skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Slightly off topic and not sure if this is allowed but I've a copy of MVS JCL by Doug Lowe and rather than dump it I'd be more than happy to send it free of charge to anyone in the UK.

It's in excellent condition other than a bit of staining on the outer rear cover

https://www.amazon.co.uk/MVS-JCL-370-XA-JES/dp/0911625852

I worked with them for a year or so at an insurance company and particularly liked some of the feature of the ISPF editor. You could hide rows then perform actions on the remaining columns, quirky but very handy when you needed it!
I mean, the filesystem is just hierarchical organization. It's not even really a computer skill - I remember being taught how to use an encyclopedia in school with its index.

The UI is not a big deal because graphically, there are only so many ways to represent a hierarchy. Even 3d file managers are pretty intuitive because the base data structure is simple.

It's really easy to use a computer when someone has already programmed it to do the things you want. It's much harder to use one as a machine that can be programmed to do anything.
Firefox survives because it is open source. Mozilla will hopefully not survive and make space for someone who actually cares about privacy.

> main source of income for Mozilla is an Ads Company

Yes, that is a big part of why Mozilla cannot be redeemed.

> "ads industry is not going to pack up and leave"

They have already been banished from all my devices.

> ads industry has much deeper pockets than Mozilla (even if Mozilla replaces Google's money bags with someone else's money bags of equal size)

So? That won't allow them to control what runs on my devices.

> any step away from the extreme privacy-protecting position is seen as treason

Yes, it is betraying the trust people have put in a self-proclaimed privacy champion.
1. The best card-creation practice is to divide these itemized lists into separate cards. So ideally, you shouldn't have 5 items on one card anyway.

2. Dates are pretty important to know, so I'm not sure what the issue is here.

3. With language learning, there is no reason why you need to make cards word-word. Personally I use image-word much more often, which correlates more to how we learn our first language.

It happens often that you can remember things when doing Anki, while being at a loss when needing the information in the real world.

I haven't had that experience at all. But if you have, there is a simple fix: create cards that mimic the situation you'd use the phrase in. For example, have the phrase "a cappuccino, please" matched with a photo of a barista in a coffee shop.

Anki does nothing for conceptual understanding. You really need to learn a subject before memorizing it, but in the learning phase Anki is not helpful.

I also don't agree with this. Learning the "foundational" aspects of something is critique for understanding it conceptually. For example, knowing the boring geographical details of European borders circa 1900 is key to understanding the subsequent 45 years of geopolitical conflicts.

In general, I think most of the critiques of Anki/spaced repetition/flashcards are mostly just critiques of the "typical" way people make cards and use the apps. If you get a little more creative with creating cards, most of these issues go away.

That all said, I do agree that Anki is definitely not perfect and could be improved – but more in the sense of making better-designed cards and better practices the default, not something you have to implement manually yourself.
What I wanted to say is, the session key isn't generated from the private keys of either party.

If I sign any data, it's mathematically linked to the certificate, but that doesn't mean the cert was involved in creating the data.
If in “time going forwards” a ball hits another one at rest and you “reverse time” right after the collision won’t the “time going backwards” get that ball in rest again? (You’re the one who mentioned physics being symmetrical.)

The point is that with just two things interacting with “time going backwards” you “predict” unlikely things to “happen” and we know that it’s because the “initial” conditions are the exact ones that would make such things happen. It doesn’t seem a big mystery.

In the “many, many, many, we-don’t-even-know-how-many” things interacting case we would encounter something similar. The “initial” conditions if we had “time going backwards” are much more unlikely and the “outcome” much more unexpected because in reality we don’t know almost anything about the state of the system. But we know that those “initial” conditions are “special” - it’s not more mysterious than the simpler case.
Because this is Microsoft we shall apply Gates' razor and must thus conclude that "never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice".
> I didn't get that impression at all. My take is that he's simply providing a view of OSS through the lens of financial transactions.

Which totally misses the point, since open source works as a gift economy [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy
To be frank I quite like this idea. Can’t we standardize it somehow and add it to other email clients too? IMO the fallback, that internally it’s just a regular, human-readable email, is quite neat (though I wonder how they dealt with other languages than English - do they know which language the email is in? Is it just always English? That’d be bad).

I work on a chat component library (https://talkjs.com) and we support both emoji reactions and email notifications for missed chat messages. These emails can be replied to and they show up as chat messages in the conversation. It’d be very natural for us to add reaction support to the emails too, but I’d be reluctant to do so if it means a great UX for Outlook users but a terrible UX (overload of little reaction emails) for the rest.
> The needs of security are opposed to the needs of a convenient user experience. Improving one typically hurts the other.

I must be Dr Contrary tonight but this strikes me as bullshit.

SSH is more convenient that telnet. Passkeys are more convenient than passwords. TouchID and FaceID are more convenient than passwords.

In general, security is an afterthought that is inconvenient to developers to add back. But in the digital world I haven’t seen many examples of security being less convenient than the alternative.

(I am writing this from an airport and definitely do not assert that this applies to the built environment.)
"DEI provides impetus..."

DEI also provides an impetus to hire token minorities, even if underqualified, because the DEI team demands results and will label your explanation that you didn't really get your hands on a good black programmer as systemic racism. Or perhaps even your own personal racism.

From where I live (Czechia), we still remember old Communist Czechoslovakia. Late stage Communism was all about impressive statistics - on paper. Ticking the important boxes in the form was very important. Of course, the economy collapsed, because the real problems couldn't be papered over by impressive statistics forever.

DEI in American context looks similar to that, only America is more free and the corporations are more willing to shed the concept once it proved useless.
Issues with nepotism aside, I bet hiring on candidate merit (blind) would require not flexing your racism. You're willing to discard candidates that don't meet the skin color you prefer, that's some heavy stuff.
The whole article is them projecting.

Worst part:

> We donate to charities to feel good and elevate our status. We give freebies to our prospects to put them at ease so that they reciprocate with a purchase. We apply for internships, we put together portfolios, and agree on grueling interviews to market ourselves as potential employees.
I think read receipts may be a better solution for what most people seem to use the reaction buttons for. Then again, I don't really care either way. I can see the value of email reactions, but that does require clients to build in support for the standard.

The text fallback also isn't great, I'd much rather they'd sendan email with nothing but the emoji than "person X reacted to your message". I suppose this is more corporate-compliant?
> A ship in port is safe. But that’s not what ships were built for.

arsa Grace Hopper, who was quoting John Shedd.
i mean in effect a hexfet is a lot of very small fets in parallel

nice thing about fets, hotspots don't hog current, so you don't have to derate the living bejesus out of the soa curves
No, Graphcast is a graph transformer trained on ERA5 weather reconstructions of the atmosphere, not a general time series prediction model. It by the way outperforms all traditional global point forecasts (non-ensembles), at least on predicting large-scale global patterns (Z500 and such, on the lag of 3–10 days or so). ECMWF has AIFS that is a derivate of Graphcast, they'll probably get it or something similar to production in a couple of years.
https://rclone.org/ works great
>I just don't get what the new terminology is for. Like how is this helping anybody?

The corporate world likes to come up with new terminology for old stuff and brands it as some new profound discovery. The result being that the new young generation of employees believe that they are living in a new enlightened age (bestowed by their corporate overlords) compared to their older counterparts who were living in the intellectual un-enlightened, dark ages.
shouldn't you count the input clamping diodes as transistors
When is a gift not a gift?

If your not willing to have the other person shame you for your gift then you shouldn't be giving gifts. Gifts are given because you enjoy the act of giving not how the gift is perceived by another person, if that rubs you the wrong way you shouldn't be giving, it's as simple as that.
> This enables endless editing and visualization possibilities, given that python is turing complete.

This is a strange thing to write, given that the sky is blue.
In that future, those will _be_ the Europeans :) While heritage is important, culture is predominantly made up by the living.
So if something is important to preserve, pass it on to the next generations (and not just your own children).
A true example of making better use of available space would be the Mimblewimble protocol, which allows all spent outputs to be permanently erased from history. The integrity of the entire transaction history can be verified from the UTXO set and the history of transaction kernels (just ~100 bytes per tx).
Yes, but any other app need to explicitly integrate it, and it the biggest issue in modern software. Let's imaging such project is an Emacs package, you do not need any change from notmuch, mu4e, gnus, meow, ... to use your package, you can just put a bunch of advises, hooks, some functions wrapping some others etc, it's YOU the one who can integrate. In modern software it's the opposite and that's why anything fails because you can convince some apps to support this projects while some others will do not and to communicate you need some import/export solution/bridge and so on.

Modern software is a series of walled gardens with an enormous amount of resources to plumb something in between as a result only some projects who get enough popularity have chances of integrations, the other will remain standalone, and most tend to try implementing any possible features becoming monsters of bloats after a bit of time. There is no escape in such model, the modern web is not a valid answer, we simply need the classic OS as a single app/framework but this being incompatible with commercial software (at least it can only be mono-vendor) is a thing nobody in modern industry accept.

It's simply about time to admin that software can only be FLOSS and the competition can only be in hw. Meaning things we need to build as products, with raw materials not simply "selling some copies/bit", or "physical economy" vs "paper/finance one".
My notes on implementing the crawler challenge from A Tour of Go
A lot off other companies are monopolies in their fields.
Return-to-Office Mandates Aren't Worth the Talent Risks
I didn’t 100% follow this story. Sounds like you knew the manager’s password and used it to log into a website. Where did the email protocols come into it?
All-heads?
Even after reading the entire article, I still don't understand what the author is trying to convey. In my personal opinion, open-source software is just like what the MIT license implies. By sharing the code I wrote, I give up all rights and also refuse to take on any obligations.
It doesn't seem any of these would be naturally be able to express the example case https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eras/tlsd/master/doc/seque... . But maybe it's possible?

In addition there's also the case of messages that are never processed, but I suppose that could be its own "never handled" box.
I'm currently building an open-source French alternative to Google/Apple Maps, https://cartes.app.

It's the most pleasant project I've worked on so far and I've already got plenty of interesting encouragements and calls. Already worth it.

https://github.com/laem/cartes
> The most common belief open source maintainers have is that offering something for free gives them the right to some of their users’ money.

Utter horse pucky.

If there's a common misconception around corporate open source, it's the belief that it will reduce the maintenance burden by sharing it with volunteer contributors, or (for major projects at least) that releasing open source code will lead them to be in control of a standard, rather than (if they are lucky) having influence over one.

But individual contributors have such differing motivations, I have no idea what the evidence base for that first line is.

And it continues in that vein. So much [citation needed].
He's doing way more than that. He's questioning the stated motivations of many OSS maintainers and pushing the line that career enhancement is the only reasonable motivation.
So guilty people were convicted, and so was anyone who knew how oil works.
Completely agree. Most GraphQL interfaces are papered over a relational database that speaks SQL. It seems ridiculous to me to have 2 query languages on top of one another like this. Feels like any GraphQL system could've just exposed their SQL directly for way less code and more flexibility.

Though I guess the layer in between lets you change your SQL schema without changing the GraphQL schema.
Not sure if I agree with the whole article but for most people, open source is fun. That's it. That's the reason
> offering something for free gives them the right to some of their users’ money

This article misses the entire point of the Open Source movement. OS maintainers owe nothing to their users and expect nothing in return. It's that simple. Nobody owes you a bug fix or a new feature that you and your company desperately need. Implement it yourself, then contribute back. That's how it's supposed to work. If you need a feature but don't want to implement it yourself, you should consider compensating a maintainer for their work. A maintainer does not owe you their time and operates on their own release or feature schedule.

> guilt trip people for it

This is a cynical misrepresentation. Most open-source developers know that monetizing their projects is nearly impossible. It’s about passion, not entitlement.

> the goal is for it to be seen by others

Visibility and career advancement can be beneficial, but they are often secondary. Many maintainers continue their work long after securing jobs, driven by their commitment to their projects and communities.
Agreed - I've been unable to get at sensible meaning in my head for "AI safety" that isn't "to prevent ultron/skynet/the matrix"
"your suggestion that diverse hiring equals less competent hiring is offensive."

Well, so was suggestion that the Earth revolves around the Sun, once.

What really interests me is if it is true, not if it is offensive. Truth > Conformism, at least if you don't want to end up with an ossified society.
Virtual threads do one thing: they allow creating lots of threads. This helps throughput due to Little's law [1]. But because this server here saturates the CPU with only a few threads (it doesn't do the fanout modern servers tend to do), this means that no significant improvements can be provided by virtual threads (or asynchronous programming, which operates on the same principle) while keeping everything else in the system the same, especially since everything else in that server was optimised for over two decades under the constraints of expensive threads (such as the deployment strategy to many small instances with little CPU).

So it looks like their goal was: try adopting a new technology without changing any of the aspects designed for an old technology and optimised around it.

[1]: https://youtu.be/07V08SB1l8c
I think he just drank the capitalist cool-aid: everyhing is a financial transaction, nobody can ever do anything for reasons other than selfish financial interest.
> Not sure about Rust, but it probably also uses some Rust macro magic to do something similar.

Much the same as JavaScript I understand, but no macros; the compiler turns them into Futures that can be polled
> We Love Writing Software So Much, We're Willing to Do It for Free

The title is right. People love writing software a lot.

In my experience in this field, most don't love or even hate:

1. Fixing bugs, especially obscure ones.

2. Localizing.

3. Updating project dependencies.

4. Updating the project to follow the latest standards (security, internet, domain specific standards).

5. Doing especially the UI part, in a consistent way (consistent colors, spacing, workflows, the works).

6. Writing tests.

7. Setting up builds.

8. Setting up CI/CD pipelines.

9. Planning and roadmaps.

I'd argue that writing software is basically cheap. The expensive part is everything else, which means you're a professional software developer, so basically a "software accountant" that has to dot every i and cross every t, and it's what makes software provide real value.
In all likelihood, DEI was never business critical.

An interesting test is whether you can state this opinion openly and still remain an employee of $big_corp.
Free software is a heroic endeavor. This poor guy doesn't get it.
For how long do you need to dry them? Are we talking hours here or like 15 minutes?
Just speculation.
Don't know in the States but here in Europe I think it will hurt Tesla. The only ones that are really supporting Elon are the same people who deny climate change and are against EV cars, solar energy, batteries where they suddenly are caring for coloured people in the mines,...

Empirical but I know a lot of Tesla drivers that are looking for a different brand when their lease is over. Although its not only about his politics but also quality, broken promises,... .
Granted, I wasn‘t aware. But unless you also have to tell CP/M how many cylinders and/or tracks you want to allocate for your „file“ upfront, and how large the (single!) extent should be should that allocation be exceeded, as well as having to separately enter your file into a catalogue (instead of every file on disk implying at least one directory entry, multiple for filesystems that support hard links), then CP/M and MS-DOS files are still very similar to each other.

Also, it sounds to me like those 128 byte records were still very much sequential. That is, 128 bytes may have been the smallest unit that you can extend a file by, but after that it‘s still a consecutive stream of bytes. (Happy to get told that I’m wrong.) With MVS, the „files“ can be fundamentally indexed by record number, or even by key, and it will even be organized like that by the disk hardware itself.
Funny to see that on a laggy page, stuffed with intersection-observers to demonstrate text slide-in effects, with gaussian-blurred arbitrary large shapes, custom fonts and animated svg's. And then suggesting to add script to Hacker News, which will make an extra request to REST api, just to draw a badge.
I lived in the Nordics for many years, and I have interacted with plenty Swedish people.

It is definitely not the norm, but it is definitely a wide spread phenomenon.

Or at least it used to be more prevalent, as my sampling has an age bias.

A quick duckduckgoing supports their claims:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/swedengate-sweden-dinne...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/02/world/europe/sweden-feedi...

https://www.thelocal.se/20220530/fact-check-do-swedish-paren...
FOSS developers gift their tools, libraries, frameworks, applications, and corporations use them and then don't OSS their cloud control planes (AWS, Azure, GCP), UI frameworks (Apple), app stores (Apple, Google), etc, etc.

Some give, others take.

I guess that's how things work in gift economies in real life, too.
“But, like most people”

When you find yourself thinking this, you are probably wrong.
While I agree FOSS doesn't give you the right to users money.

It is especially painful if (big) companies make big money with your free product.
Posting something to github does not shift the burden of proof for fantastic claims onto the community.

You also completely failed to address my larger point, which is that the data or code is not flawed, your assumptions are.
China is bigger, but the real point seems to be the "dictatorship", no?
The Aragoscope: Ultra-High Resolution Imaging at Low Cost (2016) [pdf]
ad 1: have you tried using Cloze cards for that? I like to group eg 1-2 reasons, then I will see the list with 1 or 2 items missing

ad 3: I had success for similar problems by simply creating a lot of cards that give enough context and just ask for the next step. In chess openings, couldn't you just display the current position and ask something like "In opening X, variant Y, what are the next moves for white here"? In some cases I've written scripts to create cards for all variations of a question I want to ask

ad 4: I think Cloze deletions can help to some extent here (I've basically made Cloze my new default card type), but you are probably running into the limitations of Anki there

ad 5: language learning, specifically vocab lists, has always baffled me as a use case for SRS. there is so much context that you need in order to use words proficiently (in what kind of medium was the word used? what register was used (formal/scientific/informal/...)? was it used ironically, empathetically,...?). the only way to learn language imho is to immerse youself as much as possible, through ways where it gets actually used, not such artificial environments

the one thing that I'd like to see changed about Anki would be to have more options for changing the scheduler, or making it easier to use custom schedulers on multiple device types. I simply don't like the logic of SM2/FSRS of hiding a card from you until a specified date and assuming that you'll be reading it then. if you don't open the app for a while, the review dates get completely messed up (I've had new cards scheduled for review sometime in the 2040's). I love the interface and that you can use HTML to enter cards, but I just want to put knowledge in there and get exposed to it from time to time. I wish there was a scheduler that just randomly shows you cards, with probability roughly proportional to how urgently you need to see them. and do not interpret too much into the fact if I haven't opened the app for half a year but still remember some of the cards well. I don't mind seeing those cards "too often", but I do mind if Anki hides the knowledge that I put in there from me, for years or decades even
I agree with the solution, but what do you mean with "better" in the first sentence? Spelling out the complete approach wasn't suitable for the article, but the ISO 27001 framework spells out roughly what you describe. At each "security classification level" you have a different risk appetite, and will apply different controls.
Lost Decade – how the US fell behind in checking China