3jckd

Show HN is about showing your own work, not just sth you think is interesting. Doesn't matter if you missed it, still shouldn't have posted it.

Nothing that you said is wrong but it doesn't make the situation better.

1) As many people pointed out, this doesn't prevent OCR, it just prevents copying strings (e.g. with crawlers). 2) Majority of OCR doesn't deal with PDFs produced from a text source but either from a) jpg-scans of documents b) pdfs produced from those jpg-scans. 3) The first thing I tried, was OCR with my iPhone and it obviously worked. As someone else said, there're solutions that let you batch process many documents.

Don't get me wrong, your stuff works for what you designed it to. However, it provides <false sense of security> by <falsely> claiming that it prevents OCR; which in turn, can lead to more harm[1].

[1] - e.g., it may convince people to share stuff that they wouldn't otherwise.

It's interesting what/when/if will unsettle Python. And what the adoption would be like.

Julia has been <designed> to unsettle Python in the data space but to no avail.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Didn't read bc of the paywall so maybe someone can enlighten me.

My educated guess is that <at best> UN is using homomorphic encryption for basic analysis...

or they have achieved a breakthrough and have FHE /s.

How is it different from Notion and Evernote like solutions? What’s better and what’s worse about Dino?

Likewise, how’s it different from backlink-based apps like Obsidian, Roam and Craft?

Is OSS the only selling feature?

I agree that using booleans like this can be confusing. But, imo, it's more confusing to have a bunch of wrapper functions that create abstraction madness.

I mostly write computation/math-related code and I find using named arguments to be a good practice. This is also quite similar to OP's enum approach, e.g. sth like `calc_formula(a, b, is_gain=True)`.

To be fair, the older I get, the more I like explicit arguments for everything like in Swift (and smalltalk iirc).

What about the part where people used expired credentials to 3rd-party services to create admin accounts?

Scraping may not be a crime but unintended privilege escalation is a whole different story.

In other news, gen-1 device is good but not perfect yet.

I fully subscribe to this point. It comes up, then it either gets voted out or doesn't even come that far. What baffles me though is that such blatant power-grabs are being introduced, and that anyone thinks that anything would be better off afterwards. Surveillance is going to get more difficult, not easier unless you want to spy on middle-aged people talking about fishing or sour dough recipes.

While the assumption that you can make changes to swift’s stl is not that far-fetched, doing so to cpp’s is completely mental.

I’ve got a feeling that swift is becoming a very polluted mashup of features that come from parties with conflicting interests. AFAIK, internally at Apple, teams pull in different directions (e.g. to get SwiftUI), at the same time there’s this half-baked differentiable programming / swift4tf manifesto, then there’s the backend swift initiative with vapour.

This reminds of a hotch-potch that Scala’s framework and feature landscape is. The overhead of getting into it is quite substantial and for some, definitely not worth the investment if not just downright scary.

The link is dead atm.

This is the key point here. Google (Chrome), Apple (Safari) and MIcrosoft (Edge) funnel money from other ventures to their browser dev teams. For Apple and Microsoft it’s just a staple tool that each operating system needs but for Google it’s a platform that guides users towards their other services and ties them in, YouTube, Gmail, Drive, to name but a few.

In the current business model, there’s absolutely no competing with them long term. You’d have to either break them up or create some weird funding schemes driven by govs and users that don’t care (public good or some other utilitarian argument).

No, if you work in a software house; or I'd say, you have extremely low chance there and anyone who made it, was an outlier.

Yes, if you work in a company that does some RnD and you have actual domain knowledge and expertise as opposed to being a generic, even if experienced, but nevertheless generic developer. I have many colleagues well into their 50s and some even 60s that work at Intel, NVIDIA, Ericsson etc.. They are not a rare sight over there.

On one hand side, provided rationale is right and I agree. If Twitter wants to play the policing game, they'd better bring out big guns and introduce a mechanism to police and fact-check entire platform.

On the other hand, and maybe its due to my lack of knowledge on the 230, how's report-and-remove of posts different? Twitter already has mechanisms to remove flagged content so how's this incident different (apart from being blatantly political).

Lastly, does anyone know if Facebook and YouTube are also protected under 230? I imagine that GOP wants to make an example of Twitter but for the sake of consistency Facebook and Youtube should get the same treatment.

Could someone ELI5, why it is so difficult to make it right? And I do not mean exclusively to Linux, because Windows has been horrible for years now too.

If the issue is hardware, then we'd blame OEMs.

If it's software, then we'd blame, say, Microsoft.

If it was a combination of these two, then we could say that Apple is the only one that controls both... if it wasn't for the Surface series which still has atrocious touchpad experience.

Asking for a friend - could someone explain what happened there? The README doc is quite vague - it is more of a personal justification than a rationale (to me).

Yes, they are. Slow and hardly as expressive or rich as python/r counterparts.

Yeah, I've been using Mathpix for almost a year now and this seems practically the same.

Unless they are deliberately avoiding comparison to Mathpix, they are quite unaware of the competition out there :|

Not OP, but I ditched taking notes on paper for the most part. I write stuff down on the iPad Pro (Notes and/or Notability) instead nowadays. It is easier to find and extract things and I can just archive them to the cloud when they are not needed anymore.

The only time I use paper is when I don't have the iPad on me and for personal journaling (for which I have a dedicated notebook anyway).

I can subscribe to this. Whenever I needed to learn or revise something, I would just write it down again, usually paraphrasing the original material.

While I wouldn't use that material directly ever again, I noticed that I would often paraphrase a paraphrase, so to speak, because I would remember some of the material.

Tangentially, this thread shows that people prefer different ways of taking (or not taking notes) usually due to a habit itselfc as opposed to superiority of one method over the other. It reminds me of Dvorak vs qwerty, while technically superior for typing in English, the cost of switching is not worth it for most people out there.

Maybe I didn't make this clear but by hardware I meant literally physical switch, as in e.g. power delivery through the circuit.

I was trying to come up with a reasonable solution this. I wouldn't trust any software solution in the OS that "disables" the camera because even if hacking of the device is not possible, some sort of settings-phising might be.

It seems that the only way to deal with this, would be to have a hardware switch that disables the camera, e.g. like iPhone's mute toggle.

That they have more than they say that they have (and are allowed to have) to the point where cleaning this up would be a serious engineering effort.

I say this in jest but at the same time I'm concerned this might be true.

One one hand side, I agree that Facebook/Amazon/Apple etc. but also many telcoms are way too big which in turn stifles fair competition and leads to monopolies (and subsequently abuse of power, lobbying etc). On the other, there has not been one good solution proposed to this so far.

Let's run through the options (accumulated over months or years of discussions): 1) Split FB into the FB-Instagram-WhatsApp trio that we used to have in the past. Neat but the main culprit remains the same. 2) Remove Zuck or at least reduce his voting power s.t. the board has more. This would work if we assume that Zuck is the main issue with FB, which I doubt he is. Investors would always push for more money and if it means more of the same privacy-violating, advertising-driven social media, I doubt they would change it - money hardly ever has a moral compass of any kind. 3) Kind of like 2 but on top of this, you fix some members of the board with community/government selected representatives which would be supposed to balance out things and/or at least raise concerns. 4) Introduce point 3 as a general rule - if a company reaches X% of the given industry's estimated total market value, it has to give up some board seats. In theory, forces companies to stay focused instead of spreading into every single adjacent industry.

Now, all of these have problems of their own (corruption in case of 3-4, anyone?) but the sooner the discussion starts the better. Google/Amazon/Microsoft/Apple/chip makers are next in line but also, as another commenter pointed out - we do want to see people build strong and prosperous companies that truly innovate.

Damn, it's a non-trivial topic, just writing this down brings more questions than answers

One tip from personal experience: I usually introduce CORS (and Access-Control-Allow-Origin header in particular) first. Most people unfamiliar with HTTP headers have no problem understanding the usefulness of that one and it opens the door to other stuff.

Despite being on the FB-naysayers' side, I think that scientific and engineering work that FB outputs is amazing and greatly adds to our (tech) community. I use several of their frameworks on a daily basis and look forward into dabbling with the new stuff.

I wouldn't say these are level-up but rather some introductory material that covers the basics.

Swapping Introduction to Statistical Learning for Elements of Statistical Learning is a good step-up if you don't need as much hand-holding (it's essentially the same book, by the same author just more thorough). Then, adding Bishop's ML book is a good idea. Although also introductory, it covers a lot more topics (some kernel methods and probabilistic stuff) and in a more disciplined way.

Also, while not that popular in the deep learning hype era, Vapnik's Nature of Statistical Learning is a great read.

My first thought once I saw this was "flutter". It's really getting a lot of market share in mobile dev and all you need to write is Dart, for better or worse. Also, whenever you need to do iOS specific duct-tape-plumbing, it seems that Obj-C is still more capable than Swift because of the accumulated legacy.

However, take it as an educated guess rather than a fact since I have never been a mobile dev apart from hobby apps.

EDIT: typos.

I don't know much about Pony but glancing over the doc it seems very Scala-ish, which can already be written in very pythonic way and has ADTs. Am I missing something here?

It's interesting how it's going to play out. On one hand side, Swift is a pleasant language to work with (despite its infancy). But on the other, having a Tensorflow API doesn't suddenly give it a bunch of libraries for statistics, comp. vision, modeling, visualisation, etc. that Python/R/Julia coughMATLABcough have.

Nowadays, it's difficult enough to convince people to drop e.g. MATLAB for R or Python for Julia (let's assume that there's some merit to it), despite them having excellent counterparts for almost everything. Swift's success in this domain depends solely on the adoption by developers/researchers/engineers. Unless they're just going to mostly use it internally (as Google is known to).

Which brings me to the last point - why on Earth would they pick Swift (apart from Christ Lattner being involved) when Julia was on the table? It ticks all their boxes and has more mature ecosystem for all things "data". Provided rationale is hardly convincing.