skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Using "Maybe" as a positive example of what Haskell can do isn't right. Say you have a function with input of type A and output of type B, written (A -> B). The problem with Maybe ("option" types) then is that if you have a function, in production use, of type (X -> Maybe Y), you can't "weaken your assumptions for the input and strengthen your promises for the output" (which would be an improvement) and rewrite it to the type (Maybe X -> Y). Because then you would have to modify all the code which already uses the function. Since "A" and "Maybe A" are incompatible types. Which is illogical.

Several other null-safe languages solve this correctly by allowing disjunctions of types (often called unions, though countless other type related things are also called unions). They have a type operator "|" (or) and the function type (X -> Y|Null) can be improved by rewriting the function to (X|Null -> Y). Code outside the function doesn't have to be changed: Accepting X or Null implies accepting X, and returning Y implies returning Y or Null.
Normal fluorescent lights will glow in a microwave.

Mr. Wizard demonstrates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_iQ54aQ_-I
I have built multiple EV conversions and used DC charging.

- AC is easier to start with

- DC charging protocols you need to communicate & negotiate with the rapid charger in the street

- There is no reason why you couldn't DC charge any conversion in principle, just comes down to time & effort

If you want to read more, AC is J1772 and is just a voltage dividing resistor with some PWM
https://www.fveaa.org/fb/J1772_386.pdf

For DC there are two (three?) protocols

- ChaDeMo is being phased out despite being the best one (V2G & simplicity of use)

- CCS2 is what the big manufacturers have come up with and it is hilariously complicated. My friend Uwe developed the FOCCCI project that has reverse engineered it

- In the US Tesla are using NACS (not sure on the details)

I am recording a video series where I illuminate the tech behind EVs, charging and energy, you can find it in my submissions.
it does. They were public letters that would’ve been read aloud to a group.
Annual vaccines are much more convenient and are preferable to one-off treatments like antibiotics, (which reduce the nations GDP as well because of they "cure" the problem cheaply), and have proven to be safe.

I call for an immediate ban on antibiotics. Only high ranking members of society should have access. And people with good social credit scores.
Ah yeah, if you're not trying to identify all loops but just check if some loops exist then that works. I think you can dispense with the "walking around taking clockwise/anticlockwise edges" part though. If you repeatedly do the "remove all nodes with only 1 edge going to them" step then you've already identified whether or not at least one loop exists.
I’m an EV fanboy and I find this argument very unconvincing. I don’t want to learn the workings of a new car when I’m on vacation. I don’t want to add two trips to the rental place. I want to go on vacation!
Thanks for pointing out in the paper that lot of Spain and Italy is untagged !!

It's interesting to see the first high-speed train line in spain (Madrid-Seville) doesn't appear. I'll see if I can fix that.
Run off the mill MBAs are not allowed anywhere near to stuff as important as Voyager.

All the web apps, that run of the mill devs are implementing are nowhere near as important as voyager.

I think we are fine ;)
> Victor can prepare a pair of quantum particles in a special state known as an entangled state. In this state, the outcomes of Alice's and Bob's measurements are not just random but are correlated in a way that defies any classical explanation based on local hidden variables.

What if there are no hidden properties per particle, but the combination of specific property values of particles allow for breaking Bell's Inequality?

I.e. what we call 'entanglement', it might not be 'action-at-a-distance', but the simple effect of the interaction of the properties of the two particles as they are generated.

For example, if we have two billiard balls, which are really close together, and we hit them with a third ball simultaneously, their spin will be correlated when we measure it for both balls (without taking into account other factors, i.e. friction, tilting of the table etc). Wouldn't that break Bell's inequality as well? the spins of the two balls will be correlated.
> There is no reason why a website should be able to track from the first second that easily

There's one big reason for that: The world's most popular browser and search engine both make their money by tracking you from the first second to the last
I'm surprised they chose Researchgate to publish their pre-print, instead of Arxiv
"According to Cowart, many of the same freelance writing platforms that have AI detection software in place are simultaneously hiring people to edit content produced by chatbots. That means in some corners of the copywriting ecosystem, almost everything revolves around efforts to avoid the appearance of artificial intelligence.

"They're selling AI content and paying you to fix it, and at the same time they're sending you emails about how to write like a human so you don't trigger their AI detector," Cowart says. "It's so insulting." Worse, the detectors are regularly updated to keep up with ongoing changes from the companies who make AI chatbots, which means the rules about what might get your writing flagged as AI constantly shift. "It's frustrating, because there are a million ways to say the same thing in English, but which one is more human? I don't like the guessing," she says."

Infinite AI slop getting churned out and people getting paid a pittance to make it sound less like AI, in order to trick other people who are actively working to not be fed the slop. What an absurd and depressing state of affairs.
> More information being available is unlikely to change that.

No, it's not. Education is though.

> We already can't parse the amount of information available today.

You're right, we can't. But more ignorance is hardly the solution I'd opt for.
"But if one make could build something like a Willys Jeep EV"

Look up electric mini moke. Exactly what you are describing. Rich man's toy mind. If there's a Chinese knock off it could be very cheap though.
The Volt is still perfect for a vast majority of people in the US. Sad they killed it.
Thanks. That’s interesting. :-)
Any technical paper written in the last century.

A surprising number of children's books -- either they're too simple, or too! over! punctuated?! or just carelessly written.

Poems whose shape is as important as their sound or sense -- like https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/47244/buffalo-bill-s

things written without a care towards euphony. I think fantasy/scifi that clearly never intends anyone to attempt to _pronounce_ the names of characters or locations fall into this, but other things do too.
Moon Logic Puzzles: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoonLogicPuzzle
In your imperative language, imagine this:

World simulation(Stream<Event> events, World world) =>
events.IsComplete
? world
: simulation(applyEventToWorld(events.Head, world), events.Tail);

World applyEventToWorld(Event event, World world) =>
// .. create a new World using the immutable inputs

That takes the first event that arrives, transforms the World, then recursively calls itself with the remaining events and the transformed World. This is the most pure way of doing what you ask. Recursion is the best way to 'mutate', without using mutable structures.

However, there are real mutation constructs, like IORef [1] It will do actual in-place (atomic) mutation if you really want in-place updates. It requires the IO monad.

[1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.20.0.1/docs/Data-...
Performance death by over-performance of code-generators? After that? Rejuvenation of dying systems by constantly generated new systems. Also selling retro software in containers cause it "works"..
Haskell have a garbage collector (and it have a lot or work to do). So even if you are in the context of immutability, if you don't want a gc, you still need to take care of memory yourself using RAII like Rust or any other low level technique. About syntax for me haskell is beautiful. But maybe it's just my love for having type notation aside from function declaration and not mixed.
I will never understand why companies make these ridiculous demands from their customers and just keep pestering them. I have a Samsung phone and it routinely sends me annoying user data agreement notices which I ignore. What exactly do they get out of this?
Folks are working on it! I believe it boots on some small systems and under QEMU, but it's still relatively early days. I'm excited for the port to eventually make it into the gate, though!
I think the tooling being not ideal is a reflection of how mature/serious the community is about non academic usage. Haskell has been around for ages but it never really escaped its academic nature. I actually studied in Utrecht in the nineties where there was a lot of activity around this topic at the time. Eric Meyer who later created F# at MS was a teacher there and there was a lot of activity around doing stuff with Gopher which is a Haskell predecessor, which I learned and used at the time. All our compiler courses were basically fiddling with compiler generator frameworks that came straight out of the graduate program. Awesome research group at the time.

My take on this is that this was all nice and interesting but a lot of this stuff was a bit academic. F# is probably the closest the community got to having a mature tooling and developer ecosystem.

I don't use Haskell myself and have no strong opinions on the topic. But usually a good community response to challenges like this is somebody stepping up and doing something about it. That starts with caring enough. If nobody cares, nothing happens.

Smalltalk kicked off a small tool revolution in the nineties with its refactoring browser. Smalltalk was famous for having its own IDE. That was no accident. Alan Kay, who was at Xerox PARC famously said that the best way to predict the future was to invent it. And of course he was (and is) very active in the Smalltalk community and its early development. Smalltalk was a language community that was from day one focused on having great tools. Lots of good stuff came out of that community at IBM (Visual Age, Eclipse) and later Jetbrains and other IDE makers.

Rust is a good recent example of a community that's very passionate about having good tools as well. Down to the firmware and operating system and everything up. In terms of IDE support they could do better perhaps. But I think there are ongoing efforts on making the compiler more suitable for IDE features (which overlap with compiler features). And of course Cargo has a good reputation. That's a community that cares.

I use Kotlin myself. Made by Jetbrains and heavily used in their IDEs and toolchains. It shows. This is a language made by tool specialists. Which is why I love it. Not necessarily for functional purists. Even though som Scala users have reluctantly switched to it. And the rest is flirting with things like Haskel and Elixir.
few and far between...
The article is from August 28th, the conference was on Sept 10th (two days ago).
SpaceX Polaris Dawn crew attempts first private spacewalk [video]
I'd cry irony, but I couldn't imagine the modern NYT writing about the help.
got Salix inked MB146 in my pocket right as I write this! It's a really nice ink for higher end pens (I probably wouldn't dare putting it into anything with a steel nib).

If the long-term properties / resistance of the ink are important, R&K also makes one of the few archive grade inks - their Dokumentus. A bit more expensive, but still affordable compared to alternatives. It's nice, but a bit higher maintenance than the Salix / IG inks. I think part of the permanence is achieved by some powder emulsion, so long term storage of an inked pen can be an issue (past maybe a month or so, or even a week in hot and dry weather).
> you could argue independence had been a disaster with everything getting worse post independence

There hasn't been a single famine in india since independence. The last one was the bengal famine of 1943. India became independent in 1947.
Probably because the boiler room indentured servant/foreign imported slave the scammer criminal gangs maintain would have difficulty extracting money from a mark with any level of sophistication or agency.
You... don't. You have to rely on compiler optimizations to get good performance.

Monads are more-or-less syntax sugar. They give you a structure that allows these optimizations more easily, and also make the code more readable sometimes.

But in your example, update returns a new copy of the state, and you map it over a list for each step. The compiler tries to optimize that into in-place mutation.

IMO, having to rely so much on optimization is one of the weak points of the language.
One day these guys are going to look up and FreeCAD is going to be the industry standard. All because they didn't know how to license individuals.
They don't need your charity, they need to be fined
The Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV is very good (and is available without a wait). It differs from some of the other PHEVs in that it is really an EV (with 2 electric motors) and uses the gas engine primarily as a generator. This means it drives like an EV (no transmission, no power bands, just smooth acceleration at all times). A downside is that when running on gas, it's not as efficient because of the losses of going from mechanical energy to electrical energy back to mechanical, but I regularly get 70-80km on a charge, so the engine only kicks in on long weekend trips.
True, but a TPU v5p is supposedly much closer to an H100 than an A100 (the A100 and TPU v4 were fairly similar) — and you need the RAM as a baseline just to fit the model. I haven't seen super thorough benchmarking done between the two but the Google claims similar numbers. So, $/RAM/hr is all I can really look at without benchmarking sadly.
It feels like a step back from creativity
Sadly I came here to say this
In this example it might not be so practical, but in calculang everything is a function including constants.

This is because of an emphasis on flexibility. They're a constant here but in another calculang model I can call calculations from this same code while asking for specific pieces of the calculation to be different.

e.g. if I have a population growth assumption then in an exercise I can get all these numbers allowing for population growth - without myself touching these formulas. Population then depends on time and must be a function.

On calculang.dev I say that formulas (functions) are the building blocks of calculations, and they're the mechanism for flexibility (also transparency).
The summit was two days ago, September 10th according to the article.
I mean, Haskell has mutable vectors[1]. You can mutate them in place either in the IO monad or in the ST monad. They fundamentally work the same way as mutable data structures in any other garbage collected language.

When I worked on a relatively simple simulation in Haskell, that's exactly what I did: the individual entities were immutable, but the state of the system was stored in a mutable vector and updated in place. The actual "loop" of the simulation was a stream[2] of events, which is what managed the actual IO effect.

My favorite aspect of designing the system in Haskell was that I could separate out the core logic of the simulation which could mutate the state on each event from observers which could only read the state on events. This separation between logic and pure metrics made the code much easier to maintain, especially since most of the business needs and complexity ended up being in the metrics rather than the core simulation dynamics. (Not to say that this would always be the case, that's just what happened for this specific supply chain domain.)

Looking back, if I were going to write a more complex performance-sensitive simulation, I'd probably end up with state stored in a bunch of different mutable arrays, which sounds a lot like an ECS. Doing that with base Haskell would be really awkward, but luckily Haskell is expressive enough that you can build a legitimately nice interface on top of the low-level mutable code. I haven't used it but I imagine that's exactly what apces[3] does and that's where I'd start if I were writing a similar sort of simulation today, but, who knows, sometimes it's straight-up faster to write your own abstractions instead...

[1]: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/vector-0.13.1.0/docs/Dat...

[2]: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/streaming

[3]: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/apecs
To play devils advocate let's say they are forced by law to get consent for data. But why force me to make an account?
> drop-down box with all the functions

I remember the “#pragma -“ to separate the functions. We don’t have this anymore. As an alternative we have “#pragma region” to fold blocks of code but it’s different.
AI can produce text, but it still needs human intervention yet still how much time will pass before this necessity also disappears?
> It might be hard to reason about the memory usage and other operational behaviours of a

> Haskell program, but the ability to reason about semantics and correctness is far ahead

> of the mainstream.

For any practical program, memory usage and number of operations are part of the engineering specification and no one will deem correct a program that exceeds those specifications. So you just confirmed “impractical”, “academic” and “niche” charges.

> It actually supports equational reasoning.

TLDR: to understand what a Haskell 5-liner does, you sometimes have to read a paper. Are you actually disputing “impractical” and “academic” labels, or saying that those _good_ things?
Elden Ring and Fallouts are IMO good examples of games that have done great in this environment. There are people wondering at the art and archaeology(!) and cultures and various descriptions and other lore bits scattered around the games while others are speedrunning and stat optimizing things. They're extracting enjoyment whether they're on their first playthrough or have thousands of hours invested in countless builds. Surely just about every technical detail has been discovered, debugged, and charted a long ago.

There are probably far simpler ones as well. People still talk about chess strategies and things like that all across the detail spectrum.

There is also the reality that most games produced just aren't worth that much of people's time. They may still be fun, but in a more limited capacity.
Balsamiq offers a desktop version with a one-time license fee at $149 per user https://balsamiq.com/wireframes/desktop/
Well that’s a lie. The summit was on September 10th.
Despite a few anecdotes, what data did they use to conclude that?
When we read - we are never truly silent...
> does Haskell have a special construct that allows for values to be overwritten

Yes and no.

No, the language doesn't have a special construct.
Yes, there are all kinds of mutable values for different usage patterns and restrictions.

Most likely you end up with mutable containers with some space reserved for entity state.

You can start with putting `IORef EntityState` as a field and let the `update` write there. Or multiple fields for state sub-parts that mutate at different rates.
The next step is putting all entity state into big blobs of data and let entities keep an index to their stuff inside that big blob.
If your entities are a mishmash of data, then there's `apecs`, ECS library that will do it in AoS way. It even can do concurrent updates in STM if you need that.

Going further, there's `massiv` library with integrated task supervisor and `repa`/`accelerate` that can produce even faster kernels.
Finally, you can have your happy Haskell glue code and offload all the difficult work to GPU with `vulkan` compute.
Not going to trust "newaccount74" with that info. It seems that the experts say that if the metal in the body is attached to bone (a screw or a plate), that is okay, but not if the metal is not permanently fastened to bone, so "surrounding tissue" is not going to stop the metal from causing problems.

>MRIs don't accelerate objects instantaneously.

See some of the videos below for evidence to the contrary. Large metal objects inside the room can definitely accelerate very rapidly and suddenly, and unexpectedly and has killed people.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2NNJrOsw8vs "Metal objects not attached to bone may not be safe"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naAZVCxhEcI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDfwxoigZZk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KuzTyn45og

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn6sDYOrOC8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxcrt1-gmLQ
Jonathan Corbet is great, as the first example I thought of. I don't want to try to make a proper list right now, it feels like it would get nitpicky and waste an hour to do so, but I could point to a lot of sites and blogs that do good tech and security writeups. Many without a day job of "journalist", but in this context they'd still be filling the role as press.
> There are many players that don't want to be challenged or explore

That might be true in some cases, sure.

But in recent years I've noticed a lot of games adding things like crafting and alchemy mechanics that are pretty grind-heavy to puzzle out on your own.

If I've got to brute-force recipes? Or if there are hard-won ingredients and they might get wasted or produce something useless? Or if the developers, not wanting to risk breaking the game balance, made the craftable items weak or highly situational? Can easily be Not Fun.
I'm reminded of one of the developer commentaries on one of the Valve games, that designing games is as much about teaching as it is 'making fun'.

It's not just about setting up start and end points, a challenge between them, and informing the player of the mechanics involved at least once beforehand. For any teaching on a topic with a broad audience there will be different attitudes from the students and how much prompting is needed, they may be returning to it after a long break, you might be drawing from lessons a long time ago. Then most games try to put that in an immersive world without breaking the 4th wall more than they can help it and have the challenge fit and be plausible within it. Graphics and detail levels are constantly increasing, and may be variable depending on the user's system which can obscure/reveal any hints/prompts or deliberately hidden elements they needs to see to progress (and similar with other senses).

And after all that, the range of players need to hit a Goldilocks "just right" amount of resistance so it feels like a fair challenge to conquer, not be drawn out of the experience, and whatever extra goals are laid on top such as slowing pacing so story/lore/character conversations can play out.
it's still available https://balsamiq.com/wireframes/desktop/
Everything you say about risk-management is correct, but none of it scales down to non-profit organizations without employees. Pensions aren't involved, commodity trading is irrelevant, and insurance for four or low five-figures of "float" isn't practical.

Your services look great, and I don't "get" these guys either. The people who do are (for now) happy to contribute at whatever level for whatever reason. Not being a "competitor" (as you seem to be?), I'm happy to wish them well.
"giant explosive mass that is current lithium battery tech" <-- full petrol tank is the same, anything that is energy dense like that will have problems with uncontrolled release of that energy.

Equivalent market exists, but is less established, some keywords that might be worth looking at:

- OpenInverter, Fellten, EVWest, diyelectriccar, Lunaz, Everrati, RaleighEV, BradshawEV, LegacyEV, RichRebuilds
Walk starts at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABQBEdOzrV0&t=6360s
Isn't it a missed opportunity for fostering transparency and rebuilding trust?