skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Being taken private does not mean Not being beholden to show growth every quarter, in fact often then private equity takes a Tech company private the impetus return value to the new owners is even higher than if it was still public

The pattern of Private Equity take over is clear

1. Buy out public stock

2. Extreme Cost Cutting to make the company profitable by sacrificing Engineering and Customer Service

3. Massive Increase in prices to make the company profitable by sacrificing long term market share for short term profits

4. Sell the company again (or in pieces) before it goes bankrupt due to 1 and 2.

This has happened time and time again.
Yes. It may be legal discrimination, though.

In the US, Federal law makes age discrimination illegal only if the victim is over 40.
Its always been possible, its just AWS offered something good enough first.

its a lesson for us in programming when AI starts to automate large parts of it. Being techincally the best is nothing when you can replace slow hard to build things with shitter but significantly faster to deploy things.
That would be a fatal blow to the advertisment industry...
Was thinking the same thing, totally gona start bringing them into the hood! Some bike company bikes became fair game after they went bust in Europe.
> 1. Software does not make money. Not ever. Sales makes money. Software only costs money. When your developer peers get confused, distracted, or lost on this matter you better hope your employer is either too big, too stupid, or too wealthy to care.

I do not like this comparison, mostly because it leads to out weight one for another. We currently have the situation that we are understaffed in dev and overstaffed in sales, but sales does not generate enough revenue to justify their existence. However, we can also not deliver as much features as we like, because the dev department is too small.
Would be amazing if you could get this swapped in and out for a longer roadtrip
There's a Concorde Engine Complete with Afterburner for Sale on eBay
This resonates with the approach we’ve taken in Langroid (the Multi-Agent framework from ex-CMU/UW-Madison researchers): our DocChatAgent uses a combination of lexical and semantic retrieval, reranking and relevance extraction to improve precision and recall:

https://github.com/langroid/langroid/blob/main/langroid/agen...
Looks like playback depends on "ticks" arriving from browser to the JS library, and library selects a frame according to the scroll location.

Mobile devices send this data constantly and periodically, making it smoother; yet desktop browsers do not, appearing choppy.

It works as intended on my iPhone X, yet stutters on an infinitely more powerful desktop, and only possible explanation is this.
If they were only building them in volume
> Slight inefficiency is acceptable.

Sure - and in rust that probably means boxed types everywhere. Maybe the worst feature of Java was the easy access to bare types. For rust it might be a culture thing - but that might change.
It’s kind of weird how the art world says “this person made some great works ergo all of their works are precious”. I remember seeing in a museum some doodles Picasso made on a restaurant napkin or something. And it was like “what was he trying to say drawing his friend as a funny looking animal man?”.
These two points (docs and looking at source code)
Started working for me only few years into the career, when I had a really good grasp of foundations
> I guess if you can get away with promising "full self driving next year" since 2014, what is described in TFA is just small beer.

IMHO it's the other way around. Promising that some kind of technology is being worked on is just as normal as are setbacks during said development.

But this here is outright lying to customers and leaving them stuck with the bills, and it's lying to investors about risks on the company books.
Did they repeal it after the withdrawal finalized or something? IIRC, it was granted ascent long before they left the EU.
I’m shitting on the religion, not the code.
Also, why would the fact that GNU helped Linux in the past mean we should give 2 shits about it once alternatives arose? If it’s better for your use case, that’s fine, continue using it.
I’m just tired of the GNU zealots emotionally defending their religion at every turn.

Let a thousand flowers bloom and whatnot
I imagine as soon as we detect alines the guardian will tells us to be humane and sympathetic as this new found underclass cleans our roads and fixes our homes.

Nonetheless people moved on from believing in aliens, to 5g viruses, agi, and all sorts of other out of this world theories.
I'll clarify, as yes it's possible, but not using the built in conversions from strings to floats. That is, the following is not true for all x: Number(String(x)) == x
I thought about that but decided that the issue is a function of location. A cabin in the middle of nowhere is not the same as a busy block in the city. So I really didnt see the need to ban everywhere, only in certain locations. You could even rent the "party zones" at a premium that I am sure some would be willing to pay
C Object Oriented Programming (2014)
My concern was more that you'll have more people who would like to pay to remove the branding, compared to how many people would need the Pro plan, but you have offering for those customers.

If you just want to remove the branding, I view it a $19/$29 subscription for something that's worth maybe $1 - $2.

Maybe also add an explanation as to what a site is, because I can't tell what the difference between a site and a domain is.
Tangent: I love that this includes a list of frequently asked questions in the literal sense of questions that are asked frequently.
And leaving history aside for a moment, by now government probably produces lots of native digital records, but that in no way means that they're automatically publicly accessible.
I'd assume their connectivity provider would've terminated their contract.

Although bankruptcy can also mean restructuring...
When I was younger, I was obsessed with writing clever code to show off my programming knowledge. Over time I realized code that is easy to understand is much more valuable.
Why are you able to halt someone else’s product when you don’t even have a product?

It’s supposed to protect first movers, not randos who show up 10 years later and demand cash.
Judge certifies child sex abuse victim's class action lawsuit against Pornhub
If it catches bugs before run-time, that's a benefit to me, in the same way that testing doesn't catch all bugs (and yes, can introduce a false sense of security), but most people still think it's a good idea.

You obviously don't get the haskell experience, where if your program type checks it's probably correct, but the alternative (if, remember, you want a dynamically typed scripting language) is no type checking, which is definitely worse for some people.
Pakistan politician uses AI to deliver speech from jail
yes, what my comment proposes is a solution that avoids breaking the web, by referring to document.lastModified. in this scenario there's a transition period where only Object.groupBy is available, then after a few years Array.groupBy is also available for any pages modified after the cutoff date. static pages are spared, and servers + library devs have plenty of time to react

there is definitely an approach out there that breaks fewer pages than things like the flash EOL broke
20 Awesome Keyboard-First Mac Apps
> 8. Take walks.

I'm fortunate enough to have an office overlooking a small pond. When I'm frustrated I go to my window and stare at the pond for a while. When I'm really frustrated I walk down to the pond and stare at it for a while.

I also walk to lunch as often as I can (i.e. when it's not freezing or boiling outside). Highly recommend.
Are you using Obsidian's native sync?
Yeah none of this has to do with the GNU religion. Every word of this can be addressed with or without GNU.
I don’t want software from my car manufacturer. I want a thing I can cast Apple CarPlay on.

Regarding range, pretty much any EV with a comparable battery pack (kWh-wise) is a peer. And there’s plenty of those now.
Looks like this article from Car News China is testing a Chinese car in China with Chinese batteries on Chinese roads. I didn’t see any reference to USA or USA freeways.
I had the same question.

"The Entity Component System (ECS) is the core of the Unity Data-Oriented Tech Stack. As the name indicates, ECS has three principal parts:

Entities — the entities, or things, that populate your game or program.

Components — the data associated with your entities, but organized by the data itself rather than by entity. (This difference in organization is one of the key differences between an object-oriented and a data-oriented design.)

Systems — the logic that transforms the component data from its current state to its next state— for example, a system might update the positions of all moving entities by their velocity times the time interval since the previous frame"

From https://docs.unity3d.com/Packages/com.unity.entities@0.17/ma...
99 times out of 100, GFL getting an electric car from a dealer without a Eastern Bloc-like wait time.

My family waited for 2 years on a Lada in the 1980s.
Tile-Able Background Generator
Asking again, can you please link directly to the problematic content ?
> We need to be focused on solving problems, and if we aren't sure what problem our code is solving, we need to stop coding and figure that out.

I am not sure whether this is a good advice - for a quite subtle reason: I do claim that most code (including most of the code that is written "for code's sake") does solve a problem, and most programmers at least unconsciously are aware of this fact - and that's why they write this "code for code's sake".

The issue rather is that other people (say, "the suits") want that the code solves a different problem than the one that the code solves.
I have the feeling that this is a very high theoretical ebony tower view.

E.g., I have a SWC that stores and reads something, and that similarly uses another SWC to do that.

If I do an integration test to write and then read something, I test very explicitly at the same time that my SWC does what it specs and is expected, as well as the lower layer SWC. (And at the same time this is also then a good regression finder for when you replace the black box you maybe shouldn't know about).

However, similarly I can also write more explicit tests that test the lower SWC in isolation and cover even more cases I cannot cover by just integration testing.

Arguing with purview in testing, and what should be done or not, never helped me so far in my career
to end up with good problem and regression finding tests, and provide well working and robust systems.
The contrary, discussions and nit-picking at that level are usually a huge red flag. Nice in theory, failed in practice.
Yes… It will eat itself before it reaches any prolific state imo but that’s just an insane guess. I agree with your dystopian conclusion.
context: Non-physicist here; and I struggled with maths from calculus onwards despite "liking" it.

Causality requires time - something (A) causing something else (B) means A and B are separated by time (or maybe distance). If they're not, then aren't they "the same thing", and the event is a single system and no energy or information has changed? In fact, the idea of _change_ also requires time. All the graphs in the abstract of the paper show a value Y and time axes.

How is any of this "1D"? Why isn't it 2D, with one of the Ds measuring time? Do physicists just ignore time because it's always there? How can that work if time is relative? Surely that _forces_ us to always pay attention to it? (and if time is relative, doesn't that mean you also need a 3rd D against which to observe the relativity, all just to measure that one dimension you were interested in?)
Well, at least it's obvious where this is coming from.

> You will look like a genius because you'll have an encyclopedic knowledge

> You can learn esoteric knowledge about programming

– and you will pay an incredibly steep price for it.

If you want to be effective, stay clear of this one. Systems are going to be increasingly complex to the point where it's absolutely impossible for any one person to understand it all and your best bet is getting efficient at poking them to figure out what's going on.
I hope this is not intended as it seems to be...
Moving the litter from the streets to the river where they can do more damage to the environment as they are degraded by water. Makes sense.
I think the authors argument is fascinating; the idea that Western capitalism is self-defeating precisely because it is so successful in ensuring political and social stability, thereby stifling the people living under it. However, I wonder if 'Trumpism, Brexit, rising nationalism, etc.' are better explaining within the context of wealth inequality. In other words by capitalism failing to provide benefits to subset of the population while still keeping the status quo.
Well, I do think differently and I believe that Capitalism is pushing humans to the brink of destruction as it provides a strong incentive for people/corporations to exploit resources as fast as possible.

The Airbnb problem highlights that free markets shouldn't be applied everywhere as there's often important considerations that go beyond just making someone some money.

> The free market is efficient at creating competition to drive down the costs of goods and services and drive up the quality(in theory)

I know that's the general belief of free markets, but in reality the size of businesses counts far more than their efficiency or quality. Arguably, we don't have free markets as that would entail people having sufficient knowledge about the products/services and that just doesn't happen as the people with the most money can easily influence people (e.g. marketing, advertising, buying news services etc).
Volkswagen and other ICE car manufacturers are not IT companies like Tesla. They are holdings outsourcing design and manufacturing to Bosch, Magna Steyr, and others.
tcpdump only uses BPF, not eBPF. BPF is a simpler language that, among other things, is guaranteed to run in finite time because it doesn't have backward jumps, and has limitations on program size (4096 instructions). (The "e" in eBPF stands for "extended", as it extends BPF to remove those limitations, among other changes.)

It compiles your filter expression into a series of instructions, using libpcap. For instance, the output of `tcpdump -d -y EN10MB 'ip and tcp port 80' (which is rather similar to the use case in the OP, but not identical, since it doesn't strip headers), on my machine, is:

# Load the 2-byte ethernet protocol into A (the accumulator register).
(000) ldh [12]
# If IPv4, continue to line 2. Else, jump to line 12.
(001) jeq #0x800 jt 2 jf 12
# Load the one-byte IP protocol into A.
(002) ldb [23]
# If TCP, continue. Else, jump to line 12.
(003) jeq #0x6 jt 4 jf 12
# Load the 2 bytes corresponding to IP flags / fragment offset into A.
(004) ldh [20]
# If the fragment offset is nonzero, jump to line 12. Else, continue.
(005) jset #0x1fff jt 12 jf 6
# Load the internet header length into X. (Note that this is the bottom 4
# bits of the first byte of the IPv4 header, expressed in 4-byte words)
(006) ldxb 4*([14]&0xf)
# Load the source port into A.
(007) ldh [x + 14]
# If 80, jump to 11. Else, continue.
(008) jeq #0x50 jt 11 jf 9
# Load the dest port into A.
(009) ldh [x + 16]
# If 80, jump to 11. Else, jump to 12.
(010) jeq #0x50 jt 11 jf 12
# Accept. Return 262144 bytes, the default snaplen.
(011) ret #262144
# Reject. Literally, return 0 bytes.
(012) ret #0

If you know how to read assembly, it should be fairly straightforward to follow a typical program (you'll need various protocol header wire formats handy if you haven't memorized the offsets).
You are not. I distrust almost everything on Wikipedia and verify from other sources because I've found so many examples of heavily editorialized content in the past. (and never mind actually trying to contribute, trying that years and year ago burned me for good.)
A wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Which has always made me wonder how to do it right. Or if it's even possible to do it right. Perhaps some iron law governs a project becoming impossible past a certain number of people involved. Maybe smaller subject specific sites are actually the only possibility?

Or maybe I'm just holding on to the dream of the order internet. I don't know. I'd like to know. But I wouldn't trust whatever answer to the question was on Wikipedia.
Is your new car on a storage compound?
I really like this.
I think the pricing is too high so I won't be using it, but really love the concept.
Really? How? I mean, I find regular Python quite structured, uniform and easy to follow. Also very explicit (except when you start to do some __getattr__ magic and so on. That part is messy.

But most ot the time you find for loops, comprehensions and unsurprising code.
most of the Python code I've seen with type annotations appears to be significantly worse than the code without them.

You're in Python. Either embrace it or use another language.
python types can be ignored if you choose to ignore them.

Running pyright in CI/CD and in vscode has considerably improved the quality of my code, especially when refactoring.
are you serious? it's when you look away from the road in front of you for a sec to check your mirrors
Oh sweet summer child. Not only do some manufacturers bury climate in a submenu, some don't even give you a simple [-][+] touchbutton arrangement.

A few years ago I had a rental (can't remember the make but I think it was korean) where you had to move a slider. Doing that is of course extremely easy while driving, especially if the manufacturer forgot that touchpoints should be perspective-corrected for the drive (every point was way to the right of where I saw it).
In 2021 i tried a Tesla. One of the back doors didn't align properly with the car body.

If they can't get that right, how can they get moving parts right?
> The crucial metric is how long it initially takes to create the index and then update it when the application starts (i.e. finding all changes to the filesystem which happened while the application wasn't running)

That's what I meant by " delta between file creation/removal time and the time that the file shows up in the results set (or index)."

Basically, how fast can we update the index?

> That's where Everything excels and to which I and others haven't found a solution on non-Windows systems (without making significant changes to the kernel of course).

I've got a couple of out-there ideas which may or may not pan out, one of which was, indeed, a kernel module.

Another idea is to deploy the indexer as a daemon with the applications all using IPC to query and update it. This will give the query applications a significant advantage on startup compared to Everything.

As for updating the index timeously, I've got a few ideas there as well. Walking the filesystem starting at `/` for each update will result in only performing index updates once a day or so (hence, the reason I expressed the metric as a delta) so I feel that that is no good.

I'll do an implementation and try to message you (if you want to check it out) because code talks louder than words :-)
Troll account. Unfortunately mods are more interested bothering accounts that occasionally offend the HN zeitgeist.
You don't want software, you just want a thing that relies on software. Got it
Unrelated question to the article: “They were absolutely petrified,” Jain said of his wife and daughter. “If we were on a 70-mile-per-hour highway, and this would have happened, that would have been catastrophic.”

Is it normal for people in the UK (Jain is from Cambridge, England) to use miles-per-hour? I thought it was kilometers-per-hour, generally.
Nonsense. It's not like the UK government is building the technology required to surveil at this scale. They're effectively laundering data in pursue of "societal good" which gets filtered through dozens of tech firms who only exist to collect and analyze this specific data.

Capitalism, in this instance, is exploiting a niche, that is the UK government (and others) want more control over their populations. These firms are more than happy to oblige, given the government contract is lucrative enough.
Exactly. Tesla’s overuse of software for everything is a bug, not a feature. I want knobs and dials and something to cast CarPlay on, and that’s it.
> Most are still years behind Tesla on the range

FTA: "In July, the news agency revealed how Tesla had created a secret team to suppress thousands of customer complaints about poor driving range. The report, which found that Tesla rigged an algorithm to inflate its cars’ in-dash range estimates, sparked a federal investigation."
At a point in time when new car deliveries should be recovering by now, it’s infuriating to see execs thinking they know better.

A very quick way to lose customer loyalty.
60% total is still pretty tight. We are almost evenly split as a society, all across the world. Weird and sad.
Rite Aid banned from using face recognition software after false ID shoplifters
Pretty much everything road-related in the UK is in miles (distances, speeds, etc.)
> However, Python doesn’t have the compile-time check

Yes it does. All Python source code is parsed and compiled into bytecode. SyntaxError is raised before runtime.
> do you believe that it is always the best idea to continue development regardless of estimated impacts?

Emphatically yes. The possible downsides are much smaller than the expected upside (as history shows) and we are really bad at predicting either in advance anyway (also as history shows). Finally, we really really really need those upsides to change our fate as a species currently one cosmic accident (meteorite, virus, nuclear escalation, etc) away from extinction.

Also even if the good guys stop, the bad guys will certainly accelerate - so in a competitive world there is really no advantage in voluntarily giving up technological development.
It’s not insane at all. You’re all whining but you’ve never requested a physical copy of these wills.

If you’re willing to store hundreds of millions of individual physical documents for eternity, free of charge then feel free to pipe up. I’m sure they’d be willing if you have the means to do so. But you don’t.

So you want us to spend billions pointlessly keeping a warehouse full of documents nobody ever reads. When it’s trivial to just scan them in enough quality that you would never need them.