skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>And then this galactically confused statement: "In the larger Star Trek universe, time travel eventually becomes commonplace, leading to the “Temporal Wars,” after which the technology was banned."

>How do you ban time travel 'after' anything? The entire statement is meaningless.

To be fair, that is the canon, senseless as it is. Expecting Star Trek to be logically consistent is a fool's errand - time travel episodes don't even agree on how time travel works between them. It's basically a plot device.
Private life? Could you elaborate?
That's a good description of modern software development. For any junior devs reading, this is the accurate presentation of the reality of software development for the most devs. There are exceptions, but they are either lucky and know it, lucky but with a superiority complex who think they have a monopoly on the truth, NPCs, or the usual gaggle of people who disagree with everything I post here anyway.

Think about it: How can JavaScript have so many innovations, yet practically no one has moved on from the scrum/kanban abomination in going on a decade? Perhaps more. Why
Its very interesting to me that we went from "dont be evil" to full on Bond Villain leading every sudo-tech company in 20 years.

I guess the initial lies that pushed the dont be evil line set the tone that you say one thing and do another...
https://archive.is/CCft4

An article about the Godmothers of AI and no mention of Fei-Fei Li?

lol
This will revolutionise Yorkshire.
You're missing that JWT were a bad idea in the first place.

Oldish but still largely relevant:
https://paragonie.com/blog/2017/03/jwt-json-web-tokens-is-ba...
Argentina and Turkey floored by new Steam price hikes as high as 2900%
https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/order-safe-travel.html#:~:tex....
That's a great project ! But isn't the adoption of axolotls by people as pets also one of the causes of their endangerment ?
In essence, all a financial system functionally provides is a set of buffers/caches so that individual or company lives can overcome some bumps quickly at the expense of promise to refill the buffer + some extra later.
But McDonald's also has salads?
I do the same, but different kinds of projects exercise different stacks.

A web project does not prepare you for a bad UI history, for example...
It's been over a decade since I looked at this, but in real-time Monte Carlo path tracing the speed of your RNG is material. In simple enough scenes, probably something like 5-10% IIRC when using MT.

I appreciate that you had a note about performance, but you were pretty quick to dismiss that there's a large quality difference between rand() and any modern PRNG. Plenty of these are fine enough and paying for a CSPRNG with 4x or more the perf hit may be a mistake.

I do agree that if you don't know what you're going to use them for or don't know if you have a performance problem that you should just use a CSPRNG. The potential for someone to accidentally cause a security bug is not worth it. If they decide to do so intentionally, that's on them.

tl;dr: maybe "Need a PRNG? Start with one that's cryptographically secure"?
Here is a much shorter explanation. PSTN voice calls go over 64 kbps digital links (e.g. G.711 uLaw codec, 8 kHz sample rate).

56 kbps pushes close to the theoretically available channel bandwidth.

That's all there is to it: information coding theory.

To get more than around 56 kbps from modems, you would need more fidelity from the underlying lines: a wider-band, lower noise pure copper end-to-end connection, or higher bitrate codecs.
Wow, building physical tech feels so much more approachable because of stuff like this
It also strikes me how much the old phone network, and its cultural aspects, have faded into the past - particularly when I drive past some derelict bit of telecom infrastructure. Even 30 years ago, it was amusing to watch kids try to deal with a rotary-dial phone. Now even landlines are an endangered species, and area codes are barely relevant. Finding a working telco pay phone these days would be like finding a unicorn.

Meanwhile, on a random roadtrip through rural Illinois yesterday, I was seeing "5G UC" on my cell phone, out in the middle of nowhere. Unevenly distributed, indeed!
The brake pedal does not have to make noise for me to know the brakes are working. The pads do not have to clunk. There does not need to be a thunk to the contacts opening on the battery when I park for me to know the car is parked. There is a difference between convenience acknowledgements and mechanical parts being clunky, they are all put together here.

Kind of shows where Tesla put its focus, and that there is work to do on future models. People used to higher end cars tend to notice and maybe not like the extra clunky bits, everything should just work smoothly and quietly.
I was never able to exceed 24kb/s with my "56k" modem. I came to find out that the phone company (in Austin TX) was using a single pair to service more than one customer in my apartment complex. Naturally, whatever piece of equipment they used to accomplish this stymied faster modem speeds.

I finally installed an ISDN. That was delightful. Not only did it allow me to have two lines - one for voice and one for data - the netgear RT-338 ISDN router automatically dialed my ISP instantaneously. It felt like I was always connected because I didn't have to wait for a modem handshake. Speeds were more than twice as fast as what I could get with my analog modem. However, by far the MOST IMPORTANT thing (and mostly the reason I installed the ISDN in the first place) is that my latency took a nosedive allowing me to become an LPB with a 50ms ping time on QuakeWorld. >:-D

(Shoutout to Charlie S. from OuterNet, Austin's best ISP in the 90's)
Only if the foundations have fundamental issues.

Ad tracking should be so high up in the stack that for a change that far down to cause issues then far more significant issues should be occurring at all.

If your system has to be balanced juuuuuuust right to function it's a poorly engineered system.
Thank you, there is a great explainer in those search results: https://environmentalmalta.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/IR...
Oof, looks like I touched a nerve. I’m providing a measured response to the unexamined breathless enthusiasm for mediocre writing. I’ve had to talk lots of people into reading a second sci-fi series because they started with Dune and decided that the genre isn’t worth it.

Dune is fine. But people need to re-read it as adults or something before extolling it’s virtues from the rooftops as they do in this thread.

You should consider that you feeling attacked is as much about you as it is about me.
Something else interesting when supercharging in the cold...LOTS of steam(?) at times.

Shocked me the first time it happened. Cold (~5F outside), low and hot battery (just went from 80 to ~5%). Legit thought the car was on fire at first.
Are you talking about toaster oven-style reflow, or something fancier?
When your only option was to repeat yourself, then change the subject.

Winning arguments stand on their own.

Will this analysis of yours go on my permanent record? What's my MBTI personality type?
> As should be every other modern western comfort and privilege.

Seems to me like gambling, speculation, and proof of waste all perfectly fit the definition of "comfort and privilege".

> Maybe after the world is done taking care of the truly impactful stuff we can revisit this proof of work debate.

It's crazy how much we can agree on!

The only problem is, PoW is considered harmful even by the larger crypto community, to the point where alternatives were not only considered, but also implemented (e.g. PoS). I'm more than willing to reconsider PoW's merits at a later time (as you suggest), under the condition that all ongoing PoW schemes are paused until we're done dealing with these more important things. I think it's a perfectly reasonable compromise.
It was “Thinking Fast & Slow” until much of it was discredited. I do believe awareness of Behavioral Economics can be good, but be wary of its cynical anti humanism.

48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene.

The 4 Gospels of the Bible, which you can get free on the App Store.
Is this a good or a bad thing?

If the limiting factor for a rover on Mars is transportation or the launch window then it's probably unambiguously good.

Hypothetically though what if there's a trade off where you can have 1 rover that (however long it's announced it will last for) goes for 5 years vs. another that actually runs 1 year and then stops but you get 5 of the 1 year rovers. It's not immediately clear to me which is a better situation.
New maps show where snowfall is disappearing
I don't know how it worked but I never saw better than 53/54k with v.90 or v.92. Maybe there was more going on.
Firefox 121 Is Looking Good for Having Wayland Enabled by Default
Always has been. See related VHNW, UHNW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-net-worth_individual
It’s human psychology. Imagine you guess the birthday of everyone you meet. Your odds of being right are the same no matter whether you always say “January 1” or if you pick a date that feels right for the person (assuming there is no astrological or other magical sensing).

But getting Jan 1 right would feel like an inevitable event, like you’re testing statistics and, yep, they work. Getting a custom date right would feel like you made a smart choice. Even if you know it’s just the same statistics.

At least I expect most people would feel that, or at least as many as enjoy gambling in games of chance.
But adultery is a very common reason, and a preventable one.
Some (topical) amusements:

$ echo 25 | pwsh -c '$input-replace"\d",{2*"$_"}'
410
$ echo 25 | perl -pe 's/\d/2*$&/eg'
410

```

PS> $temp:pwsh_out = 10000
PS> /bin/cat /tmp/pwsh_out
10000

```

$ echo ''''

PS> echo ''''
'

```

PS> $Y = { param($f) . { param($x) . $x $x } { param($y) . $f { param($x) . (. $y $y) $x }.GetNewClosure() }.GetNewClosure() }
PS> $fac = & $Y { param($f) { param($n) $n -lt 2 ? 1 : $n * (. $f ($n - 1)) }.GetNewClosure() }
PS> & $fac 5
120

```

PS> gv -v|% m*d|% t*
gv -v|% m*d|% t*

PS> &($x={"&(`$x={$x})"})
&($x={"&(`$x={$x})"})

$ bash
$ eval ${x='echo eval \${${x@A}}'}
eval ${x='echo eval \${${x@A}}'}

```

bilingual pun,

.ps1 .pl
1 1
{1} {1}
end {1} sub {1}
{end {1}} {sub {1}}
&{end {1}} &{sub {1}}

```

awk -e 'BEGIN { printf "3\n" }'
perl -e 'BEGIN { printf "3\n" }'
ruby -e 'BEGIN { printf "3\n" }'
pwsh -c 'BEGIN { printf "3\n" }'

```

$ time ...; time ...; ....
real 0.00 ...
real 0.00 ...
real 0.03 ...
real 0.22 ...
How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 123 Easy Steps [pdf]
> But that is no the same as the results not being right or even valuable at some point.

I can't imagine anyone who truly understands the current replication failure rates thinking that a single non-replicated study is valuable for anything other than informing what replications should be attempted.

Just think about it: replication rate is generally less than 50%. That means you'll have a better chance of determining the truth on any question posed by a study by flipping a coin than by actually reading the study.

> Replication is not a be all and end all, because things could replicate even though understanding is wrong (i.e., observation is right in the publication but everything else is wrong).

The observations are the only things that we have to get right. Interpretations can be subject to decades of debate (some QM debates are ongoing a century later), but if the data isn't reliable then you're just wasting time debating falsehoods. Replications are critical to ensuring we have reliable empirical data.

> Even the replication itself can be wrong, if certain materials share on unknown contaminant, for example.

Indeed, and literally the only way to figure out that such variables exist and are affecting the results are by independent replications. The more replications, the better. One replication is a bare minimum threshold to demonstrate that the process of gathering the data is at least repeatable, in principle.

> For some areas it also not clear what replication means. What is it for theology, for example?

It makes perfect sense in any context where you're gathering empirical data. For instance, if you're surveying people's interpretation of "free will" [1], then the process via which you probe their views should be replicable. This means being clear about the specific phrasing of the questions asked, the environment in which they were asked, the makeup of the cohort, and so on.

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274892120_Why_Compa...
What's a good useful difference between .bashrc and .bashprofile? I usually just ignore everything but the rc files.
Where I live is a private decision. That should have zero influence on how much they pay me. To me, that comes across as “we will determine your standard of living” and that is incredibly toxic.
Agreed. Darktable has always been an impressive project, produced great results, great features and the UI was IMHO above average for an open source project. But it did suffer from lack of holistic view, many features were kind of duplicated across modules and it was unclear what's the best way to do things. It seemed like people had a lot of freedom to implement their own thing in modules.

I think Aurélien's snarkiness is quite distasteful and might prevent getting some of them on board. But he has a proven track record and I believe he can execute his vision, so I will be donating as well.
> The answer here is just to store your session JWTs in HttpOnly secure cookies

And set CORS correctly (probably by not having anything in it), and deal with CSRF, and make sure you don't have any XSS issue.

It's definitively not insurmountable. But the XSS problem the article focus on still applies. (You shouldn't have any problem with XSS anyway, it's a solved problem that most of the times shouldn't even require thinking about it to keep it solved.)
Do your administrative procedures serve your customers' needs?
Keep in mind that urls end up in logs, that might well not be so well protected
> Static typing is a very bad software development practice. There are a lot of other software development practices that are superior to it.

Can you give some examples for
these supposedly superior techniques?

> "help you in refactoring" It's a terrible way to refactor your code.

Could you explain why you think so? Say I'm changing the name of an attribute. Why is using static typing to find the places I have to change terrible?

> "There is no way around verifying your assumptions about types" Yes, there are. There are many many ways to do this that do a lot better job than static typing. Static typing is known to be terrible at eliminating bugs from code.

I didn't say what you think I said, since I didn't touch on static typing in this. Want to try responding to my actual argument?
Happy to see this post on HN. As a college prof, I've spend many years studying the history of 1700s navigation and taking student groups to Greenwich to see and study H1 (H2, H3 and H4). I love these clocks and all of the stories behind them. The serious enthusiast will find a lot of technical details on the Harrison's clocks in this book https://www.amazon.com/Marine-Chronometers-Greenwich-Catalog... and this one https://www.amazon.com/Marine-Chronometer-Its-History-Develo.... I've also collected all of my pedagogy on 1700s navigation into a this book: https://www.amazon.com/Longitude-Time-Navigation-Tom-Bensky-... where I dive somewhat into the innards of H1. To answer another post: H1 has been fully disassembled and reassembled with XRF done throughout.
Sopwith – a classic bi-plane shoot 'em up from 1984 in the browser
src: https://github.com/midzer/sdl-sopwith

via: https://fragglet.github.io/sdl-sopwith/
> Once you make your JWT stateful, by storing it in a database there is no reason to use JWT.

JWTs are a cryptographically sound means of conveying identity between systems, assuming the implementation doesn't allow `algorithm: none`. I'm genuinely curious why you perceive JWTs as useless when they're stateful. It's a common opinion, so I assume there's something to it. My best guess is that it stems from JWTs being "sold" as a stateless means of conveying identity. In which case, I think they fall short of that promise. I just don't equate that with useless. I'm using the word useless, which I interpreted your statement "no reason to use JWT" to mean, but feel free to correct me on that.
I know this will read like I am a luddite, but hear me out.

I would love to consider crypto as a type of medium of exchange. Unfortunately, as soon as crypto came out, I saw governments of many nations moving into it in some way, shape, or form. They gave it two options, either government has full control over time or eradication, with a few outliers. The US SEC was vacillating on how to deal with crypto for quite some time, and they are not alone. Is it property or legal tender, both, or neither? Now they have planted their stake.

Cash is a tangible and disconnected way for payment for goods and services. Disconnected, as in the government (mostly) does not have instantaneous method to cripple the existence of cash. It requires significantly more interaction than just disable, for our example a government run, centralized crypto exchange (lest we forget, however you feel about politics, when governments froze or seized banked assets).

1. fear of the government wiping out all crypto assets in an instance because one disagrees with them, or more likely by an accident or hackers.

2. no transactions can be conducted if there is no electricity or device to conduct the exchange of crypto. There are many nations where power outages are scheduled as a matter of fact, or worse, power on times are scheduled. The dependence on a device is a bit more acceptable but the cost between a paper clip that holds the paper cash versus a cellular phone is still enormous.
One related thing that happened was that when the rolling blackouts started, the power companies had a list of critical customers that should not be cut off like hospitals, police stations, etc. Unfortunately some natural gas pumping stations were not on that list (or were on the list but were ignored), so they got cut off. Which of course created a positive feedback loop.
Well, it's dated to February, so maybe not.
I can't agree more, I've not seen a better book on the subject and Sobel's writing makes it an enjoyable read (I still have my copy of it).
For more than 99% of the world's population it most definitely is. For many, many of them, it's almost an incredible, dreamlike amount of money to have.
This is neat, Im currently passing some IP addresses to OpenAi for a crude version of this, but will try this out!
Coincidentally, I was watching a video on this topic last night. I'm only 20 minutes in, though.
https://youtu.be/J35ENSaXyGU
> What am I missing?

People using JS frontend frameworks to handle every single feature of the frontend, so that they have to let the cookie unprotected or store the token into a JS-only storage.
Translation: there are times when a veto is warranted, but other times the effort to build software custom fit to your problems is worth spending the time to make. More often than vetoing for any valid reason, they do it so they don't have to give up software they are comfortable with.
I'm using the standard dictionary definition of "able to be known, seen or declared in advance" (there's also "behaving in a way that is expected" which is not relevant). We are discussing events that are not known in advance, so by the dictionary definition, they are not predictable. Knowing the probability is not the same as you will not be able to say "it's going to happen this time".

Sorry, but you're using a bizarre definition of predictability. If I were to say that the chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one, then you'd be considering it "predictable".
HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29615428 :)
You can’t have real dollars without a US bank account.
It is LLVM.
I enjoy coming up with alternate terminology. It’s not a pair, it’s a double run minus the singletons.
that is a vastly different thing from “made by a single person”
Further, from Engadget:

https://www.engadget.com/nvidia-sued-for-stealing-trade-secr...
The government-mandated “safety” tone that EV’s play at low speed was invented by a marketing department. They wanted to be able to force everyone to play their audio logos.

Fast-forward a decade, and the bought-off regulators left for industry. The remaining transportation safety people in the US realized the tones are useless, since the sounds are not standardized and are therefore ambiguous and ignorable.

So, moving forward, they’ll standardize the noise, defeating its only practical purpose (branding). Sadly, they didn’t revisit whether it was actually necessary or helpful in the first place.

Our pre-tone EV makes plenty of noise at low speed due to various servos, capacitor whine, drivetrain gears/friction, and so on.
Not sure how that’s relevant? It’s still not a single person.
100 years in this society, what more could one want..
Despite the optimistic tone this is rather depressing reading. This is the beginning of the industrial farming trend that has made all meat products rather tasteless.
I recently discovered their YouTube channel, and it is absolutely fascinating.

https://youtube.com/@ConnectionsMuseum
This is lovely. Thanks for sharing. I used to play this game a LOT.
Until the day when GPT hallucinates some nice (and confident) rm -rf equivalent for you ;)
That demo run was tiny and short though

If I was a provider I'd probably be fine with 1 million @ 100/s once, but not 2000/s or 100/s sustained for 22 days
This is some seriously brazen propaganda. I'll give them points for courage.
> there's no universal gold standard way to handle authentication with websites

Hum... HTTP has an entire authentication header.

There is also an entire set of standard practices to authenticate by cookies.

The only thing there isn't a standard is for handling authentication data with random code. As that's a pretty stupid thing to do.
"reproducible build" in this sense has nothing to do with scientific reproducibility. That issue is about hash-verifiability for the sake of security, and how some autogenerated random paths included in the binary affects that.

Scientific reproducibility requires only that versioned binaries be functionally equivalent if they have the same version, which is quite independent of this and certainly exists in Julia.

Would love a link to the Guix mailing list discussion, if you can dig it up.
Is this for any sort of web content?
With edge being switched to Chromium some years ago I would assume Microsoft also has a quite a few engineers working full time on it.
This is the power of collective techno-optimism. China is a country of techno-optimists and that is why they are so far ahead of everyone with their deployment of AI tools and engineered environments. They are truly ahead of the curve when it comes to adopting innovative technologies. Hopefully others will also realize the value of techno-optimism and adopt it as a philosophy for managing their lives like the Chinese.
Name Australia's Lunar Rover
Wonder what is up with the UAE or Singapore. They are such small countries.
Correct, I've only heard this from two people and this is only their take. This is not an official position.

But the fact that people within the company are saying this to me directly is enough to get me to believe it.

I wouldn't trust a random person on the internet saying stuff like this either, but even without any inside knowledge, it's just logical that they should try and limit time spent developing two of the exact same product .. and I think it's probably becoming apparent to you as well which one is on the chopping block.
Does it have to go to SCOTUS for the powerful precedent to be set?

I would imagine the SEC will be keen to avoid a country-wide precedent should they lose in district courts.

Excellent comment btw. It’s the 201-level analysis vs the 101 that we see in the media of SEC shutting down crypto etc