skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hi HN community.

I have always found it difficult to style clothes as the current solutions out there are not appealing to me (pinterest, lookbook, ig, youtube and countless others). All the necessary information I need to make a purchase is fragmented. I want to create a place where you can go to get product and styling info. The product I prototyped is called MODE. Here is some high level information:

MODE's mission is to help people look and feel like the best version of themselves through styling

To fulfill this mission, we want to build the greatest collection of product and styles (fits) all in one place

I envision MODE to be a hyper styling and fashion curation platform that enables people to upload products and styles to help members of the community feel like the best version of themselves.

If you are an avid sneaker enthusiast or just like fashion in general, I'd really love your feedback and initial thoughts on this styling platform. Thank you so much!
And yet sales volumes for the past several years have been near record levels. Regardless of incomes, consumers are buying those expensive vehicles. So, why would manufacturers waste resources on building cheaper models if they don't have to?
I’ve often pondered this and I have concluded that there are a number of factors:

1. Licensing. While it might appear that the Indiana Jones IP is fully in the hands of Disney, it’s plausible that there are nuances behind the scenes. For example, Paramount owns the distribution rights to the first four films. That’s a different issue, but I mention it as an example of how rights can become fragmented over time over multiple contracts. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the rights to Fate of Atlantis are more complex than we see from the outside. Having said that, I’ve no evidence of this.

2. It was a good game, but does that make for a good movie? FoA had some great game features: multiple paths, fun puzzles, classic adventure game exploration and interactivity, awesome pixel art - but none of these are useful to a movie.

3. The script was… OK. It doesn’t have any standout quotable lines like the first three films did. Its comedy is more slapstick than witty, and there are more than a few video-game in-jokes. It’s also highly derivative, written, I suspect, to make players think “This is cinematic! This is just like a real Indiana Jones movie!” To that end, it worked brilliantly. But in the 90s, games were still a sideshow compared to Hollywood, and were written in a parodic style, not yet having found their own space as a unique medium. To an extent, this is still true today.

4. An aging Harrison Ford is tough to reconcile with a story set in the 1930s. I expect this alone was a big driver in the studio wanting new scripts set in the 50s and 60s for the last two films.

5. Movies based on games have an abysmal track record, and I’m sure Hollywood producers get an allergic reaction whenever someone suggests another one.

And yet, despite all the above, FoA is still fantastic raw material for a movie. The plot, mythology, locations, set-pieces, and even the music, are all perfect for being reimagined on the big screen. Which leads me to the final reason why I think it hasn’t happened:

5. Nobody took games seriously in the 90s, Lucas was in control in the 00s for Crystal Skull and wanted his own story not somebody else’s, Disney was distracted by Star Wars and Marvel in the 10s, and by the time we get to Dial of Destiny in the 20s, Disney has become so risk averse that the idea of pulling ideas from a video game seems far outside what they are creatively capable of. Sadly, with Dial of Destiny bombing, the franchise is probably dead until the 30s.

Still, the fact that Disney lawyers shut down the recent fan-remastered version of the FoA game gives me hope that they still recognize how much value that IP has. They’ve strip-mined every other IP, so it’s possible they will eventually realize they've been digging in the wrong place, let go of Harrison Ford (in either live, de-aged, or posthumous generative form), and get their top men working on it.
Man who didn't sleep record 264 hours suffered from crippling effects for years
One thing I never liked about ripgrep is that it doesn't have a pager. Yes, it can be configured to use the system-wide ones, but it's an extra step (and every time I have to google how to preserve colors) and on Windows you're SOL unless you install gnu utils or something. The author always refused to fix that.

Ugrep not only has a pager built in, but it also allows searching the results which is super nice! And that feature works on all supported platforms!
Minisforum is actually advertising it as being a 65Gbit capable machine. Using link aggregation, presumably, you could do a lot better than just 10Gbit as a NAS.

> The MS-01 is capable of building a high-speed network experience with two 10Gbps SFP+ LAN ports, two 2.5Gbps RJ45 LAN ports, and two USB4 ports, providing a total maximum Ethernet throughput of 65Gbps.

Network throughput isn't necessarily the bottleneck though, if you're running a database that needs to do a lot of lookups and concatenation for each query, you could still be bottleneck by the 3.0 x2 while still having headroom on the 10GbE
> "We don't like you, so we're giving you the shit work, but if you find a better offer, please take it."

I’m an entrepreneur in France, and I had one employee I would have like to say that to, but it can so easily be turned against the employer… Unions and litigations have basically made honesty the worst choice in every situation. Only to discover afterwards that the person had been willing to go since 6 months already. The entire experience is stupid, stupid humans working (or not working) together.
I don't know why you should feel bad about that. If anything, you should feel good that you independently recognized a problem so significant that it was given a name.

I assume most problems I face are solved, and that I just don't know shit. So I scramble to research the solutions, and I'm shocked when what seem to be widely-encountered problems are NOT, in fact solved.

One recent example I encountered was API definition. I was tasked to define a new API for my company's products, and celebrated when I discovered OpenAPI. I was a bit surprised to find that only the very latest version of the standard (3.1) was competent enough to be useful.

And despite 3.1 being ratified for years, today there are still no usable code-generation tools that support it. I wasted weeks studying and trying to fix various tools, after studying reams of redundant and conflicting documentation in different repositories... thinking it was my problem. No. It's just a hideously broken mess.

Today I'm dealing with the same thing in SwiftUI... and again have reached the conclusion that the programming paradigm it pushes has not been thought through. Its rushed and immature state shows in its kitchen sink full of overlapping and rapidly-deprecated approaches to problems that were solved in traditional application structures a decade and a half ago.

Just typing that out, I wonder if I failed to learn from my first example and wasted too much time on the second. But if you're a thorough person, you have to satisfy yourself that you've been diligent in trying to inform yourself of best practices.
being "the opposite extreme" doesn't mean it's wrong
> You can’t

Speak for yourself. ;) Depends on how you define “digital”. Digital is typically defined as being based on logic gates, not necessarily anything to do with your representation of numbers. I say if your adder is built with op-amps and multiple lines, it’s doing analog computation on digits, and it stays analog for longer than if you build it with CMOS gates.

This distinction is important when you start making signal integrators or matrix multipliers or do other computations with analog components, for example.
I do most of my meetings on my phone, and enlarging the screen if someone is sharing their screen works pretty well (it's not perfect, but more than enough for presentations). But I can of course transfer the call to my PC if need be.

But I just have scrcpy up in a window on one of my screens/workspace constantly. The keyboard shortcuts work quite well and I don't have to break my flow just to do something on my phone. Clipboard is synced as well.

If I get a notification I can check what it is about without taking my hands of my keyboard etc.

I'm sure it sounds a bit convoluted, and each usecase (meetings, notifications etc.) have other better/more-native solutions but the experience all in all is a game-changer.

To the point where "just picking up your device" is too much of a bother. Why not do it through scrcpy instead? Quicker, proper keyboard etc. and the mouse works really well. To the point where I kind of miss right-click is "back" when I'm outside the scrcpy window.
and for anyone that actually believed companies cared about those things when they said them, I have a bridge in NY I'd like to sell you.
Fair, although I feel like if you're doing that level of IO you probably want actual enterprise hardware or something.
Some examples of input and processed output would have been nice.
It also imples that any border between countries that is defined by a natural border, eg a river is infinitely long, right?
Show HN: An AI assistant to advise on growing bonsai trees
> If the certs live much longer than the rotation window, this really is just security theatre.

That's very true.

> and GP's company probably misinterpreted the rotation requirements and short lifespans were implied in the requirement.

Or GP didn't know that the company was indeed using short expiration times, and somehow confused it with certificate revocation (called "cancelled" in the post).
Are there any developments towards helping these efforts out by decentralizing / backing up parts of the archive and way back machine data?
I know torrents are hugely important in helping to decentralize and maintain many important files in academia and such (e.g. NN weights and CERN data) but I think cephfs is also trying to allow decentralized data storage with redundancy.

It seems like there is some solution which can provide a huge data source to be decentralized over arbitrary number of nodes, where each node can hold or back up just some part of the data, and allow for a dashboard view that shows the level of redundancy over all of the data for each of its parts.
Yeah this could be terrible unless there's very specific exceptions for sub 1mil revenue players.

Lots of big players are already providing shit software to millions of customers especially through government contracts because they've hired armies of legal and sales teams, squashing the little guy in the process.

If just providing some small web service built on top of open source now requires hiring a huge legal team, well goodbye to any entrepreneurship.

I know this because i've seen big players win contracts over actually talented people 9 of 10 times because they can play this regulation game, and i've seen small companies burn 100s of thousands in consultancy fees over GDPR that made zero difference for their Wordpress setup that a talented coder could have used 10 hours to fix.

That said the intentions are good, but for some reason EU thinks small players should have the same extreme measures as Facebook, Google, ie the actual reasons this regulation was made in the first place. Bizarre.
I shared this (somewhat old) post hoping old HN discussions would auto-pop-up but it looks like it wasn't discussed much at the time. I was hoping to find some elucidation of _what_ Webfinger is doing here and/or when it's actually invoked by Mastodon federation. The Webfinger document we create in this tutorial is never served up or posted anywhere. So mastodon doesn't need it for you to reply to a post. When does it come into play?
Another underrated benefit is this is potentially a lot faster. A flat array, which you can use to store this, is a lot more cache friendly to a CPU than a data structure with a lot of pointers. (Although this mostly requires a language like C++ where you can control the memory layout)
Jenni AI: Dropout Builds $30M Startup While Fighting Cancer [video]
No prototypes?
I'm glad that the concerns of the open source community were clearly heard and incorporated into the CRA. Experts were listened to and being involved in this regulation helped making it better.

As the author states "regulations are never fun" bjt this is as good as it gets.

I'm an optimist and hope that this will somewhat dampen the voices on the internet and (unfortunately) on HN that claim the EU is only filled with near evil idiots acting to destroy European industry.

I guess we will see how it goes next time (admittedly my hope is small).
Read the comment I linked. It's about the regulation being enforced with its principles in mind, not robotically through its strict interpretation.
If you could only make one app, for Android, and know that it would appear on both platforms, that could swing developers to just target Android to save development costs. Reduces SDK cost, don't need to buy Apple hardware, only one set of testing required.
Abdurraheem dot ali at microsoft dot com
Questions:

- If you run a commercial kitchen on your own (or, let's say, with a staff of 2-3 people), can you ignore the food safety regulations? The fire regulations?

- If you run a one-man plumbing company, can you ignore safety regulations? Water regulations? Sewage regulations?

etc.

Why is it than when it comes to "commercial software" it is inevitably "oh my god these laws are so hard, why should I as one-man company be forced to comply with them". Because that is literally your job.
It was 400Gb/s this year as well.
Huh? What about it uses marching cubes?
Two clicks in I already see COVID pandemic and climate chance being denied and a link to David Icke (quoting Wikipedia "an English conspiracy theorist").
Yeah, I should've written "cannot rely on that alone and also check". I've worked with vi, later vim, for 34 years and read about it here first; ddg'ing for it doesn't give many hits.
And just to provide some perspective… typical household breakers work very similar to this.

If your 15A breaker tripped instantly when the current exceeded 15A, you’d be resetting a breaker every time you turned on a stand mixer or something.

Instead they have two mechanisms of action—thermal and electromagnetic.

The thermal trip time varies depending on how much you’ve exceeded the rated current, but for a typical household breaker could be a couple of minutes.

The electromagnetic trip is the “hard cutoff” where as soon as you exceed that limit the breaker trips near instantly. Depending on the type of breaker this is usually 5-10x its rated current. So your 15A breaker may allow you to briefly pull 75-150A through it.

So while these fuses are mislabeled and should not be sold, it’s not as much of a death trap as it might appear on first glance from what it sounds like.
The speeds would be completely reliable until somebody starts walking around the office, disrupting the line of sight to the lightspot in the ceiling.
> ePM1 50%+

If there’s actual poor air quality (smoke, etc), this is inadequate. 50% is fine for a recirculating system — fine particles will be reduced by half on each pass. For for a single pass system, if you have 50 μg/m3 outdoors (quite common in a lot of places, sadly) you get 25 μg/m3 coming in through your fancy ventilation system, which is not great.

What you want is a great honking filter, 95% or better, with a prefilter. You’ll pay several hundred dollars for that big filter, but you’ll be running it at low velocity (maybe 150cfm of flow in a 24”x24” filter housing), so it will have minimal pressure drop and will last a long time. Even an actual HEPA filter wouldn’t be out of place here.

But even the really fancy European ERV/HRV brands use those inadequate ePM1 50% filters. I’ve even measured them with a handheld particle counter — they work every bit as poorly as one would expect from the specs. And those filters are small, and they gunk up quickly.
iOS includes the requesting application’s name in the UA string. You could use that to measure Firefox on iOS usage.
The Alberta coast??
Maybe they are? Has this been tested?
This has been a talking point pretty much from the day the Brexit vote happened. The usual suspects then repeatedly publish that same line in the usual papers (The Guardian for one) hoping to reify the "belief" into being with their domination of PR.

Eventually a broken clock will be right. Regardless of the truth of this talking point though, its process of dissemination is unambiguously propaganda. Certain elites really want the public to believe this.

Examples:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/12/11/does-britain...

Half a decade ago

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/31/the-gu...

https://www.businessinsider.com/yougov-poll-brexit-regret-re...

Honestly just search Brexit in the News section of google and try to find a mainstream paper that has anything positive to say.
> it's hard to make money with OSS so there is no staff working on security.

Sooo.... Because of that you should be exempt even though you're expecting to sell that software?

How does this make sense?
Added a release and installation instructions now!
sure, in the led 1536, but the older panels we're talking about were multiplexed, so the data would only have to go through the (shift registers for the) previous leds on the same row

you obviously know a lot more than i do, so maybe i'm missing something, but in either case i wouldn't expect noise or reflections, the signal levels and timing get restored at every shift stage, even low voltage cmos usually has more than a volt of noise margin, the traces are pretty short, and we're talking about longwave to shortwave frequencies, not microwave frequencies
If you have a data structure like...

struct item_t {
char key[255];
char display_value[255];
}

And your key has consistent path separators like a/b/c

Then looking up parents and children is incredibly easy. At worst it's a linear scan of the array, but if it's in order you can even just look at previous items in the list until you're at the parent.
Thanks for chiming in! If you don't mind, I'm trying to understand the exact accounting implications of this for you.

In the context of self-publishing, what does it mean to order "author's copies"? Are they:
A) offered for free, like they would be as part of a traditional publishing contract?
B) Sold to you "at cost" of printing and shipping without any markup?
C) Sold above cost but with a discount greater than or equal to size of the royalty?
D) Sold above cost but with a discount smaller than the size of the royalty?
E) Sold at full retail price but without any royalty?

I very much doubt A because then Amazon would basically be operating what amounts to a free vanity press. But maybe they'd throw in a couple as a perk.

I also doubt B because then they would be operating a revenue-neutral vanity press, but maybe it would still be worth it to them if they counted on gettong enough non-author sales to make enough margin to fund the operation.

I also doubt D or E, because if so, then why would anybody order "author's copies" of their book?. Just get your friend to order them for you and reimburse them and you'll come out ahead.

I would guess the answer is C. But in that case, it seems to me that you are getting implicit royalty on those "author's copies", but those royalties are baked into the discounted price rather than being distributed to you later. (I suppose this might also have advantageous tax implications for you on those implicit royalties, compared to the alternative where you just order normal copies and get your royalties later.) Am I wrong about this?
Yeah I actually don't necessarily mean to convince anyone of my way of doing things. I'm more or less just trying to convince others to both convey their ideas more clearly, and more importantly, recognize the trade offs in each of the approaches accurately. I do not feel either one of those things is really being done here.

I feel like this sort of confusion comes up every time there's a discussion about rebase versus merge. My favorite explanation of this is the combination of overloaded terminology (jargon versus layspeak, e.g., "history" and "merge") and inexperience. I don't jump in every time, but when I do, it feels like I'm banging my head against the wall. Sigh.

> He corrects mistakes forward (new commit fixes old commit), we correct them backwards when possible (just fix the old commit directly), otherwise forwards. I know which I prefer, but nobody's going to convince anybody.

I understand this. But I don't like the phrasing because it doesn't tell you anything about the differences in the approaches, when you might want to use one over the other and the trade-offs.

> I just wish I didn't have to wade through dozens of pointless "Fold in John's suggestions from the PR" commits when trying to get to the meat. Or have git bisect land on a merge commit with two parents, throw up its hands and say "over to you, pal".

Yeah those pointless commits are why I curate. And the overhead of submitting one-PR-per-commit is why I use both rebase & merge and squash & merge on GitHub.

> Funny thing is, I'm normally a proponent of "worse is better". I wonder why I'm not in this case. Probably because a rebase repo is a single train track, and so much easier to reason about.

I definitely don't chase perfection here. I don't mind having a commit that doesn't build or pass tests now and then. What I'm after is communicating clearly. Both to folks reviewing my code and to folks looking at the source history 6 months from now. I quite literally try to treat source history like I treat the code itself. Both things benefit from thinking about how other humans are going to interpret it in the future.

> (I bet the answer to your "when did rebase screw up so badly it took days to unpick" is something to do with "push --force". With great power...)

I'm sure I bungled things up pretty badly when I was first learning `git rebase`, but that was so long ago I can't remember. In working memory, the worst fuckups with rebase have been with `push --force` (well, `--force-with-lease`) and dependent PRs. But I just recently learned about `git rebase --update-refs`, and that's already made things a lot nicer.
400nm UV is still probably bad for your eyes.

> (FYI: this is why all "LED" sterilizers are snake-oil)

Most are snake oil, but there are definitely UV-C LEDs out there.

IMO, we should just use ordinary white LED lighting for this. Easy to ensure that no matter what the data, the lights are at 80% DC brightness, and you can still get an absurd amount of data throughput per light fixture.
It will run off a battery for a bit but not for very long, the LEDs draw a fair bit of power, especially when you start lighting up a lot of them. To protect the circuitry and to run it directly off a USB port I reduced the brightness to a maximum of 16 out of 256, that seems to work fine but when all of the LEDs are illuminated you can sometimes see a bit of a ripple when it is on a small charger.

These LEDs put out an insane amount of light at full illumination, they do a about 50 mA each so if you were to set all of them to 'white' and maximum intensity (255,255,255) then that would work out to 1536x.05A or a whopping 75A. You'd need a very beefy power supply to be able to do that and you'd need to power each of the LED boards separately (they already have leads soldered on for that purpose but I left those unconnected for now).

At 5V power consumption would be 375W, and I reckon the boards would get fairly hot, each LED would do .250 W.

So for practical reasons I think limiting the intensity is a smart move, unless you know for sure that you will be illuminating only very few LEDs.