throwaway189262

If Dems had no intention to fix these loopholes why would they waste time making a bunch of hoopla about it? Words imply intent. Would you rather they say nothing and look away, as the Republicans are?

Dems are at least doing something besides electing a billionaire who dropped the corporate tax to the lowest it's been since the 1930's.

> With rust you don't need to constantly generate code.

In Rust, macros generate code on build. In Java, Annotations Processors do. I don't see a big difference between these approaches, besides Java's mechanism being older and crustier. Rust macros generate tons of code.

> if you have rust-analyze you get inline errors, code completion, jump to definition, autoimport, autoformat...

Last time I checked, Rust analyzer was in alpha/beta. Java has all this and it's battle-tested. Including language server for VScode and other lightweight editors, and several options for build plugins that auto format.

> You don't need to constantly "extract method", move to class, generate all these mountains of classes by rightclick.

Lombok, or one of the popular Builder libraries, gets rid of all this boilerplate. I don't generate anything using IDE. In my experience, most Java user don't. There's many mature libraries for geting around class ceremony.

> there is one way to set global toolchain and per project/dir. You're not required to also click through a million menus and dialogs and copypaste stuff and sync and rebuild and restart to get the editor barely working.

You are right. Rusts build system is simpler and better integrated. But Java has amazing build tools, maybe the best out there. A properly configured maven project will compile, test, and run with one command. And it will import into your IDE with a simple "import project, yes"

I have worked on a ton of Java projects over the years and never had to deal with most of what your describe.

> Its attempting to build tolerance to sudden transient latency spikes interacting badly with congestion control algorithms. You can hide packet loss, you can't hide some random packet taking a lot longer to be delivered due to having to be retried.

Good point. By using UDP you can get around head-of-line blocking. I didn't consider that

Unrelated but a ton of work is being put into HTTP/3 while ESNI has been lingering in draft spec for years. As far as protocol work, I think their priorities are wrong.

Most wireless protocols hide packet loss from upper layers anyways using retry/FEC. I can't think of a common situation where wireless packet loss is even visible to layer 4, so efforts to build tolerance to it are usually pointless

This is multi-pronged. Chip manufacturing output isn't flexible, and in the last year we've had:

* COVID stay at home * Every kid wants to be a streamer * E-sports becoming a real sport * 2 new console releases * Amazing new CPU's from AMD * Amazing new graphics cards from AMD/Intel. * Another crypto boom/bubble (depending on who you ask)

All these factors have put pressure on chip production.

I'm not as excited about this as I was for HTTP/2 . Every benchmark I've seen is <5% performance improvement.

I've heard the difference is larger on cellular networks with packet loss but haven't seen examples.

What we need more than HTTP/3 is ESNI. Exposed server names are a real security risk.

The languages are kin, but Java has more going for it.

C# is much smaller community.

Microsoft isn't as good about avoiding breaking changes.

Java has more quality tooling options.

The CLR GC is way worse. Shenandoah and ZGC, and even G1 on new versions blow away CLR GC.

Also heard the JIT compiler isn't as good from an Oracle dev a while back. C# performs better in synthetic benchmarks because it exposes more low level primitives.

C# is far ahead in syntactical niceness and exposing lower level primitives. It also has reified generics and true primitive types. The "language" itself is definitely better than Java, there's no question. It's everything built around Java and the capabilities of the JVM that make it better than C#.

IMO terrible Java code is partially due to how good the JVM is. Performance is within spitting distance of native code, so people can do TERRIBLE things and it won't tank performance.

Endless abstraction, loading giant things into RAM, looping over every item in huge arrays. Blocking server threads for minutes at a time. In most languages you would be punished severely with awful performance or OOM. Java chugs along until things get horrifically bad.

IMO it's the other way around. Java has some of the best IDE's around so everyone uses them. You can code in notepad and compile with maven but why would you?

With Rust you code in VIM because there's nothing better. Improving Rust IDE's has been one of the teams big focuses for years. Everyone codes in random text editors because there's no amazing IDE.

Development is going the other way at my org. Our JS services quickly became "out of date", and nobody wants to put in the massive effort required to bring them up to modern JS language features, build tools, and libraries.

In contrast, our Java upgrades remain painless. Many of our JS services have been merged back into older Java back ends

Java is rock stable and "complete". Not just the language itself. Build tools, JVM, profiling, dependency management. Everything is at least decent, most language problems were solved years ago. I have used many languages and nothing comes close to Java in the balance of speed, flexibility, ecosystem, and polish. If you're not sure which language will be best for a project, Java is perfect.

I work on a codebase with hundreds of thousands of lines that haven't been touched in 15 years. We're on Java 11 with plans to update to 17 later this year. Our 8->11 upgrade took me 3 days on a million+ line codebase. And when we released there were zero bugs related to the upgrade.

Java has the stability keep projects maintainable over decades. The only mainstream language with comparable backwards compatibility is C.

Antitrust most likely. FLOC + anything else is probably identifying too. If there's a couple thousand FLOC ids, you only need one more identifier with that level of specificity to form a unique identifier. IP alone might be enough

Google's FLOC has an unfixable problem. As soon as other advertisers create their own FLOC's, anonymity goes away. No matter how careful Google is to make sure these ID's aren't unique, as soon as users have several FLOC identifiers, maybe even two, they're uniquely identifiable.

Behavioral tracking needs to die. It was a mistake created from lack of web security in the early days, nothing more. It's a bug, not a feature.

Google is finally showing us what Chrome was meant to be. A browser monopoly to defend Google's user tracking interests.

They need to ban user tracking already. The advertising industry was fine for thousands of years without it. Instead of tracking users, you put ads in places your audience likes. Google and the other ad networks don't like this, because if you're choosing the sites you want ads on, there's no reason to use them as a middle-man

Yeah, it's less profitable. But it's been proven to work since like 7000BC and it gets rid of all the privacy problems.

All the invasive FBI style user tracking only existed for ~20 years. A mote in the history of advertising. Anybody who tells you online advertising won't work without it is a liar.

On the plus side, maybe now people will see Chrome for what it really is. A vehicle and a weapon for Google to protect its shady business model. Just like Android.

Biden's jobs plan is largely a fig leaf to the poor rural voters that believe America has left them behind.

Initiatives like 100% rural broadband are less about making the most efficient use of resources, and more about attempting to bring some money and jobs back to bumfuck America.

The author makes the mistake of framing the Jobs Plan as inefficient in the goals it was designed for. It's not. Everybody knows investing in podunk towns that peaked half a century ago is a "waste of money". The Jobs plan contains these measures in an attempt to reduce the vast inequality between these places and wealthy "hub" cities that produce an ever increasing majority of US GDP.

Will it work? I have no idea

Some things.

WASM binary size is highly dependent on optimization level. If your WASM is anywhere near the size of your JS, something is off with your compiler settings. Since Rust and C++ are statically typed, compilers can use LTO to remove almost every unreachable instruction. JS, even with tree shaking, gets nowhere near this.

Default settings in Emscipten generate huge binaries. Rust without the "native" target or a bunch of configuration also does.

WASM bytecode is also more compact than JS. There's simply no reason the binaries should be even close to the same size.

The memory usage should also be different by and order of magnitude. WASM has basically no overhead above machine sizes for most types. Look at Benchmarks Game, memory use JS vs Rust. You should be seeing a difference close to that.

I can't speak for speed. But I can say I did a head-to-head comparison between the fastest pure JS PNG encoder I could find vs a C encoder transpiled to WASM, and the transpiled encoder was >10X faster.

It's hard to say if something is off in the benchmark or compilation but I find it hard to believe there's such a big difference between my tests and yours. Emcripten especially is not exactly easy to use and maybe a good place to look for size and speed optimization

These are both Adenovirus vectored vaccines. My theory is that plain Adenovirus also causes clots, but likewise at percentages so low you would never see them in data. Unless you infected millions of people with the same strain, like these vaccines do.

There's studies dating back many years showing that adenoviruses can cause clots and thrombocytopenia in rodents.

The lesson might end up being, surprisingly, that mRNA vaccines are both safer and more effective than traditional vaccines

Quite sad, glad someone picked up the torch

It's barely sufficient. Much of the docs is in various pull requests from others adding models. In another reply a user posted a better maintained fork repo

And this is why IBM is the most shorted blue chip on the index...

Mozilla TTS is a great open source speech generator that uses state of the art ML models. https://github.com/mozilla/TTS

If you need good TTS, this is it. It sounds as good as Google, Apple, or Amazon products, if you have a good data set. The pre trained models are decent enough for real use cases.

Datasets are the problem. Quality data is expensive. It takes about 24 hours of aligned and annotated quality voice samples to make a model.

The most common "open" dataset is LJSpeech. It's kinda noisy and recorded with a bad mic. And that greatly degrades quality of generated audio. It's still miles better than anything 5+ years ago, but has a metallic quality.

If anyone is interested, you can record your own voice to make a model for Mozilla TTS. What isn't talked about, is that modern ML voice models aren't synthetic voices, they're audio deepfakes. Clones. We're talking to the point your friends couldn't tell if it was you or the model on the phone.

Some people might find that scary but I think it's incredibly cool. If you build a great quality model for Mozilla TTS your voice can outlive you.

Ugh when did alt right crazies invade HN? Multiple comments in the thread from accounts a few months old that have posted nothing tech related, nothing but right wing talking points.

(And lots of it is BS)

Maybe it would be better if we don't allow off topic threads, just to discourage politics bots from invading

Theres another option. Better vetting for apps and extensions that use dangerous API's.

It's disingenuous to say "these API's are too dangerous to use" when the browser itself does all the things the API could. Why should people trust Chrome or Firefox more than their extensions?

Google/Apple got themselves in this situation by having their official stores. People assume it's on the store, it's safe. Now they take away API's because they don't actually police their stores, they just made them to have a captive market. Now they blame extension developers and take away API's because they don't want to admit they don't police their own stores enough.

Before the days of official stores most people were careful what they downloaded. And they would be again if it wasn't in these companies perverse interests to convince users that store apps are safer than non store apps. Because people would stop using the stores and take away the money train.

The right way to fix this would never happen. Decentralize the stores and let users make their own decisions. And take away all the api restrictions because once people realize the risk they'll be more careful. PC's are and have been an open market for decades, yet getting viruses is rare. I have no reason to believe it would be different for phones and extensions

I could be wrong, but I believe all the videos we've seen were leaked first, then acknowledged. That alone suggests the military has something to hide

Since they've already been leaked, the best US can do is try to deflect. Release the footage to "prove" you aren't hiding anything, then claim you have no idea what it is.

All very tinfoily. But we know something is out there. We just don't know who made it

Text classification might be very good at identifying ad text. There's a popular fake news dataset where models hit 85% accuracy https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-68787-8_...

Ads are highly tuned for click through rates. Even if the model isn't 100% accurate, it would force advertisers to use less effective ad text to avoid filters.

I think the future is machine learning based blocking.

Ads are obvious, they have to be for users to see them. You could probably use text classification and object recognition to filter ads effectively. And you could do it from the view layer where nothing on the page can tell they've been blocked.

This is also my tinfoily theory for why Chrome restricts the API's used by ad blockers. It's to prevent more effective blockers from being developed.

Recently renamed to rif is fun, probably copyright related

Gotta be secret military tech. One commonality with nearly all sightings is they occured in restricted waters, and over the ocean.

Another possibility, the US knows these are foreign drones and they're leaking the videos to get the offender to stop.

Tinfoil hat time, nuclear powered drones with plasma stealth.

US supposedly stopped researching nuclear plane engines after the 60's, but they built some working ones. They might be viable now that drone tech means we don't need people around them. And as a drone, they could fly forever. They would be super dangerous to fly over land, but maybe not over water. Especially if they were designed to safely submerge if reactor conditions became dangerous. And if your vehicle is too dangerous to land on solid earth, it needs to land in water. Which might explain the multiple videos of these vehicles transitioning from air to water.

It's been known that a plasma sheath gives radar stealth since the first atmospheric re-entries. This is why spacecraft lose radio contact on the way down. But ionizing enough air takes a lot of power, or a lot of radiation.

Maybe nuclear powered plasma stealth craft aren't that crazy? It would explain the lights, which otherwise make no sense for a covert craft

I had to chuckle at this, one of the bulleted features:

"Offers an extended source format that lets source text vary in length up to 252 bytes per line. COBOL for Linux on x86 supports fixed source format and extended source format. Fixed source format consists of text that varies in length up to a 72 bytes per line."

Yeah I'm never going to be in the same room as COBOL code

This is already happening. Used Leaf and Tesla modules are quite expensive because people buy them up for off grid solar setups.

You can hook a Tesla or Leaf module to a BMS and charge controller that supports lithium like Victron, and have a massive battery for off grid solar and RV's. Not many are doing this, but enough that it keeps used module prices up.

Rumors you don't even need to do balance charging on these packs because they're designed for hundreds of kilowatts output and nobody runs them anywhere near that.

Lithium batteries get unbalanced due from varying internal resistance between cells. But when you're not drawing anywhere near their rated output, the differences don't matter much.