then you've got the supply problems on the eastern front. From what I understand the Stalingrad airlift failed not because they couldn't carry enough stuff on the planes, but because they couldn't get the stuff from the rail heads to the air strips.

It's very under appreciated just how much oil impacted the war.
Aha thank you this was my eureka moment. I remember from high school chemistry the idea that temperature stays constant when energy input goes to phase change.

So in the southern hemisphere with that much water, some of the energy goes into the phase change between water/steam. Much less so in the northern hemisphere.

Thank god we have these big thermal sinks (ice/water) to hold a lot of this energy to keep temp a little more stable.

Follow up question: I'm assuming the exact same thing applies with ice->water. So some of the energy hitting the earth is going into melting the ice instead of increasing temperature. It would seem to follow that, once all the sea ice and glaciers have melted, that this phase-change effect is removed, and therefore the temperatures will increase faster as none of the excess energy is going into ice->water phase-change?

Do they predict the temperature rise to increase once all of the sea ice and glaciers have melted?

Or maybe once it's water it just means that there is that much more liquid water available to evaporate into humidity?

Also, anyone know how the Canadian wildfires impacting the equation? Is that a potential explanation for the several sigma deviation this year?
Some video editor is getting fired.
I mean yeah, there were times in Earth's past where sea levels were so high that the American midwest was an ocean. Americans living in the midwest would like to avoid this scenario. Even more threatened are lowland states like Florida and Louisiana.

Sure in a technical sense the Earth will survive this change. It's a big ball of rock, a few degress of difference on the surface means nothing to it. For the plants and animals however we're talking about a mass extinction event.
Thank you for your insight- leaving a comment here to come back to later.
Discussed at the time:

Boycott systemd - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7639170 - April 2014 (232 comments)
> Unfortunately, like it or not, your DNA isn't yours.

The current trends seem to go against this, saying that even things like image, voice, or memories about us are all somehow private even in a public setting, and cannot be used without a permission of their owner. DNA is essentially in the same category - even more so, we leave it just about everywhere, yet most people think about it as something extremely intimate, much more so than a picture from a public venue (where opinions sort of diverge).

And whenever I agree on disagree, I can totally understand why this is happening and why the current trends are like this. It's basically a reaction of the society trying to protect itself from abuse by the entities of similar (large) scale.

All this stuff is basically a (relatively) new dilemma of the information age, where we've gained an ability to store, analyze and transfer large arrays of data efficiently. Paired with technologies (such as cameras or sequencers) becoming more affordable to deploy at scale.

Sadly, consumer technologies (empowering "normal" people) drastically lag behind business and government tech, so before your casual Joe ever gets a chance to have some meaningful (and not really privacy-breaking; although there's rarely an incentive to develop tech that doesn't break this) use cases, large corporations and governments ruin everything.
The problem is that NIMBY folks have the ability to block multifamily in California almost indefinitely. And often do. The cities where they most efficiently bock it are the ones with most of the offices, because local government collects more taxes over time with offices than housing. This is a result of https://www.nber.org/digest/apr05/lock-effect-californias-pr....

The result? California is about 3-4 million housing units short of what it needs. And it is getting steadily worse. There is no prospect of this changing any time soon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_housing_shortage

When it comes to rent, we're boiling the frog. And the frog is already well-cooked.
Copetti has great articles.

Related: a couple of good articles on the Xbox 360 architecture from Jon 'Hannibal' Stokes

https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/06/xbox360-1/

https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/06/xbox360-2/
That turns out not to be the case.

“Ignoring” is not “taking action based on”

Ignoring is, for example, ignoring the fact that an array access is out of bounds and performing the array access.

Ignoring is not noticing that there is undefined behavior and removing the access and the entire loop that contains the access. Or a safety check.
This is a fantastic way of explaining the concepts! I love it, thanks for posting.
>systemd's team is noticeably chauvinistic and anti-Unix

ONE OF THESE THINGS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER, ONE OF THESE THINGS IS a serious allegation against the values of systemd's maintainers that is not backed up by anything in the text. Unless the writer just doesn't understand what "chauvinism" is beyond being a malword.

>systemd flies in the face of the Unix philosophy: "do one thing and do it well," representing a complex collection of dozens of binaries

>systemd clusters itself into PID 1 (...) This happens to be another example of SPOF.

PICK ONE! Either it's multiple binaries or everything's in PID1.

Also, the single-point-of-failure is not systemd's fault. Having a PID1 at all is the single point of failure. That being said, practically speaking there are loads of processes that will effectively crash your system if they fail. Does the user care (or even notice) if their system rebooted because systemd died, or because Wayland died and took the desktop session with it?

>Ultimately, systemd's parasitism is symbolic of something more than systemd itself. It shows a radical shift in thinking by the Linux community. Not necessarily a positive one, either. One that is vehemently postmodern, monolithic, heavily desktop-oriented, choice-limiting, isolationist, reinvents the flat tire, and is just anti-Unix in general.

By 2014 every relevant commercial UNIX-like was shipping the moral equivalent of systemd's all-encompassing setup. systemd clones modern UNIX in the same way GNU clones classical UNIX, because systemd does all the basic system maintenance tasks that people expect out of a modern desktop.

I'm not sure if "postmodern" is being used in the sense of "I can't figure this out" or "they put critical race theory in my userland". Perhaps this is me talking without the necessary historical perspective, but Mark Shuttlesworth's quip about the "Open Source Tea Party" comes to mind here.
You underestimate how vastly cultures can differ based on location or background. Also keep in mind the US is young and most of its inhabitants have a migrant background / family history.

The US is the opposite of a monolithic culture.
Keep in mind that climate change also means more extremes in many places. Quite a few of those US places that have only gotten a little average warming have been getting getting more extremes and longer heat and cold waves.

I'd guess that for most people in the US they are more likely to notice that than to notice a change in average temperature. Consider someone in a place that normally gets cold enough to require heat for much of the winter and hot enough to require air conditioning for most of the summer.

Someone could easily not notice a 3℃ increase in average temperature that manifests as winter being a little less cold, summer being a little warmer, and winter being a little shorter, and summer a little longer because their HVAC system keeps their would at a fixed temperature all year around.

Their energy bill would go up, but they might think that is just due to inflation.

But if they start getting afternoon brownouts because of everyone's AC dealing with extreme summer heat, and that happens more and more each year, that is something they might notice
4GB is not a lot on Android so 10 tabs sounds about right. You need a lot of wiggle room for garbage collection to be efficient and you can't swap to flash without burning write cycles and power on small devices.

That aside, I don't see any technical reason why you can't renew a token that expired 1 week ago. Renewal just makes sure nothing changed (Eg user hasn't been deleted) while you were gone. It doesn't have to do any user-facing auth
Adapting an App to VisionOS
Because it's been the way the world works for some years now. No need to double-check anymore.