phpnode

I think the answer to that question is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39035853

I would bet that the Chinese manufacturer that cloned the design never had one of the original balls in their possession in the first place. They probably saw photos of the ball online, copied the design as closely as possible and googled some clipart to fill in the letters that weren't visible in the photos. That clipart was Swedish, maybe by coincidence but probably intentionally.

Subscription is a common model for things like this, particularly because it’s so easy for people to make direct approaches to the vendor, cutting out the middleman to avoid the commission/fees

There's this and a few other magical things in the client that give me pause, in particular:

    const [post, comments] = await query(({ get }) => {
      get.post.with.slug = 'new-pricing';
      get.comments;
    });

there is simply no way to make that type safe without wrapping or forking TypeScript, and consumers really don't want that. Why make that tradeoff? Especially when it's so easy to accomplish with a more normal syntax:

    const [post, comments] = await query(({ get }) => [
      get('post').with({slug: 'new-pricing'}),
      get('comments')
    ]);

I think this used to happen when files were transferred as plain text rather than binary, but I forget which transfer protocol was affected - maybe FTP?

your snark is obscuring any point that you might be trying to make here...

The clauses are common in the UK but I see them all the time from startups incorporated in Delaware. Maybe they're there for the deterrent factor. Also, hi!

I'm quite surprised by this, if only because of the regularity with which they appear in standard software consulting agreements.

MS and OpenAI certainly have non-solicitation clauses in their contracts. MS could afford the legal battle but isn't it better for them to wait it out and see what happens first?

about 1.5%, so a bit but not earth shattering (although that does represent about $40bn in market cap)

It is upsetting to hear the phrase “turn of the century” used to describe the year 2000. I know it’s correct, but it still feels very wrong.

The video makes the point that a single bag of cement costs €20 in an area where the average daily wage is €10.

Linux is the name of the kernel

If you were the other side of that trade then you’re the victim. For everyone else it erodes trust in the market

ah out of memory, I'll try with a shorter track.

Just tried this and it seems to get stuck at the following step (for 20 mins so far)

[WASM/C++ 18:07:24] Getting waveforms from istft [WASM/C++ 18:07:25] Copying waveforms

That proposal aims to allow type annotations as part of JS, but to do that the parser needs to know when a type annotation starts (easy) and ends (hard), the only realistic ways that can be done at the moment is explicitly supporting all of the syntax TS introduces (which is bad for other type checkers) or restricting to a limited subset which would mean a lot of what TS supports would not be allowed, negating the usefulness of the proposal.

What I'm saying is that if instead we said that all type annotations must follow existing JS grammar rules, with perhaps a couple of small additions, then we'd be able to support all sorts of complex type annotations in JS directly, using existing syntax. This would mean that TS's grammar would end up changing a bit, but that's a small price to pay for ongoing interoperability.

For example, instead of

    type UserProperties = keyof typeof User;

which is tied to TS's arbitrary syntax, and not supported in Flow, use

    type UserProperties = keyOf(typeOf(User));

this is exactly what I want from the Types as Comments proposal[0] as I think it's the only way that types can feasibly become part of the language. It's hard to imagine how all of the concepts TS introduces via special syntax can be covered otherwise.

[0] https://tc39.es/proposal-type-annotations

users tend to be quite good at flagging most highly political stories, so they disappear off the front page pretty quickly but can still be found by those who really want to engage. The status quo is good imo

Mostly in the form of quotes from SEC lawsuits

When did @click and so on become part of HTML?

Microsoft actually laid off most of their IE developers after IE6 if I recall correctly, they had no vision for the future, it was finished, they'd won (for a while)

Almost all discourse around HATEOAS is in the context of APIs

It’s a brilliant and beautiful idea that has approximately zero success stories in the real world

All weaknesses or differences can be used against you. When you’re interviewing for a job you are presenting an idealised version of yourself that makes the decision to hire you easy from the interviewer’s perspective. That’s not the time to bring up flaws.

In general though this idea that people should talk openly about their mental health problems is good for society and terrible for the individuals concerned. People will absolutely change their opinion of you and treat you differently, and they will never disclose why.

it doesn't. Hosts will inevitably start blocking clients which don't exchange an attestation token

As the middle man Google benefits from ad-fraud and has few incentives to really stop it. Ad-blocking is a real problem for them however, and they have huge incentives to prevent that. Ignore what they say - that's what WEI is actually about.

This is the bait to make it sound reasonable. Of course this hold-back feature will be quietly disabled at some point in the future. The whole proposal is full of weaselly half truths and misrepresentation about their real plans

Too slow, it will be decades before the people going through the education system now are in a position to effect change