skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Automatic indentation helps, but the main problem is that LISP uses a single kind of parentheses in all places where some kind of brackets is required.

If different kinds of brackets had been used for every distinct purpose, then there would have been no need to count parentheses or be dependent on enforcing invariable indentation rules.

ALGOL 68 is another example of programming language with fully parenthesized non-ambiguous syntax, but it uses many kinds of different bracket pairs, which makes it much easier to read. While some of its bracket pairs, like if/fi, do/od, case/esac, have been rightfully mocked, they achieve well their purpose.

In a programming language there are many different purposes for which bracket pairs are needed, e.g. for delimiting sub-expressions in order to change the default order of evaluation, for delimiting function argument lists, for delimiting array index lists, for delimiting blocks, for delimiting function bodies, for delimiting record/structure component definitions, for delimiting the components of various program structures, like conditional expressions and loops, and so on.

For an automatic parser, the use of different kinds of brackets can only make its task easier, never harder, because in the worst case its lexical analysis could replace all kinds of brackets with a single kind, while for a human reader different kinds of brackets are always helpful.

Using many kinds of bracket pairs is not necessarily as verbose as in Algol 68, because Unicode offers enough bracket pairs to choose for all purposes.

In LISP all parentheses look the same, but a LISP programmer who does not recognize that the things delimited in those parentheses are of different natures, e.g. "(CAR ..." vs. "(COND ..." vs. "(QUOTE ..." and so on, cannot write high quality LISP programs.

Many years ago, I have written many rather big Scheme or LISP programs, because they have many advantages beyond the uniform parentheses. If I would use again a language of the LISP family, I would use a text preprocessor to pass the source to the compiler, which would allow me to use various kinds of bracket pairs, for instance Unicode mathematical angle brackets for COND, Unicode bag delimiters for loops, curly brackets for blocks (curly bracket is the Unicode term for braces), and so on.
It's a very, very good thing that the place you visited is not in the article.

Consider the mention of a lovely place in the NYT to be the harbinger of mass attention and ecological damage.
I'm asking whether the laws which allow this are within scope of the US Constitution's clause on intellectual property rights.

There are plenty of laws which have been ruled unconstitutional. But it takes someone making the complaint to a court for this to happen. Otherwise the legislature does whatever it wants.

Currently a majority of the US Supreme court thinks that the status quo at the time of the writing of the US Constitution or its amendments has bearing as to the meaning of those texts. Thus I mentioned back then authors sold copies of their works while retaining all other rights as indicating that "licensing" is within this clause. Whether or not total sales of the rights to the work is within the purview of the clause is another question that I'm curious about.
Right, but at least you’d be defrauding the federal government, which tends to be punished readily enough that there’s an actual deterrent.
That just means patent trolls would split their patent portfolios into hundreds of holding companies. Also people would start filing bigger and bigger patents, stuffing more and more claims into a single patent.
Pharmaceutical parents seems like an odd choice. Aren't most of those inventions driven by government funding at universities?
One would hope that they've learned since then - but it could very well be that they haven't!
I just opened Spotify on my iPhone mini, just to check, and I really have to disagree. Spotify has TONS of wasted space. Even when you do want to pull up the "extra" menus (which is frequent for me, since it seems like that's the only place to get to the album for a given song), they practically throw the space away. The hamburger menu can only fit two items on its list of 10, because they waste so much space. I'm sorry, but 10 options can easily all be visible simultaneously while still showing the current context of that menu (the song).

But that ethos abounds. They hid all the controls, and make many of the controls that they do show ambiguous. Am I going to be shuffle-play on the queue? Is my queue currently autogenerating songs at its end or is it going to stop at the end of queue? And long presses / hovers provide zero extra information for what the unlabeled buttons mean / do.

I'm pretty satisfied with Spotify UI on the whole, mostly because of how easy they make it to toss the currently playing song around to different devices and they handle shared control well, but I do wish it didn't require three taps and a scroll (in a context where it's not even obvious that scrolling is possible, because the list is so sparse that it doesn't look like there are any more items at the end) to get to an album, which is almost always the context in which I want to listen to a search result.
It is a big deal. Rotational inertia depends on the distribution of weight around the point of rotation (i.e. the wheel hub). The further the weight is from the hub, the more force is needed to accelerate the wheel.
> So, what happens if this particular FPGA no longer can be bought?

The same code can be easily target another FPGA as long as you don't use any vendor specific primitives or IP cores
Free time I guess is a big one. If you value the 'hanging with the boys', clubbing, or really any solo activity it certainly would be a shock. By the time mine came along, I was done with most of that anyways I guess. But my own free time - watching TV, playing games, reading books, or just scrolling on my phone, was largely replaced with building legos, having nerf gun fights, playing board games, etc. One 'hidden' benefit is that you get to be a kid again without seeming weird, and kids toys todays are so much cooler.

I do think 'selfish' was too broad and strong of a claim. I was focusing solely on the thought of people who make way more than enough money claiming a child would ruin their lifestyle/break them. In reality, there are tons of other reasons a person may not want a child that aren't selfish at all.
There's no mention of the services available, which are a great reason for staying, there's a passing mention of the climate, which is pretty amazing ... I visited a valley city 50 miles from home with stories and pictures of the 6 inches of snow we got. (foothill people like to drive to valley cities without clearing snow from the car's roof, to scare and impress) and of course, the fact that everyone is mailed a ballot each election, with basically ZERO problems and controversies except among the wackos who briefly put up fake collection boxes in liberal areas. more ...

Sometimes, it what you DON'T get that is worth a whole lot.
If you invented and patented something in the US in 1989, you'd have protections until 2009 at the latest. If it wasn't usable until 2013, then that sucks for you, but it is what it is. Your invention doesn't get 20 guaranteed years of profitability. You get 20 years to figure out how to make it profitable.

The two are very different concepts.

edit: this is why you don't patent every damned thing, just the things that you believe will be profitable over the next 20 years. Otherwise, the cost of researching and filing the patent, as well as maintaining it, may well exceed whatever profit you actually get from the thing.
It is time to create project similar to Wine, but for iOS
I think a better model would just be something like adverse possession, where if the owner of the patent hasn't developed it, or done certain things it can be nullified.
Ask HN: How Do You Usually Plan and Approach Your Solo Projects?
I'm a solo freelance software engineer, and it's my 3'rd year working.

I am constantly improving my coding and testing skills and I can feel the improvements day after day.

However, one part that I am still facing trouble with, is project planning and actually executing that plan.

I can't decide whether I should start with a DB schema or jump right in to experimenting. I can't decide whether I should develop the frontend first or the backend. I can't decide what steps to take after I have an MVP.

I want to learn how other developers approach these tasks in their projects, maybe I could learn something new from everyone!
I mostly associate the term with the original left-wing version of accelerationism (which is a little further up in the Wikipedia article you linked to). In both versions, the view is essentially that the society we have now is so bad as to be practically unredeemable, so the next best course of action is to accelerate this society's downfall so the new "good" society can be built instead. Obviously, the vision of the "good" thing that comes next is, uh, wildly different.

In either case, seems very different than what proponents of e/acc are about, but in a cynical sense, not totally unrelated. The Wikipedia does include, "It has been regarded as an ideological spectrum divided into mutually contradictory left-wing and right-wing variants, both of which support the indefinite intensification of capitalism and its structures as well as the conditions for a technological singularity, a hypothetical point in time where technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible."
I'm thinking loudly about three questions:

1. How does the maintenance fee and replacement fee look like, per year?

2. Is it possible to develop a home use version?

3. I assume the tide is going to be consistent, but need to dig deeper into this.
Plese stop repeating this FUD in every reply on this thread, you already posted the exact same comment here[1] and here[2] as well, and I already explained you why it's false.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39348035

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39348077
I think it's actually developmentally inappropriate for teenagers to have that level of work ethic. A teenager has far too many things on their plate at school to dedicate that much of their energy and motivation to Walmart, even ignoring the cost to their social and cognitive development.
ycombinator makes it difficult to provide a detailed analysis. But I would recommend you look to history of other melt-ups, and compare. The one notable difference with Nvidia is they actually have a product and revenue. To verify the $20 billion in revenue, go look at their own guidance.
I was curious, so I grabbed three undergraduate-level physics texts I had nearby.

One explicitly recites the Ultraviolet Catastrophe prompted Planck story, complete with Rayleigh's incomplete formula.

One essentially matches the story in section 2, using the lesser version of Rayleigh's formula, but (just like the story) does not explicitly tie Planck's work to it. (That textbook notes "an act of desperation" is a quote from one of Planck's letters.)

The third one is interesting! It says that "late nineteenth century physicists tried to understand the shape of the blackbody spectrum [...] using their knowledge of thermodynamics and electromagnetic waves. Their efforts ended in failure." This third text never mentions Rayleigh by name and doesn't specifically show "Rayleigh's Lesser Formula", but it does graph that formula vs. the observed blackbody radiation (interestingly, as a function of frequency instead of wavelength).

The text then eventually says that in 1900, Planck used a photon argument "to make a theoretical prediction that is in excellent agreement with the experimental spectrum". It does not explicitly state cause and effect, but it's kinda implied from the structure of the writing.

Reading into the third text a smidge, it feels like the result of wanting to use the Rayleigh/Catastrophe story and yet knowing it wasn't quite true.
maybe I'm cynical but I think it's selecting for moderately or reasonably dishonest, the dishonesty of the median. I think you'd have to be extremely honest to think huh, this is an absolutely bullshit test that if I answer honestly on just this part here means I won't get the job I want (assuming that you are only bad on a single metric) but I am going to answer honestly no matter what.

Hmm, but maybe they have that baked into the test!? If you slightly fail one of the bad metrics and none of the others they rate you super honest and hire you immediately! Science says we should definitely try to figure this out.
Belatedly, let's plug in some numbers for the Carnot heat-pump furnace.

T1 = -9.4 F = -23 C = 250.15 K (Outdoor temperature in winter on cold day.)

T2 = 71.6 F = 22 C = 295.15 K (Indoor room temperature.)

T3 = 2236 K (Adiabatic flame temperature of methane at constant volume.)

Then we have B(T1, T2, T3) = 6.69.

That's very substantial!

Of course, this assumes Carnot efficiencies for everything, so it's an upper bound.

Also, my assumption of T3 being the adiabatic flame temperature may be too optimistic. Google says

> Today's commercial jet engines can reach temperatures as high as 1,700 degrees Celsius (that's 3,092 degrees Fahrenheit)

https://engineering.virginia.edu/news/2018/11/generating-cur....

so letting T3 = 1,700 C = 1973.15 K, we get the slightly lower B(T1, T2, T3) = 6.58.

This is still fantastic.

This is also assuming a very cold day, which is when the system will have lower efficiency. If we instead assume T1 = 0 C = 273.15 K, and use the more conservative T3 = 1973.15 K assumption, then we get B(T1, T2, T3) = 12.4. That's huge.

So, assuming my math/modeling is right, a hypothetical heat-pump furnace could (using Carnot bounds) use around 1/6th - 1/12th the natural gas as a conventional one, even in a very cold place, if you keep all the other properties of the house (insulation, air exchange) constant.
One thing I found a bit unsettling about some products is how manufacturers can say they support a standard when they’re really using it as a basis for a proprietary lock-in strategy. I didn’t realize the standards were so loose until I started researching some newer devices to support Home Assistant, namely the Aqara U100 which seems to require the Aqara hub to be able to support standard Zigbee when it’s advertised as supporting Zigbee

https://community.home-assistant.io/t/aqara-u100-smart-lock/...
It's certainly possible that there are errors in the data, but if you suspect that to be the case, the proper argument would be to identify those errors so they can be mitigated, not to dismiss the data in favor of anecdotes, especially anecdotes that may represent outliers.
> In my anecdotal experience where a job went from the best role I ever had to one of the worst happened over a very short week or two with the change in a manager.

Two managers in my case, both of whom were, let's say, not successful in their roles. And a glass ceiling so that I had to do most of the work _and_ be a tech lead, yet "could not manage the team because reasons".

Sudden reorgs + hire above + glass ceilings = golden ticket for horrors like this.
GeneGPT, a tool-augmented LLM for bioinformatics
I've been selling softare on Mac (and Windows) for nearly 2 decades. I've never bothered with the Mac App Store. I just couldn't be bothered to jump through the hoops and I didn't want Apple getting between me and my customer. I guess that isn't a realistic option for iOS apps though.
> High risk, high reward.

Which usually means no trade because for many transactions, the required sufficiently high reward would outweigh the intended gains. So you get deadweight loss. Think of a lemon market for used cars. Yes, there will still be some transactions for cars which look like a sufficiently astounding bargain, but overall, both buyers and sellers are much worse off.
> Each one has a title

The OP of the Reddit thread didn't see the titles, and was instructed to "look at the images and go with your gut".

For the record, I don't have blue skin and hair, so I'd be inclined to answer "not me" for all of them.
There is no competition when games only come to Linux by "emulating" Windows.

The only thing it has going for it is being a free beer UNIX clone for headless environments, and even then, isn't that relevant on cloud environments where containers and managed languages abstract everything they run on.
Some people value variety over quantity.
Oh this is awesome! Bookmarking for later, thank you for the link!
Airplane mode status and Wi-Fi status are separate statuses. Airplane mode can be on and it tells you nothing one way or the other about the actual state of Wi-Fi. This ultimately comes down to some Kindles being like phones and having more than 1 radio where you may want airplane mode on except for the Wi-Fi radio if you plan on using in flight Wi-Fi.

Airplane mode is a convenience to conserve battery during a flight. If you judge it by how well it acts as a universal radios on/off switch it will measure accordingly.
It depends on your interpretation of the definition. If the two "computers" that the webster definition is referring to have a different architecture, then Wine does not fit that definition, because Wine relies on the fact that it's the same computer architecture, namely an x86 PC.

If you combine Wine with Rosetta to run Windows programs on an M1 Mac, then it is definitely emulation by any definition. But then it's not Wine that's doing the emulation, it's Rosetta.
It also works if the button is not labeled, as long as the state is clearly visible in the environment and the link is clear.

Consider the light switch - if there’s just one, it’s the best UI ever. You know what to do to turn the lights off, just flip the closest switch. Obviously if there’s more than one then it’s the worst UI ever.

Another example, a smartphone’s side button (screen on/off).
Finland: Windows95man Wins UMK 2024 – To Eurovision with "No Rules"
Ironically, Rembrandt used[1] smalt, a glass powder with cobalt which is now known to be fugitive in some formulations; this includes Rembrandt works in the National Gallery in London[2].

[1] https://heritagesciencejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10....

[2] c.f. their excellent book, Art in the Making: Rembrandt
HP Time-Shared Basic
It wouldn't be a great shot of some people enjoying a natural hot spring miles from civilization, if it didn't have some plastic sheet garbage in the foreground.
I happened to find out what the Danish laws for not getting paid on time are, as the company I was working for got into financial trouble. If you're not paid on time, you can send a letter setting a deadline for the payment - typically a week or two. If you're not paid by then, you get to declare the company bankrupt. You can stop working, and you will get the next three month's payment from a state-run fund, even if you find other work. Isn't socialism just wonderful?
I do something similar to that FlowTime method where I write down what I’m working on and add a tally mark every time I’m interrupted.

Have you encountered what’s called time-block planning or hyperscheduling?

There are many of these ideas floating around; I wouldn’t say any is the standard.
You are speaking past the GP by missing the de jure (their point) versus de facto (your point) aspect of the discussion, I think.
For someone who has decades of experience but was knocked down by severe seizures that slowed him down, do you think any manager would consider hiring me for a non critical position at lower pay?

I've gone through cognitive rehab,but honestly am not where I used to be. I'm thinking something like my time spent integrating code after bank mergers - nothing sexy, nothing expected overnight, but workhorse plodding would be an asset.( I've done a lot more, but thought this would be an example where someone would consider my experience more important than speed.)

When I speak, it's obvious I've had a cognitive setback, but the knowledge is still there. However I'd fail live tests.

I really miss programming and my half pay since my seizures was not enough to sock away retirement money.

In this environment, I feel foolish to think I would ever be hired again, but wonder if there's a place I'd fit.
You could buy non-Bell phones and even connect them to a functioning telephone network. The problem (and incentive for antitrust action) was Bell's business of charging users to connect to their proprietary and all-encompassing network. They created a situation where the only way to compete was to acquiesce with Bell's exploitative terms.

It's not illegal to be a monopoly, it's illegal to abuse monopoly power.
Incidentally this is why people miss the mark when they get mad about mathematicians using single letter variable names. Short names let you focus on the structure of equations and relationships, which lets you more easily pattern match and say "wait, this is structurally the same as X other thing I already know but with different names". It's not about saving paper or making it easier to write (it is not easier to write Greek letters with super/subscripts in LaTeX using an English keyboard than it would be to use words). It is about transmitting a certain type of information to the reader that is otherwise very difficult to transmit.

While it uses letters so it looks vaguely like writing, math notation is very pictorial in nature. Long words would obscure the pictures.
> Just to get a slimmer bezel which is not a useful feature

I would much rather have more screen real estate.

And if you need to have a perfectly rectangular display you can just make your apps full screen.
This particular part of "physicist's history of physics" about quantization and Planck's work, promulgated by some sources, is well-known to be a false account of history and motivations, and has been criticized in mainstream literature before, e.g. by Helge Kragh [1] (and probably by many others). The present authors apparently are not aware of this, which makes me suspicious that they did not do their homework on this topic...

[1] https://dept.math.lsa.umich.edu/~krasny/math156_article_plan...
No worries. Didn't seem abrupt.
There are some fantastic products (LIFX, Twinkly) that are WiFi and don't require the cloud. Zigbee falls apart when controlling a large number of devices in real-time.
The weight-at-the-wheels is apparently the most apparent in the mountain climbs.

Lots of pros had specific clauses in their contracts to use certain ultralight rims regardless of the official team kit of the proteam.

Anecdotally, I think this is related to the inevitable far lower rpms climbing a hill and that highlights the uneven power output as a rider (even heavily trained pros don't output perfectly distributed power as they turn a crank). At the low RPMs and variant power highlighted combined with the unending pull of gravity, I guess there's lots of micro-accelerations of the wheel rims.
First, I wasn't talking about a Florida law. Attempts to restrict sex education happen all over the country, and have been happening since at least the 1980s. I remember having to take a permission slip home to my parents during the Reagan years to be present when the subject was taught.

Your second point was a ridiculous attempt to bring guns into the conversation. "Gun rights" are a uniquely American concept and have nothing to do with understanding one's own body, sexuality and reproduction. These concepts are not just universal human concerns; they are core to the functioning of the animal kingdom.
In the case of BTC and gold, mining puts downward price pressure as new "resources" are "discovered". Miners need to sell the gold/BTC to recoup the cost associated with mining. In BTC it's energy, in gold it's equipment/labor.

In a free market, we would expect the inefficiencies to be removed from the economy over time. New competition, new ideas, etc.

In the case of BTC, removing PoW would remove the downward price pressure it sees today. The miners don't really want BTC, they want USD.
Webflow's Account Deletion Process