foo101

None of the tools you mention does anything similar to the tool shared in this post. What similarity do you find apart from the obvious and peripheral similarity that they are all rendering latex?

The first and third tools require you to sign up. How exactly do you create a distributable Markdown file there that can be read both in editor as text and viewed as HTML in browser? The second link does not recognize Markdown.

More like start searching with DuckDuckGo, use an alternate email service such as Fastmail, Protonmail, etc., and use Firefox.

By the way, what's an alternate email service the HN users recommend?

Honest question: What exactly does it mean for a registrar to block a domain? I believed so far that for my browser to successfully connect to a web server running on a domain or for a mail server to deliver email to a domain, there should only be valid A, AAAA, MX, and/or CNAME records in the DNS.

Was it really a block at the registrar level or was it a block at the DNS level, i.e., the registrar also ran DNS service and their DNS service refused to return responses for zoho.com domains?

At what layer or at which stage of the protocol can a registrar disrupt this and take a domain offline?

> It makes sense to me that to get the investment required to fund this, you’d want sole rights to commercialize.

It indeed does make sense to commercialize. Nobody said otherwise. But making good sense does not make a software open source. Releasing a software under an open source license makes a software open source. CC-BY-NC-SA is not such a license.

The title is indeed wrong. There is no definition or usage of the word "open source" that is compatible with restriction of commercial usage.

Never in the history of free software or open source software from the release of Donald Knuth's TeX in 1979, to the birth of FSF in 1985, or the formalization of OSD in 1998 was it ever acceptable to forbid commercial usage in something that is known as open source.

The corruption of the word "open source" to mean anything with source code available on GitHub under a non-commercial license is very recent and does not reflect the true origin or meaning of the word "open source".

The implication that CC-BY-NC-SA could be open source seems to be your belief which is not based on facts.

I am not familiar with JavaScript. Could someone share some sample JavaScript code that shows how it allows the browser to modify my system clipboard?

How does a site disabling "paste from clipboard" protect my password that I have already copied to clipboard?

Note that I would copy the password first and then I would realise that the site is not allowing me to paste it.

> you leave the password in the clipboard, and another website copies it (used to be a thing, I think it's patched now)

Even if it were not patched, how a site disabling "paste from clipboard" remove my password that I have already copied to clipboard.

Note that I would copy the password first and then I would realise that the site is not allowing me to paste it.

It isn't clear to me whether you are saying that Pandoc is necessary or if you are saying that Pandoc is unnecessary and LaTeX alone is sufficient for all purposes.

I think your parent comment was saying that LaTeX alone is sufficient. You also seem to be saying that LaTeX alone is sufficient while using Org mode. Would you please clarify if I am interpreting your comment correctly or not?

There are a few ways in which the shared objects method you suggest does not match the full power of Lisp debugging.

First of all, when a C program crashes, it just crashes. There is no REPL. There is only a core dump. So any live-debugging you plan to do is after the fact. After you have seen a crash, you would now begin to prepare for the next crash by launching your process via GDB or restarting your process and attaching a GDB to it. Whether a similar crash would occur again or not or when it would occur again depends on the nature of the bug. Now contrast this with Lisp debugging when your program crashes, it stops there and offers you an REPL to interact with the program right then. There is no need to wait for the next crash.

Secondly, when you debug with GDB, you would be dealing with syntaxes: The syntax of C that we are so familiar with. The GDB syntax to investigate the problem that we may be less familiar with. When the Lisp debugger offers the REPL to you, you are working with Lisp again. Your compiler, debugger, program, etc. all are part of the same unified environment where you just execute Lisp code to debug your issue.

Finally, putting your code in shared objects and reloading them requires you to go through the complete write-build-test-debug cycle. And then what do you do if your shared object itself crashes? With Lisp you skip the write-build-test part when all you want to do is debug an error. You jump straight to the debug part of the cycle and begin investigating the runtime state. And it works the same in a uniform manner whether your main program crashes or a dependency crashes.

> If you’re like me and already have Vim burned too deeply into your fingers to ever get it out, I’d recommend Vim with Vlime.

Anyone has tried both Slimv and Vlime for Vim? What are the differences? Which one gives an experience closer to that of SLIME?

I think you or someone understands this subject should write a detailed comment in this thread that explains this to software folks like us. I appreciate the help.

I want to know the answer too.

I always thought the universe is expanding to a larger universe. I never thought that it could be expanding to something else.

> The fact a new resource (you) has ...

I am not familiar with this lingo. Why exactly is the OP a resource? Is this usage of "resource" common in business speak?

If the vendor wrote crash reports which you could review before sending, would you trust that the crash report is actually what is being sent?

If you opted out of sending anything, do you really trust that the vendor is not sending anything?

You still need to research what is going on at the low level to be sure if something is being sent or not and what is being sent. Your grandma is going to rely on the information obtained from independent researchers.

Yes, the behavior of Linux distributions are also independently audited by independent researchers.

If the vendor supplied such a system or provided the answer to your question, would you trust it? Why?

You always need independent researchers to verify vendor's claims.

Your grandma comment is misguided. Your parent comment has a good point.

If a system is sending out sensitive data, there is a way to figure it out by setting breakpoints and reverse engineering the payload that is getting encrypted.

Once a researcher finds whether or not sensitive data is being sent, the researcher can publish the information so that your grandma can know about it and she can have the transparency and fair dealing she needs.

I believe something like the model followed by Apache Software Foundation works well in favor of continuity of a project. They have an overseeing committee that one can request to add new committers or even transfer ownership of project if the existing committers are no longer maintaining the project.

But ASF does come with a lot of bureaucracy for creating a new project. GitHub makes creating new projects very simple but it also makes disapperance of ownership very likely. If there was a way to request GitHub to transfer ownership of a popular but unmaintained project to someone else, a lot of time and effort spent in creating new forks and new project resources could be avoided.

I have always wanted something like this without having to move away from Git (to Fossil).

A bug tracker like this allows the bug history to be tracked and remain with the source code which is much better than keeping the bugs in a web based service because every 5 years you need to migrate it (Bugzilla to Trac to JIRA) and in every migration, some context or formatting is lost.

For something like this to be successful in enterprises, the tool should be management-friendly. Right now JIRA leads because it allows management to pull pretty reports out of it. Is there anything planned in git-bug to appease these management type people so that it has a good chance of taking off in the enterprise world too?

> How do you know this?

I believe from the comment history of the OP. There is a specific comment where the OP mentions that they are Pakistani.

Has any other mainstream programming language like C or Java introduced such reserved keywords in a new release? I guess if C or Java were to do something like this it would cause a lot of hue and cry.

I remember when C++ had to introduce a keyword for automatic type inference they reused the 'auto' keyword instead of introducing a new keyword at the risk of breaking a lot of existing code.

How do other mainstream languages handle a scenario like this where a new keyword is required?

> With the release of Python 3.6, it became clear that Pylama was in need of maintenance updates. Python 3.6 warned that async was about to become a reserved keyword in Python 3.7.

I can imagine there must be lot of code bases with async as variable name. For example:

  async = True

This is an error in Python 3.7.

  >>> async = 1
    File "<stdin>", line 1
      async = 1
            ^
  SyntaxError: invalid syntax

But this used to run just fine without any warning or issues until Python 3.5.

So now any code that uses async as a variable name would break. So is Python 3.7 considered a breaking change that is not backward compatible?

From the popular answers to this thread, I think the next relevant question that arises is: How non-scholars can find opportunities to collaborate with scholars? We need some kind of "Who is open to collaborating?" threads similar to that of "Who is hiring?" threads.

What's your Redshift setting for daytime?

Do you or anyone else have a third setting for bedtime like f.lux has (say for 1 or 2 hours prior to bedtime)? If yes, how do you simulate this third setting and how do transition smoothly from the evening setting to the bedtime setting?

Does this work on macOS? The source code seems to be including X11 headers, so I guess it would require XQuartz or something to make it work? Has anyone got sct to work on macOS?

Redshift works just fine on macOS. I've been using it and I like it more than f.lux because one can write scripts around it.

The colors on a RGB-based display is incorrect either way (with flux or without flux) at any color temperature (cool, warm, or in between).

Why is it that you prefer the incorrect colors without flux to the incorrect colors with flux?

Sounds like you prefer cool color temperature which is no more correct than warm color temperature.

> Ozone doesn't have a smell.

This does not sound right. This is what I see on Wikipedia which is also exactly what I was taught in high school:

> It is a pale blue gas with a distinctively pungent smell.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone

What would be the right daytime setting in f.lux to reduce the harmful effects of blue light?

The default daytime setting under recommended colors in f.lux is 6500K. I tend to use a daytime setting of 5500K. Is 5500K good enough to reduce the harmful effects of blue light or do I need to go even lower?

Can someone who has more context around this commit explain what is going on here?

What does this commit do?

Why did this commit get accepted in the commit history tree published at android.googlesource.com?

> The whole magic of the site is being able to have the experience of looking over other people's shoulders into their inbox, and seeing how they actually talk with one another when they're not on stage.

I am having a hard time understanding if this is written sincerely or as satire.

I hope you are being humorous here because if this is indeed true, it does not look like something I would appreciate. I really don't want anyone to have the experience of looking over my shoulders into my inbox to see how I actually talk with others when I am not on stage.

I have always perceived email as a private mode of communication. Has this perception changed recently among the new generation of application developers?