ajnin

The stock markets definitely have competition. For instance Frankfurt, London, Paris or Amsterdam very much compete with each other to offer desirable conditions for investors, and companies will move their trading from one to another if it is their interest. I think the fact they close at night is a self-preservation mechanism, traders would become insane if they had to worry about their positions 24/7.

The batch jobs don't take 13 hours. They're just scheduled to run some time at night where the old offices used to be closed and the jobs could be ran with some expectations regarding data stability over the period. There are probably many jobs scheduled to run at 1AM then 2AM, etc, all depending on the previous to be finished so there is some large delay to ensure that a job does not start before the previous one is finished.

As to your "not a complex system" remark, when a system is built for 60 years, piling up new rules to implement new legislation and needs over time, you tend to end up with a tangled mess of services all interdependent that are very difficult to replace piece-wise with a new shiny architecturally pure one. This is closer to a distributed monolith than a microservices architecture. In my experience you can't rebuild such a thing "in 3 months". People who believe that are those that don't realize the complexity and the extraordinary amount of specifics, special cases, that are baked into the system, and any attempt to just rebuild from scratch in a few months hits that wall and ends up taking years.

Good old shmup, that's a genre that is sadly fallen into disfavour these days.

I played a bit however after 2 minutes or so some enemy ships get stuck going in a square pattern across the edge of the screen where they are impossible to hit and the game stops progressing. I refreshed once and got the same issue after a few minutes (Firefox).

I learned electronics as a kid from a kit that used a water analogy to describe things. The transistor was described as a vane across a large water canal, connected with a hinge to a smaller vane in a smaller water canal, which allowed it to move up and down. So, a small water current in the small canal could cause a large water current in th large canal. Did it fully and accurately describe the gain characteristics of a real transistor ? No, it didnt. But it would be ridiculous to dismiss it entirely as a learning tool because of it. Overall I think the hydraulic analogy is a very good one, it holds up well and it breaks down only in the face of quantum phenomenon. It allows to understand electricity using concepts children are familiar with. All children like to play with water and have some intuitive sense of it. By the time you care about quantum electronics you can also understand the limitations of the analogy.

Is 100k somehow a small number? How many of them are working on YouTube? To prioritize an issue and not another is a deliberate act, and YouTube has had problems in Firefox for years.

I'm not a mathematician so please bear with me here, but I think a problem stems from the fact that the set of reals is "infinite". So, whatever interval you choose, there are infinitely more reals outside the interval as inside (by that I mean that you can fit an infinite number of copies of that interval up to infinity). So the probability e is not >0, it is effectively 0. The second problem is, what does it mean to choose a real at random ? There is an implication that you can choose such number, but as a human living in the finite universe there are limitations to your choice. Any number you can write using all the atoms in the universe is infinitely outnumbered by all numbers that you can't. So effectively it is impossible to pick a random real number. You have to pick a real in some interval, implicitly the interval of reals you can write in an envelope. Which is a different problem than stated originally and for which your "e" can be >0.

If you're in the EU, you can :

https://www.clarionsolicitors.com/articles/reselling-used-so...

It might be difficult in practice though, with platforms like Steam providing no means to actually resell a game to someone else.

If you take a piece of string to measure the radius, and then later c changes and you measure it again, the two pieces of string will have a different length when put next to each other. Saying it doesn't change because the length of the meter changed in the meantime is playing with words. The reason humans came up with a definition based on light is the assumption that c is constant and thus would be a more reliable choice as a standard than some physical bar of metal kept in Paris. But if the constant is not constant after all then something else will be needed as reference.

Sure but that forces you to group options in ways that don't always make sense discursively and push some alternatives down the tree, and we all know that arguments that are near the root get the most attention.

Looks good, finally a language-supported way to remove thousands of unnecessary Exceptions and null-checks. But the nullness-narrowing automatic conversions feel wrong. From the proposal :

  String? id(String! arg) { return arg; }
  
  String s = null;
  Object! o1 = s; // NPE
  Object o2 = id(s); // NPE
  Object o3 = (String!) s; // NPE

Surely at least the two first cases should yield a compiler error. The last case you're explicit so it's borderline but I'd rather see something like :

  String s = ...
  if (s != null) {
    # Here the compiler knows that the effective type is String!
    String! ss = s; # OK
  }

Like this no possibility of error.

When I try to explain the issue, it boils down to this : the results look like they have been cooked. And the probability of that hapening by chance is 1 in 100 million.

Mathematically, if votes are random, with 10,058,774 voters you have 10,058,774^2 ~= 1e14 possibilities of different results for 3 candidates (Maduro, Gonzalez and "Other"). On the other hand, the number of possible results that land exactly on the closest integer to be a round 0.1 percentage point is 1000^2 = 1e6. So the probability of the actual votes landing on a round 0.1 percentage point purely by chance is 1000^2/10,058,774^2 ~= 1 in 100 million.

Of course the votes are not entirely random, but they have a random element, so it gives a rough idea of the reality.

I read that commment as well but if you need to use the Zig build system it means you won't be able to integrate Zig into an existing project as easily, you'll have to integrate the Zig build system or even to integrate your project into the Zig build system, and that's an another level of complexity entirely.

> remove libclang

So `zig cc` will have to go as well ? I was under the impression Zig as a drop-in C (cross-)compiler was one of its main selling points.

Not involved with Zig at all, but this comment is a bit concerning :

> This is not the first controversial change I have made to the Zig project, and it won't be the last. I have a vision, and I know how to execute it. People are often surprised by what Zig has accomplished, and they wonder why other projects have not done what Zig does. Well, you are seeing the magic right now. I ignore the peanut gallery and do what I know is right, while taking care of my users' needs at the same time. If you don't understand now, you will understand once this plan unfolds. By that time it will seem obvious in hindsight.

He's probably brillant and all but this ... feels like hubris.

The "What Problem Do Certificates Solve" paragraph is a little bit confusing. The role of a certificate is to ensure integrity and confidentiality of communications between two hosts. The "making sure the certificate holder is who they claim" part is the role of the CA authority hierarchy, which interestingly is a system based on some hard math but also mostly on trust, authority, and everyone's ability to keep keys private.

It's the same only if the income tax is linear, which is almost never the case ? Most places have progressive income tax rates.

It requires mlx but it is an Apple silicon-only library as far as I can tell. How is it supposed to be (I quote) "iPhone, iPad, Android, Mac, Linux, pretty much any device" ? Has it been tested on anything else than the author's MacBook ?

I don't like radial charts because the outer rings have a larger area, which makes it look like files deep in the hierarchy take more space than in reality. And also it leaves the majority of screen space unused.

I prefer the more classic treemap view, my personal favorite being the classic version of SpaceMonger but it's Windows only and very slow.

While we're talking about keyboards, why won't they put dedicated page up/down keys ? There are 2 empty spots right above the left/right keys that would be ideal for this and are basically just wasted, being left empty, as one can see on the photos. It's one of the reasons that makes me cling on my old Thinkpad for so long, I use them all the time.

OT but this website completely breaks arrow and page up/down scrolling, as well as alt=arrow navigation. Only mouse scrolling works for me (I'm using Firefox). Can't websites stop messing with basic browser functionality for no valid reason at all ?

The article also mentions that they have relatively little muscle mass, so maybe it is more rewarding to catch say a regular monkey rather than a sloth.

Evolutionary traits usually come with a tradeoff, and if a predator evolved to be able to catch sloths more easily it might make them less able to catch the juiciest prey, so overall it might be more worthwhile to focus on the other animals and leave sloths off the table, so to speak.

That begs the question ... How did you come up with that plant database ?

I don't see why you're opposing HTTPS everywhere and SNI, HTTP already had the Host header so it is not a new information leak.

It's pretty much mandatory if you intend to serve multiple domains with different certificates from the same host/proxy, which seems like a very very common use case, and there is no alternative to this right now.

This graph is about "extreme poverty", that is people living with less than $2.15 a day, per UN definition. It's possible to have less "extremely poor" and more "poor" people at the same time.

This is to handle the case where transactions keep getting written to the wal file while it is being "checkpointed", preventing it from ever being deleted. You only need to alternate between two files, one checkpointed, one written to, for this.

Well there is some tool that provides some functionalities, and surprise surprise the technical details of how they are implemented is not a mirror image of the set of functionalities ! I don't think that makes it a social construct but rather an abstraction made up by the creator of said tool to achieve their goals. Sometimes the abstraction gets a bit leaky as is the case with git, which makes things confusing and messy, but abstraction is in most things in computing.

> We will need to upload ourselve

You mean, copies of ourselves. Our current selves would remain right where they were before, and wither and die, while our copies would lead on merry and adventurous if disembodied lives. Provided they practice good backup hygiene of course. I find that quite depressing to think about.

> 100 GB of weights don't resemble any work

I don't think that argument has a lot of weight. By the same logic a zip file of a book doesn't resemble the original work if you look at the raw bytes but you can extract it and get it back. It would be hard to argue that the copyright violation happens only when you extract the zip, and not, say, if you distribute the archive.

Wait until they evolve to use them as energy like the mushrooms of Chernobyl.

Pretty sure that would violate the second principle of thermodynamics.