skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's technically correct that a language specification is rarely precise enough to require compiler output to be deterministic.

But it's pragmatically true that engineers will want to murder you if your compiler is non-deterministic. All sorts of build systems, benchmark harnesses, supply chain validation tools, and other bits of surrounding ecosystem will shit the bed if the compiler doesn't produce bitwise identical output on the same input and compiler flags.
In an alternate universe, I wonder what would happen if we went the other way, allowing the walled groundskeepers their fences, but taking away all 'platform'-based legal protections that they enjoy; not just section 230: Apple liable for all copyright infringement, users defrauded by an app on the Play Store could claim damages from Google, etc.

These protections are also precisely what the faux-libertarian defenders of Apple and Google's rights to shine their gnomes and trim their hedges ignore.
It's almost impossible to find hand-milled flour in a store or online.

You might be confusing "Stone Ground" flour which is ground using a machine [0]

[0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SolMVg3_Ac
Simply because you're not a fan of the outcomes doesn't mean that the appointments of justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett were illegitimate. Chevron deference started under the Stevens court and the deference it entailed related to the Reagan administration. That this has become a conservative hobby horse since then has nothing to do with policy preferences that only cut one way in a partisan way, and has everything to do with a deeper disagreement over the separation of powers and the role of the judiciary. Chevron deference isn't "the system" it's simply one precedent that has been faltering for years. There's no reason for any "side" to see this as the sky falling unless you really, really want to preserve some federal regulation that is TOO IMPORTANT to allow statutes to clarify.
I know a BUNCH of elixir devs that would love to pick up an Elixir project that needs a new lead....just saying. There's plenty of talent looking at the moment.
> easily dispose of 40 years

As I tried to explain to people in 2016, your kids are going to be living with the consequences of your vote for generations. We are in a new era of judicial supremacy and they are out of bubble gum.
Well, for me I already knew this ruling months back. There is no surprise here.
Thanks for the info, I was hesitant to introduce more platform-specific tools hence why I stuck with PyInstaller. I'll see if py2exe suits my needs.
And of course a Congress bought and paid for by lobbyists will actually represent voters, right? The US is a broken country in decline and actively working towards its own destruction
The Supreme Court is explicitly subject to not even that.
The supreme Court is hosting a revolution upending the common understanding of modern government, without firing a shot.

We need to amend the constitution to revert what these jurists are doing to destroy our administrative state.
err... no?

Example using Lit and Template Literals:

html`<div class="thing-contents">Hello</div>`;

Example using only web components:

shadow.innerHTML = `<div class="thing-contents">Hello</div>`;
I strongly disagree. As someone above said it's the equivalent of requiring a meeting for every commit when building software. How good do you think congress will be at passing small laws when changes need to be made in federal agencies regulations?
Sure there is: Article I, Section 1

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Anything short of "all" contradicts that.

Now you need to find somewhere that says "Oh, btw.. we didn't mean 'All' but really 'some' because Congress might give some legislative powers to other branches."
That's more like when they show you it's not working after doing almost everything wrong which can possibly be wrong. Then you just show them the right way and suddenly it's "working" even though the only thing that changed is they just started click "save" instead of "cancel".

What OP is talking about is probably the user forgetting some detail about their actions immediately prior to the problem occurring and thereby being unable to reproduce the behavior, which is something anybody can do regardless of their technical knowledge.
> I often wonder what role snobbery plays in the acceptance or formation of these kinds of rules.

Perhaps it's snobbery for some people, but there's definitely practical value in those rules, at least as far as painting is concerned: there's much less control with photography (unless it's digitally altered: we're getting closer to painting).

For example, when you put things slightly of center this creates room to induce a "flow" within the piece, pathways for the eyes, keeping the viewer engaged with the piece/animation (eyes are attracted by strong contrasts: by controlling the intensity and placement of the contrasts, the eyes can be more or less predictably guided).

Random reference: https://ebenschumacherart.com/learn-to-use-flow-in-your-art/

The main issue with composition rules is when they're applied too rigidly: they should be thought as general guidelines. The key is too be conscious of the general impact of some of those rules (e.g. horizontal => calmness), and apply them with intent.
This article does little to help navigate the situation it seems. Part of the problem is not providing multiple versions of what "Yes" would look like I think.

I don't know if it was done purposely but it's amusing that "No." is the translation of the answer to a question that is (apparently) not a yes/no question: “I’ve brought a new project plan. What do you think?”

Is the question "What do you think?" supposed to be interpreted as asking a colleague "Can you tell me what you think?" or is the question asked to their boss and is to be interpreted as "Do you like/approve my business plan"? I haven't gotten past that snag.

The article, ironically to someone who is still as clueless and ignorant as prior to reading the article, seems to still have failed to provide enough context to non-Japanese readers in order to be helpful.
Gotta pay the k8s bills somehow
Is using the bathroom or stretching your legs advisable?
I think you misunderstand arxiv, blogging, and research papers.

(I've used/done extensively the three mentioned things before, including blogging in a research context)

arxiv is a preprint server. Blog posts can, sometimes, play the same role as research preprints. Research papers are fundamentally about having a _structured conversation_ about a topic.

This paper is arxiv at its best.
I mean, I’ve never been able to wrap my head around people who are Christian (or whatever) and pick and choose which of the religions “rules” to follow.

I realize to not do so in general makes society a pretty awful place, but most religions say you’ll go to hell if you don’t.

It’s the Supreme Court’s job to explicitly follow the constitution. In your example I want them to be religious fundamentalists. If that turns out to be an issue we have a body that can change our society’s “bible.”
Indeed.

It seems like people don't understand how the system works.

Congress cries about Roe vs. Wade, but the power is entirely in their hands to pass federal law to secure abortion rights.

It's like the police crying that someone should do something about crime.
Lithium extraction to build millions of solar panels, batteries etc is not a 0 impact operation.
Honestly I'd assume medicare fraud might not be representative. It's kinda big risk/ big reward because the govt has the power to imprison you, but other insurance companies would just stop dealing with you if you rip them off enough and still sue you to get their money back.
The biggest beneficiary of Pax Americana is the United States, the second biggest is the entire world.
Congress can’t write good laws (good = clean, unambiguous) due to a variety of reasons, most of which are just political and not practical reasons.

Here’s hoping this decision causes Congress to write laws with more clarity now that they cannot be as sloppy and get away with it.

There may be much upheaval in the short term, but for that reason alone, I think it will have a positive impact on the country.

One other reason I think this decision is good - if we are innocent until proven guilty, then ambiguities should go in favor of the individual not the State.
Its both. The tooling has a very direct impact on the quality of the code.

I think the reason its not easy replicable is:

1. It takes a ton of initial investment and ongoing maintenance but its worth it when your code base is gigantic.

2. There is a consistent set of top down enforced rules. With the consistency it becomes much, much easier to build tight integrations between tools.

(almost?) everything is buildable by a single build system (blaze). When anyone can consistently build/test/run anything in your codebase it becomes a lot easier to build a whole host of potential tools like code search.

Probably someone can dive deeper than I can. But one thing I learned the most important property for a code base to be maintainable/scalable is consistency.
This effectively neuters the ability for federal agencies to create regulations within the specific areas that Congress has tasked them with regulating. This is a significant blow to both legislative and executive branches, and further entrenches the power in the judiciary.

In both reality and your supposed system, someone could always go to appointed officials and get their patent enforced - just look at how the Eastern District of Texas operated for decades. In reality, we see far more frequent turnover and shifting of opinion in federal agencies than we do in the judiciary. Just look at how often Net Neutrality has flopped back and forth at the FCC. (Constant reversal of regulatory decisions is also an issue, but it goes to show that the idea that a patent system that exists outside of judiciary control wouldn't have plenty of opportunity to make your case to sympathetic ears is silly)
>Personally, I would trust the nations top lawyers more than most of the congress members we have. However, it doesn't take much imagination to see the new issues that could arise)

Good luck with this.

At least these corrupt politicians come to face the music every four years.
Excellent. Deregulate then. That's the desired effect of this anyway.
> Everyone fantasizes about government by an unelected group of experts, until they wake up one day and find out those unelected experts don't share their values at all -- and there's nothing they can do about it.

Does SCOTUS fit into this hypothetical?
What??? Slavery was still legal in the North until the 13th amendment.
I’d highly recommend it if you get the time, was an excellent tour to geek out on. Enjoy DEFCON!
Congress could hire their own experts instead of having them work for the president.
Others have said this using different words, but I'm going to chime in anyway. I don't think the courts will have more power. SCOTUS is saying that congress needs to actually make clearer (better?) use of its power by being more explicit when legislating (i.e. when writing laws) instead of relying on the executive branch agencies (for those unfamiliar with the US political structure, agencies like the FDA, EPA, etc. are executive branch agencies that, ultimately, report to whomever is the current US president) to interpret and in many cases read into the laws that congress has passed.

The more practical reality of this ruling is, I think, this: there is no world where this is a win for anyone who believes in a bigger US federal government. This is a huge win for those people who believe the power of the federal government should be limited. It's likely the biggest challenge to the size of the federal government in my lifetime and I've been alive for a good bit. The dysfunctional congress that the US currently has makes it a certainty that in the short term countless regulations will be unenforceable and therefore this will be a picnic for anyone who is anti-regulation (note Trump in the debate last night where he talked about scrapping regulation. In comparison to this decision, Trump's regulation-slashing will look like he shot a rifle in comparison to the shotgun SCOTUS just fired).

Last comment: this SCOTUS has made it clear that the federal government will be massively restrained. There are two avenues by which they've made this clear: first, they have ruled very aggressively in favor of state's rights (especially when it comes to social issues like abortion), and, second, with this Chevron ruling, federal agencies will not be able to make decisions unless there is explicit intent in the laws that congress passes.

I'm having an extremely difficult time wrapping my head around just how epic of a change this SCOTUS has brought to the way the US population is governed, at both the state and federal level. Hard to really comprehend the gravity of the coming change, which will take decades and decades to fully understand.
Exactly, only when convenient. A glaring example of this is when they decided that section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment did not disqualify Trump from the ballot. The plain language is not complicated:

----------

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

----------

Note that this amendment provides a legislative remedy: Congress can remove the disability by a two-thirds vote. Textualism, but only when it serves their purposes.
Automation and AI: What Does Adoption Look Like for Fifth District Businesses?
We disagree. I prefer an effective administration of government.
That's pretty generous to claim that expertise is what was influencing application of law and policy before this. Agency oversight got us Ajit Pai deciding to kill net neutrality.
Due to court orders, OpenDNS shutdown itself in France and Portugal
That is exactly what the US' adversaries would like you to believe is the case. By all means, carry water for the despots of the world as you turn inwards.
Extremely well said. There are reasons gigantic corporations like Microsoft and Google spend all that money convincing you to use their new creation.
Do you have to close all of your tags? Yes. Is the markup based on HTML with XML rules like closing tags? Yes. Do you even have to close the tags of your custom components? Yes. When generating your createElement sequence from JSX, does it create or close tags in a different order/hierarchy than what you specified in the JSX? No. Does it emit markup or element creation calls that match the parsing behavior of HTML5? No.

Walks like an XHTML duck. Talks like an XHTML duck. It's an XHTML duck despite the JS interop and the lack of DTD preamble.
> It seems less like a language thing than it's being made out to be, and more of a cultural thing?

Yes. I think when you're speaking English in the United States, the cultural lens comes from specific context that depends on the conversation. If you're talking with a coworker, it depends on the culture of the company you both work for. If you're talking with a stranger in a bar, it'll be different depending on whether you're gulping martinis at a hotel bar or beer at a punk show. If you're talking with your next-door neighbor, it will depend on whether you both live in a gated community in Plano or a condo in Miami or a co-op in Portland.

I wonder if the article is missing something similar. Do Japanese teenagers who are best friends say, "That party was a little bit quiet, I'm not unhappy that we left" or do they say, "That party SUUUUUCKED! I'm so glad we got the fuck out of there!" Is it the whole language, or is it certain contexts in Japanese society?
This is a very uncharitable view of how foreign policy works. It is absolutely in our best interest to not only maintain strong diplomatic ties with peoples and countries who share our values, but also cooperate in defense efforts and ensuring safety and security from military actions that would undo things we benefit from in the long term.
Is Carbon Capture and Storage more expensive than we thought?
I think there are two things going on:

1. The syntax is significantly different than what one may be used to. Fair enough.
2. The paradigm itself is different and thus requires you to learn way of structuring your code in some pretty fundamental ways. This is a much bigger deal than one may initially give it credit for. For example, pattern matching. The mere possibility of defining multiple versions of the same functions based on the number and kind of arguments completely changes how one writes functions.

Instead of:

function hello(x) {

if (x == 2) {

// do x

} else {

// do y

}

}

We can write:

def hello(2) do

# do x

end

def hello(_) do

# do y

end

This was very disruptive to my brain at first as I was not used to reading code in this manner. My brain said "find function, read definition" but it had to learn "find function with proper arity and arguments, read definition". It's hard to put into words, but this made understanding Elixir code feel more difficult at first. However, once I did sink my teeth in , start to maneuver around code bases, and write my own modules it is hard for me to "unsee it" and go back to anything else. I love it! I think the most mind-blowing moment was when I started to pull back the covers in Phoenix and discovered that the framework wasn't some magical black box of FancilyNamedProviders but was just a collection of functions that I could actually read my way through quite simply. I never had to stop and say "wait what did that FacadeOfGoodness do again" but just traced simple functions.
I don’t take environmentalists seriously because they primarily act to accelerate climate change. So I’m just going to dismiss this out of hand. They’re a poor source of information.
The problem aren’t interpretative courts, its unclear laws.

The pencil example is all fun and games, but swap « buying mechanical pencils » with « sending people to prison », and then it makes more sense why some people prefer the judiciary branch to constrain the power of HR when there’s ambiguity.
Operation First Light highlights the extensive reach of scam syndicates
or use a passkey
This follows https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40693451

OpenDNS prefered shutdown itself from those countries instead of lying to their users.

root@jack:~# dig google.com @208.67.222.222

; <<>> DiG 9.18.19-1~deb12u1-Debian <<>> google.com @208.67.222.222
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: REFUSED, id: 37178
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 2

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1410
; EDE: 16 (Censored)
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;google.com. IN A

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
google.com. 0 IN TXT "Due to a court order in
France issued under Article L.333-10 of the French Sport code the OpenDNS
service is not currently available to users in France and certain French
territories."

;; Query time: 7 msec
;; SERVER: 208.67.222.222#53(208.67.222.222) (UDP)
;; WHEN: Fri Jun 28 20:29:00 CEST 2024
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 241
> Yet the market evolved and it's clear that "might as well be a game console" is no longer an adequate defense for these leading smartphone platform owners.

Could you explain why this is the case (what evolution makes it different from the game console case)? My understanding is that the percentage take is about the same in consoles and phones.
It's not even years of precedent, they contradicted themselves on this decision today in their separate ruling on allowing public sleeping bans. Roberts said "Why would you think that these nine people are the best people to judge and weigh those policy judgements?". SCOTUS follows tradition when it suits their lobbied interests, and disregards tradition if it contradicts them.
Most individual competitive sports are like this. The top of the crop get the bulk of the tournament payouts, the bottom get a pittance that barely cover their costs to attend the tournament, and the ones who miss the cut entirely get a mound of debt for making their way out there to merely be a warm body for other talent to route. Sponsorships help cover some costs but not everyone can get very lucrative sponsor deals especially a low rank player. There's honestly better money giving lessons for probably $150-250 an hour or so than there is making a go at the world stage. I'm sure that's a path many end up taking after the writing is clear on the wall.
Wasn't crypto supposed to cause this same energy apocalypse?

Does AI even use more energy than crypto ever did? Doubtful.

Besides, we're projected to ingest all of humanity's written knowledge by 2026, and after that there will be a cliff in power consumption, we will mostly switch to inference on purpose built hardware, which is vastly more efficient.
$330k would be good for an individual with a desk job, but when you factor in the other costs to run the "enterprise" of a tennis player, what does the take home look like?

IE how much does a tennis coach cost? Travel and lodging for tournaments. I'm assuming they might have a medical expert or nutritionist on the staff as well?
I'm not saying you don't have the experience, but by your own admission you left React years ago, so how can you have context into what its current problems are and how they're being solved? Experience does not necessarily transfer across domains. It can, but not necessarily so.
philosophically I see what you're saying, but will congress be good at passing small laws to amend the ever changing regulatory landscape? I'm going to guess no. So practically this could be a nightmare
One more reason for deep space telescopes. A PHA about to impact will not have much movement in relation to the background stars when seen from Earth, but will be moving when seen from a different vantage point.
Holo Display: generate the refractive voxel via ultrasonic convergent propagation fringe pattern, and light the voxel with IR that becomes higher frequency visible light color at point of interfearance/intersection.

PrHoteph: hyperplanes are your friends, may they guide your long distance acoustic whisper / ultrasonic voxel intersections.
We can nit pick what you meant by 'automatically' morph, but the fact that it was just forced into a pretty severe morph to adapt to what 6 particular persons wanted I think challenges the argument you're making.
primitive.io has a VR browser for Java Maven, .Net, Node, Pip and PhP

Disclosure: founder posting here
Sounds like we need a monitoring station on Mars.
Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear, I was talking about the covid shots. There are studies suggesting negative efficacy against infection after the initial period°. So while I think for hospitalizations and death there is a stronger argument, for infections it's not terribly clear.

° from chat gpt (with all the standard caveats):

Source: "Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: a Danish cohort study" (Published in The Lancet).

Source: "Efficacy of a Fourth Dose of Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine against Omicron" (Published in NEJM).

Source: UKHSA COVID-19 vaccine surveillance reports.
1. React doesn't have less boilerplate than the average let alone most.

2. You haven't seen Angular lately, have you? It's on 18 now. 15 and 16 really trimmed things down.
>I will go as far as to say that charging $200 for a Tylenol

That's a common example but that's not actually what happens at all.