skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That phrase doesn't mean what you think it is.

"Learn from the mistakes of X" doesn't mean X is bad, it means X made mistakes.
Kind of ironic to be arguing about capitalism vs socialism while a foreign company buys the means of production out from under us.

This was all predicted by academics in the late 70s and early 80s. Reagan's trickle-down economics was designed to halt wage increases so that capitalists could collect worker productivity and control the money supply. Then invest those capital gains in regulatory capture to install right wing cronies to carry out the amoral aims of corporations to remove all labor and environmental protections to maximize profit. Allowing the national debt (currently $30+ trillion) to be run up above GDP, making it easier to sell the public on selling off public lands and other resources from the commons to pay it off. Eventually undermining democracy enough to form a constitutional convention to restructure the federal government as a patriarchal society like the Republic of Gilead in The Handmaid's Tale, at the top of a New World Order controlled by wealthy financiers.

The sale of US Steel to Nippon Steel should probably have been stopped due to national security concerns. It's especially troublesome that it happened on Biden's watch. But that's how all of this works. In post-New Deal politics, the economy gets targeted during democratic administrations to undermine it enough that people vote for republicans. Then republican administrations run up the debt further to roll out more of their programs while nobody is looking. The worse things get, the more the public votes against its own self-interest. Rinse, repeat. The public never catches its breath long enough to figure it out, so we're still caught in this dysfunction in 2023.

I only mention this because I believe that this endgame transcends politics, in the way that pushing a Monopoly board off the table transcends the game itself. We're at a point now where the democratic party as it was once known probably no longer exists, and can be thought of as the 1980s republican party, favorable to corporations, gentrification, tax cuts for the wealthy, neoliberalism, colonialism, exploitation, etc. The republican party today works more like a line of succession, where the vice president is the man behind the curtain, and each level below contains leaks through PR and ownership of the mass media to keep the public in the dark while it's being fleeced. So democrats are in the business of losing while republicans are in the business of winning, while both sell out to the highest bidder.

With the Boomers retiring and Gen X not wanting to pursue revisionist history fever dreams, Millennials and Gen Z are in a unique position to stop what seems inevitable now. I could see a return to middle class strengthening, sort of an Atlas Shrugged but from a government captured by capitalism:

https://time.com/6343967/bidenomics-is-real-economics/

A plainspoken take on the dysfunction:

https://www.tiktok.com/@watchfulcoyote/video/731150385197721...
You use the same process as for deciding if changes to rustc are compliant or not; the judgement of the language and compiler teams.

And running into these kinds of questions, both in a single project that evolves over time (rustc) and a separate project, help to feed information back into what you need for a formal specification; which is something that is being planned out. Having a second implementation can help find these areas where you might need to be narrower or broader in your specification, in order to clarify enough for it to be implementable or broaden it enough to accommodate reasonable implementation differences.

They are not trying to diverge in language implementation, but there will always be simple compiler bugs, which may crop up in one implementation but not another. For instance, some LLVM optimization pass may miscompile some code; gccrs wouldn't necessarily be trying to recreate that exact bug. I think that "bugs, quirks, and all" really means that they aren't trying to fix major limitations of rustc, such as introducing a whole different borrow checker model which might allow some programs that current rustc does not. They're trying to fairly faithfully recreate the language that rustc implements, even if some aspects might be considered sub-optimal, but they aren't going to re-implement every ICE and miscompilation, those are places where there could be differences.
There's a difference between content that is meant to be communicated vs. "widgets" that do something on your screen. CSS wants to support widgets, therefore it is complex.

Apps vs. Content. Web is for both but if you can and want to do just content it should be easy and simple.
I remember Mozilla Prism as a "site specific browser"or what one calls it back in the days.
Even before I used adblockers I purposefully bought a speakerset with one big volume knob to turn down the volume whenever an ad or otherwise annoying sound 'hit' my computer. No more fiddling with mouse clicks in menus to regulate the volume. Also no buttons to gradually turn down the volume step-by-step, just swing the wheel. Best purchase ever for peace of mind.
The ancient Chinese exams were the exact opposite of what you describe.

The Chinese rulers realized they had a problem where incompetent rich kids got promoted to important government jobs. This caused the government and therefore society to function poorly. As a result of this, many people died unnecessarily.

To combat this, the Chinese government instituted very hard entrance exams that promoted competent applicants regardless of rich parents.
I think the most important differentiator is who gets fleeced. In the case of the phone, average Joes get stuffed. In Nikola's cases, rich people got stuffed.

That's why this gets prosecuted fairly quickly, while corporations regularly committing fraud against consumers remain in business for decades.
Here's three more that I feel it's important:

An app called Libby and the big business of library e-books (2021) (newyorker.com)
186 points by samizdis | 141 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28390791

The Coming Enshittification of Public Libraries (karawynn.substack.com)
249 points by mrzool 4 months ago | 399 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36998643

When you buy a book, you can loan it to anyone – a judge says libraries can’t (thenation.com)
99 points by yours truly 8 months ago | 39 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35645309
$1 billion termination fee split between 900 employees = happy times.

I’m sure that will happen.
I am not sure that the founder approves of this but my current favourite way to use Chimera on the desktop is to install an Arch Linux distrobox inside it. This allows me to enjoy the base Chimera system while also having instant access to the full Arch repo and AUR catalog. It is also a simple way to run any application which currently has issues with MUSL ( since things run on Glibc inside distrobox ). Since Distrobox passes Wayland through, even graphical apps work great.

The goal is to run as much as possible native in Chimera but sometimes I am just trying to get something else done.

Chimera does not include distrobox in the repos but it does include podman so that gets you most of the way there. Anyway, it works great. I am posting this from Chimera right now.

Some people prefer Flatpak but I prefer old school package management. Flatpak just feels so heavy and opaque to me ( but I know opinions differ ). Distrobox certainly works better for console stuff.

Distrobox is just a handy tool as well and super convenient for spinning up quick sandboxes and temporary dev environments.

Arch is just a personal choice as well. I could have picked Void or Debian or anything else.
Two fractals create each other (a love story?)
Video Feedback Device “Insanity Mode” - the image on the left creates the image on the right while the image on the right creates the image on the left. They create each other!

In this mode of the Video Feedback Kinetic Sculpture, each of the four monitors effects every other monitor, and the image on the left is composed of the image on the right, while the image on right is composed of the image on the left - all at once! - making fractal sets within fractals sets within fractal sets within fractal sets...

Here, there's a feedback loop between two cameras and two monitor structures (each monitor structure has a top and bottom monitor with a sheet of beam splitter glass between the two). There's also a feedback loop between the monitor structures themselves, where the image created on the left structure is sent to the right structure, while the image created on the right structure is sent to the left structure (thus, Insanity Mode).
My experience at the LA Greyhound station was pretty miserable. It would have been just as good had it been at an existing train station, gas station, or somewhere else that is also reachable by public transit.
Yeah, I recall some of the various levels of heaven stuff. But it's more the second part that gets me. Most people who reject this belief system in life do so because there's no solid evidence to support it. But if they've died and have someone presenting the option to them to ascend to a better heaven or reject salvation, it's a very different situation. Now there is very strong evidence. If I'm the same person after death as in life, then both versions of me are going to make decisions based on evidence, so my decision would naturally change.
What was the reason Firefox for Android did not have a large repertoire of extensions from the start? Was it because of different multiprocess support?
I think it is more like people on HN dislike the idea of Software / Hardware patents in general that are similar to these but I agree that people can be biased especially the company being attacked.

Apple vs Epic and Google vs Epic comes to mind.
> Hindenburg publication

I have not been following the Nikola story, and the fact that the founder has now been convicted of fraud came as news to me. I also was not aware that Hindenburg had published anything on Nikola - reading that now: https://hindenburgresearch.com/nikola/
> Wonder how badly it could go if the data storage container is ruptured while against someone's body?

Nothing, really. Your body is good at fighting that sort of thing, because it's literally happening every second of every day with billions of bacteria and environmental DNA. Even specialized organisms have a rather tough time getting by all the defenses.

For example, there are zero human-infecting raw-DNA pathogens.
Are you saying "smart, are disciplined, and have the capacity to work hard for a long period" have no bearing on doing a good job?
How does a SPAC become a publicly traded company? What's the process that allows it to become listed on a reputable exchange "without any real assets other than cash"?
If they wanted to spend a bunch of money they could just license the patents. It would probably be cheaper than buying the whole company.
If you really want to know, the government has lots of info on it:

* https://www.justice.gov/criminal/file/442156/download

* https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-48000-computer-fraud

* https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47557
I just don't understand how we are talking past each other. We seem to agree while disagreeing (basically just cause guns are a contentious issue. I said it was a bad example at the outset...) right : Statistics do not dictate outcomes. I am identifying something that does definitely without question change outcomes for gun ownership (that is safety practices) and you seem to be making the argument that this does not change my chance of injuring myself with my own firearm.

In fact, I currently have no bullets in my house at all, and have no plans to purchase any. So right now my chance of injury is 0. It is not possible for me to be in the same cohort as the people with average risk of injuring themselves.
From NYTimes "In court, Masimo detailed how Apple poached its top executives and more than a dozen other employees before later releasing a watch with pulse oximeter capabilities — which measures the percentage of oxygen that red blood cells carry from the lungs to the body — that were patented by Masimo."

Doesn't sound like they accidentally stepped on a vague patent to me.
Honestly depending on the feature that might be for the best. If all three compilers have distinct on by default divergent settings that would be terrible.

My point is outside of instances where everyone agrees something has to change you need a compiler branch at the minimum. This means the compiler you changed will get that feature first.

Given it takes years to implement the full standard this leads to divergence between the compilers in standards compliance.

Honestly all totally workable but makes talking about "standard C++" hard.
Because natural gas has gone up in price.

Econ 101: price is set at the margin.

The price of the good is the cost of the most expensive producer that satisfies demand. Since wind & solar can't (yet) satisfy demand, they're not the marginal producer and don't set the price.
Yeah I am really waiting for these tools to be proactive. I don't find the idea of asking if there is a but very sensible. It should tell me when it looks like I wrote a bug. Or if it has a suggestion for a refactor.
> * A possible arms race between obfuscating and detecting unusual retrotranscriptases

Why, exactly?
You can do anything and everything you want to do -- if the alternative is death.
Here is how it is going to go, Adobe will tell their accountant to wire the money, the accountant will get the details from Figma. Adobe accountant will call their bank or maybe even go in to the branch. And tell them they are sending X to X. It will take a few stamps and confirmation and it will be done in about 5 mins. Some computer somewhere will go - 1 billion Adobe and + 1 billion Figma.

On the bank side nothing really happens unless Figma decides it wants to withdrawal all 1 billion. Then X bank will owe Y bank money, that loan will be balanced at some point. It will probably take a few days so Figma will be told it needs a few days.

Even if Figma decides to pay all their employees a share, that's also just - 50k Figma, + 50k Bob Smith in a computer somewhere.

There is no actual exchange of money until stuff is balanced at some point or you withdrawal. It's all just 1s and 0s in a record.
The assertiveness of your replies implies to me that you never worked in big companies
Ioniq 5 is at the top of my list for when we go car shopping, probably late next year. Coming from a pre-touchscreen-era 2011 Mazda, I'm pretty nervous about the UI disaster cars have turned into these days. I wish Mazda would build a good EV, but it sounds like it's not happening any time in the near term.
> You don't need JS for basic autocomplete in 2023, you can use "datalist" in HTML:

This does not seem to load data dynamically, it seems to be a way to show data from a predefined list?
Or the estate, read families, of these artists?

Not all copyright is owned or even licensed to organisations.

It really is a bad feel if you created something, then 20 years later someone releases the exact thing you created and make millions and you don't get a cent of that money.

Also many people after retirement age probably need the income from royalties a little bit more than when they were in their prime, not less.
Pretty sure it had always predefined sources
I suspect many people question the value of the patent system at all, so the size of any company doesn't come into it. The patent system was designed to stimulate innovation by allowing inventors to be open with their ideas without risk of "losing out on their idea."

When it was conceived, it may have been a worthy system solving a real problem. But today, it's hard to argue that without the patent system we'd lose out on any innovation. Given the population size and the ease at which it takes to come up with and validate an idea, twenty five years now is an eternity. Do you seriously think that no one would have come up with this particular idea if there were no patent system? I'd argue, that even without copying any idea, this sort of thing would be independently "discovered" many many times within 25 years.

Why should we reward the first person with the money to get the patent? Why should we not instead reward the first to market? Is not being the first to market already a reward?

I'm firmly in the camp that ideas are dime a dozen, and the value is in the implementation/verification of them not in simply writing down a vague notion. The patent system rewards the latter and doesn't even require demonstrating a working prototype, let alone a viable product! It's rewarding the wrong thing.
Say that to BofA. On my phone they still require email or text when I sign in.

Guess what I receive on this iPhone? Right, email & text.

On my PC it prompts for my YubiKey, but I cannot use it on iOS.
>>The average person is never going to understand what is true in any meaningful way,

Agree, but this means we are talking about two different topics. I'm talking at a functional level of truth; a base level of truths commonly understood in a society such that it can maintain cohesion. You're talking about deeply understood truths, like the 2+-hour discussion of quantum effects on the question of "why is the sky blue?" at a PhD's defense presentation.

>> Conversation only happens when people realize they are working with a faulty model...

what about when people actually have a good model, and a disinformation stream replaces that with a bad model, or causes them to just say 'nothing is true'?

For your purposes of deep truth, sure, everyone knows almost nothing except maybe in their own tight discipline, so one noise level or another will make no difference.

But at the level I'm talking about, common understanding of basic truths (the sky is blue, scattering, not a clue abt quantum effects), we are already seeing how increasing the noise level only by removing the Fairness Doctrine in broadcast media — society is significantly more fragmented. Automating and scaling those drivers of untruths is likely to accelerate the fragmentation.
I do wish we could go back to how things were in the early 00s where view source on any page was extremely telling and would show you cleanly formatted code.

Another huge reason for the status quo is a lot of companies actively try to obfuscate their frontend code for a variety of reasons, and a lot unwittingly do it as part of minification to squeeze out a little bit of extra efficiency both in terms of payload size and parsing time for clients (every token counts!).

That said, I would love a world where the de-jure frontend syntax was less ambiguous to the point where minification is essentially a lossless operation other than the actual names of things.

At the browser level we have to make the decision: do we want clients to be able to figure exactly what is running in their browser? If the answer is no, the current situation is great, if the answer is yes, the current situation is pretty bleak, and will actually get bleaker with the advent of WASM-based payloads where we now need to disassemble on top of everything else.
Here is how this works:

When the program starts, it prompts you to input an objective. Together with a screen capture featuring a guidance grid, this objective is sent to the GPT-4 Vision model. The model then selects the most effective action to fulfill the specified goal, and the program carries out this action.

The actions are:

CLICK <X> <Y> (estimates the coordinates of the mouse cursor as a percentage of the screen size and clicks on that point)
- TYPE <TEXT> (types the specified text)
- SEARCH <TEXT> (searches the specified app in the computer and opens it)
- DONE (if the objective is achieved)

The program will keep executing the actions until the objective is achieved or reaches a maximum number of iterations (which is 15 by default).

Love to hear your feedbacks!
Big difference between 60 and 85. But I do grant that at some point, people should give up driving if their vision, reaction times, cognative function, etc. do not allow them to do it safely.
I agree that the difference is both subtle and important, but I believe they used the right word. The key is that to be great, you do good often, not that what you do good can be done often.
Idk, it's likely very expensive to maintain the physical copies. It's easy to say that the government should just do everything, but spending money to maintain an archive that probably is very rarely used isn't a good use of limited money. Digital copies aren't always infinitely durable, but they can be copied exactly which is something that can't be done with paper and honestly I'd guess more durable than a paper archive with a the same amount of money being spent
My wife has a 2023 ID.4. As the article says, it's a good EV ruined by the touch controls. It is without a doubt the worst UX I've experienced in any car. Prime example: a touch toggle with no real feedback to switch between the front and rear window controls, since there's only one button.
This is the weak aspect of democracies my friends. The enemy can put out propaganda, ignorant people will believe it, and representatives will vote in the interests of the enemy.
A silken web
I bought a Dacia Duster and I love the physical buttons and knobs. It's a cheap brand with tech lagging behind the current by about ten years (guesstimate), which is annoying when it comes to safety features, but I love that I don't need to read the manual back to back to understand all its features and I can control the AC in curvy mountain roads without hesitation. And, big plus, they didn't invent their own silly overly complicated custom OS, you just connect your phone and you are good to go.
IIRC There was some followup hikers that explored and found a cave/entrance near a military area which sort of looked like the described one, only that it had been caved in (which they couldn't judge if natural or man-made). Not sure about the 'validity' or if they just wanted to contribute to the story.
Customers are emailing us saying that they like it as a compliment to support, you think it's impossible that people actually like it?
It's actually fascinating just how much power private business has to keep their chemical lists private _now_, in the _past_ and concievably in the future.

The fact that we can't just ask them "what were you chemically making 20 years ago" is really an absurd blackhole in regulatory frameworks.

Basically, even the leading edge regulatory frameworks tackling PFAS are doing so _after it's polluted things_ and has _no idea_ what they're associated with, other than large scale manufacturing, 3M, etc.

On the one hand, it's easy to understand since manufaturing has so many different components, but a sheer "there's clearly chemists somewhere, making this shit up and detailing what they're doing" issue, it's pathetic.
There are physical buttons, but they don't control the climate or seat warmers.

Most Hyundai's I've seen have a physical button for the seat warmers and a nice 1 knob control for automated climate. Just turn to the temperature you want and the car handles whatever is needed to get you there. It don't get any simpler.
Yeah, 25% is way too low a threshold for brainwashed to be useful to those at the top. They need at least 50%, 70% would be good but 90% is ideal. Society being defined as in peril is basically a rhetorical constant however.

On a more serious note haven't societies long been based upon common brainwashing? The Bronze Age and before are fuzzier on the details but propaganda certainly existed then as well at a smaller scale.
It's strange how often this article gets posted to hn. I have no idea what the appeal is but neither did I get it the last 6 or so times it was posted.
This is true of technical customers, which only a small percentage of people are in a B2B or consumer context. Non technical customers behave very differently.