skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is great, I think this has an excellent chance.

The biggest argument Oracle would have is GraalVM but that supports primarily Java and many other languages. I'm not even sure that Oracle at this point would want to conflate Javascript and Java. (Which may be why they haven't cited GraalVM as a use of the JS mark in commerce in their trademark filings).
> Google "definition of product recall"

I did, just to be safe, once again look up the legal definition of recall (both in regard to cars and other products) and continue to find that it was never written in a way that would make OTA not fit the term. It isn't limited to vehicles, but extends even to perishables for which a physical return directly to the manufacturer is not expected even using a more liberal interpretation of the word.

Here, this is what recall, in this context means:

> A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA.

> Manufacturers are required to fix the problem by repairing it, replacing it, offering a refund, or in rare cases repurchasing the vehicle.

Source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#recalls-7746

OTA falls under that. Can you perhaps find some source saying the contrary somewhere on the internet (just like one can find numerous sources proclaiming the earth to be flat)? Yes.

Does that change the legal definition as it has been in place for decades? No.

And if you want to fully ho by whatever some random person may believe recall to mean, then does that mean that product recalls for produce, milk, etc. do not exist according to you, because the item isn’t necessarily interfacing with the manufacturer again, but may just get disposed?

That was my point. If people feel this definition should be changed, more power to them, but arguing that OTA have as of yet not been covered by the definition is just dishonest.

I'd be partial to calling these recalls something akin to "Mitigating unreasonable safety issue", but I feel that for some reason, some people may feel compeled to argue that this wouldn't be fair to Tesla either, no matter how dangerous or forseeable a fault might be.
> Draft Dodging is unethical.

For me what seems deeply unethical is that some crooked old politicians/military are able to force young people to kill each other in wars the later had no part in starting.
I don't get it. How is this different than starting new threads?

In the article example, it doesn't look like anything is returned from each parallel function call. the main loop just invokes the func for each I, and they print when done. No shared memory, no scheduling or ordering.. what's the advantage here?

In code examples, seems shared memory & scheduling are not a thing either. More like functional or chain programming - a function calls next func and passes output to it. Each loop runs independently, asynchronously from others.
Reminds me of ECS model in gamedev.

That's great and all, but it doesn't solve or simplify intricacies of parallel programming so much as it circumnavigates them, right?

Is the advantage it being low-level and small?

I think the same "concept" can be done in Bash:
```for i in $(seq 1 100); do fizzbuzz $i & ; done```
I would say it differently. Even using your example, "smoking is good for you" is objectively less true than "smoking is bad for you". We know that now.

The problem is that 1) we don't always have enough data to know what is true, and 2) we have a lot of people working as hard as they can to obscure the truth in order to push their own agenda.

All those post-modernist philosophers that I scoffed at were on to something: If we cannot determine the truth from the data available to us, then in practice, there is no truth. That may not have been the point they were trying to make, but for us who are living in it, it works out the same.
expecting corporate publishing to be a source of good art is a mistake. of course a corporation will adapt to the market. seems like you have a problem with the free market which is exploiting the desire for wokeness in culture.
I'm not Elon Musk or Donald Trump. Sending your complaints of mainstream culture to me will not result in your political representation and its voice being heard. I am unable to effectively sponsor and defend your proposed alternative dynamics.

But! If I am like a techno-angel sent from the Heavens above, then what I can do is suggest to you that exit, as opposed to voice, is a sociopolitical act that you should consider. Exit from the mainstream culture is your best bet.
Why? I'm quite curious. There aren't any good benchmarks on the internet, especially ones comparing it to other languages. I'd love to actually see some real numbers showing how far off it is from Java or Go (I don't doubt it is slower than Java or Go, as it is a much more sophisticated language).

My anecdotal evidence suggests it is not as slow as many think. It compiles a 500k LoC (that's count of all code in dependencies) project in ~10s on my M2 Pro.
I thought it was founded on Bill Gates’s mommy having strong connections to IBM that allowed little Bill to keep the rights to the source code they paid him to write. And the privileged position of having access to a computer at his school when 99.9% of the population did not.
Not the government's property. It's more that you're a citizen like in a polis.

An element of citizenship is mutual aid and participation in the military and political life of the state. Of course, if you're excluded from part of this, then we do end up in the situation you describe-- maybe doing this properly even requires direct democracy.
By "Western" I think I meant "stereotypical Western and Northern European"

> I think I remember talking with some Greek person at some point as well, where "conscientious objection" theoretically exists, but the alternative ends up longer than the military service + basically feels like a punishment, rather than an alternative.

Same in Israel and South Korea
You can ask all the rhetorical questions you want.

I just don't see a need for pretensions that China does not cynically invade countries on occasion, or similar nonsense.

The death toll on two of the interventions above (2M+ each for Korea/Cambodia), BTW.
This is hilarious. The Devil's been urging me to buy one of high-end ones for the past year -- I specifically clicked on this post hoping to see someone regretting buying one of these things so I could use it as fuel against my utopian fantasies.
JavaScript is a common name, shouldn't be trademarked
Or nitter

https://nitter.poast.org/TomHacohen/status/18611374842492520...
> as most tesla owners will tell you there is no maintenance costs and insurance (if you are not a shitty driver) is not bad at all

Statistically neither of these are true. Average repair costs for collision damage are higher than comparable MSRP vehicles. So is insurance, I already provided many sources for that claim.

Tesla owners can think the sky is purple. That doesn't make it so.
Musk's Neuralink Launches Study of Mind-Controlled Robotic Arm
I just started to use nodejs test runner in a new project. All configuration is basically:

node --experimental-transform-types --experimental-test-module-mocks --env-file test/test.env --test

It then automatically runs all my test/*.tests.ts files.

So nice to get rid of all that extra config. As this is still a tiny project, I can tolerate some API changes in these experimental features.
Reynolds Number
I pay for it. I dont do anything super fancy, and its been working fine for two years now. I think the cost is low enough that I'm happy paying and not thinking about email setup, and happy I'm not paying google
https://archive.is/fsuxe
Have you tried the approach that Zig has, or the approach that Rust has? They are easy to debug and do not use any crazy stuff, just simple syntax like `try x()` (Zig) or `x()?` (Rust)
About my only gripe with the language.

But it's getting better.
> The standard has nothing to say about calling convention. Calling conventions are defined by the ABI standards. unique_ptr is a class template, how a class is passed between routines is defined by ABI standards, ergo how unique_ptr is passed between routines is defined by the ABI standards.

The ABI defines the calling convention but it is restricted by the guarantees the language already makes. Specifically this part from the System V ABI spec quoted in the linked SO discussions:

> If a C++ object has either a non-trivial copy constructor or a non-trivial destructor, it is passed by invisible reference (the object is replaced in the parameter list by a pointer that has class INTEGER).

> An object with either a non-trivial copy constructor or a non-trivial destructor cannot be passed by value because such objects must have well defined addresses. Similar issues apply when returning an object from a function.

What is needed so that we can have smart pointers passed in registers is:

a) A way to specify that the address of the object itself may change (even though the object is not trivially destructible). P1144's [[trivially_relocatable]] would cover this requirement.

b) The System V ABI needs to be adapted to make use of this new information. Note that this also requires to make the callee responsible for destruction which may or may not be desirable generally (makes fusing allocation and deallocation harder or impossible in many cases) - raw pointers leave this decision to the programmer.

c) The standard library needs to add the new attribute to unique_ptr et al. This would now be an ABI break (the goal is to improve the ABI, duh).

So in essence BOTH the language AND the ABI need to be adapted to achieve the optimum behavior here. And even then with only [[trivially_relocatable]] there is still a difference with raw pointers less flexible in which function the destruction happens. And making the ABI depend on [[trivially_relocatable]] limits where the attribute can be added - so the the ABI depends on the the language spec and the standard library spec depends on the ABI for its compatibility requirements.
This might be due to quality of the dataset because Nvidia seems to be not using copyrighted commercial recordings (if I read their paper properly). It is difficult to compete with those who have used larger and higher quality dataset without permission.
Subjectively, not baked by any science, the Linking step is the worst, even with mold.
A bit of an aside, but the entire Berkeley collection has been saved by and is available at archive.org: https://archive.org/search?query=subject%3A%22webcast.berkel...

It would be great if they were annotated and served in a more user-friendly fashion.

As a bonus link, one of my favorite courses from the time: https://archive.org/details/ucberkeley_webcast_itunesu_35482...
TFA:

> Dahl said Oracle’s ownership “has caused confusion and unnecessary barriers, including cease-and-desist letters sent to organizations for simply using the term ‘JavaScript’ in their names.” The USPTO filing marks a pivotal step toward freeing the JavaScript name from legal entanglements, Dahl said.
Proton suffers from the Lavabit problem but worse, it pretends to offer security and freedom when it does neither and acts as a tool of foreign governments to abuse individuals. Use your own GPG keys and better clients, preferably with self-hosting in Iceland or Sweden.
Yeah, every time I try and figure out an approach that could've avoided this being covered by the rules without making it easy for everybody to screw over deaf people entirely I end up coming to the conclusion that there probably isn't one.

I'm somewhat tempted to think that whoever sued berkeley and had the whole thing taken down in this specific case was just being a knob, but OTOH there's issues even with that POV in terms of letting precedents be set that will de facto still become "screw over deaf people entirely" even when everybody involved is doing their best to act in good faith.

Hopefully speech-to-text and text-to-speech will make the question moot in the medium term.
Reminds me of “this call will be used for training and quality purposes.”
Sure it's offered free of charge -- and immediately next to the big "Download" button is a big "Donate" button.

> Maybe they do actually donate to the project, contribute code, or support in other means.

Maybe instead of shaming, the question is a cue for them to mention one of those things.

---

In the US it's Thanskgiving week. It's nice to give thanks. It can also be nice to give other things -- like support to a project that has saved/made your company non-trivial money. Not required, but nice.

To be clear, I think it would be fair if they answer something like: "I am trying to get my company to contribute... but as my original story showed, my company is pretty shitty at making simple decisions." :)
Yes, this can happen. How often and under what conditions I’m not sure.

I’ll give some other lenses:

1. From the point of view of an individual person, growth in the overall market is often an advantage. If one company doesn’t survive, there will be probably be others. Your skills and connections can help in a similar organization with a slightly different angle on the problem.

2. From the point of view of memetics, good business ideas are likely to appear and survive and take many forms in many niches. If you find yourself with competition, this can suggest that the underlying ideas are suited to the current environment. (Warning: this tendency can be distorted by irrational herd behavior and intentional gaming.)
Sounds interesting - any link to the control flow implementation online?

Or how does one optionally throw and exception without an "if" statement? What's the "base" exception call?

Ie if "if" is implemented via exceptions, how do exceptions get triggered?

And is "while" done via an "if exception" and recursion? Or another way?
No they aren't, they're auditing it
Specifically speaking on software and tesla most/all recalls are for items that no longer comply with a government rule. No argument, the rules should be followed but I do believe there is a shade of gray as a number of them are imo tail events. They should be fixed but I would not classify them as the car cannot be used because safety is an issue.

"The Boombox function allows sounds to be played through an external speaker while the vehicle is in motion, which may obscure the Pedestrian Warning System (PWS) sounds. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 141, "Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles"

"A software error may cause a valve in the heat pump to open unintentionally and trap the refrigerant inside the evaporator, resulting in decreased defrosting performance. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 103, "Windshield Defrosting and Defogging Systems."

" A factory reset muted the Pedestrian Warning System (PWS) sounds. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 141, "Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles."

"An incorrect font size is displayed on the instrument panel for the Brake, Park, and Antilock Brake System (ABS) warning lights. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 105, "Hydraulic and Electric Brake Systems" and 135, "Light Vehicle Brake Systems."

Outside of these there are a handful of FSD recalls and a couple that are more critical, like rear-view cameras not working due to software. Stating again for the eventual naysayers, all of these absolutely should be fixed but I believe they are shades of gray in terms of how critical they are to safety.
I'd be curious to see what the slowdown is, because my gut feeling is that it simply comes down to QoL stuff tools like maven do. If we keep it to compiling only, stuff like resolving dependencies from the pom.xml and such.
You are aware that in this very thread are examples of Tesla recalls that impacted the safety of the vehicle?
Meanwhile, China simply doesn't care.
Yes, I've also grown tired of this toxic mindset, as well as the whole "idiomatic Go" dogma that is very often an excuse for poor engineering practices.
> For me what seems deeply unethical is that some crooked old politicians/military are able to force young people to kill each other in wars the later had no part in starting.

In countries where drafts are thing, they are a part of the social contract.

Rejecting the social contract means rejecting the primacy of that society.

Furthermore, most countries that retain a draft have active security threats or are in frozen conflicts that can re-ignite at a moment's notice.

By dodging the draft you are essentially freeloading off of the rest of society who did get drafted.
>It's visible in the visible spectrum and hearable in the human hearing range, which means that you can build detection and tracking systems in those wavelengths instead of pretending that its invisible because its hard to detect at radar wavelengths.

Most anti aircraft radar works by sending out radar pulses and measuring the return. Visual spectrum light is scattered significantly by the atmosphere. It is a physics problem and visual range is just not as good of a medium as HF, UHF, VHF etc radar. Which there are multiple over-the-horizon radars with ranges in the hundreds of miles. And that is before we add in clouds, fog, smoke, snow, or you know, darkness, where radio waves easily penetrate. Visual detection needs far more contrast than radio wave detection. Optical detection is just not well suited.

As for using sound to detect and track an object coming at you at faster than the speed of sound, I think it encapsulates this entire comment’s level of thought and insight.
I could make some arguments about economics, world order, and devastating weapons, but i think this above all: governments barely got their people to go along with covid measures.
>I'm guessing the implication that if you can take 6months off you weren't really necessary?

No one is strictly necessary. You can bring value to the company and it still doesn't mean that the company would go bankrupt if you left for half a year.
Rust does not compile the whole world at once. Each crate is compiled separately, and then they’re all linked together at the end.
Thanks for sharing that, clearly there is something at least worth investigating here. The concern about long-term exposure to LiDAR beams is not extensively studied. Current regulations seem to primarily focus on short-term exposure limits, and there is a lack of comprehensive testing under real-world conditions
> Just a single example of "Javascript" written on a spec sheet of some product would be enough to defend the trademark.

Is that really true? Doesn’t it have to be used as a trademark? If they just mention the programming language in generic terms rather than as something specifically owned and sold by Oracle, would that really be enough? That’s exactly what you would expect from a generic term - that it would be used generically.
Are you saying this could be a way to break out of the 32 bit barrier (a bit) on WASM? Sort of like how Windows NT could handle 64 gigs of RAM even though it was a 32 bit operating system?
> Because they only done this since its socially and commercially profitable?

You still did not tell me what those trojan horse writers are doing except that it is outside of the definition of "ESG score" that I provided.

What has become socially and commercially profitable?
> they may propagate automatically from any point in code, potentially breaking atomicity invariants and preventing forward progress

A failure can propagate in the same circumstances in a Rust program. First, Rust has panics, which are exceptions. Second, if any function you call returns Result, and if propagate any error to your caller with ?, you have the same from-anywhere control flow you're complaining about above.

Programmers who can't maintain invariants in exceptional code can't maintain them at all.

> try…catch is a non-expression statement,

That's a language design choice. Some languages, like Common Lisp, have a catch that's also an expression. So what?

> they are an implicit side-channel treated in the type system like an afterthought an

Non-specific criticism. If your complaint is that exceptions don't appear in function signatures, you can design a language in which they do. The mechanism is called "checked exceptions"

Amazing to me that the same people will laud Result because it lifts errors into signatures in Rust but hate checked exceptions because they lift errors into signatures in Java.

Besides, in the real world, junior Rust programmers (and some senior ones who should be ashamed of themselves) just .unwrap().unwrap().unwrap(). I can abort on error in C too, LOL.
The great suspicion with YC is what proportion of YC companies have all their customers being a mix of other YC companies and those with shared investors?

There is a real danger with current era Bay Area tech that it is just a game of musical chairs played with money, with remarkably little external value being generated.
So you are expected to see to your job duties while on vacation?

What you describe sounds a bit like "if you manage to do your work faster, you can take the remaining time off", correct?
Leibniz independently invented calculus, including the notation for the derivative that is most common today.

He also basically invented computer science -- he did pioneering work in binary arithmetic, designed a mechanical calculator, and came up with the concept of a "universal language", which was an early attempt at codifying the rules of logic and reason into a form that could be operated upon mechanically.
No, it wouldn't. Simple use of JavaScript somewhere isn't enough for this.

Oracle would need to show vigorous trademark enforcement. I use 'JavaScript' generically, with no reference to Oracle or a trademark, and have never heard from an Oracle lawyer. I had no idea who the current owner of the trademark was.

I bet 95% of people who use the term have no idea it has any connection to Oracle's legal department.

At this point, there are probably millions of .js files out there. If Oracle wished to enforce all of these moving to .es for ECMAScript, they would have needed to start that process a long, long time ago.

Oracle's own documentation uses this term generically:

https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/apex/22.1/aexjs/t...

To the contrary, a use like this doesn't support the trademark, but pretty much invalidates it entirely.
Which still makes it a bad choice for marketing copy.

They want something that isn't likely to be misinterpreted, and I've never seen that phrase used to mean "next big thing", only "second best".
Alternatively they can work in care facilities (elderly care, psychiatric hospitals, etc…). I dont have the details but i know a few people who did this
I hate the idea that just being a hater is a bad thing and horrible and you're smearing the good, honest, hardworking Tesleratti.

Sorry, these are expensive, multiple-ton machines being sold at incredible profit, and we all deserve to get to take pot shots at it. We collectively pay for the privilege
Most tech theses days seems to fall into that classification.

There are not too many pieces of technology these days that intentionally avoid collecting your data in order to be sold to another company.
Making Rust a first-class citizen for Xen
CI Pipeline Best Practices for DevOps