For the best experience on desktop, install the Chrome extension to track your reading on news.ycombinator.com
Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | history | breakingcups's commentsregister

The only one I was vaguely interested in!

Oh, Blades, like the Xbox 360 Dashboard thing?

Or no, you must be referring to the Azure Portal sections.


> In several EU western countries the most common gynelogical surgery act is re-building the hymen (so that the woman can pretend she's a virgin once she marries, often forcibly by her family).

Can you source that claim?


You'd be getting practically the same result. If someone is too lazy to write their own commit messages they're definitely too lazy to write this blog post manually.

Everybody knows better on the internet.

> No Python. No frameworks. Just C, Objective-C, and hand-tuned Metal shaders.

Welp, I know where those tokens came from.


But only on Chrome? I'm on Firefox and I see those prompts all the time.


Go to your uBlock Origin settings and enable the annoyances/social filter lists.


Is that true, though? Wouldn't it be possible to just copy a font wholesale, since they are uncopyrightable? How would licensing fees be enforced?


I think modern fonts include hinting software and stuff like that.

If you produced a bunch of screenshots of the output at various sizes, and then asked an LLM to convert to ttf or whatever, I’m guessing that’d be OK. I’m not an expert in this stuff though.


Brand fonts are typically a specific license by the original creator of the font, often together with some adjustments (e.g. big companies often need additions for global markets that were not in the smaller original font)


Slopyright, transloptions, one-stop-slop...


Could you elaborate on that or share a source? It sounds like it'd be not just interesting but important to learn.


https://dl.acm.org/doi/epdf/10.1145/2957276.2957310

Try to understand 3.1-3.4 in this paper, and you'll find that the correctness proof doesn't prove anything.

In particular, when they define <_c, they do this in terms of rule1, rule2, and rule3, but these are defined in terms of <_c, so this is just a circular definition, and therefore actually not a definition at all, but just wishful thinking. They then prove that <_c is a total order, but that proof doesn't matter, because <_c does not exist with the given properties in the first place.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search:

HN For You