It is not obvious to me that this is correcting for the differences in bicycle vs escooter users? Or the total number of users over time.
By and large I expect someone riding a bicycle to be fitter than the average bear. In contrast, someone using an escooter could have any possible composition: slim/obese, young/old, safe/reckless. The increasing popularity of scooters also means that the absolute number of people has likely risen from a decade ago.
I might have a work use case for which this would be perfect.
Having no experience with word2vec, some reference performance numbers would be great. If I have one million PDF pages, how long is that going to take to encode? How long will it take to search? Is it CPU only or will I get a huge performance benefit if I have a GPU?
As someone working extensively with word2vec: I would recommend to set up Elasticsearch. It has support for vector embeddings, so you can process your PDF documents once, write the word2vec embeddings and PDF metadata into an index, and search that in milliseconds later on. Doing live vectorisation is neat for exploring data, but using Elasticsearch will be much more convenient in actual products!
I would personally vote for Postgres and one of the many vector indexing extensions over Elasticsearch. I think Elasticsearch can be more challenging to maintain. Certainly a matter of opinion though. Elasticsearch is a very reasonable choice.
Elasticsearch is a pain to maintain, the docs are all over the place, and the API is what you end up with if developers run free and implement everything that jumps to their mind.
But there just isn’t anything comparable when it comes to building your own search engine. Postgres with a vector extension is good if all you want to do is a vector search and some SQL (not dismissing it here, I love PG); but if you want more complex search cases, Elasticsearch is the way to go.
Fraud against private companies happens all the time as well. There was an infamous case about a guy who sent fake $100+ million total invoices to Facebook, Google, etc[0]. If they had just stopped after a single interaction, probably would have gotten away with it free and clear.
Is the kernel really the differentiator there? seL4 is a Proven microkernel that is some 9000 lines of C. This ancient SO post[0] claims Linux is 140k lines. The kernel is just a tiny component of the many things required to get an OS up and running. I suspect most projects just peter out as the enormity of the complexity becomes apparent.
I’d love to know what the smallest OS is that can boot on an old MacBook, get to network (wired or wireless), and includes a basic browser (tui or gui) even if it doesn’t drive all the onboard hardware. That feels like it would be an excellent learning platform.
DOS just isn't much of an operating system, it's more like a bunch of helper functions preloaded into RAM, and you're free to do whatever you want with or without them.
Nah. Microsoft did a great job handling Minecraft imo.
I am still peeved that my lifetime license "mysteriously" broke during Microsoft's account transitions. Trillion dollar company lacks the manpower and technical capability to handle it? Or someone cannot be arsed to maintain "freeloader" customers.
Same here. Had one of the first few thousand accounts. Since Microsoft took over:
- it got hacked. Got it back but name was changed, history not perfect anymore
- much later somehow lost my account due to me trying to keep my old account I guess. Whatever I wasnt noticed that my account is going to die. It just did. Microsoft support also never answered to my request getting it back
Microsoft’s bean counters immediately set about milking as much profit from Minecraft as they can right after the purchase, be through Minecoin, premium skins, or by collecting PII via requiring phone numbers from everyone for “SMS verification” due to “security alert” blackmail (total joke—the attacker could just as well provide their own phone number and lock me out—except, of course, there is no actual suspicious activity: my account was never hacked, and I was not playing for years).
It was the first game I bought in my life, and 30 EUR was quite a chunk of change. Since the acquisition, it stopped being a game I have; it is now a game that Microsoft may or may not let me play. As a result, I don’t bother.
They did provide several notices regarding that years in advance to shutting down the old auth servers and also had a long migration period during which you could log in with both accounts (assuming you have migrated the old account to Xbox/Microsoft).
The whole reason they did it is that you can now easily switch between Java and Bedrock, and that it's not as laughably easy to hack accounts as it used to be.
Their notices required you to re-verify your original email address, which so far has never been required. So lots of people (myself included) had their passwords and could play fine, never mind the 10-year-old @aol.com account tied to it, and could do nothing but watch that deadline approach before being locked out.
Oh man, I guess I was so angry about that at some point I blocked it out. My dumb ass actually bought a 2nd account because I couldn't convince my friends to play with me until it was free. After MSFT purchased Minecraft I could never recover either of those accounts!
Yeah, that's fair. That was just a shitty thing to do.
I was more focusing on the creative development that Minecraft saw under Microsoft.
Fandoms are often extremely nervous when a large corporation buys the rights to a beloved media ip, largely because this has gone wrong so many times, with poor adaptions or obvious cashgrabs milking a property until the fanbase turns away.
This really hasn't happened to Minecraft. It grew further in popularity, even though it was already massively popular at the time and it did it mostly without driving away the existing fans. That in itself is quite unusual (I think) and definitely not what I would have expected. At the time I really thought that the sale would mark the beginning of Minecraft's slow descent into irrelevancy and I definitely remember that being a fairly common sentiment.
But I fully understand people being mad at the license issues you mention. They should be. Might not have been illegal, but that was essentially theft.
Every F500 company with historical Oracle installations built before the open source offerings were actually competitive. Even if every one of those decided today they were going to ditch Oracle, you are talking about multi-year initiatives.
Is this then a done deal? Or can the Supreme Court somehow decide there was a half-sentence in a Federalist Paper which argued the opposite and invalidate the ruling?
This is a ruling by a District Court. It could be appealed to the Circuit Court, and then to the Supreme Court.
In the federal court system, District Court decisions are not binding precedent. Circuit Court decisions bind the District Courts in their circuit, and Supreme Court decisions bind all lower courts.
This District Court is in the Second Circuit. Another District Court in the same Circuit made a similar decision in US v. Smith, but the Second Circuit Court has not yet ruled on warrantless border searches of cell phones. Several other Circuit Courts have, however, and their rulings were all opposite of this one: the First Circuit in Alasaad v. Mayorkas; the Fifth Circuit in US v. Castillo; the Seventh Circuit in US v. Wanjiku; and the Ninth Circuit in US v. Cano.
In short: this decision is not binding precedent, and a substantial amount of binding precedent exists in the opposite direction within other circuits.
Exactly this. (and for those unfamiliar with the terms, in federal courts "Circuit Courts" are the first level of appeals courts, which both sides have a right to be heard in, followed by the Supreme Court which is discretionary and only takes on big cases)
When there is a "circuit split" like this, with different appellate courts going in opposite directions you are almost 100% guaranteed SCOTUS has to step in to fix it.
I don't know the outcome of this, as I've not studied border searches in years, but while SCOTUS went in the favor of defendants on prior search cases (e.g. Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373, cellphone searches on person during arrest; Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), cellphone GPS logs from carrier; United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), GPS attached to car), the court has changed to the right, which generally (but not always) means less defendant-friendly, more government-friendly.
If I had to wager, SCOTUS will uphold warrantless border searches.
With this SCOTUS it's really hard to tell... while they've mostly aligned to state actors, there are a few instances, in particular 2A cases where they've leaned into favoring civil liberties over state actors, so it could really go either way IMO.
That said, my own take has been for a while, that if I travel across borders that I'd specifically buy a burner phone and something cheap like a chromebook, possibly in the country being travelled to and expressly wiped clean before travel if taking said device across the border. Keeping some printed/written notes with contacts that I can establish on the other side.
It's kind of weird in that I don't think the above is excessively paranoid given how intrusive state actors can be, not just the US.
SCOTUS doesn't always make shitty decisions. Sometimes dozens of lower courts will all make a shitty decision and then it gets to SCOTUS and they somehow use their greater resources to produce a better decision contrary to everyone's expectations.
That 2012 decision was unanimous, including all the conservatives. Roberts, Thomas and Alito all held GPS tracking without a warrant to be unconstitutional, along with Scalia (now deceased).
If the exact same case came before the Court today, would it rule differently? I doubt. One must assume Roberts, Thomas and Alito would rule the same way. Ideologically, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are all less conservative than Thomas and Alito, more conservative than Roberts – which suggests if Roberts, Thomas and Alito are all ruling the same way, probably Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett would too. And Jackson is both a liberal, and has been seen to be defendant-friendly even when the other liberals wouldn't be (see when she joined all but of the conservatives in the recent J6 case, while Barrett joined the remaining liberals). So probably, that case would go the same way today as it did in 2012.
Now, this is a separate issue, so the outcome of that 2012 case isn't decisive in how this case would be decided (if it ever reaches SCOTUS). But it would be wrong to assume that SCOTUS becoming significantly more conservative is necessarily going to change the outcome.
A textualist interpretation of the constitution would likely take a very dim view of the federal government trying to stretch its powers and get around the Fourth Amendment. I don’t think we have much to worry about on this topic from the current court.
For the Hacker News members who are reflexively downvoting my comment, presumably for political reasons, I refer you to Riley vs. California, the 2014 SCOTUS decision that ruled warrantless searches of cell phones were unconstitutional:
The opinion was written by Roberts with a concurrence by Alito.
Again, presumably, the 2024 court is likely to take an even a dimmer view of the Feds trying to expand their powers and circumvent the 4th Amendment than the 2014 court.
> textualist interpretation of the constitution would likely take a very dim view of the federal government trying to stretch its powers and get around the Fourth Amendment
Scalia was textualist. "Justices Antonin Scalia, Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch describe themselves as originalists in scholarly writings and public speeches" [1]. (In several cases, e.g. the application of Sarbanes-Oxley to the January 6th cases, they dismissed a textualist interpretation.)
Textualism would have trouble with this case because phones aren't mentioned in the Constitution. Originalism does better, which explains Riley.
Originalism would also have trouble because phones didn't exist when the Frames wrote or the 18th Century public read the Constitution.
Originalism is funny, by the way. By its tenets, if you don't like what the Constitution says, you can pass an Amendment with the exact same words as the Constitution but those words would have new, different meaning.
Scalia’s originalism—the dominant strain today—is textualism, as explained in the very article you linked. Specifically it is originalism in terms of the original public meaning of the text, or in other words, textualism with the understanding that language changes over time.
Alternatively, when the Supreme court composition has changed and shown a willingness to view old decisions as bad law, its a great time for a district court to break rank with precedent.
We have a couple decades to shape the country however you want, you don’t have to act like a victim because the justices lied during their confirmation hearings on one specific topic, just bring different cases for other various inconveniences you have.
You were not kidding. On the front page of this moment is "14,000 3v Lithium CR2032 Coin Batteries" held in two barrels with a weight of 200 pounds. A tremendous bargain, if you can snatch it at the current bid of $20.
Hah, yeah just be careful with those tiny batteries if that's the way you choose to go. Different chemestries have very different outcomes and I've never been comfortable with scaling tiny batteries up to a whole-home use.
I was about to order a pallet of new lithium cells from one of the US resellers when the batch of repurposed automotive cells popped up. When I was pricing them out I could get the cells and a DIY BMS for around half the price as rack batteries often used by DIYers today. There's more work involved in putting the cells together yourself, but it is nice knowing how it works and how to fix it should a cell fail.
By and large I expect someone riding a bicycle to be fitter than the average bear. In contrast, someone using an escooter could have any possible composition: slim/obese, young/old, safe/reckless. The increasing popularity of scooters also means that the absolute number of people has likely risen from a decade ago.