skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've done this in the past to assign a different exit node in Mullvad to a given Firefox container.

1. You click the Multi-Account Containers extension icon

2. Select "Manage Containers"

3. Select the container that you want to use for this purpose

4. Click "Advanced proxy settings"

5. Enter the address. For example, `socks://us-nyc-wg-socks5-301.relays.mullvad.net:1080` if I'm using one of Mullvad's NYC servers

This supposes you're already connected to one of Mullvad's wireguard servers.

You can also use the FoxyProxy extension [0] for finer-control or extend this behavior across all tabs.

[0]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/foxyproxy-sta...
There are two reasons I can think of why that wouldn't happen: first, there's no primer to even initiate the reverse transcription. Maybe you might get unlucky and there's something close enough floating around. But integration machinery usually requires some specific sequence to identify the ends of the viral genome. Maybe that exists, it's not my field, but I've never heard of one.

Also, even if it did integrate, there would be no promoter, so the vaccine gene wouldn't get expressed. So the only danger I see would be if it integrated into something functional, but the virus was going to do that anyway. But this is so improbable to begin with I wouldn't worry about it.
There are real, tangible benefits to monorepos. And real, tangible downsides, too. Like everything else, it's a tradeoff.

I'm sure people advocating for them have brought up some benefits. But in case they haven't, here's an example I recently encountered at work: for an application we are developing, we needed functionality X. We knew that we'd need X in other projects, too, so we made it a library. I published it to our internal package registry and referenced it in the project. So far, so good. Turns out, feature X wasn't as well understood as we thought it was and we are still changing things around all the time. That meant:
* changing the library
* cutting a new release and publishing it
* updating dependencies in the project and using the new feature

Since this was happening much too often for what was often a one or two line change, I moved the library into the project repo and build it as part of the project pipeline. This removes so much friction around these changes, I find it makes a significant difference. Eventually, I'll move the library back into its own repository, but for now the monorepo is the right choice in my eyes.
I think that good decision regarding numbers in API (as it was made in my project) is to put meaningful decimal numbers into string and let them be handled by exact decimal calculation framework, e.g. BigDecimal in Java etc.
Here's the article on MSN: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/the-disarray-insid...
> The biggest thing was a fork of the Redis project, Valkey, that is backed by The Linux Foundation and, critically, also Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud, Oracle, Ericsson, and Snap Inc.
The world reacted swiftly... And then the war continued. Had West reacted swiftly with it's shear power, the war would have ended 2 years ago. But it's still going on. And situation is getting dire for Ukraine. Too little ammo is supplied. New options of guns are approved too late. West could have helped to close airspace at least in West Ukraine, but that's not happening either. All sorts of sanctions are repeatedly broken with the help of „global south“ and our own greedy corrupted actors.

The only lesson here is (core)West cannot be trusted and you're on it's own. At least this is the lesson I learned living 30km from (pseudo)Russia border.
I believe that archive.is is whatever you've archived into it. If you pressed the button when looking at the paywall, that's what it will carry.
Some people are trying to push a conspiracy theory that the maintainer and the contributor are the same person.
There are still nowadays projects without a proper source control.

For example, xpdfreader, source of xpdf, is distributed just as source tarballs. The maintainer just publishes them every time there is a new version.

https://www.xpdfreader.com/download.html

https://www.xpdfreader.com/old-versions.html

https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=xpdf

There is nothing in Debian or FOSS in general that mandates having source control.

(I remember that was a point of contention with WebKit/KHTML... in the olden days of 2000-something, Apple forked KHTML to make WebKit, and in order to comply with GPL, they just published source tarballs, which were basically impossible to merge back into KHTML.)

edit:

ahh I see that the xpdf that is in debian is actually different than this one; someone forked it some time ago and it is in in git here (but no github/other forge, just .git)

https://offog.org/git/xpopple.git/

well ok, maybe I was wrong. but still, a .git folder on someone webpage is not that much more reliable than a tarball on someone's webpage
Still Can't Live Without Apple's Touch Bar
please, back up this novel claim
What else is wrong with it?
Not affiliated (not my first comment about this) but we are using KVRocks[1] for now at work, which is based on RocksDB by Meta and it works nicely. Developers are nice and reactive and the Redis commands support is large.

We picked this project because of our RAM usage that was exploding with Redis.

The only downside for us right now is the Kubernetes support. There is an operator and a controller being made but no Helm Chart yet to deploy Kvrocks with master and replicas easily. That will be awesome.

[1]: https://github.com/apache/kvrocks
Rowan sounds like a typical VC techbro that doesn't understand their product and costumers.

On the other hand, I understand they are pissed that AWS is making money from their work and they get nothing back.
I thought it was goin to be this: https://youtu.be/orBH_Qnw3eY
if unregulated AI is banned in the US/EU, good luck trying to sell services to US/EU companies from the outside
How to get people to disagree with you
Eh. Some countries (totally not pointing at Germany) fall out of that unison repeatedly.
> What are you actually proposing here? Any Ubuntu/Debian distribution contains hundreds or thousands of packages and transitive dependencies - it's unreasonable to expect corporations to contribute, even financially, to all of these.

Why is it unreasonable?

I actually see it as very reasonable. You use a package in a commercial distribution, you use aggregators like Github sponsors to pay the maintainer (a subscription, not a one-off payment!). What's unreasonable about that?
Playstation announces your free store credit opportunities for April
Edit: A disappointing 38,608 on my first go. Just tried it on mobile and like someone else mentioned, ability to slide the tiles would be great too.
Nope. It's this disparaging of integration tests that gets us into hundreds of useless unit tests that in reality test nothing.

Integration tests must be much higher on the list.

Also: nothing is stopping you from running your prop tests in integration tests, too
I remember watching one of his show's episode on Apple TV about GameStop and somehow he thought the problem was the (deliberate) obscurity of modern financial systems (instead of, say, how stock trading creates wrong incentives for a healthy economy). That was pretty weird.
This post it timestamped March 30, which is "just" three days ago; but in this case is _over_ three days ago.
Most developers jump on the hype train and don't stop to think about ramifications or requirements or purpose. Having said that, monorepos have their use cases, and they help eliminate the need to have convoluted tool chains whose entire purpose is to ensure version compatibility between various components of the system... before you can even start making a line of change on the dev machine.. or some asinine docker abstraction that you must spin up... essentially, if everything is in one place (and not conceived by antisocial pranksters), you bet it's meant to be together. This makes it easier for any number of different life cycle teams to pick up a project and not waste time chasing down silly time wasting issues.
Boiler Room | Lead Full Stack Developer | London, UK | full-time | hybrid / on-site | https://boilerroom.tv/ | No VISA sponsorship

Boiler Room is an underground music platform. We’re looking for an experienced lead to join us & manage a small team of developers within our product team.

We’re currently working on improving the data sets & analytics that help us sell tickets & apparel, solving difficult scaling problems as our audience grows, plus an iOS app where fans can listen without ads.

Our stack currently: NodeJS, JavaScript, React, Python, Django, GraphQL, AWS, Cloudflare

We work 2 days a week from our HQ in Hackney. We are owned by DICE (https://dice.fm/) and we work from their Dalston office sometimes too.

Perks include private healthcare, ClassPass, free food & snacks, a dog friendly office, free clothes quarterly from our collection & guest list to our parties.

Apply here: https://boards.greenhouse.io/boilerroom/jobs/7273620002
It's not a monopoly. It's America opting out of open research.
Off the top of my head, I’m sure there are plenty others - “2006 transatlantic aircraft plot”:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_....
I think we should have learned this lesson by now. The revelation that GitHub deliberately injects malware into things would be unlikely to "end their business": it would contentiously divide their userbase between purists who believe repo hosts should not be injecting malware into people's FOSS projects, and pragmatists who defend the trust-and-safety reasons for injecting malware into FOSS (say, to assist US intelligence preventing terror attacks).

We've had this recurring discussion in many forms, and the typical result is that peoples' capacity for outrage wears out quickly. Who still remembers, for instance, that the GitHub entity sabotaged its users by giving the NSA backdoors to its private infrastructure [0]? How much business is Microsoft missing out on today, in 2024, because of that betrayal of trust? Essentially none, right? They're bigger than ever.

GitHub sneaking NSA malware onto their platform—maybe selectively serving it to certain targets—would be perfectly in character with their past behavior. It would be smart business sense (they're a major DoD vendor). It'd be totally irrational to have a faith-based trust that they wouldn't do this.

(There's a precedent: the FOSS host SourceForge destroyed itself by making the error of judgement of injecting code into people's repos [1]. But that was a decade ago: the Overton Window's shifted a lot. What SourceForge lost their business for doing in 2013—injecting ads—is something Microsoft comfortably gets away with today, on Windows desktops).

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6027779 ("How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages" (2013))

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Adware_controversy
Location: Vietnam

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Python, Go, Erlang

Résumé/CV: https://giang-nghg.github.io/assets/GiangNguyen_CV.pdf

Email: giang.nghg@gmail.com
> Trying to figure out how much a North Korean knows about foreign pop culture is like trying to nail jelly to a wall...

Watching old soviet filmstrips and movies makes it clear that a lot of culture (fashion trends, etc.) was global, with maybe a slight delay crossing the "iron curtain". DPRK seems like a different story, but (even before Glasnost) the citizens of the USSR seemed to know much more about our pop culture than we knew about theirs.
Except, in this case, "better" should be replaced with "worse" -- because that is what AI does.
This actually sounds to me as bit complicated. As you need to adjust angle for each pour from a bottle. And then there might be different viscosities involved with some bottles...
Or it could mean that the 99%, or a large part thereof, have chosen the wrong tool for their task, which is a problem for them to fix not the tool's maker.
Probably an agency environment, or a enterprise environment that insists on having private mirrors of all 3rd party code.
Think Like an Executive
executives think differently. mastering the mindset is the first step towards fast promotions.
There will still be "free" as in freedom models available from China and others.

And no doubt a burgeoning resistance focused on making open source models available. It would be a disaster but I can see it making the industry stronger, with more variety and breaking the influence of some of the bigger players.

Practically, if you're concerned about this, learn more about ML/AI, not about how to use super high level frameworks but about how it actually works so when "SHTF" as survivalists say, you'll still be able to use it.
Jon Stewart says Apple asked him not to host FTC Chair Lina Khan
AI centralises power, devalues human labour and at its limit is fundamentally uncontrollable.

Personally I struggle to understand anyone who believes it's in humanities best interest to continue developing AI systems without significant limitations on the rate of progress. There's so many ways AI could go wrong I'd argue it's almost guaranteed that something will go wrong if we continue on this trajectory.
This started out on the Something Awful forums back in the early 2000s. They made a few more after this one was such a hit. I joined in one year, probably at about age 18, using a bootleg copy of Photoshop that I got at a LAN party. My contribution is floating around somewhere.
MariaDB Server 11.4 will be LTS
Hi,

1. Yes. We're essentially a baremetal solution. Either we run it on your behalf (this is kraft.cloud), or we deliver an ISO or AMI and this can be installed on-prem/cloud-prem. This latter solution is our enterprise offering.

2. eBPF used in this way, I feel, has become a symptom of the problem that we're trying to solve at Unikraft: the bloated Linux- (and cloud native-) stack. In the end, you're adding more tools or doing more tricks to try and do computationally less since performance and running faster is about performing less operations in the critical-path. Unikraft approaches the problem space differently: bottom up (app first, then dependencies, then select OS libraries/primitives based on required syscalls) as opposed to top-down (taking away from Linux, its distros, removing functionality, making short-cuts, etc.).
It's not that hard to emulate the basic Linux system calls. If you have the user mode compiler and libc running, then you can get simple console applications up and running in a day or two.

Having looked at qemu a bit, it feels like a bigger undertaking to understand the qemu internals enough to start modifying it.

But if you can run qemu as-is, the core kernel is not that big if you have a very limited set of HW support and don't implement the more complicated system calls.
Google agrees to delete Incognito data despite prior claim that's "impossible"
A few bits we've learned from building louie over the last year+:

* Training on the internet means fault tolerance out-of-the-box

* Rule-of-thumb: Sub-gpt4 models are derpy, while gpt4/claude are reasonable. The dumber the model, the more it gets tripped up on basics and the more you need to engineer.

* In areas it's already confused, prompt errors can push it over the edge: When asking for JSON, will it output JSON strings, or Python literals?

* Even GPT4 grade will get tripped up on things like negations. So simpler grammar helps. As does emphasizing where to pay attention. REALLY.

* They're simple-minded. So asking GPT4 to do multiple things, especially over a long duration, gets weird. (Long context is a bit of a myth.)

* They're sensitive to persona. Instructing it to answer carefully as a professional would helps improve quality. The opposite is less clear - the base model is just ok, and typos seem to be similarly ok.

* Agents can easily 2-100X quality, so after basics in the prompt, better to focus on the code outside the prompt.
> The only path forward is open model weights, Sam Altman is on the wrong side of history here, and I hope he fails to convince regulators.

The third path would be an uprising against AI that would ultimately lead to an outright ban of it, a dissolution of all AI companies, and a moratorium on research on AI.
the jvm bytecode has been designed to be bytecode from day 1.

JS is the TS's bytecode but it has been designed to be a language to be developed in, which causes impedance mismatches as tools and people get confused about the usage context.
You're right. It's a closed Beta at this point, so feel free to drop your email, and we'll open a user for you. Soon we'll release an open beta where everyone can sign up and start using.

Reg the demo, there might be a chance that in the demo, you got the response from a location that is close to you but not the closest. The product version is well-optimized. I hope it helps.
It can be useful to solve the "blank page problem" i.e. to get an initial set of data to challenge. However it has zero customer data, or internal code to help with anything like that.
I had to think it over, but here’s what I mean:

The two temples and all the subsequent churches from the time of Solomon up to and including the nineteenth century may have looked radically different in terms of architectural style, but what they had in common is that they were unambiguously constructed for offering propitiatory sacrifices to God.

Churches built after that are instead built for offering a meal to mortal humans. If that’s not a secular activity, then it’s one of a completely different religion. In fact the transformation of the twentieth century was a far more radical change than the one going from the old to the new covenant, in that it has rejected both of them.

Of course like all the other new age hippie nonsense that came from that century it will eventually fall out of fashion, just like Arianism eventually did despite the Church apparently being completely overcome with it. The question is just how long it will take.
The font choice for inline text is so distracting

This "Averia Serif Libre" is unreadable for me.
Commented out code in downstream forks is particularly bad as it either generates spurious merge problems ( // style commenting means you’ll have to do manual resolution for every line in the commented out sections) or hides real changes altogether (/* */ comments allow whole new functions to be added inside the commented region and go unnoticed - which might cause a compilation failure, but might also just result in different method resolution).

Maybe put a comment about the removal if you want something that can easily lead back to the commit which did it.
> Bun is run by a little prince.

What does that even mean? Bun is run by a fictional French character capable of interplanetary travel? Or are you calling them a spoiled brat with money? Why does that affect code organisation? Or is it code quality?

If you’re going to criticise the project and the people who run it, some clarity of communication and specifics on the issues would be appreciated so others can evaluate your claims. Otherwise it’s just empty insults which do not advance the discussion.
I agree. It's a shame the PEOPLE do not have any say in this matter. They should be able to vote also, and one of the options should be "outright ban on AI".
I would try contacting the startup to confirm they have received investment via AngelList, but conveniently their terms forbid you from contacting startups directly.
See the rest of my comment, where I propose using an aggregator. I think it's unreasonable to expect everyone to engage in support contracts individually with every maintainer.
> Turns out, feature X wasn't as well understood as we thought it was and we are still changing things around all the time.

If you publish something as a library for someone else, you should generally commit to supporting the public interface of that library as if it were a long-term support release. Exactly how long that should be depends on many factors, of course. But as a rule of thumb, I would recommend supporting this library version for at least two years. If that doesn't make sense, don't release it or look for a subset, where it makes sense.
I mean, it’s been around for a while, and I haven’t heard negative things.

That doesn’t necessarily translate to trusting them with money though.
Identifying Secure Software
Property rights in general are a thing made up by people, we're just arguing over where to draw the line.
Yes. It happens a lot when you are working as an independent consultant.

a. You can invest in learning new technology
b. You can invest a newly learned technology and build a small product /utility.
I know that story. :)
Fedora 42 Change Proposal Wants to Make KDE Plasma the Default over Gnome
Ask HN: What are the companies similar to Replicate for AI Model Hosting?
I am looking for suggestions to choose between Replicate.com and Banana.dev
Mine will always be https://picard.ytmnd.com/
The opensource tooling to handle large monorepos is just not there.

The monorepo at Google with the massively distributed build system and all other tooling make it very effective to work with.

You cannot just take one part of that system and expect to magically reap the benefits.

The main benefit I see in practice is that you can immediately see which parts of the system are broken by your change immediately as you test your change (as opposed to waiting when integration happen later when dependencies between modules are bumped in a multi-repo)
github have (for the moment) backed down and currently the auto-generated tarballs are stable, but they have in the past and may in the future change this.
Right, that's why I'm also working with the assumption they are legit. Just too high-profile not to be.

But what's to prevent a rogue syndicate from taking money without actually investing it forward...
This comment reads like a GPT-generated comment! When I look at your history, your other comments seem genuine. I’m probably totally wrong, but I do like the idea of using GPT to counter anti-GPT sentiment. :)
> To say it has single handedly started a movement is a huge stretch.

I disagree. Anonymous was an substantial movement.

4chan has long existed before the concept of facebook and to compare 4chan to the new trends of the likes such as facebook or reddit when 4chan is it's own, you can't.

Reddit and Facebook have all been designed to cater to the masses; 4chan not so.

To rule out that 4chan has never been influential is incorrect.
> Since this was happening much too often for what was often a one or two line change

The famous 5 minute project.

Happens in coding, car repair, and interstellar travel.
The salary range seems to be quite wide: $10K - $100K? Is it location based?
I think we all agree management can't be blamed. Factory workers did not execute the expected steps and failed to properly escalate issues as soon as possible. Management had no information of what was going on the factory floor, and the change of the headquarters away from the factory, while reducing management overhead with day-to-day issues, required workers to escalate issues properly instead of tip-toing around the issues.
Fedora is supported by Red Hat. And yes, I do think there is something to the fact that Red Hat is selling businesses commercial support for projects they have no expertise in, which probably means some of the pressure flows downwards from Red Hat's clients to the unpaid maintainers.

Arch, (Gentoo, Nix, Mint, etc.) have no commercial aspect on the other hand and certainly doesn't have the money, but those distros are offered on the same "as is" basis as the downstream software.