skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, I'm using a photomask vendor to fabricate the objective. It's in the low hundreds of dollar to get 7um features, a bit more expensive to reach 4um and bloody murder to get 1um (~thousands).

Currently we have some tiny photon sieves, around 1.5mm aperture ~f/14. The next step is going up to 60mm @ f/6.5. The end goal, and I don't know how achievable this is, will be a very large aperture panelized scope. We've discussed making something unsteerably large, sticking it in a field and using the Earth's rotation to sweep the sky.

There's a little bit of trickery to reduce harmonics, though I'm not sure how it'll perform in practice. Please get in touch if you have experience doing diffraction simulation. After first light I plan to write everything up.
AI-powered app building beyond no code
We’re the co-founders of Scabld, an app builder company rethinking software and app development. Tired of Bubble.io’s limits or chasing software developers near me? We built Scabld, an AI app builder free of coding app complexity, to develop mobile apps, web, and desktop apps fast. We’re on a waitlist now. Here’s why it’s worth checking out.

Beyond no code

No code app development like Bubble app and bubble io lets you write an app with drag-and-drop ease. Think bubble low code for bubble applications. It’s solid for web, but we hit walls: slow workflows and weak mobile app development software support. We wanted a builder AI that could develop a mobile application across iOS, Android, Windows, macOS, Linux, and web without the hassle.

What we made

Scabld’s app generator AI changes the game. Got an idea for an app? Tell us in plain English, maybe an app for AI or a custom app creation, and our app development platform, powered by Flutter, builds a code application that runs everywhere. No coding application needed. Just prompt, preview live, and tweak. It’s no coding taken to the next level, slashing app dev time from weeks to minutes.

Why it’s different

Compared to bubble io, our build AI is faster, with prototypes in moments instead of hours. It’s flexible, scaling across platforms unlike bubble low code’s web focus. And it’s simple, with no clunky editors, just words. For software and app development, Scabld’s app development ideas beat traditional make application tools. We’re not just another mobile app development software. We’re a new way to develop an application.

We started Scabld to turn app development ideas into reality without the grind. Our ai app builder free of old constraints opens app dev to everyone, coders or not. We’re waitlisting now, fine-tuning this app generator ai. Hop on at https://scabld.com/ and be first to develop apps with us.
WRT drawing, specifically: no, they dragged their feet on introducing a pen/stylus for years. They insisted it be a "touch-only" device (Wacom's patents on display digitizers surely did not factor in /s), which sucked for those of us who couldn't afford a Cintiq, but who had a perfectly good iPad 2 lying around. There were several valiant, if flawed, stylus efforts befor the Pencil, but with awkward connection, pressure, and power solutions, they were DOA.
One of my favorite pastimes on my TRS-80 and TRS-80 color computer was to type in a simple basic program that would poke random values into random memory addresses and see how long it would take to crash or do something else.

Sometimes the value would wind up in the basic program itself and it would stop. Mostly it just locked up and I had to hit the power button and try again.
"Fil-C is currently 1.5x slower than normal C in good cases, and about 4x slower in the worst cases. I'm actively working on performance optimizations for Fil-C, so that 4x number will go down."

source
https://github.com/pizlonator/llvm-project-deluge/blob/delug...
They are very different as far as I know:

The second step, Orient, does not include making hypotheses. It's about forming a picture or concept in your mind of the situation in which you have to act.

There is nothing in OODA about hypothesizing or testing; you are quickly forming a final conclusion and acting - it's almost the opposite of science, in that regard. It was created for fighter pilots; a failed hypothesis would often result in death and be your last thought.

Science and aerial combat are very different: Science has time to be methodical and it experiments to uncover an absolute truth; in aerial combat you must make final, 'good enough' decisions as quickly as possible, because taking time results in failure.
This is a bummer as I had been thinking about grinding my own for some time now. I'd like to know more about it and how I can protect myself.

The only part of the wikipedia for Silicosis that mentions glass is about manufacturing it and, even if it includes the grinding part, the reference it links to doesn't mention glass or grinding at all.

If you have more pointers or keywords about this subject, please let me know!
The form to get the free e-book doesn't seem to work.
"Internet is a little flaky today. Probably a bird perching on the fiber."
I don't speak Polish but i know Russian, Belarusians (especially), Slovaks, and Ukrainians all do it. Czech women don't seem to be concerned with men or getting married overall so i doubt they do. True, i have no direct exposure to Polish culture save for Belarusian Catholics who are halfway Polish, but since they are religious, i think they do the same thing.
This has to be the perfect passive aggressive comeback to bitchslap a project manager with a mirco-management fetish into the PaaS cost control limits the moment they demonstrate the power at their fingertips by adding a few zeroes. You have setup those limits didn't you, project manager?
I don't want to quibble just to be contrarian. Polaris Dawn was at the International Space Station's inclination, 52°, which is the most common destination for human astronauts. Isn't usually considered a polar orbit.

I want rather to clarify a really neat point, about what the other mission's doing. From KSC, you can conventionally only launch to inclinations below 62° [0] (constrained by populated landmasses). To get to a true polar orbit from Florida, that means they have to attempt a curved launch [1]—something that's pretty rare, and (to my knowledge) Falcon itself never tried before. (The parent comment was right to ask whether a polar orbit is possible: it does create interesting challenges).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_Space_Center_Launch_Co...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogleg_maneuver
A Bash function to detect if an alias overrides a command or builtin
Haven't yet completed it. In my opinion, although the originals had a clunky control scheme, it still had charm. Really bugs me how they moved the camera to an "over one shoulder" view rather than directly behind like in the first games. (nitpick) They also changed the iconic font used in the for no good reason.
It holds up pretty well, mostly because it is so general. It is ingrained in a lot of things, and its basically just another restatement of the classic control loop - something that used from rockets to therapy. There isnt that much remaining of colonel Boyds work besides some old presentations, but it is very much grounded in cybernetics and systems theory.
Oh absolutely. I think it's very safe to say that Aaron Swartz would have hated everything Carl Lundstöm stood for. I was being slightly facetious with my comparison.
Construction, for one.
why is Ycombinator not funding a Linkedin competitor! Everybody is complaining about linkedin but no alternative. ycombinator should be one funding disruptive startups that take on established players, but instead funding 100 similar startups doing the same thing.
Which games? I'd argue this isn't true for AAA games, where you see major firms milking the big releases for a decade in some cases--3 versions of the Last of Us, GTA V just had a "enhanced" patch thing on PC etc.
Foriegners like the US citizen spouses and (ex)girlfriends of NSA employees?

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/uk/nsa-staff-used-spy-...
IP is P2P, but a lot of the layers built on top of it are centralized, and very vulnerable to attack. DNS is hierarchical with 13 root name servers. Google is a private company, but if websearch ever goes offline, the utility of the Internet decreases dramatically. Some stupid percentage of webhosts are protected by Cloudflare; Cloudflare outages have taken large portions of the Internet offline. Same with AWS on the backend; when AWS has gone down, people find that a large number of the websites they depend upon go down too. Most people's consumer IPs are blocked off from the public Internet by their ISP and NAT.

Actually using an Internet based on IP addresses alone is ridiculously difficult. Quick, tell me how the IP protocol works using IP addresses alone! You can't type anything other than IP addresses into the address bar of your computer, and your browser can't make any secondary requests unless they're to a raw IP address. No using Google or Wikipedia unless you have their IP addresses memorized and have HOST file entries for all the secondary resources they request. You can't use HN to tell me; you need to find my computer's IP address and SSH in to me. Oh, and whatever certificate validation SSH does can't make any network requests to a DNS entry.
I'd also emphasize the point here is that if a systems-level programming language is going to call itself pure, it just needs a really, really careful definition of what exactly it means by pure. Purity is intrinsically relative [1]. That doesn't make it a bad goal, or a bad thing, and there's definitely a significant difference between a language striving for any meaning of "purity" versus one that doesn't care at all, but whatever definition the language designer is using should be very carefully defined. Particularly for a systems language, if by "systems language" one means "the sort of language that allows poking at low level details", because having lots of "low level" access greatly expands the scope of "things my code may be able to witness the stack for".

To give a degenerate-but-simple example of that, a low-level systems language striving for "purity" but that also allowed arbitrary memory reading for whatever reason ("deep low-level custom stack trace functionality") would technically be able to witness the effects of the stack changing due to function calls. You can just define that away as an effect (and honestly would probably have to), but I'd suggest being clear about it.

A denegenerate-but-often-relevant example is that a "pure" function in a language that considers memory allocation "pure" can crash the entire OS process by running it out of memory. That's so impure that not only can the execution context (thread, async context, whatever) that is running the program out of memory witness it, so can every other execution context in the process, indeed, whether they want to or not they have to! We generally consider memory allocation "pure" for pragmatic reasons, because we really have no choice, the alternative is to create such a restrictive definition of "pure" as to be effectively useless, but that is almost the largest possible "effect" we're glossing over!

[1]: https://jerf.org/iri/post/2025/fp_lessons_purity/#purity-is-...
We can’t leave things alone
Sorry, I was recalling from here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43213612
Well then why wouldn’t the celebrities just do that?

Pay someone to do a good photo and then pay them to license it with a Creative Commons license for Wikipedia use. Or just pay them to make it public domain.

This is assuming the celebrities care about their Wikipedia pages.
North Dakota Legislature close to asking SCOTUS to undo gay marriage ruling
So let’s say we have blogger with a blogger API, and twitter with a Twitter API, and by some miracle they agree on a merged-with-flags API.

Along comes Tumblr, and … the APIs don’t fit, in the sense that they significantly limit the planned functionality.

Now what? A new API! Or a committee to update the existing API!

Central planning doesn’t work for these things. And when you do finally have agreement on something (e.g. email), you either stagnate because no one can improve things, or get incompatible implementations because a significant player decides they will break the standard for some reason (e.g. recall and TNEF on outlook, which only work on outlook).

The internet started the way you describe (with finger .plan for “social” status, Unix talk for one-to-one, IRC for chat, email, nntp, gopher, ftp, Xwindows, RDP, etc etc). All of these is are 98% web based these days, because the protocol+client+server model cannot adapt quickly enough. The modern web with presentation layer + runtime code delivery + transport protocol does allow lightning fast evolution.
Depends on the company, ya? Microsoft isn't going to care that you went in all Apple or all Linux at home (or work!).

But companies like Coke and Pepsi aren't going to be too happy to see an employee drinking a competitor's product. Not that anyone would drink Pepsi.

Years ago I worked for a company that was building a relationship with Apple. The company sent some employees to an Apple facility with Dell laptops.

That didn't go over too well. Got a bunch of Macs after that.
Iirc when I checked there were about ~25 if checks per edition on the compiler. I feel like we can go for a while at that rate without it being a big maintenance burden.
Of course not. Read my comment.
> or western Nebraska.

Now you've taken it too far.
> Pay a photographer, release the photo under some CC licence

The person who buys a photographer's work doesn't get to change the license. Unless you pay a photographer a great deal of money to transfer the rights, the license is what the photographer (or photo agency) says it is.
This may be worthy of the black bar if politics are properly ignored and the tech value/virtue isn't. RIP.
Just like you I am just a somewhat informed layperson as far as QM is concerned, which is the reason Heisenberg was dragged into the conversation. I invite you to read his book -- he wrote it to share his thoughts with friends and family so it is an 'accessible' text modulo obviously being the thoughts of a very rigorous and powerful mind, so it's not a breezy pop treatment either.

Heisenberg begins with an abstract consideration of language and correspondence of expressions in a language to a given 'context' or domain of understanding. He then uses this framework to progressively consider distinct domains or contexts of knowledge (celestial mechanics, EM, QM, Chemistry, Biology ..) by noting the content of their respective languages and their relationship to one another. For example, Newtonian mechanics has the vocabulary of force, mass, acceleration, etc. Then he notes how Electro-Magnetism necessitated the introduction of new terms, most importantly (force) fields. He then notes, as an example, how 19th century mechanics (alone) could not explain the stability of the atomic ensemble, which is what gave birth to QM.

In all this, his main point is that each of these domains are 'closed' and complete in terms of phenomena that they are expressing, but are not universally complete. For example, basic (Newtonian) mechanics can fully explain the motion of an automobile, but if you want to understand what is happening with say the brakepads on a car when it is decelerating, we need to introduce the langauge of 'heat' and effectively Chemistry.

In terms of "organic matter", he muses on the fact that there is clearly something different about "living matter" and "dead matter", yet as of then (or now) we see that the same physical laws (chemical and QM) are operable in both modalities of matter, yet clearly something is different. He refers to the then current theories of vitalism and entelechy and also the thoughts of his mentor (Bohr) who apparently projected his overarching 'guiding thought' of "complementarity" to the question of living matter. At some point he also considers the possiblity that all 'organic matter' and "consciousness" may somehow be related.

As to "improbable", he takes pain to point out distinction between "objective" and "subjective" understanding of a system or phenomena. (This is likely due to his following in the footsteps of Goethe, whom he references.) QM can give "very precise" predictions regarding "a specific aspect" of a (complex) system, say momentum, but the other aspects of the system can only be defined statistically.

In all this, what is clear is that as of 1940-whatever neither Heisenberg nor Bohr thought QM as a language that is 'closed' over organic matter, to say nothing of consciousness.

Hope this clarifies.
Error diffusion dithering is kind of old fashioned. It is a great algorithm where you only need to go though the image once, pixel by pixel. But it doesn't work well with todays hardware, especially GPUs. Would be fun to come up with new algorithms that are better parallelizable.
The "original research" rule only applies to facts. Take a look at a few photos on wikipedia and you'll find many (most?) of them are uploaded there by the creator, not copied from another publication.
Amazing that anyone is willing to make an effort and subscribe to some random media portal with 80% content generated by chat GPT and alikes, just to read an article about replacing photo of the man, whose girlfriend has the same age since 30 years, with a different photo of the same guy.
That’s for compute bound workloads. None of these tools that they’re oxidizing is compute bound
I can also write you a review of a non-existent camera or washing machine. Or anything else you want a fake review of! Does that mean I’m not capable of reasoning?
The firing caused understaffing.

More staff would mean less traffic per controller.

Understaffing allowed the hiring issues in question, to have a larger impact.

A lot of the current problems are consequences of Reagan's mass firing.

Opinions are my own do not necessarily reflect those of the FAA.
Thanks for the recommendation.

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/97802030888...

John Boyd is often known exclusively for the so-called ‘OODA’ loop model he developed. This model refers to a decision-making process and to the idea that military victory goes to the side that can complete the cycle from observation to action the fastest.

This book aims to redress this state of affairs and re-examines John Boyd’s original contribution to strategic theory. By highlighting diverse sources that shaped Boyd’s thinking, and by offering a comprehensive overview of Boyd’s work, this volume demonstrates that the common interpretation of the meaning of Boyd’s OODA loop concept is incomplete. It also shows that Boyd’s work is much more comprehensive, richer and deeper than is generally thought.
Not really.

I have written a lot of C and Rust. The notion that identical projects written in both languages would have identical numbers of (or even severity of) bugs is laughable on its face.

I mean, literally just not being able to deref a NULL pointer by itself is enormous.
> they'd have to arrange some way for a photographer (or themselves) to take a better picture and then CC license it.

Passport photo studio will do it for $20. Depending on the celeb they might even do it free. /s
Concur. Photographers are universally unwilling to not use heavy post-processing.
Nothing is inclusive unless it is inclusive to the majority of people.

I have no problem with "gay", "lesbian", "bisexual", "transexual" and other identities, but I don't like LGBTQIA+ (or whatever it is today) as a label because I believe that label erases the individual identities involved. In fact, labels in general tend to obscure reality, see [1] [2] [3].

As an activist I've seen that the strategy of taking the most radical position on every issue and putting up the tallest flag just doesn't work -- people get disengaged and stop going to your protests.

When I saw "I" added to that list I was hoping it was "Incel" (talk about people who "can't be heterosexual") but, no, it is Intersex -- some Intersex people feel violated by the same surgeries that help transgender people feel whole.

I was annoyed, as a foxworker, that "two spirits" was added to this list without consulting me. I certainly do contact female fox spirits but I also contact male fox spirits too and the gender of them doesn't concern me so much as the interspecies difference. I don't see any reason why I should buy into the reductivist gender paradigm of the day or dislike the Harry Potter books any more than I did when they came out.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexual_erasure

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_who_have_sex_with_men

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer
Prompt Engineering (For Everyday Tasks) Doesn't Have to Be So Complicated
Photographs and other original media are an exemption to the original research policy because otherwise it'd be impossible to get images in articles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research...

> Because of copyright laws in several countries, there may be relatively few images available for use on Wikipedia. Editors are therefore encouraged to upload their own images, releasing them under appropriate Creative Commons licenses or other free licenses. Original images created by a Wikimedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments, the core reason behind the "No original research" policy.
For sure. I think we're channeling similar sentiments. Obviously there is *some* amount of objectivity here. No one is going to look at a million lines of Brainfuck code and say "this is easy to grok". it's just that the problem is these objective truths make up a tiny fraction of the crap people debate when these topics come up.

And yes, the maximal familiarity is a huge aspect. Many years ago I got into an argument with a colleague regarding FP patterns. He contended that they were objectively harder to reason about and cited the difficulty of new hires in ramping up. I was contending that this is untrue, but rather those new hires had existed in a world where they didn't often encounter FP patterns. For practical purposes the end result is the same, I'll admit. But to your point: if we accept that the missing ingredient is familiarity vs it being objectively bad it changes how one might approach the problem.
Thank you for posting that. I own a Dobsonian telescope, but never wondered about the figure behind its name.
It's a work for hire that creators of all sorts do all the time. Contracts may well be involved but most creators are happy to take the money and mostly release the rights for the work they did in exchange for a paycheck--as are most people on this board.
Glad you liked it, thanks for playing!

Fair point on the scoring, seems like a lot of people feel that way. Right now, half your points come from distance in km, and half come from distance in years. So you probably got 5000 points for location, and lost points on the year. But it's probably a bit too harsh right now.

And thanks for pointing out the Vatican City nit.
Reduce

<-Somewhere between these
two.

Reuse

.

.

Recycle

--

Redundant consumption is not a virtue.
The dithering work Mark Ferrari did by hand on some of the old LucasFilm games was really impressive.

https://www.superrune.com/tutorials/loom_ega.php
And even that gen keyboard pales in comparison to the old silver ones from the Al PowerBook and non-unibody MacBook Pros.

My 12” G4 PowerBook has the best keyboard of any laptop in my house.
Nike doesn't like their employees wearing anything but Nike shoes.
Good points about the control loop. Is there a fundamental abstraction of it that generally applies - a 1st law of control loops, so to speak?
Steam Networks