skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
By far, the majority of my time "online" these days is spent in a Discord server for enthusiasts that are also interested in my hobby. Due to the server's small size and narrow niche, moderation is straightforward and we rarely have any issues with trolling. We don't allow political discussion, which mostly allows members of diverse backgrounds to interact safely, since triggering discussions don't come up very often.

It's not even a particularly novel idea, right? Chatrooms have been a thing just about since packet switching was a thing, this one is just a polished implementation of that idea. Trouble is, the one metric that matters to Google (inter-linking, engagement, etc) can't happen when the content can't be crawled in the first place. So our pleasant, intellectually simulating content stays hidden where the rest of the internet never notices it.
Glad to see this challenge to the powers that be and the status quo.
Reminds me of all the high school prompts like "What does the Lord of the Flies teach us about human nature". Nothing, its a complete work of fiction
Just out of curiosity, having looked at the blurb, I'm left wondering, what do you fill notebooks with?

Planning projects and what you want to do?

From the description, I'd personally think I could be labelled a scanner, but I'm trying to work out if this is a read now or read later book/

At present I'm interested in unpacking more of what's going on in my head and putting it down on paper, and I'm curious to know what reading the book gave you and if it will be useful in pulling out interesting stuff from my thoughts =)...
There is one like that which runs compute (read Nvidia cards).
What’s a Topah?
What is a Tophas?
>but your $1000 phone is a brick if it can't see a cell tower. Something went wrong there.

it's not exactly a "brick". airdrop/bluetooth still work albeit at a reduced range.
And don’t forget, people change too, sometimes becoming misaligned over time. Maybe that’s a little like cancer. Org resilience is hard to model.
To guard against cyberattacks in space, researchers ask "what if?"
Klingon for animal?
What’s a Klingon?
Who uses multicast for TV these days? I'm also unsure what this has to do with NAT.

The reason they use CG-NAT is because there is a complete shortage of IPv4 addresses.
The article is generally confused and definitions of words seem to shift throughout.

I'm also unsure of what the question posed by the title even means. Reactionary, I suspect, does not mean what the author thinks it means.
An invite only product with extremely meager sales realized to have been about as worthwhile as a brick being fully refunded with $300 extra plus cost of recycling covered may not be a hacker's utopia but seems like a pretty good option to me. Much better than imagining any of these businesses were going to hack the failed gear into something useful instead.
Maybe you are unaware of this? https://www.oracle.com/cloud/free/
Tell you what, if you're bored and want to learn about this world, I recommend newcomers read Robert Weinberg, The Biology of Cancer, (2nd Edition): https://www.amazon.com/dp/0815342195
Seems it requires cloud services, so once Amazon shuts these down it’s as good as bricked. Otherwise they have to run the cloud forever, or reprogram them not to need cloud.

I had a cat feeder that required cloud, and when that company went out of business I had a brick and no refund. (Yeah I was crazy to buy the thing, but I had my reasons and knew the risks.) That’s the risk with these cloudy devices.
> My first thought for a “fill” algorithm would be to just fill with zeros, and hence read out the pad, since it is going to be used up anyway.

That also would use up the pad when there are no messages, requiring some secure way to get a new pad to the operatives when their existing pad is consumed. This is difficult enough (secure delivery of new pad) that it is unlikely that spy-HQ wishes to consume pad data for fill.

> But I suppose that’s bad since if it did accidentally get re-used then that cyphertext would be fully compromised

Yes, if they reused any part of any pad for more than one single message, they have compromised (and revealed) the contents of the reused pad messages. This is the other difficulty with OTP's. The OTP data must never be reused. Which is alo why spy-HQ would not want to use it (the OTP) up for the fill, because to avoid reuse then they have to get new pad material to the operatives in some secure way.

> So, I guess the actual algorithm must be derived from the OTP, but not padded with it?

The 'implication' of the article is that the fill is just random data (without using up any pad material). Possibly with the appropriate headers in place so that it looks indistinguishable from a read message in the same slot.

The further implication is that the Cuban station did something essentially like this:

for (count=0; count<20; count++) {
send(int(rand()*9));
}

With a rand() implementation that returned a number from zero to 1.0 exclusive of 1.0 and an int() implementation that merely truncated any fraction from the multiplication. With the result that 9 is never sent.
A bit funny, I donated and got redirected to https://ladybird.org/thanks.html which is a 404.
What’s a Topah?

Klingon slang for Idiot
Given the context `Falsehoods Programmers Believe`, I think it is referring to how one validates a number submitted from a form (but maybe there are devices like this?). So, if a flowers company signs up and wants to list their number as 1-800-Flowers they would get a validation error on many sites.
Right, they never claimed to have found a roadmap to AGI, they just found a cool geometric tool to describe how LLMs reason through approximation. Sounds like a handy tool if you want to discover things about approximation or generalization.
Considering the vast number of programs that wine works extremely well with I'm not so sure they spent too much optimizing the no-congestion case. You are just doing something extremely quirky in your program.
he's probably cursing in klingon.

HN turns into slashdot on sundays, when all the MBAs are barbecuing.
I am doubtful that people bought these to park their money in it so as long they get back the money 'it is all good'. Whatever the vague use of this was that failed so bad those purchased it for a purpose that needs to be fulfilled, again. Waste of efforts, have to try again.

The root comment was not about money but reputation. How confidently can someone buy something from Amazon to use if a 'sorry, I changed my mind, give it back and solve your task some other way, I am out of here!' is hanging over the head.
https://youtu.be/ibA7noX6rnc?t=63
Funding Servo is another good option: https://servo.org/sponsorship/
Tech Interview Stats 2024
Thanks, that's a good case.

Actually, the JavaScript semicolon insertion algorithm [0] seems more complex than I had remembered. I had thought of them as variations on the semicolon insertion in BCPL, but it seems like that's an oversimplification.

For reference, these are the BCPL rules:

The canonical symbol SEMICOLON is inserted between pairs of items if they appeared on different lines and if the first was from the set of items which may end a command or definition, namely:

BREAK RETURN FINISH REPEAT SKET RKET
SECTKET NAME STRINGCONST NUMBER TRUE FALSE

and the second is from the set of items which may start: a command, namely:

TEST FOR IF UNLESS UNTIL WHILE GOTO RESULTIS
CASE DEFAULT BREAK RETURN FINISH SECTBRA
RBRA VALOF LV RV NAME

...

( ) [ ] § § are used to denote RBRA RKET SBRA SKET SECTBRA and SECTKET.

[0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...
I haven't, but tbh, the OS is already using next to zero resources, chromium is the real issue. Of course I could just throw a more peweful Pi or SBC at it, but that's not my goal.
How much does Mozilla spend hardening Firefox? How much does Apple spend hardening Safari? I see no reason to believe that Chromium is so far ahead security-wise that the only way to compete is with Rust. Happy to be proven wrong, of course.
Culture has AI. Dune doesn't.
Thank you! Resubmitted.
Chromium is written in C++...
Most, possibly all of that, was due to the mass lockdowns - something we'd never attempted before even in the face of much worse pandemics.
Thanks for the excellent article! While you're here, I noticed a coupled "ergnomic"s in the text.
There are always stories of people who "quit" normal tech things, buying obscure eink phones and other pretentious minimalist crap, claiming it does this or that to their sleep or attention span. Always devs or at least tech-adjecent people. A lone outlier is what you are. Meanwhile most of the population remains completely (happily?) addicted to scrolling <social app of the year> every free waking moment of every day with no sign of stopping.

Not really surprising when the entire tech industry is hellbent on keeping everyone there and making sure the engagement numbers continue to go up for the next quarterly report. Until that changes there won't be any major move away from it. Systemic problems require systemic solutions.
Ask HN: Blade Runner Enhance Scene – How To (edit: synthetizing) ?
I have a shelf of specific books in some movie - but can't read titles and yandex.com/images/ or lens.google.com seem to not have them - any chance I could do better soon with AI (and realtime :) or in some other way?

( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHepKd38pr0 )
> If writing down your ideas always makes them more precise and more complete, then no one who hasn't written about a topic has fully formed ideas about it. And someone who never writes has no fully formed ideas about anything nontrivial.

This is very flawed logic. This assumes that only writing can result in fully formed ideas, and that is simply a false assumption. I can't believe that it was even typed out as-is, it's so wrong. It's wrong on its face. It's wrong if you think about it for 1/10th of a second. It's wrong if you think about it for a minute. It's wrong if you think about it for an hour. It's even wrong if you write it out.
There's always someone ready to predict the end. That includes Al Gore and Greta Thunberg who both predicted we would be far worse off today than we actually are.

If we are going to be done in within our lifetimes, it will surely be because of war or some tremendous nuclear disaster (most likely triggered by a war).
Interesting, but I still think most problems like that are solvable via Excel. Put some formulas in some cells, tweak some variables until you find a way to maximize something. Possibly use graphs or pivot tables or other advanced features to help if needed.
Once you’ve figured out the solution, then you build a pretty graph for the BoD proving it. Make sure to keep the spreadsheet around as evidence.
Gasoline in era of EVs is nuts.

Liquified natural gas might still have few decades for certain industries, but with electrification underway for pretty much everything all these processes seem pointless.

Sure you could capture CO2 from a plant, liquify, ship to where sun shines, convert to CNG, then ship back. Or you could just build power lines.
Business opportunity to provide a service to reprogram them for non-cloud use.
I think it's like a jabroni.
So don't rest on your laurels, move on to your next money-making project.
I do something similar, building a lightweight search index over very large relational datasets.

So the tables are much simpler to manage, much more portable, so I can serve search off scalable hardware without disturbing the underlying source of truth.

The downside is queries are more complex and slower.
You can tell they are a fly by night meme enterprise for not starting from a Mozilla fork.

Be realistic. For all bad mozilla foundation/corporation/toppahs did, the code is still open source and relatively free. If even something called IceWeasel almost had a shot at forking, the bar is pretty low.
Please anything but electron dear god
>but your $1000 phone is a brick if it can't see a cell tower. Something went wrong there.

I suppose in that case there are mesh networking apps such as Briar? https://briarproject.org/
Another comment brough up memory safety. I'm surprised myself that the project is moving forward without using a memory safe language at its core. A browser is a huge attack surface and all the example I know point to a necessarily enormous code base.

I understand the project started as a hobby, and anyone who wishes to be involved has their own prerogative, but I'd have a hard time getting behind it myself.
If you subscribe to Firefox services isn't that also funding Firefox?
His point is correct. To pretend to make Cpp safe, you need google sized budget (if not in engineering, in marketing, but oh well)
> * A tax rate of 21% thanks to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (it was 35%)

That's... the standard corporate tax rate? It really undercuts your argument when you're outraged over them not being treated specially.
And Google Spend roughly 100 Times more money on making it safe than ladybird will get in funding in total.
Cold air is more dense than hot air which counteracts the effects somewhat. 130 degree heat is roughly the equivalent of being at 5000’ at 60 degrees if I’m using the air density calculator right.

https://e6bx.com/density-altitude/
Nonsense, all 4 of the most widely used browsers were written in C/C++. A browser is basically an OS at this point, and these issues can be addressed in the design, just like in any OS kernel, which are also almost all written in C/C++.

I think the demise of Firefox has been greatly exaggerated... I'm still using it as my main browser, and the user experience and performance are excellent.
Why do You think creating a browser in a 'safe' language would prevent security bugs from occurring?
This is the article by Ingesson and Andersson.

Clandestine communications in cyber-denied
Environments:
Numbers stations and radio in the 21st century

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/18335330.2023.2...
Cannabis legalisation hampered by most German of substances: red tape
ELI5: as far as I know, „safe“ programming languages are able to avoid memory related issues that are/were prevalent in C(++). Is this actually the class of bug that causes most security related issues in the browser?
In fact in-universe the Culture is considered deviant as a whole by similarly advanced civilizations because, instead of focusing on collectively ascending as a civilization as it is proper, they meddle in the affairs of other civilizations.
Not sure public infrastructure is a good comparison, because that kind of stuff benefits the public.

GenAI is definitely a major upheaval, and the payoffs will definitely be huge, but those payoffs will go to those who fund it at the detriment of the working class who haven’t been sharing in the productivity gains made by capital.

I just don’t see the public benefit that we see from public infrastructure. If anything GenAI will exacerbate and accelerate all the structural issues we have in our economy and society.
The inability to fund Firefox development is completely baffling to me. The finances seem pretty obvious: Open up a fund for Firefox donations. Hire contractors under the non-profit to work on Firefox. When you have enough to pay a full time developer, hire one under the non-profit. Rinse and repeat.

If, as some claim, there isn't ever enough money to really fund development, fine, they've now proven that. But not even allowing it as a possibility is completely insane!

I'm left in a position where I'm assured repeatedly that the best way to fund Firefox development is to pay for a side project I have no use for like Pocket or their VPN and then hope that that payment doesn't get consumed paying for said side project or future side projects.

OP's thoughts were mine the day that the LBI was announced: finally there's a non-profit that is actually committed to maintaining browser diversity. It's just a pity that it's one that's starting from behind and not the existing non-profit whose browser at one point enjoyed a majority market share.
Because 70% of the security holes in C code bases tend to be things that never happen in a memory-safe language.
I know they didn't do this on purpose and it was because it started as part of SerenityOS, but I'm unexcited by this project because it's written in C/C++.

Rust was literally invented to solve the security and concurrency issues inherent in using C/C++ for a browser engine. You could argue that's the one use-case where it is objectively the best language to use. It's so valuable for that purpose that every large company has rewritten at least some crucial components in Rust.

I also think Rust will be one of the only languages strict enough to enable the use of AI-generated code without compromising security. I certainly don't want AI-generated code for high-security applications, but there's nothing we can do to stop it at this point.
I would wager that is has more to do with leveraging existing infrastructure that is commonly deployed to more than just G7 nations and working with people in those countries who may not have a Q branch handy nor could afford to be caught with gear-turned-evidence.

As well, as any honest engineer knows, new tech is rarely reliable and bug free. You may adopt it for other benefits, but assurance is generally not one of them. So if lives depend on something, you may keep using things that have been proven reliable.
Attach it to a robot arm and yes it does.

The latency isn't there yet so there's not much money being poured in, but when a 8b model can run in microseconds you'd see a very different world of robotics.
I'll give you an alternate take: the compute power available to EDA software has been roughly scaling at the same rate as transistors on a die. So the complexity of the problem relative to compute power available has remained somewhat constant. So standard cell design remains an efficient method of reducing complexity of the problems EDA tools have to solve.
Isn’t servo Mozilla’s cancelled browser project? (Genuine question)
https://archive.is/RztC0
How do you carry water in a sieve? That's the personnel cost analogy to have safe cpp. His point is not about replacing the sieve, it is about having the money to still have some water across even when using sieves.
Power to the reverse engineers who will stop this stuff from turning to junk. Death to TOS.
Nice Strawman. My Argument is that it takes likely 10s of millions of dollars to secure a large CPP Browser from the metric shitload of memory safety issues the average C/CPP Programmer leaves behind. If you want to compete with Google, either you use a memory safe language and spend your time securing the other millions of security issues that arise from writing a web browser or you waste time and money to build something no one in their right mind should be using for anything given the state of the modern web.
Only monsters prefer invisible characters having syntactic meaning, and most of them probably also like pineapple on pizza. Shameful. (j/k)
You can make firefox fullscreen _within the window_ by changing a flag in about:config ... full-screen-api.ignore-widgets (set to true)

then, when you press `F` on a video, you will remove all firefox 'decoration', just like fullscreen mode, but it'll respect whatever position and size you have set for the browser.
Found the article. Interesting:

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40819854
>Deadlocks are an application issue.

Not necessarily, and not in the very common single-writer-many-reader case. In that case, PostreSQL's MVCC allows all readers to see consistent snapshots of the data without blocking each other or the writer. TTBOMK, any other mechanism providing this guarantee requires locking (making deadlocks possible).

So: Does Mongo now also implement MVCC? (Last time I checked, it didn't.) If not, how does it guarantee that reads see consistent snapshots without blocking a writer?
They may be starting from behind, but a clean slate might be to their advantage. It takes a distinguished dev to jump into an old, large scale project. Firefox and Chrome definitely meets both of those factors.
But how will the CEO get millions in compensation for running the browser into the ground while funding her side projects?

Oh sorry, she's chairwoman of the board now, completely different.
Yes. It now has a life of its own.
Andreas has been doing this for a long time. The difference is that now he is openly shifting focus from the OS to the browser.

Having a fully new codebase implementing the web is a great thing.

IceWeasel was a completely different thing mainly based around mozilla trademarks for logos/names that clashed with the FOSS policies of linux distros when shipping non-upstream binaries.
I remember vividly the day "WWW" showed up in the university's Gopher menu. I asked my friend what it was all about and he said, "I looked at it; it sucked."
Ad Generator
> At the moment, Bython is written in Python.

PR #1: Makes Bython self-hosting
It moved to the Linux Foundation in 2020[0] and has been getting active development since about 2023[1].

I guess I should also add that it is just the rendering engine, not a full browser

[0] https://servo.org/blog/2020/11/17/servo-home/

[1] https://servo.org/blog/2023/01/16/servo-2023/
Money is not the Problem with firefox https://preview.redd.it/r9q69xop8n6d1.png?auto=webp&s=59a1d3...
I'm not an expert or anything, but don't modern day drone capabilities mean that aricraft carriers are easy to destroy or incapacitate?
All hackers should understand this and use at least Firefox. Otherwise you are failing your duty of keeping hacking alive.
I'm not going to deconstruct the whole thing to appease a stranger, but let's just take the first point of the argument: That it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of the internet.

Setting aside what does "end of the world" actually mean, who's making this statement?

Almost nobody is, since practically every instance is someone referencing somebody else with little commitment. Essentially this is arguing against a person instead of some wide-spread view.

Even if it was wide spread, does it even matter?

It obviously can't be true since end of the world in any reasonable understanding contains end of the internet. So what exactly is this point and argument against it trying to show? I have no idea since believing or not in something dying generally matters little to it being (or not) in such process.

Let's say it is important. What are the arguments that it is incorrect beyond being obviously so?

Well, some unrelated people before you were incorrect about unrelated shape of future so you, but not the author, probably are too. Then he follows this by putting words in mouth of the people he disagrees with, before he swerves into his own experiencing of internet consumption and resulting numbness. I guess based on his expectations of near future there's an expectation of universality of his experience, but even if it was universal (and huge amounts of emotions exhibited online create at least some doubt that it is), why would it contribute to internet's death? It obviously doesn't stop him from scrolling, or writing and otherwise engaging on internet. Again, I have no idea.

So all of it does not really add up to much, but I admit it is entertainingly written which is more than most of us manage.
Training a Simple Transformer Neural Net on Conway's Game of Life
It might prevent 70%[0] or so of exploitable bugs. Which is better than C++, which, after almost 40 years of effort, continues to be the source of most of that 70% in the first place.

0 - https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-70-percent-of-all-se...
Sort of related - someone uses Windows 98 and tries to install a virus, but can't.

https://youtu.be/mbbRUDexuBk