skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Does that change the point of the discussion? Because all of those ISPs are in multiple markets.

The point being that ISPs remain a primary stall-point of IPv6 adoption. There is eagerness to hand-wave that away - and that is part of the reason IPv6 stays underdeployed.
While picking the right algorithm seldom comes up in most programmers day-to-day activities, being aware of big-Oh and the performance guarantees/characteristics of the libraries you use most certainly should.

I don't care if you don't know how to write a merge sort from scratch. I do care about you knowing not to write an O(n^2) loop when it can be avoided.
JavaScript, Python, Lua, I don't see any dynamic language with good performances. Do you have examples?
If you have a csam detection model that can run locally, the vast majority of sysadmins who use it will just delete the content and ban whoever posted it. Why would they report someone to the police? If you're running a file sharing service, you probably don't even know the identities of your users. You could try looking up the user IP on WHOIS and emailing the abuse contact, but chances are no one is listening and no one will care. What's important is that (1) it'll be harder to distribute this material, (2) service operators who are just trying to build and innovate will be able to easily protect themselves with minimal cost.
Python is really really slow compared to JS though.
"Language" is a subset of "symbols". I agree with what you said, but it's not representative of the quote in GP.

Just a few days ago was "What do you visualize while programming?", and there's a few of us in the comments that, when programming, think symbolically without language: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41869237
Right, because tooling is standardized in eg Go. There’s no custom build pipeline, transpilation hell, or experimental language features that are selectively enabled randomly. I’m not even against JS, like at all, and I think the majority of perf issues can be resolved. However, JS tooling is the prime example of where things get truly nightmarish from a software development perspective. Webpack being a perfect example of this horror.
In higher level languages your code may allocate memory or trigger a GC pass or other smartness in unexpected places. This may cause slowdowns you may not have control over or may change from version to version or vendor to vendor. It is often easier to manage in "faster" languages. Good algorithm may not be enough.
Still don't love that public art needs tickets.
I have PinePhone. It's not really usable. Battery life is atrocious. Just overall meh. I wish I could use it.
I mean, the QKV part of transformers is like an "ASIC" ... well, for an (approximate) lookup table.

(also important to note that NNs/LLMs operate on... abstract vectors, not "language" -- not relevant as a response to your post though).
I think that is fair. A simple language with a simple memory model is nice to work with.

I also think that it wouldn't be bad for code to be more generic. It is somewhat unnecessary for a procedure to allow an argument of type A but not of type B if the types A and B share all the commonalities necessitated by the procedure. Of course procedures with equivalent source code generate different machine code for different types A or B, but not in a way that matters much.

I believe it is beneficial for the language to see code as the description of a procedure, and to permit this description to be reused as much as possible, for the widest variety of types possible. The lack of this ability I think might be the biggest criticism I have for C from a modern standpoint.
I think your analysis is spot on, based on my expertise of "reading too much hacker news since every day since March 2023". This Bain report[1] barely mentions "Independent Software Vendors" and when they do it's clearly an afterthought, and the only software focused takes I can find are[2] extremely speculative, e.g.

"For every dollar invested in hardware, we expect 8-to-20 times the amount to be spent on software... While the initial wave of AI investment lays the foundational infrastructure, the next wave is clearly set to capitalise on the burgeoning AI software market."

I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable about capital markets can fill us in here, I'd be curious to see some hard numbers still! Maybe this is what a Bloomberg terminal does...?

Regardless, I think this makes a lot of sense; there's no clear scientific consensus on the path forward for these models other than "keep going?", so building out preparatory infrastructure is seen as the clear, safe move. As the common refrain goes: "in a gold rush, sell shovels!"

As a big believer in the upcoming cognitive era of software and society, I would only add a short bit onto the end of that saying: "...until the hydraulic mining cannons[3] come online."

[1] https://www.bain.com/insights/ais-trillion-dollar-opportunit...

[2] https://www.privatebankerinternational.com/comment/is-ai-sof...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_mining
- the human body seems designed to be able to produce more power for physical exertion when needed by consuming more energy (in addition to making long-term adaptations to make energy usage more efficient).

Most top athletes are retiring around 35. Their bodies are ruined like those who need to physically work hardly every day. They look elder as well.

We are not machines that will do more when given more sources without consequences.
> It’s very forgiving of types

I lost you here. JavaScript doesn't work around type issues, no language really can. It just pushes the type issues to a later time.
I don't feel it's so much typing. Especially for the clarity and, most importantly, safety and correctness I get back. I'd rather type 3 1/2 seconds more than debug a dumb type issue for half an hour.

It gets really old to get something like "NoneType does not have blah" in a deeply nested, complicated data structure in python, but obviously only at runtime and only in that hard to hit corner case, when all you did is forget to wrap something in the right number of square brackets in some other part of the code.

I haven't fully given up on python, but I only deal with it using mypy, which adds static typing, anymore.
Confabulations are decreasing with newer models. I tested confabulations based on provided documents (relevant for RAG) here: https://github.com/lechmazur/confabulations/.
Note the significant difference between GPT-4 Turbo and GPT-4o.
Conclusion noted: nuke the whales before they nuke us.

(/s)
It looks like Rust can interop with JS via WebASM?

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65000209/how-to-call-rus...
Can a good execution algo enable a 28% annual return with a 19% max drawdown?
Exactly. What do you do when you have the right algorithm and it’s too slow (very typical for linear problems that require visiting each item).
Stripe Buys Crypto Startup Bridge for $1.1B
JS array access is a lot faster than Python array access. JS is easily within magnitude of C and can be even about as fast with typed arrays or well JITable code.
> . It's begging the question by presuming that authors actually feel such a need. I'm fairly certain the devs involved do not want or care about accessing medical records.

iA -- one of the cases you mention -- balked at needing a standardized security assessment to access the full Google Drive.

> In order to get our users full access to their Google Drive on their devices, we now needed to pass a yearly CASA (Cloud Application Security Assessment) audit.

https://ia.net/topics/our-android-app-is-frozen-in-carbonite

Googe Drive as part of Workspace is HIPAA compliant (https://support.google.com/a/answer/3407054?hl=en), meaning medical offices can and do host medical records on Drive. It's not mentioned in the article why iA needs access to all files on a HIPAA compliant service.

Workspace is also (at least partially) FedRAMP compliant (https://support.google.com/a/answer/13190816?hl=en). So similar questions arise as to whether iA needs to access federal data.
This makes me strike upon an idea seeing as petroleum is leaking from the whale - might whales be used as a renewable oil resource in the same way as renewable lumber? Whale farms and such (not referring to online dating here, but literally a whale farm). The oil of whale might be used for many things such as lighting of lamp or lubrication of machine.
Is this article out-of-date?

There is a (wonderful) 2001 4k uhd disk that has come out that is unmentioned.

EDIT: December, 2018

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07KH8W76F
For Biggest Problem #3, I don't any competitive offerings from Intel or AMD, now or in the near future. I also don't see anyone crossing the CUDA moat any time soon either.

A correction is natural though. Both on AI hype and NVDA value.
Sjeez, tone it down. People can be incorrect without lying.
It’s not about piracy, it’s about keeping you inside the “flywheels” created by the interlocking hardware and services.
I wonder if author is aware that Node.js is not written in JavaScript.
I think there’s a lot of bias in the samples one tends to see:

- you’re less likely to hear about a failed rewrite

- rewrites often gain from having a much better understanding of the problem/requirements than the existing solution which was likely developed more incrementally

- if you know you will care about performance a lot, you hopefully will think about how to architect things in a way that is capable of achieving good performance. (Non-cpu example: if you are gluing streams of data with processing steps together, you may not think much about buffering; if you know you will care about throughput, you will probably have to think about batching and maybe also some kind of fan-out->map->fan-in; if you know you will care about latency you will probably think about each extra hop or batch-building step)

- hopefully people do a bit of napkin math to decide if rewriting something to be faster will achieve the goals, and so you only see the rewrites that people thought would be beneficial (because eg you’re touching a lot of memory so a better memory layout could help)

I feel like you’re much more likely to see ‘we found some JavaScript that was too useful for its own good, figured out how to rewrite it with better algorithms/data structures, concurrency, and sims instructions, which we used rust to get’ than ‘our service receives one request, sends 10 requests to 5 different services, collects the results and responds; we rewrote it in rust but the performance is the same because it turns out most of what our service did was waiting’.
FBI's WMD Program Has a New Target: Animal Rights Activists
That typically means two totally different implementations, and pure Python versions are often unusably slow, so it doesn't help much to hack that.
Lua with LuaJIT has pretty good performance. With that said, I spent today writing in C++, so I do agree with the overall sentiment.
Uranium, at least the un-enriched kind you can just buy, was never the problem.

Even the peak of that graph (136… er, USD per lb?) is essentially a rounding error compared to everything else.

0.00191 USD/kWh? Something like that, depends on the type of reactor it goes in.
Curious what you mean by "most" (I'm agnostic/unlearned on the statistics tbh). I "feel" like it doesn't happen too often when it's not either already low-level or the supposed extra performance is likely worth it.

Like, I can't imagine most people using Javascript would want to rewrite in Rust without some decent reason.
I think part of the problem is how companies shove everything and anything into the engineering role. They have long lists of all your 'core priorities', many of which have nothing to do with engineering. They confuse engineering with "being a good employee of XYZ company".
Crap Data Everywhere
Sometimes it seems that people who write these kinds of pieces forget that not everyone in the world does web or even web-adjacent work, and node.js is something we don’t even consider to be part of our ecosystem. Rewriting useful things in non-JS has the benefit of letting folks like me who avoid JS like the plague use useful tools. Stop assuming everyone wants to get anywhere near the JS ecosystem: I’ve gone 30 years without touching it, and plan to continue that streak. Rewriting stuff is great from my perspective.
Torrents have a bad reputation due to malicious executables, I have never met someone who genuinely saw piracy as stealing, only as dangerous. In fact, stealing as a definition cannot cover digital piracy, as stealing is to take something away, and to take is to possess something physically. The correct term is copying, because you are duplicating files. And that’s not even getting into the cultural protection piracy affords in today’s DRM and license-filled world.
Most comments so far are complaints about things not working how they “should” - be careful of getting rage baited, people.

What you’ve read is nothing more than a grab bag of rage-bait comments from a psychology expert promoting his latest book. And he put in enough breadth for each individual to find something to latch on to.

Color me impressed, dude is a master of psychology.
GPT-based translator for large pptx files
because DeepL and Google have tough limits on size (30Mb for DeepL, 10Mb for Google), which makes their solution practically useless for many professionnal cases.

For this reason, I developed slidelang: same as existing services, without the size limit.

With a bonus: since the translation is achieved with an LLM, the user can add custom instructions to tune the style of the translation.

- the app (still in alpha): https://alpha.slidelang.com

- a short blog post about it: https://nocodefunctions.com/blog/developing-slidelang/

Your feedback is welcome.
Ubuntu was really revolutionary and helped me bring hundreds or maybe thousands of people to Linux years ago. I wish they would still have the power to push things further and do the same to mobile.
Well there are serious network effects at play.IPv6 would be a lot more valuable if it was more broadly deployed.
Remember how it was called "linux for human beings". Now, not so much, I tried it recently and it's clear that desktop users aren't their current audience any-more.
Thank you for highlighting that, I had remembered it wrongly.
holocaust survivor mania salinger visited my synagogue and told us she was forced to live between borders of two countries. what saved her life is that she was forced from her home by the nazis as a child in the Summer and her parents who were separated from her in that moment told her to bring boots for the Winter. she survived in this area because of this while other children froze. it taught me that parenting is the most important skill you can have.
Thank you! And that's a really good question. Since it's summarizing the articles, I would assume that there shouldn't be any issues regarding copyright. Regarding the comments that it's using, I think HN generally has some rights to them, although again it's more of a summarization. Generally HN seems cool about these things.

Now, if you were to scan the homepage of the BBC and create a news broadcast from it, they probably wouldn't be too happy about that, understandably. I have no idea how this would fare in court though.
The overall topic was also discussed extensively in this subthread from 6 days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41837317
It's the hardest thing humans have ever tried to do yes. It took less time to go to the moon.

There are tons of companies and governments working on energy solutions, there is ample time for Tesla to work on self driving.

Also, do we really have an energy crisis? Are you experiencing rolling blackouts?
Ruff is one example https://astral.sh/ruff
>Yeah, paying is fair, but so long as you contribute back, you've paid, IMHO.

I actually agree with this viewpoint, it makes me think of Peter Serafinowicz's why I steal movies article https://gizmodo.com/why-i-steal-movies-even-ones-im-in-55394...

however - I'm not sure if Serafinowicz would think that some guy on the internet writing articles is actually contributing back in the same way he might feel if you were distributing your own short comedic videos.

You may be contributing in a distribution channel, but are you contributing in a media?

The same goes for authors etc. They may think other authors should get a free pass on buying their books, because they're contributing, but not think that someone writing fan fiction on the web should get a pass.

The same with musicians, I'm sure you get the point. An artist in some field might think you are contributing if you are producing work in their field and should be given a pass on paying (I certainly would) but posting some meaningful to you on the web might not pass the bar of what they consider a contribution.
Only semi-relevant, but there's also the fact that lower level languages can auto-optimize more deeply -- but that's also more my intuition (would love to get learnt if I'm wrong).

For example, I'd expect that Rust (or rustc I guess) can auto-vectorize more than Node/Deno/etc.
My ISP is only couple years old. And yet, surprisingly to me, they don't support IPv6, only ipv4.
"Good" compared to what? All the mentioned languages keep getting more performant year-over-year, but in the medium future scripting languages are unlikely to reach the performance levels of C, Rust or other low-level languages.

Wouldn't it be amazing though? Maybe some combination of JIT and runtime static analysis could do it.

Personally, I never assign different types to the same variable unless it's part of a union (e.g. string | HTMLObject | null, in JS).

It would probably require getting rid of `eval' though, which I am fine with. On average, eval() tends to be naughty and those needs could be better met in other ways than blindly executing a string.
The types of problems in those contests are meant to highlight algorithms. In the real world you might have a trivial algorithm but a huge input size, where the constant factor matters much more.
CPython is (though it's slowly getting better). Pypy is amazingly fast
Also - Why are they not going to be co-founders if the risk profile is exactly the same?
> Lots of very smart people have worked very hard on Python tools written in Python

Yes, I agree that is very sad

Python is achingly slow. I know the Python people want to address this, I do not understand. Python makes sense as a scripting/job control language, and execution speed does not matter.

As an application development language it is diabolical. For a lot of reasons, not just speed
> For another thing: it’s straightforward to modify JavaScript dependencies locally. I’ve often tweaked something in my local node_modules folder when I’m trying to track down a bug or work on a feature in a library I depend on. Whereas if it’s written in a native language, I’d need to check out the source code and compile it myself – a big barrier to entry.

Yeah, JavaScript is sloppy, but you can always monkey-patch it by modifying tool-controlled files. Great idea. Not.

JS is just not a good language. The JIT and the web of packages made it slightly more usable, but it's still Not Good. There's no real way to do real parallel processing, async/await are hellish to debug, etc.

It's unavoidable in browsers, but we _can_ avoid using it for tools. Look at Python, a native PIP replacement improved build times for HomeAssistant by an order of magnitude: https://developers.home-assistant.io/blog/2024/04/03/build-i...
This is funny to me. Go and zig are built with the Unix shell in mind - the most extensible and modular system around.

The webpack ecosystem on the other hand is it’s own OS.
No; thanks! I had been aware of Earl Warren, however, who once became state governor by winning both D and R primaries, making a general election moot.

Lagniappe: https://cfdrodeo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/TMIL_RODEO_0...
That’s a copyright problem. 99% of things made in the last 100 years fall under copyright.
It's also a breeding ground where the best ideas often end becoming a sort of standard not only for javascript devs but for other langauges as well.
Not the OP, but the appeal of languages like JS has a lot to do with developer productivity. I write gobs of JS and Python code and the finished programs and libraries can be strongly and statically typed end-to-end. I just don't want to be forced to do it in cases when it doesn't really make a difference, and I don't want to waste time on it when I'm still figuring out the design.

My hope is one of the Next Big Things in programming languages is the widespread adoption of incremental typing systems.

So during the early stages of dev you get the productivity benefits of dynamic and loose/duck typing as much as you want, and then as the code matures - as the design firms up - you begin layering in the type information on different parts of the program (and hopefully the toolset gives you a jump start by suggesting a lot of this type info for you, or maybe you specify it only in places where the type info can't be deduced).

Then those parts of the program (and hopefully eventually the entire program) are strongly and statically typed, and you get all of the associated goodies.
No, doesn’t work like that sorry.
What do you see as the key points that create a lot more value?
Reminds me of using Ruby ten years ago and having to contend with folks who wanted to default to using the string literal style over another because it was known to be more performant at scale. That awkward stuff surfaces earlier with some languages than with others.
I once worked on a Python system that had 50 machines dedicated to it. We were able to rewrite it in a more performant language such that it easily ran on one machine. This also allowed us to avoid all the issues distributed systems have.

So yeah, Python is not great for systems programming
It's usually the opposite. And the post is specifically about making JavaScript tools, why would you not expect them to be written in JS? I guess not making tools for say, c# devs in c# would also be bad?
I'm guessing you might end up going down a rabbit-hole you don't have time for
Agreed! But if aliens visited Earth in the past, how far back could they visit and still conclude that we're intelligent?

2000 years? Absolutely, that's Roman Empire times and we would absolutely count as an intelligent civilization.

20,000 years? Maybe. This is before agriculture, but we'd still be animals making tools and even boats.

200,000 years? I'm not sure we would be distinguishable from modern apes.

So the window is around 200,000 years, which is about 0.004% of the age of the Earth, and 0.04% of the time Earth has had multicellular life. If we visit a planet that has multicellular life, what's the chance that we will visit exactly in the 200,000 year window when they have technology similar to ours?

Most likely we'll either visit too early (before civilization and even intelligence) or millions of years after the first civilization.
You can never really tell, though following some market tea leaf readers they seem to think a few months from now, after a bit of a run up in the market. Here's one random datapoint, on mentions of "soft landing" in Bloomberg https://x.com/bravosresearch/status/1848047330794385494
I am very skeptical of the positive effects of infite intelligence on the living standards of knowledge workes.

On the more pessimistic end, AI will replace us and we'll be sent to the coal mines.

On the possibly most optimistic end, living standards are a composite of many things rooted in reality, so I'd say the actual cap is about doubling of life quality, which is not nothing, but not unprecendented if we look at the past century and a half.