skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Do one now, by focusing on it. Then do other.

It is difficult to compete with 'free' services where people pay with their privacy / time (for watching ads). Large masses cannot afford all these subscription-based models, and if then: households need to chose.

Amazon does this too. I pay 5 EUR a month, and get Amazon Prime Video, I get free S&H on Prime articles, and this makes me more inclined to order from Amazon. Meanwhile, if I order from AliExpress for more than 10 EUR, I get free shipping. Same story: stimulates me to buy more (or wait till I have more to order). With Apple, people are within the walled garden and circumventing that isn't allowed outside of EU.

Small businesses cannot do free/cheap shipping, as they don't have any large volume discounts. So what they do is sell their item on Amazon (and in NL, Bol.com) for a little bit more than their own shop. Either way, they have a tough time to compete. On service perhaps. Amazon has been terrible with warranty on expensive items to me. But if it is within a month I've been able to return the item, with no hassle.
They're doing both. They're very proud of their on-device features.
If it is such a fallacy, then why are there fewer and fewer options for those who don't want to be entrenched in technology?
It's interesting United Airlines is mentioned here. I am a security researcher and found vulnerabilities through the United Airlines bug bounty program last year. They pay you in miles instead of money.

The problem is that they gift them to you instead of what you might get from a credit card rewards program. You end up having to pay a 2% tax on the total amount in points (at least in the US).

When I made the calculations, I am actually paying more in taxes on the points than if I just paid for the flights myself. They end up being almost completely worthless.
Fundraising Platform Opinion
Hi! I'm developing a platform that could save founders over 160 hours on investor base preparation. The platform, TaskInfinity.com, automates tasks such as verifying if investors are still active, finding verified emails for everyone on the investment team, and identifying similar deals from an investor's portfolio to confirm their investment focus.

Do you think this could save you time? I'd love to hear your thoughts!
Is it feasible to use Neon connecting from smaller clouds, such as Hetzner, DO, Linode, etc? Thanks.
If the law is ambiguous and the executive interprets it in a way that is outside of Congress' intent, surely Congress could also clarify that law. One could just as (or more) easily assume that it is not the judiciary's role to tell the executive what Congress wanted, considering that Congress is right there to do it with their own voice. The judiciary would come in if Congress thought the executive was doing something outside of their intent.

What this position is really saying is that if Congress leaves something underdetermined the executive must defer to the judiciary in order to understand their own rulemaking.

I agree with you that the real problem here is a schlerotic political system, but in that context SCOTUS is actually making it worse by inserting itself unnecessarily into the process.
iOS is so stagnant it's not even funny. It's had three major overhauls that did absolutely nothing to it's functionality, roughly the same as Windows had in the same amount of time. Expanded functionality concerning USB class compliance, sideloading, on-device programming, VM compatibility, JIT-based recompilers for emulation and web browser diversity all go unaddressed. Things that are decidedly not a problem on Windows, MacOS and Linux.

Galaxy Tab users have been playing emulated games and run code locally for years. They don't have to wait for Apple to greenlight the API, Android can be modded and flashed to add whatever functionality it lacks. These up-in-the-air questions that plague Apple platforms aren't even a second thought on most others, because they don't resist common sense to try and create auxiliary markets.

> and what's new in Wayland?

Developers that want to work on it. I can count the number of "new features" in x11 on one hand.
It is poisonous and cancerous. I can only recommend to the people to abandon these ships. DEI in all it's forms will make you suffer, when you are talented and you are "diverse" by being "difficult". Simply let those shops dry out. Money talks. These "nice" communist people want everyone equal and those ideas have to be fought.
This was analyzed and the results were mixed...

https://billiards.colostate.edu/bd_articles/2013/june13.pdf

>So, based on the data, just how smooth is a CB? And how does this smoothness compare to the surface of the Earth? The highest point on earth is Mount Everest, which is about 29,000 feet above sea level; and the lowest point (in the earth’s crust) is Mariana’s Trench, which is about 36,000 feet below sea level. The larger number (36,000 feet) corresponds to about 1700 parts per million (0.17%) as compared to the average radius of the Earth (about 4000 miles). The largest peak or trench for all of the balls I tested was about 3
microns (for the Elephant Practice Ball). This corresponds to about 100 parts per million (0.01%) as compared to the radius of a pool ball (1 1/8 inch). Therefore, it would appear that a pool ball (even the worst
one tested) is much smoother than the Earth would be if it were shrunk down to the size of a pool ball. However, the Earth is actually much smoother than the numbers imply over most of its surface. A 1x1
millimeter area on a pool ball (the physical size of the images) corresponds to about a 140x140 mile area on the Earth. Such a small area certainly doesn’t include things like Mount Everest and Mariana’s Trench in the
same locale. And in many places, especially places like Louisiana, where I grew up, the Earth’s surface is very flat and smooth over this area size. Therefore, much of the Earth’s surface would be much smoother than a pool ball if it were shrunk down to the same size.
You're not wrong that Congress is now incapable of doing its important job, but I don't know if I agree that the answer is to just trust the executive branch. Keep in mind even if you like the current guy that it's about to be run by a guy you definitely don't like.

What I'm saying is it's complicated, and it seems we are paying the price for letting our government be utterly destroyed in its effectiveness.
WTH does europe-level bad mean!?
> Worst case, you have a leak vs a home battery fire.

Battery fires are an EV (and then, only certain models) and laptop/phone thing. Only a few home batteries use the really flammable electrolytes (mostly Tesla Powerwalls, I'd bet). Most people are using LFP for home, which is less expensive and doesn't have the fire problem.
So, just to clarify something here: unless they've radicalised a lot since I've left, EFF doesn't think that DRM should be outlawed. It thinks that governments shouldn't outlaw their citizens from talking about how to circumvent DRM, or criminalize the bypassing of DRM for lawful purposes. As I mentioned in my other comment, the anti-circumvention statutes of the DMCA were controversial enough to fail to pass in the US when they were introduced as part of the original 90s copyright reforms, and were only introduced in the US after they were successfully inserted into the WIPO Copyright Treaty. Those provisions have been pretty controversial ever since, and there have been multiple attempts by many groups and industries to limit the damage since then. (The Copyright Treaty itself can be interpreted to permit circumvention for purposes of fair use or other exceptions and limitations on copyright, and the limitations on individuals communicating about how to circumvent DRM may well be unconstitutional in the US -- the courts haven't really ruled on this.)

EFF and partner groups often contribute to government and international proposals (a hundred-or-so of them have been involved in the cybercrime treaty process for many years https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/01/joint-statement-propos... and I believe got it to a fairly good place before a last-minute push by some states to introduce more surveillance into it.)

You don't really get to hear about the compromises, because you don't really need to kick up a fuss about something that has worked out okay -- and even if you do post about the positive fine print, nobody sends such exciting documents to the front page of Hacker News.
Use ghost_cell/qcell, and put the QCellOwner in a mutex. Acquiring the cell owner grants the ability to access the data, but doesn't tie ownership.
In that same article, you have some iterations

8 / 41 = 0.1951219
(8 + 41 = 49) / 8 = 6.125
(49 + 8 = 57) / 49 = 1.16326531
(57 + 49 = 106) / 57 = 1.85964912
(106 + 57 = 163) / 106 = 1.53773585

That second line is screwed up, which also screws up the subsequent lines. It should look like

(41 + 8 = 49) / 41 = 1.19512195

which then means the line after that should be

(49 + 41 = 90) / 49 = 1.83673469

and so on
Ok that was the weirdest thing I’ve ever read/skimmed.

I don’t know how in the world this guy thinks that async is hard to understand…

I mean I think it’s pretty obvious it’s an async call!

But I didn’t read the whole article!
My theory was always that ships hardly ever orbited unpowered, they usually went into much lower powered "orbits" or even just hovered "in place" using the (immense) power of their engines.
How about the incalculable amount of money wasted on "compliance devices" for firearms? Citizens were/are directly and negatively impacted by the flavor-of-the-week regulations BATF decided on a whim.

People are literally guessing how the BATF might decide to interpret vague laws from the 30's this week... only for them to change their mind next week and turn everyone into criminals, only to reverse course a few months later, etc.

The lawmakers skirted their responsibility to create the gun control laws some people want, so the BATF would just make some up and enforce them. Imagine having your life ruined because some unelected crusading bureaucrat decided the stock you've had on your rifle for 10 years is suddenly illegal today...
> ultra-high-IQ people

I think that's much more stereotype than reality. People see all these parentheses and think that it must be a difficult language that requires a big mindset shift, like these purely functional languages with dependent types. In reality, it takes a week or two, plus an editor plugin that highlights matching parentheses, to get used to writing (function arg-one arg-two) instead of function(arg_one, arg_two). After that, it's smooth sailing. Just another decently designed language that's dynamically but strongly typed. Feels like writing Python, except with a bit of metaprogramming from time to time.

I think you're overestimating the importance of syntax and underestimating semantics. It doesn't take a very long program to get bitten by bad semantics. A few years ago, I was writing a game extension in Lua. It was only a couple hundred lines, and I still wasted hours debugging problems that would've been one minute fixes in Python or Lisp. All because of Lua's ridiculous idea of conflating arrays with hashtables, plus its habit of returning nil instead of raising an error when you do something that doesn't make sense.
I'm hoping precedent is set so that actions can be taken against other companies that abuse their monopoly/duopoly/etc status to dominate markets with anti-competitive policies.
Thank you for the feedback! An issue occurred, but I have restarted the service, and it should now be functioning properly. Additionally, I have increased the computational resources. The infographics community is a great place to explore.
Yes of course. People do it all the time.

For small workloads egress cost doesn’t matter. For larger - well it does.

I wish it was illegal to charge so much for egress for cloud providers.
> Unlike the hyperbolic coverage in the press - the decision did not say that judges are now responsible for making regulation, rather than experts in regulatory agencies.

No, they literally said that. Multiple times in the ruling [1] [2]. The point is that the court can now take any interpretation of the laws as reason to say the agency has no right to do what they're doing, instead of first checking if the agency and its interpretation is valid and relying on experts.

[1] "Today, the Court places a tombstone on Chevron no one can miss. In doing
so, the Court returns judges to interpretive rules that have
guided federal courts since the Nation’s founding"

[2] "Under the APA, it thus “remains the responsibility of the court
to decide whether the law means what the agency says.”
Scott Carrier is one of my favorite This American Life contributors. His delivery is so unusual and captivating.

If you like this episode, you should check out the episode dedicated to Scott Carrier stories: "The Friendly Man."

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/181/the-friendly-man
Only tiny amounts
- Social cohesion and homogeneity and all the draw backs of destroying it.

The idea that you should mass import as many people as possible to increase GDP is absolutely one of the worst things that has happened in modern time.

If you want to import this many people then it takes a lot of hard work. Singapore is a good example.
As the comment you’re replying to explains, statutes don’t have to define every eventuality. As before, ambiguities are resolved as they come up. Now it’s just the courts who decide them instead of agency officials.
So I've been thinking a little bit
Anyone have a tldr on the antelope chase?
Because this book was written more than a year ago, it spends some time on Windows Slim Reader Writer Locks, SRWLocks which at that time of its writing were how Rust's Mutex and RwLock were implemented on Windows (by the author in fact IIRC).

Since then, two important things happened.

1. On Windows 8 and beyond Rust moved to WaitOnAddress with an API similar to the futex on several other systems.

2. We found out SRWLocks have a significant (arguably fatal, but depending on your use case it may seem irrelevant) difference between how they actually work and what Microsoft's API said about them. This bug is fixed... in Microsoft's own version control, not in released Windows versions.

Specifically SRWLocks may silently give you a Write Lock, even if you asked only for a Read Lock, in the case where the lock was just released at the moment you asked. If you were expecting other threads to also get a read lock, which would ordinarily be possible - too bad, you've secretly been given the exclusive write lock so read locks are unavailable until you release it.

The actual reason seems to be this: SRWLocks are small (a single pointer, with some low bits stolen to hide metadata) and the authors forgot that they actually know (because it's a different function call) whether you asked for a read or a write lock. Since they didn't have anywhere to store this single bit (read or write) they just assumed they don't know in this edge case where the lock happens to be available immediately, and since they "don't know" they always give you a write lock anyway. Oops.

[Edited to make minor clarifications]
"Is Parallel Programming Hard, And, If So, What Can You Do About It?" is one of the best books about atomics and concurrency, and my #2 recommendation. https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paul...

My #1 actually isn't a book at all, but the two "atomic Weapons" talks by Herb Sutter, which are extremely good. https://youtu.be/A8eCGOqgvH4 https://youtu.be/KeLBd2EJLOU
> You're not wrong that Congress is now incapable of doing its important job, but I don't know if I agree that the answer is to just trust the executive branch. Keep in mind even if you like the current guy that it's about to be run by a guy you definitely don't like.

If the options are hope or action, and action might need to be fixed down the road, I ain't pickin' hope. This is a reasonable risk to accept based on the situation and options available, we are at an impasse.

> What I'm saying is it's complicated, and it seems we are paying the price for letting our government be utterly destroyed in its effectiveness.

Agreed, but the only path forward is to try to fix it, not bikeshed about how sad it is we got here. Talk to Newt about that.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gi...

https://history.princeton.edu/about/publications/burning-dow...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-inside-story-of-how-newt-g...
Any insight into why NI binaries were so large and interconnected relative to competitors such as Keysight?
> Do you think Kubernetes is an easy problem?

Kubernetes is an easy problem made hard by doing a bunch of things that don't need to be done. I've used small bash scripts to deploy software for most of my freelance career, and the few times I've been forced to use a containerization tool, it has been far more difficult, for no discernible benefit.

> The thing is just that Go is very opiniated in its feature set. That's you see people here writing about complex projects using "wild" or even "god awful" things, and lament the inability to properly map API boundaries in the language.

The problem isn't that Go is opinionated--I often wish Python was more opinionated. The problem is that Go started off with the wrong opinion on generics, and took two iterations (first casts, then `go generate`) to arrive at generics, resulting in a system that isn't opinionated on this issue, because all three ways work for reverse compatibility. And this is a) a very important issue to be opinionated on, and b) extremely forseeable given the languages that came before.

> The truth is obviously that all of these is not particularly wild. It's just things that the commenter considers inelegant but is perfectly able to follow which is Go strength and why it's so code. Want it or not, you will have to write code that someone else can follow.

The lack of abstractions means it's easy to follow on the line by line level, but that falls apart as context grows. Lines in more powerful languages are harder to follow because they do more. If you want to do the same amount of work in Go, you have to write more lines of code. You're going to be implementing the same abstractions ultimately, but because you're writing it custom you're going to do it a little differently every time. As a result, any few lines of code in Go is easy to understand, but the big picture is much harder to understand, because you're caught up in minutia which is slightly different every time instead of using a standard abstraction.

EDIT: There's no way the first person who downvoted this had time to read it.
Shipping Linear Drafts
This analysis might be selective and hindsight biased. Are there any cases where government intervention to slow or stop monopolies actually impeded innovation?
This seems wrong - Tolkien was deeply Catholic.
Somehow I learnt about Riemannian manifolds and Killing vector fields in a geometry class that didn't mention physics at all.

I am always entertained when some nonsense I learned actually has something to do with the real world.
It's not at all unusual for large organizations to have that kind of internal conflict.

For an IT example, consider employees trying to circumvent corporate computer security rules that they feel get in the way of doing their jobs.
Manicode – the best AI coder that ever ran from your terminal
Price/performance will be a wash at least for steady workloads.

But usability will be massively better. Both platforms offer various things to make developer more efficient and dev cycle shorter
> The bar for chrome was IE at the time, and it beat that.

I would say there were three trends that happened at the same time that really made a difference:

- People now actually update their web browser, and yes, started to ignore the browser vendor that wasn't shipping them (IE). Driveby download exploits started to disappear.

- Flash and Java went from enabled by default to prompt-first. Flash was later abandoned, and IcedTea-Web / Java Web Start had its core functionality gutted in later Java versions.

- No support for ActiveX at all, unless you wanted to go for IE Frame (Chrome and IE tabs under a Chrome interface) or Chrome Frame (IE and Chrome tabs under an IE interface), which quickly faded into corporate Intranet obscurity

All three saved us from a much worse future.
> Based on what?

My experience using all three.

> no random swallowing

We have not been in the same codebases, apparently. The number of times I've come across (I'm paraphrasing):

try {
// some stuff that can fail
// bonus points if there's a comment explaining why it can't error in practice
} catch (Exception e) {}

Is hilarious. Especially when it happens in library code.

As verbose as `if err != nil { return nil, err }` is, the fact that it gets banged out so much means people default to it, and I find myself less likely to get into a weird partially initialized state in go than I have been in other languages.

> It’s objectively superior to grepping for an error message

Then use `errors.Is`?
+1

This is off the-cuff thinking outloud about a concept I cannot articulate properly, but the attempt;

>>I'm just waiting for a selectable X minute recap/summary/synopsis slider for content.

Use the depth of the tools allowed us at this point, and they are FN deep.

---

Hear me out:

Using AI to craft AI in order to Feed ourselves knowledge in the most compact, pragmatic and efficient manner.

BingeKnowledgeAsASynapse.injector.

--

Many people consume vid/pod/aud/wtd at 2x speed. I frequently run 2x and then you just <-- whenever you need to in order to recap a point should you meander down all the paths.

I want to craft a funnel of information and be able to tell the AI to teach me THING -- I've some up with a nascient framework for this - which is effectively a scaffold (think BootStrap) for getting Robots to do a bidding.
Wait, can't you just set the property on the function object itself to accomplish this?
To expand on the CMBR bit here for readers who aren't as familiar with cosmology: the current temperature of the CMBR is a result of redshift, but that's not what establishes the need for expansion. No, the problem is that the CMBR seems to be in thermal equilibrium (or more properly to have been in thermal equilibrium at the time of its emission a few hundred thousand years after the Big Bang).

The problem with that is that, if the Universe had remained the same size and has the finite age it appears to have, there would not have been time for information from the "north" side of our observable Universe to reach the "south" side. After all, the "north" side's light is only just now reaching us, at the center of our observable Universe, and would have to travel a very long way again to reach the south side. In cosmological/relativity terms, we say they're not causally connected.

The obvious explanation for this is that the early Universe expanded from a very small region that was causally connected for long enough to reach thermal equilibrium, and then expanded. So while the "north" side of the observable Universe and the "south" side of the observable Universe cannot communicate from their current positions (and in an expanding Universe will never be able to do so again), they were able to communicate in the past for long enough to establish equilibrium.

Without expansion, you need a way for two patches of sky that have never been able to communicate with one another to somehow "agree" to be the same temperature. And that's pretty hard to do.
I'm not sure what amounts to "personal computing" is quite a natural monopoly, but it is important and foundational enough for modern life that it deserves special protection.
Already invented the transformer
> Think about this for a second, would Apple purposefully gimp their watch’s battery life

Yes?

Design a device with just enough to get through the day, forces getting replaced in a few years when battery degrades. Apple is a hardware company with the capability to optimize battery life but they don't since 80% health on a batt that lasts a week won't force a replacement for most customers.