skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, it would divert the $20 billion in capital that Goole currently pays Apple to not be in the search engine business.
A children's TV presenter from the 70s to 90s, pedophile, and necrophilic.

Was protected by the BBC.
These clearly aren't comparable to the support of browsers. I know this metric isn't really an important signal, but they both have under 500 stars. If I'm a business evaluating whether to build my cross platform experience either on the web using the sandboxing of browsers vs smaller frameworks like this, it's basically not even a choice.
If they're still not being paid for those choices, I don't see why Apple would do this instead of just making the default Google (or something else reasonable).
Whatever we do, we mustn't address the root cause. There's no money in it.
Counter point: Would breaking up Meta, Google, Apple, Microsoft decrease the progress in AI since those major companies are forking over hundreds of billions to build out mega AI infraustructure?
Finalists for 2025 SABR Analytics Conference Research Awards
The author is working on a new version with more features: https://www.crowdsupply.com/oddly-specific-objects/sensor-wa...
The post your are talking about is specifically about NSF proposals. Your experience with interviewing, project choice, contracting or whatever you are referring to is a different thing. It's not so wild to imagine that a different thing has different practices.
that isn't what the test questions were about at all:

The best source you can cite is a series of twitter posts that gets basic facts wrong, like the timeline and "test" contents?

The link claims the new "test" was implemented in 2014. It makes this claim repeatedly. But the BA was implemented in 2013 after years of being refined (including, as discussed by the OIG, by having current ATC staff take it). It was not intended to increase DEI-style diversity; Fox News ran a report in 2015 about a (tribal) Native American candidate who would have aced the BA if DEI-style diversity had been the goal. The original goal was to vastly expand the pool of candidates, because the FAA had a serious shortfall of candidates willing to work in all of the locations where ATCs were required and the hope was that they by bringing in more applicants, including so-called less qualified candidates, this would yield candidates willing to work at difficult-to-staff smaller airports where candidates wouldn't need to be as highly qualified to adequately perform the job.

The claim that the "correct" answers were leaked to the black ATC union (while true) is irrelevant. The "test" was a biographical questionnaire. The only way to cheat was to lie. And notably, members of the NBCFAE who supposedly had copies of the "correct" answers...didn't score any better than the people in the lawsuit suing over the test. Because again...the only way to cheat was to lie... (Unless those of you railing against the BA are suggesting that someone actually needs to be told that having more experience and expressing more enthusiasm about work is better than having less experience and not caring about your job?)

And one final important point: after Congress eliminated the BA in 2018, in 2019 Trump's FAA implemented the diversity hiring program he spent most of yesterday railing against.

Yep, that's right. The evil DEI program that Trump is mad about is his own program.
Issue with desktop app is doing updates, pushing updates/hotfixes to all of them and then works for some and not for others, instead of webapps you only update the host and test on different browsers. thats all.
It absolutely helps. It tells everyone that the car is on!

Anecdote: coming from a country where this is mandatory, visiting a country where it's not, I almost got run over because I assumed a car was parked when I glanced left before crossing the road.

Of course, might not prove that one or the other is safer, but it did show me how often I subconsciously use headlights as an indicator of off (=> stationary => safe) vs. on (=> potentially moving => potentially a "threat")
Are the runes used on the common /r/cats copy pasta accurate?

https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/kfeq3m/a...

TLDR: Yes

Does anyone know what kind of runes these are? I mean, I know they're norse, but are there different kinds of norse runes? I've had hard time figuring that out. Furthermore, are the runes accurate to the English translation below?

yes, the runes and the translation seem to match.

runes were not only used for norse. english also used runes before the latin alphabet arrived
For context, this is adapted from the book Dune, after which the OCaml build tool was named. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/2-i-must-not-fear-fear-is-t...
>You're telling me that food has become so addictive

There are labs full of people whose job it is to specifically make food addictive.

More scientists and engineers have worked on the contents of a bag of Doritos than the Falcon 9.
I've never found this argument of the anti-DEI crowd to be very convincing, because it inherently implies that without DEI measures, such decisions would be entirely meritocratic.
that, and the contrasting of "obesity suffers" and "[...] fat people"

one of those groups is entirely contained within the other. contrasting them like that, and being judgmental about the latter, isn't going to be a popular opinion

the set of people that both agree with the class analysis approach, and are fine with the fat shaming, is very small
NHSTA must not have much of a human factors / UX group. Given the vast disparity of driving experiences in rented cars there must not be much in the way of regulation either.

Big government indeed.
So this activity pattern could actually be the claustrophobia mode network?
Fortunately for you, the world as it currently exists is well suited to your preference!

It is less so for those of us who would prefer more control over our machines and our data.
This is not news. People know this. I can move my ears voluntarily, and when I'm trying to listen, I can feel that happening. It's probably half conscious. There is an intuitive purpose behind these muscles, which is to do the best impression of pricking up your ears that some evolutionary predecessor was able to do better.
These types of motions for a stay are analyzed under a four-part test. Apple needs to show that 1) it is likely to succeed in its underlying request, 2) that without a stay it will suffer irreparable harm, 3) that no other party is unduly harmed by a stay, and 4) that the public interest is not disserved by a stay.

The four parts are weighed together, and a strong showing on one part can make up for a weaker showing on another part.

Assuming that Apple can make that showing, yes the standard procedure is to stay the case while Apple appeals. That preserves the status quo, which would be lost to Apple forever even if it ultimately succeeds on appeal if there was no stay (this is the “irreparable harm” part of the test).
IMO the main reason to use a more "advanced" terminal is if you run your code editor in it. If you're just running random commands (which you are, since you code in VS Code), I don't think it's a big deal.
It's weird because we're currently trying to use the existing regulatory regime, which was created god knows how many decades ago, to wrangle with new companies that clearly don't fit into the existing definitions. Now we're in this embarrassing situation that people are trying to extricate themselves from because they know if this makes it to the Supremes the whole thing will be called out for the legally laughable farce that it is.

This is easy to solve though, just change the laws. Why are we putzing around with courts when we can just change the law? I'll never understand that?

Maybe the politicians see court cases as being able to be seen to be doing something, while at the same time having the comfort of knowing nothing will actually be done? Because they could easily just change the laws. The strategy they're pursuing doesn't make sense right now.
This has always been the case though. Not every court case gets pursued to completion. And some that do shouldn’t.
It's fascinating to see so many folks out there supporting web apps, because I personally don't like using them. They're fine for tasks I don't care about being pleasant, like, say, quickly buying something online.

But for anything I consider work, that takes toil, like writing, editing media, or programming. I'll avoid using web apps, these tasks are hard enough on their own, I don't want to make them harder by using software that, to me, lacks joy (due to it not hitting my bottom line in performance, reliability, or even beauty). I just hope enough folks out there continue to appreciate native apps, because I think my continued joy at being in tech depends on it.
Lessons Learned from Deploying Keycloak with Angular and BFF
If it was faster with ollama, then you most probably just downloaded a different model (hard to recognize with ollama). Ollama only adds UX to llama.cpp, and nothing compute-wise.
If they don't find enjoyment in a particular request, they are free to turn them down.
How We Run a 5 GB/S Kafka Workload for Just $50 per Hour
The second amendment is the right to keep and bear arms allegedly. You know if you're a well regulated militia.

Anyway everything I listed is arms.

If you want to be literalist as to the actual arms of the second amendment, then nobody should be armed with anything but a breech loading musket.
> I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop on Ozempic. There has to be one.

I don't have a problem with people using Ozempic other than if the people who really need it (e.g. type 2 diabetes people) aren't getting it cause they can't afford it or cause there's a shortage of it.

Having said that, I'm an obese person, and I still would not use it. I'd like to see in 10 years what the long term outcomes are before jumping in. I hope it's generally good for everyone. I don't need there to be an 'other shoe to drop' or some comeuppance for people who want to use it even just to look good. But I generally accept that there's no such thing as free lunches in life and that life is a series of tradeoffs.
"written from scratch" is one of those phrases that seems to cause any submission to instantly hit HN frontpage, along with "for fun and profit", "considered harmful", and a couple others.
Precisely. They're talking about a customer who has spent £700,000 ($870,000) on suits. That's a long-term relationship built on trust. Hiking your prices to manage demand might be a short-term financial bonanza, but it's disastrous in terms of reputation.
> It’s not like subpar research is ubiquitously getting funded over better research with lower “broader impacts” scores.

Yeah I don't buy that.

I've seen equity directives in universities explicitly asking to hire only underrepresented minorities, or give one third of a candidate's score based on race and gender characteristics (the other two thirds were resume and interview).

I've heard equity hiring quotas given to execs in tech industry. I've heard of pressure to hire/promote minorities.

I've seen what affirmative action did to University admissions. The admissions office reduced Asian Americans score on "likeability". As a result they needed a higher sat score than any other group for admissions. The hiring office essentially said that they did not like Asians.

So sorry, I do not buy the argument that equity initiatives just choose a minority representation from equally qualified samples. Because from what you say, Asian americans wouldn't have been discriminated against.
One of the Hydro creators here. Ballista (and the ecosystem around Arrow and Parquet) are much more focused on analytical query processing whereas Hydro is bringing the concepts from the query processing world to the implementation of distributed systems. Our goal isn't to execute a SQL query, but rather to treat your distributed systems code (e.g a microservice implementation) like it is a SQL query. Integration with Arrow and Parquet are definitely planned in our roadmap though!
Maybe, but why not let me turn them off when I want to?
Me too. Web-based applications are a compromise that I dislike a lot.
> I like the security model of browsers

What security model?

Relying on a third party cloud provider for your secrets is the opposite of a security model.

If you are talking about the browser sandbox, then it helps nothing with keeping your data secure from actors you dont realize are bad.
While everyone is focusing on the so-called 'DEI' part, please note that per this article they are also targeting "environmentally friendly technologies". This is incredibly broad and could de-fund a broad array of fundamental research that has, as potential long-term impacts, reducing carbon emissions, PFAS remediation, desalination, etc. etc. Given that proposals were written years ago, researchers did not know that in the new regime certain words would become verboten and may have framed the eventual impact of their work in entirely reasonable ways that are now considered ideologically unacceptable.

If they do choose to issue stop work orders on already funded grants that will certainly cause chaos across engineering and science in this country. And frankly, it will cede leadership on many topics to China (which is already dominating fields like materials science).
That’s the problem, most of Savile Row will offer free alterations because they want you to look good in their clothes
For a user, I get it. As someone who manages 1000 users... web apps are amazing.
Show HN: Snappy, local-first DeepSeek chat
We were frustrated by the slowness of the Deepseek app and website, so we decided to build a local-first version of it on top of our Basic database and sync tech. We chose the Groq Deepseek distill LLaMa 70B model because we felt it had the best balance of speed and accuracy.

This is an experimental open-source project that we threw together as quickly as we could, so please bare with us with any janky UI and bugs you face (happy to fix them as you point them out), but we personally have started using this instead of any of the other models and chat interfaces just because of how fast everything is

We hope this can be a pleasant contribution to your workflow
My gut says that Apple will probably get to keep what the Court gave it already (the ability to file two affidavits and participate in the post-hearing briefing) but not full intervention as it originally requested.

District courts have very broad discretion to order their affairs (going to the first point) and Apple’s request likely came too late to be permitted to intervene (going to the second point).
It is. That’s one my the many things I like about X (it has its warts too. So many warts)
Apple donated $1 million to Trump. So did all the other big tech CEOs, who were also invited as distinguished guests to his inauguration. Conservatives like Trump generally favor big business and deregulation. Your faith in Trump doing anything meaningful about big tech is likely misplaced.
10 years, you're lucky, one of mine just started doing it after 4 years, it comes with a 5 year guarantee but of course I don't have the receipt and even if I did I don't have the will to fight for a replacement. I think these new alarms are designed to fail early I've never had one fail before but after checking up on different makes and models they all seem to fail randomly.
Google has a strong position in search, and pushes Chrome every time you hit their top level page. Also Chrome is the default on Android, yeah? I don't think you can extrapolate from that market share to determine how likely people are to change browsers.
> Well, the Uncle Georges of today are turning into wraiths.

Does the author mean waifs?
Thanks for the overview!

Can't help but notice that this is all deep red states. Why might that be? From above, this seems pretty bipartisan and what Lina Khan (MVP) has been working on for the last four years.
This seems to be an real and important problem with capacitive touch screens. My elderly mother is often unable to make a touch register on recent Apple devices when a touch appears to have clearly happened and with reasonable force. She blames it on her fingers being "numb" but there genuinely seems to be a problem unrelated to her actions. (I've used the devices in question, and they appear to be fine. This is not an issue where she is not touching the device with her skin or a situation where the device is dirty.)
This is a cool effort but their claims are wildly misleading as their benchmarks aren't fair across the board:

For example:

- BenchmarkVoidPut runs a single O(n) sized transaction

- BenchmarkLMDBPut runs a single O(n) sized transaction

- BenchmarkBadgetPut runs O(n) O(n) sized transactions (!!!)

I made a local change so that all Put benchmarks ran O(n) O(1) sized transactions and the results were quite different: Void was the slowest, followed by LMDB, Bold, LevelDB, then Badger.

I'd also wager the LMDB author would also (lovingly!) tell us we're holding it wrong
Is the item (3) what the parent comment refers to?
> this replaced has almost the exact verbiage about discrimination, right?

It would be useful to show the comparison, rather than claim it. Could you be more specific about this, by at least providing the section that you read, or the EO references?
Ask HN: Any compilers that can optimize (A plus B).max() to a single pass?
This is exactly what I'd want to do for my "smart urn."
And hopefully some day we'll build a solar-gravitation lens to look at the surface of one of these exoplanets:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.08421

...with a very interesting video that someone made on that paper:

Someone also made an interesting Youtube video of the concept:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQFqDKRAROI
True, but it's really, really easy to not do it so hard that you blow your eardrums out. Scuba divers do this all the time.
How do you explain the un-equitable outcomes that we have been getting? The whole point of DEI is that there are (largely unconscious) biases that have been producing these un-equitable outcomes, and we need some conscious effort to get rid of them.

If truly being race-blind (or any other way of dividing people that is not strictly merit) is really your goal, and you are aware of unconscious bias, then what are people really objecting to?
> A person printing a single small book they didn't want to buy

Oh btw, you've paid a "tax" to unknown entities for this too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy
tbf it’s easier if you only need to serve the first 5 minutes of a video
You may have re-invented GANs :-)
> Build as a library so other people can build other interesting things as well

I LOVE this!

I firmly believe so much tech has gone to shit because things are no longer hackable. We say "move fast and break things" but we try so hard to prevent that that when we do break things we just create bigger messes and debt, so no one cleans it up. It seems slower to write hackable code but that's in the moment. In the long run it is much faster. Not to mention you get added benefits of others being able to contribute more easily with a lower likelihood of actually breaking shit.
I don't know. But we certainly would be better off if we optimized for other metrics besides GDP.
I tried digging through both the article, SICP and your comment, and here are my thoughts: I think both statements are correct in their context.

The perma-curious.eu article is right about the eval-apply cycle as presented in SICP. The SICP metacircular evaluator presents eval and apply as two mutually recursive procedures that form the core of a Lisp interpreter. In this implementation, apply does evaluate arguments indirectly through eval. The mutual recursion between eval and apply is indeed fundamental to Lisp, and it's clearly explained in the "wizard book". The call-by-value evaluation strategy is also correctly described - arguments are evaluated before being passed to functions. This eval-apply cycle forms the essence of Lisp's execution model.

But your comment is also valid, your correction is more precise:

- apply is indeed a function that takes already-evaluated arguments

- eval does the evaluation of arguments before calling apply

- apply simply binds and executes the function with its arguments

- The relationship isn't truly dual - apply depends on eval, but not vice versa

I think the confusion came from conflating the built-in apply function with the apply procedure used in implementing an interpreter.
> The whole “choice” process is a farce in the EU.

What do you suggest? Forcing people to use DuckDuckGo against their will?
I think the argument is that while there was suspicion and implicit lack of meritocratic procedures before the initiatives, after doubt was removed.

For example, I just started in the 90s and worked in tech but I never heard an HR person or hiring manager say “we’re only going to interview applicants of a majority race” but after initiatives, it became common to hear this toward an underrepresented race or gender.

I want a diverse workforce. But explicitly discriminating to attempt to fix the problem is a bad way that makes people angry. I think it’s better to work on systemic fixes (more graduates, more training programs, etc).
IANAL but AFAIK amicus curiae is not for "my interests will be impacted in this case because I have a claim that's involved". It's more for things like "hey, we do a lot in this area of law and here's something neither party has thought of that your decision might impact".
I think you’re talking about something different.

Regardless of which ethnic group, sexual orientation, nationality, etc. I belong to, if I want to get an NSF grant, I have to fill out certain paperwork. And, apparently, it’s expected that I would write how my proposal will make the world a better place based on how it impacts DEI factors. The comment is that it doesn’t actually matter what I say there, since everybody says the same thing. There’s never a case where the NSF isn’t sure about whether to grant funds, and then decides that the way one project impacts DEI makes it better than another project.
I 3D printed some Zuse-style mechanical NAND gates last year, that was a lot of fun and makes for a great fidget toy:

https://mero.ng/i/vMdqQYJG.jpg

I've kind of given some thought of doing a higher-quality metal production run of these with nice finish and engravings of the inputs and outputs as a geeky desk fidget.

Model credit goes here (and of course to the original Zuse patent application the design is from), although I made a NAND remix as I wanted a universal gate and fixed up all of the tolerances and still really have to upload my version:

https://www.printables.com/model/69642-zuse-inspired-z1-logi...
I can’t help but feel democracy needs a huge amount of separation between the legal and political systems to remain functional.

As in attorney generals, judges etc. should be appointed by a non political process. I think any rebuttals of the form ‘the other side did it too’ just add weight to this viewpoint.