Servo – A parallel browser engine in Rust by Mozilla - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/mozilla/servo <comment><USER2> Just recently passed Acid 1 [https://twitter.com/metajack/status/371041675633647616](https://twitter.com/metajack/status/371041675633647616)

<comment><USER3> Note that the master branch is actually still 1 patch from passing: [https://github.com/mozilla/servo/pull/764](https://github.com/mozilla/servo/pull/764).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I would be interested in knowing how they accomplish such a huge undertaking given the fact Rust seems [1] to be a language in constant evolution right now. Do they target a fixed subset of Rust (is it even possible) or do they make continual updates to their code? (disclaimer I know nothing about Rust other than having read some of the previous posts linked from HN)

[1] as others HN readers have commented in related threads about Rust

<comment><USER5> Servo right now is more of a Rust reference project than a serious engine. They use the most up-to-date features of Rust and don't worry about having to rewrite the code with the next version because they know they're working with a somewhat unstable language spec.

The real value of Servo right now isn't really as a browser engine, but instead its value as the largest software project currently written in Rust. When you're creating a programming language, you always want to know what it will be like to build large projects in that language, and that's exactly the experience being gained right now with Servo.

<comment><USER6> Knowing what it's like to write an HTML rendering engine in Rust is especially useful since the purpose of this language in the first place is to write the next generation Mozilla engine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I will be the first to admit to having a soft-spot for any program that will quote H.P. Lovecraft on abort/error.

[https://github.com/mozilla/rust/blob/master/src/libstd/rt/ut...](https://github.com/mozilla/rust/blob/master/src/libstd/rt/util.rs)

<comment><USER8> brson likes scatter those around. Rust's new runtime has gave me a few of when it first landed. Unfortunately I haven't seen any in quite a while. :(

(I really hope some spoil-sport doesn't get rid of them)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's funny to take a moment and notice that a cutting edge new project comes with build instructions for _Mac_ first and then _Debian_. It wasn't so long ago that if you weren't on Windows or RedHat you were going have to figure it out yourself.

<comment><USER8> And unfortunately Windows support is one of Rust's weak spots. Which will be sorted in the future of course, but it needs some tenacious souls to donate some time if it's going to happen any sooner. Game devs will need this in particular, and they are probably going to be one of Rust's primary groups of users. (in fact, anecdotally it feels like they already are)

<comment><USER10> How is it weaker? I've just started running it on windows this week. Needs to run under MinGw, but other than that I'm not aware of any probs. Am just starting on it though, so it would be interesting to know.

<comment><USER11> I don't know if this is still true, but at one point in time you needed to have installed the exact same version of MinGW that Rust itself was compiled with. That meant, for example, that you couldn't rebuild Rust with a newer version of MinGW.

Also, and this isn't really a Rust problem so much as an LLVM one, I believe exception handling was broken on Windows for some time. Presumably this is fixed now, but I haven't actually checked recently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Is there a good high level post any where about the architecture of servo (particularly compared to gecko)? All I ever hear is "parallel-er" with out any detail about which bits can/can't/aren't-but-could-be or anything.

<comment><USER8> [https://github.com/mozilla/servo/wiki/Design](https://github.com/mozilla/servo/wiki/Design)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> > Servo builds its own copy of Rust, so there is no need to provide a Rust > compiler.

That's because it downloads and compiles it when compiling Servo. I wish they'd mention this.

<comment><USER14> I was a little surprised when I caught that in my terminal as well. About to enter hour two of building...

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is this supposed to replace Gecko in the future? or is it just a "toy" project?

<comment><USER16> It's a research project. There are no product plans at this time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> What is specifically a "browser engine"?

<comment><USER2> AFAIK Servo is mostly a DOM layout parallel renderer. I mistook it for a full browser but the dev corrected me saying it's "just" rendering engine. Right now they're using separate css lib, js interpreter, etc. Servo deals with the layout.

<comment><USER18> There is a plan to replace the separate CSS library with its own.

<comment><USER2> Yeah they were saying it was probably causing performance issues, so the sooner the better.

<comment><USER19> It is a (long, hard) work in progress. One dev started this huge task about 3 weeks ago :-)

<comment><USER2> I hope this didn't come across like an impatient rant. I just wish them a quick path toward advancing state of the art ideas about DOM rendering and parallelism.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Prototyping a YC Startup Each Day - <AUTHOR> https://anvil.works/blog/one-yc-startup-a-day <comment><USER2> Hi there - founder here! Happy to answer questions.

By building "imaginary prototypes" of these YC companies in an hour or two, we're not trying to minimise how hard it is to start a business like this. But the hard part of starting (eg) Meter Feeder _should_ be selling the service to local governments, not wrangling the ~5 programming languages and 3-4 frameworks you need for the modern Web. We eventually got fed up of ranting online about it, and decided to do something about the problem. Anvil was the result :)

(Edited to add: We're hiring! If you're in the UK and this floats your boat, check out [https://anvil.works/jobs](https://anvil.works/jobs))

<comment><USER3> I have a feeling that the trend you're tapping into here is going to accelerate, but I'm not positive.

I see a trend forming where the stacks are getting too brittle, complex and overweight at all levels. I think it might be a result of trying to keep pace with constant change. There has been very little period of exnovation but huge amounts of innovation... perhaps at a cost.

A certain category of developer is suffering fatigue. People want to focus on their business more than the technology. They want to spend more resources on advanced technology like machine learning and analytics than the transactional CRUD/user interfaces. They want to apply technology holistically and stop worrying about the details (e.g. moving to cloud platforms).

For that matter, I see a lot of people trying to apply advanced tech thinking it will alleviate or continue to greatly reduce the need for human input and interaction. Most of the energy I see being expended out there is being spent on advancing tech at a blistering pace more than streamling/simplifying/solidifying ergonomics of development. There isn't a huge focus on ease of long term support.

If the trend continues and tech continues to advance at a mad pace, I think more and more people are going to want to outsource the problem of keeping up so they can just easily build what they need and hopefully this time it will scale further than previous attempts at things like 4GL.

Very interesting approach you're taking here, it will be interesting to see where it goes, and wish you great success!

<comment><USER4> I always follow the rule - get it delivered fast, with the technology you know.

For me that:

* Web: Ruby (Rails), Python (Django), Golang (Revel)

* Desktop GUI: C++ (Qt)

* Embedded: C, C++

* Data Science(ish) Problems: Python

That probably covers 95% of my day job, consulting, and my startup - I deliver a ton of work. Rails my 90% go to for web, python is data science, C is performance. A notable mention is coffeescript/js and CSS for design, but with partials / templates in the web frameworks I don't really need things like React.

I think the problem you describe is a self created one. You don't need to use the latest tech, build micro services, upgrade them independently, and use frameworks that are well supported in what you know. Hasn't failed me yet.

<comment><USER2> With respect, I think you are speaking from the position of someone who has known how to use this technology for so long, he has forgotten what it was like not to know it.

Take your "90% go to for web" stack. You'll need to know:

        * HTML
        * CSS
        * JS
        * Ruby
        * SQL (maybe)

And then the frameworks:

        * Rails
        * Bootstrap (or equivalent)
        * Vue (or equivalent)
        * Webpack (or equivalent)

And then the deployment:

        * Web server of choice
        * Database setup
        * Linux sysadmin
        * AWS

There was a front-end dev guide linked on the front page yesterday ([https://github.com/kamranahmedse/developer- roadmap](https://github.com/kamranahmedse/developer-roadmap)). Just...look at it. Count the pages. Even if you stipulate that you already know Rails, the rest of what you need to know is still a huge wall to climb.

And sure, by now, you have all that knowledge in your head, same as I do. (Probably better; I always hated web programming.) But asking somebody new to scale that wall just to join in with the supposedly open web? Seems a little much.

And I'm still pretty confident that I (with Anvil) would deploy a simple application faster than you (with Rails). Not because you're a bad developer, but because even with all your knowledge you're still navigating that stack - and deploying it, and debugging it, and editing it without autocomplete because no IDE can sensibly autocomplete a system with that many independent layers, and so on.

<comment><USER5> > * Vue (or equivalent)

> * Webpack (or equivalent)

Many web apps don't require a Javascript framework.

<comment><USER6> Nor Ruby and Rails

<comment><USER5> True, but most require some sort of backend. Many of those apps can still exist with little or no Javascript.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I love this and it shows a ton of promise.

It's missing some crucial features for non internal apps though. I kicked the tires on it a bit and paid for a plan. Things like server side rendering for various crawlers, deep linking, browser history support, automatic form validation, user accessible automated database backup and restore are currently not present. Also setting up a domain with ssl on cloudflare dns hasn't worked, when it works so easily on aws and heroku. Domain with ssl is said to be officially supported though.

I'm also unsure about using python transpiled js beyond some basic use cases. That would require some more experimentation.

There's a ton of potential but for me at least the above need some love. At this point due to those issues so much gets pushed to a separate server with say Django/heroku that I am leaning towards "why not just use that?".

</comment><comment><USER8> Cool tech, scary direction for a business model. Don't like the idea of only being able to compile code as long as I'm paying rent for the compiler.

At least with the web hellscape you can download the ridiculously-large-number of js libraries and be able to deploy your app to any server whenever you want.

I will happily pay for tools but I won't rent tools.

<comment><USER9> Second that. I will pay for the tool but not renting for serious work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Ive been thinking about this problem for sooooo long.

Even with all the SAAS/PAAS out there a significant amount of time is dedicated to really basic glue & CRUD code for a majority of developers. And its a shame! Not just for the pace of application development, but for wasting skilled developer's times on ridiculously basic (but time consuming) tasks.

Honestly, I can imagine a day where the UI editor is replaced with a UI demo. There are UX best practices across the different platforms, which most orgs ignore. Id rather have a bunch of my apps looking similar than half of them implementing strange or frustrating patterns. Given the rationale for the choice of layout and the ability to pretty it up, most PMs would have enough ammo to push it through their org.

Congrats on what looks like an excellent product!

</comment><comment><USER11> This is super cool and I'm looking forward to giving it a try. I support our finance team, and an easy way to create a GUI around API calls to our different systems would be great to automate/make self-service tasks that are really manual or that only I can do today as a programmer.

Right now I'd typically spin up a quick rails and/or react app for that, so I'm excited to see how Anvil compares. Personally I wish it supported Ruby, but I understand why you'd start with Python.

The number of tools that try to do something like this keeps growing (Bubble comes to mind, or Appian in a slightly more enterprise space), and for good reason. This space is all about execution really--I suspect within the next 5 years or so it'll become pretty easy and mainstream for semi-technical folks to easily create a web app, and I'll be interested to see what that solution looks like.

<comment><USER12> I work using something like Appian but even more enterprisey. I've watched non-technical users try and build something in it and they basically can't. What you end up with is the worst of both worlds. Non-technical users can't build in it and the features that are meant for them to use just end up slowing down developers. Effectively, whatever you build to replace a programming language eventually will be as complex as the programming language.

The learning curve of programming is steep. It's like a sheer wall and then a steady increasing line. It takes a beginner a ton of effort to produce anything in something like Rails. But once they get passed that initial hurdle over time they will be able to build more and more complex apps. Something like Appian, that initial sheer wall is far less steep, but still formidable. After you get passed that, however, you will fairly quickly find some thing Appian doesn't provide an easy way to do. At that point, you hit the sheer wall again and can even find yourself with something that isn't possible to do.

I think everyone identifies that replacing excel with web apps is a huge need with a lot of potential for monetization. The issue is that the biggest reason that non-technical users can do stuff in excel is that they have spent years to decades learning how. It's a tough sell for them to do the same in your app unless it is an industry standard.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "Web developers who all use JavaScript have to learn too many technologies, so all they have to do is learn Python"

It's the modern web and mobile focused MS Access we've all been waiting for. It looks awesome. And now all those JavaScript and PHP developers have to learn a new language, and everyone who starts with this and wants to go beyond will be unable to, because they are being taught to write front end applications in Python.

It's so awesome. I wish I didn't think the choice of language mattered, but I do (and will probably be karma pounded for not loving Python-as-a-frontend- language-choice)

<comment><AUTHOR> I haven't tried it, but you can still write your own front end stuff in javascript in Anvil. It is mentioned in Meredydd's comment below.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Concept seems useful especially for deploying internal tooling (as alluded to here)

But I know I'm going to have to put you guys through a deep vendor assessment to use the service, so here's my other question: do you guys have an on-prem offering? :) I'd be down to use this for prototyping new things all the time, but it'd make more sense if we know none of the prototypes leave our possession.

<comment><USER2> Yep! It's used by companies so big and secretive we can't mention their name on the open Internet, even :)

Drop me a line at email@example.com - I'd be happy to give you a proper demo. The on-prem version takes just one "docker-compose" command to set up.

<comment><USER14> Done.

-Bryant

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> If there is a faster way to MVP than Anvil I would be amazed to see it. I am trialling it at the moment for something entirely different, business work- flow apps and monitoring apps. It is really fast to generate API endpoints, and it comes with an amazing 'uplink' tool which is a Python library that opens a websocket to Anvil and allows communication straight through a corporate firewall!

<comment><USER15> I can appreciate that they are different tools, but to accept your challenge, I submit three.js, along with the multiple websites that have boatloads of single feature demos. In the particular venue of 3D graphics in the browser, I contend three.js would provide more depth than anvil's breadth.

That being said, I see no reason why you couldn't combine the two, and get the best of both worlds.

<comment><USER2> _> I see no reason why you couldn't combine the two_

You bet! Although Anvil mostly shields you from the mudbath of the modern web front end, we do have full HTML and JS interop. So you can call into JS from Anvil's Python code, and into Python from JS.

Even better, once you've _built_ your (eg) three.js interface, you can package it up as a custom component. Then you (or anyone else) can drag-and-drop it onto their page and use it with a pure Python API.

-

I haven't finished editing the tutorial video for this, so I'm afraid I'm just going to point you at the reference docs.

JS interop: [https://anvil.works/doc#js_interop](https://anvil.works/doc#js_interop)

Custom components: [https://anvil.works/doc#custom_components](https://anvil.works/doc#custom_components)

There are also quite a few examples on our user forum, if you sniff around. Check out the "Show and Tell" section in particular.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> We need something like that for mobile native apps

<comment><USER16> I've thought about doing something like that (for React Native) - and either blogging about it, or doing a screencast for each one, etc. What would you want to see the most out of something like that?

<comment><USER9> I think we just need a good CRUD app building tool. They are in the right direction but it is only for web app. There is a huge need for creating CRUD mobile native apps quickly with drag & drop and some coding. React Native is good enough but I feel there could be a better tool on top to make building CRUD apps really fast.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This is absolutely amazing! Looking forward to seeing more case studies, especially around internal enterprise apps because I suspect that trying to convince departments from a big company of an idea might be as hard as convincing the general public (as is the case with b2c founders)

<comment><USER2> Thanks! Is there a particular example you'd like to see?

Annoyingly, we can't really talk about the details of most of our internal- enterprise-app-type deployments. We do have an anonymised example here: [https://anvil.works/case-studies/building-secure-download- po...](https://anvil.works/case-studies/building-secure-download-portal) \- but even that is more detail than most want to share!

So if you have a suggestion for an enterprised-focused example you'd like to see - especially for your company - drop me a line and let's make it happen! (Email is in my profile.)

<comment><USER17> Similar to what jimnotgym said, workflow apps are a huge timesavers but trying to get IT to make or host one is a headache.

A big one I saw while consulting for big enterprises was document processing (esp Excel/CSV). The lowest person on totem pole goes through 100 documents replacing or reformatting some value. Python is great for this!

Is there a way to upload documents into Anvil?

<comment><USER2> _> Is there a way to upload documents into Anvil?_

Absolutely! Check out this fifteen-minute demo, building a document storage/tracking system: [https://anvil.works/blog/document- tracking](https://anvil.works/blog/document-tracking)

For more advanced processing we have have pandas, python-xslx, and all that good stuff ready to use :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm surprised no one has mentioned Microsoft Office PowerApps.

Each page in the app looks like a Powerpoint slide, each piece of logic is like an Excel formula, and the end result is that it's easy to create apps like Visual Basic. There are tons of integrations, too.

[https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/](https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en- us/)

</comment><comment><USER19> This looks pretty neat but I'm trying to understand the target market of Anvil. It seems like the intent is to target the market of people testing out ideas that need more than just a landing page with an email sign up field but the technical requirements of making an anvil site seem just technical enough to put off anyone without the bravery to get at least a little technical. The 15 year old in me who loved tinkering with Adobe Flash sees a lot in this project. Perfect for a hobbyist. The professional developer in me loves the fast prototyping angle and I'd probably point people to this site if they had a little idea they wanted to validate that seemed too costly to start any other way. Not sure it has a personal use though.

<comment><USER2> Our customers do include quite a few startups or startup-shaped projects. They're typically either professional developers in a hurry, or "allied trades" [eg data science or sysadmin] who aren't familiar with the full Lovecraftian Web stack, but who can build things just fine if they have more sane tools.

But there's a whole universe of companies who need to build internal tools. (If you're in a startup/tech-co bubble, you'll be astonished how many line-of- business Django or .NET developers are out there, and how much they are needed. They tend to quite enjoy meeting Anvil :). Unfortunately for the peanut gallery, their employers tend to be a little more leery of suppliers throwing their names around, so those customers will have to remain anonymous in HN comments...)

<comment><USER20> "Allied trades" widened to any people who willing/capable of programming some and "internal tools" (a) overlap in interesting way and (b) are still generally underserved and hence not programming enough, IMO.

In some sense, programmers with no knowledge or interest in the work that's flowing through a workflow they are formalizing as a program... it's a lot like managers with no knowledge or interest in the work they're managing. In both cases the knowledge is not with the decision maker and the tools and an accumulation of small but many & frustrating mistakes is inevitable.

Think of all the "understand your customer" and "build for yourself" advice, it's because insider, specialist knowledge and programming ability have to get together someplace and the advice wants to make it happen inside the programmers head. Well... there's another head this could take place in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Awesome but it misses a simple fact that most startups don't know exactly what they are building when they start out and that as a result there are a multitude of iteration and pivoting happening behind scene.

</comment><comment><USER22> Nice application, will test drive. Who are your competitors (apart from Sharepoint)?

<comment><USER23> ASP.net ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> > Working means....to get paid for it.

> Build time: 1 hour, 30 minutes.

Absolutely positively _no mention_ of finding customers and getting revenue in that time allotment or at all. This whole thing is clickbait ads and demeans the core of what startups do - get customers and scale quickly.

<comment><AUTHOR> > we're not trying to minimise how hard it is to start a business like this. > But the hard part of starting (eg) Meter Feeder should be selling the > service to local governments, not wrangling the ~5 programming languages and > 3-4 frameworks you need for the modern Web.

As Meredydd said above

<comment><USER25> It _might_ send investors the wrong idea that you need to use such a batteries included framework to build your app. If things become technically challenging, will you have the ability to build the team that can handle that?</comment></comment></comment>


What to do with spare home broadband bandwidth? - <AUTHOR> I would like to find out whether the users here have found an interesting use case for their spare home broadband bandwidth.<p>For example hosting Linux ISOs is one answer. But what others are there? Thanks. <comment><USER2> Help the archive team:

[http://www.archiveteam.org/index.php?title=ArchiveTeam_Warri...](http://www.archiveteam.org/index.php?title=ArchiveTeam_Warrior)

</comment><comment><USER3> Setup a bit torrent client and help host ISOs for a multitude of open source projects (not only linux distros).</comment>


Show HN: Offer Bitcoin as incentives to contributors of your project, business - <AUTHOR> https://quid.li <comment><USER2> The main reason Millennials love crypto is as a speculative investment that might get them early retirement.

What about all of the non Millennials that still make up the majority of the workforce and populace? Are we both being ageists?

<comment><USER3> Millennial's and their future is being stolen with incredible amount of debt creation by boombers and more. So Crypto might offer more than "early retirement". When one class use its all power to ensure certain financial restrictions on returns an opportunities. It's expectable that people looking for other things to get real publicly available returns.</comment></comment>


Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57617840-93/reversing-course-google-rejects-adobe-web-publishing-tech/

<comment><USER2> Ah yes, the Open Web, brought to you by MS, Google, Apple, Mozilla, and Op^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H. Remember, if there's anything you don't like about their decisions, you can change things just by starting your own web brower and getting your first hundred million users.

<comment><USER3> I hate to agree with this troll, but I don't see how to disagree :(

<comment><USER2> Thanks—though I'm not a troll. Here's a longer discussion of the problem and what could be done about it: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6810259](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6810259) .

A more straightforward response would just be to call for HTML to be brought back under the control of the W3C. There are certainly merits to that, but at the same time a) W3C has its own obvious flaws as the overlord of HTML, b) no matter how benevolent a dictator W3C would or could be, even democratic (or quasi-semi-democratic) control is not the same thing as actual openness in the form of _de facto_ (not just notional) forkability, and c) there's no easy and obvious way to get the yoke of W3C control back on the necks of the browser- vendor cartel, no matter how desirable it might be.

Regardless, one important first step is for people in general to have a clear- eyed view of what the present situation really is. One necessary part of that is for people to stop having a reflexive feel-good response to the 'Open Web' slogan.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I highly recommend reading the original thread instead of this horrible writeup: [https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink- dev/kTktlHPJn4Q)

Especially Håkon Wium Lie, who isn't even mentioned in this article, brings up some really convincing points against CSS Regions.

</comment><comment><USER5> I would say the reason is Google Docs! The current version doesn't use contentEditable [0] anymore, Google wrote a custom renderer in JS using one DIV per line with custom word wrapping, etc.

With Adobe's CSS Regions and other improvements [1] everyone could write an Google Docs competitor (single person mode) in one hour. Of course, Google and Microsoft with its Office Web fear this possible upcoming situation.

It would be awesome if some browser devs improve "contentEditable". It's really sad, there are so many bugs in Webkit and Firefox bugtrackers and got submitted related to this topic and no one fixed them. And no new features arrive either for years. Read some source code TinyMCE & co and you know what I mean, a lot of hacks to work around browser bugs.

[0] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich- text_editor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich-text_editor)

[1] [http://html.adobe.com/webplatform/](http://html.adobe.com/webplatform/)

<comment><USER6> Did you actually read the actual conversation? [https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-d...](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink- dev/kTktlHPJn4Q/YrnfLxeMO7IJ)

<comment><USER5> Yes. The Google Groups discussion made it clear that Blink devs are not interested in Adobe's patches for several reasons. And the real reason seems be more political (Google Docs interests) than anything else.

What's weird is that even Microsoft IE10+ and Apple iOS 7 support CSS regions! And Chrome (and Opera Next) want even remove multi-column support, or at least fall back to a inferior bugg solution, wtf.

What I don't get that Mozilla proposed their own inferior solution. It's reminds me of Mozilla's movement against WebSQL, a very sad story for HTML5.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This should be handled by the web-standards committee. Yes it's slow-moving, but solutions that only work in one browser will balkanize the web.

If I were Adobe I'd try to build a javascript-based solution for now, and push on the standards committees for the long term.

</comment><comment><USER8> "1.4 How does this affect web standards?

We have sufficient market share on the desktop that a few months from now, we will be in a position to unilaterally dictate them.

We hope to leverage this control to achieve the same dominance in mobile eventually."

—

"In practice, this allows us to call the project "open" while simultaneously ensuring Google will be the only effective contributor to the Chrome and Blink source now and in the future. We've had enormous success co-opting the language of open source in the past to imply our products are better, and we aim to continue with that strategy."

[http://prng.net/blink-faq.html](http://prng.net/blink-faq.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> Dear Google, other things you might want to do to make your rendering engine faster, especially on mobile.

* Proxy all mobile connections through an html-simplifier

* Ignore inline elements like <strong> and <em>

* Remove the vertical part of the box model, and disallow any vertical positioning statements

* Simply serve raw html to the end user. In these days of semantic HTML5, users should be able to read it anyway.

</comment><comment><USER10> CSS Regions considered harmful: [http://alistapart.com/blog/post/css-regions- considered-harmf...](http://alistapart.com/blog/post/css-regions-considered- harmful)

By Håkon Wium Lie,the father of CSS, the CTO of Opera, and a pioneer advocate for web standards

</comment><comment><USER11> Short-sighted. Chrome's original performance push didn't come at the expense of web platform features and that's part of why it was able to supplant existing browsers.

Any claims that this will improve performance in the long-term are misguided: These kinds of layout features are necessary, so stripping them from the core (especially when other browsers are implementing them) will result in a nasty mix of browser-specific pages and low-performance javascript shims.

<comment><USER12> > Chrome's original performance push didn't come at the expense of web > platform features

What evidence is there that it did not come at the expense of Google support for any proposed Web Platform features that Google could not efficiently implement?

<comment><USER13> The evidence is the feature-full browser that was Chrome (?)

<comment><USER12> > The evidence is the feature-full browser that was Chrome

Which has good support for what were already web standards, and good support for what became web standards through, among other things, Google's support, but you haven't yet provided any evidence that, in choosing which proposed new standards to support, Google was at all reluctant to oppose any that would have conflicted with the optimization work it was doing.

(Given how bad the performance state of the web was, then, it may be the case that the proposed web standards at the time wouldn't have conflcited _at all_ with the kinds of optimizations that were on the table -- which still doesn't show the claimed change in attitude vis-a-vis optimization and web standards, just as change in environment.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Would be great if instead they would implement CSS Books "standard" [http://books.spec.whatwg.org/](http://books.spec.whatwg.org/)</comment>


How to become a Bayesian in eight easy steps: An annotated reading list - <AUTHOR> https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/ph6sw <comment><USER2> I highly recommend, 'The theory that would not die' as a highly entertaining account of the history of Bayesian statistics.

It is not a technical text on the subject, but it provides some of the high level reasoning as well as several of the most important stories of success over many years.

<comment><USER3> Amazon link in case anyone is interested in that book:

[https://www.amazon.com/Theory-That-Would-Not- Die/dp/03001882...](https://www.amazon.com/Theory-That-Would-Not- Die/dp/0300188226)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You could do worse that reading "The Signal And The Noise". Very well written and entertaining while it gently teaches you The Way Of The Bayesian.

</comment><comment><USER5> What kind of reputation does Bayesian statistics have among mainstream statisticians?

<comment><USER6> It is mainstream. Bayesianism and Frequentism are the co-existing major branches of the field of statistics.

It's like asking what kind of reputation hydrodynamics has among mainstream physics :-p.

<comment><USER7> I'm a statistician and I second this take. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I made a list of interesting introductory articles here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14982781](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14982781)

The best one is: Bayes theorem: [http://arbital.com/p/bayes_rule_guide](http://arbital.com/p/bayes_rule_guide)</comment>


Ask YC News: Voting up vs. up and down - <AUTHOR>

What's the main difference on the quality of itens classification using a voting system that allow only up votes versus up and down votes (digg vs. reddit)? YC.news changed from up and down to only up. Why? <comment><USER2> I noticed that on reddit the voting on my essays always had a higher proportion of downvotes after 10 minutes than 10 hours. I know there are reflexive upvoters as well as reflexive downvoters, but from the way the ratio changed over time it seemed that a higher percentage of downvoters were reflexive than upvoters. If so then the downarrow injects more stupidity into the system than the uparrow.

Shorter version: downvotes are more likely to be thoughtless.

<comment><USER3> Could always have a downvote, but weight it as far less than an upvote.

Personally I miss having the option of a downvote. Yes I agree downvotes can be an uninformed reflex, but removing any voice of disagreement seems overly harsh.

I'd say have upvotes that count as 10 points, and downvotes that count as 1 point or something like that.

<comment><USER4> I disagree, as noted further up the thread. Preventing downvotes doesn't remove the dissenting opinion. In fact, it allows and encourages it. Downvotes allow groupthink to silence disagreement. If you disagree with something, instead of downvoting, post a comment explaining your position.

<comment><USER5> Likewise if you agree with something--then posts can just be sorted by comment count. Of course, it could be said that the upvote button is just a collapsed and made-convenient form of replying "Me too!"

Wouldn't it be interesting, then, if instead of editing a metadatum, clicking the arrow made a duplicate of the post (or, rather, a Post object with the votee as its prototype), which then stacked under the original...

"'A stacked comment' posted by bob, joe, fred"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't like downvoting because downvotes are so ambiguous in meaning. An upvote clearly means "read this!". A downvote could mean disagreement on the subject, dislike of the author or just disinterest. I might want to read a story with wich many people disagree, but I might not want to read one that everybody finds completely irrelevant or shallow.

The trouble is that the meanings of up and downvotes are different for news stories and comments respectively. For a comment, the votes almost exclusively mean agreement/disagreement. Only in rare cases do I disagree with a comment but still find it so important that I vote it up. This is different from, say, a scientific paper where this happens frequently.

Overall I think downvotes are unnecessary and cause a lot of bad blood.

<comment><USER7> I don't use downvotes to mean "I disagree." If I disagree and am too lazy to say why, I don't give a downvote.

Downvotes mean: "I find this especially uninteresting"

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I believe the problem with the down voting button is it often reflect more on the opinion of the voter rather than how well the article was written or its usefulness.

Good article that agree with the user = comment/up vote

Bad article that agree with the user = ignore

Good article that disagree with user = comment/down vote

Bad article that disagree with the user = down vote

Unless everyone actually vote up/down purely base on how good the article is and not their opinion, removing the down vote button is not a bad idea...

The voting button is a good idea if it's a poll, but the "hotness" of something is probably better tracked by the comments and other actions a user take...

</comment><comment><USER9> One thing I noticed from K5 is that having both options leads to lobbying and information cascades. That is, if one or two early voters post comments saying the article is really good or really bad then that hugely affects whether later voters hit +1 or -1. With only the option to vote up, people might point out flaws in the article or praise it, but the comments are more intellectual and less designed to influence the voting of others. Of course K5 is much worse because the design strongly encourages people to vote one way or another, whereas on this site the bad articles will quickly disappear if people just ignore them.

</comment><comment><USER10> I think a method of ranking news based on the number and quality of comments would be better than voting up and down. This method would be somewhat analogous to page rank in that the rank of a story (webpage) is indirectly determined by the comments (links) and quality of the comments. Writing a comment is arguable less reflexive than clicking an arrow.

Also interesting news that was generating a good discussion could tend to persist and stay near the top. This would encourge thoughtful comments as you are not penalized for taking some time to think about the matter rather than hastily shooting from the hip.

<comment><USER11> Clearly neither system works reliably, but just to put that suggestion in context:

<http://reddit.com/info/2r8d8/comments>

vs.

<http://programming.reddit.com/info/2qbye/comments>

"Quality" sounds like a good metric until you realize that upvotes mean "I agree!", not "Good comment".

<comment><USER12> Another alternative is a two-axis system. Up-down for agree-disagree, left- right for quality.

<comment><USER13> Does anything like this exist that you are aware of?

<comment><USER4> I've never heard of anything like this, though I've thought of it quite a long while back for Reddit. The problem is that it won't solve anything. Most people will still downvote / leftvote things they don't agree with and upvote / rightvote things they do agree with. If the desire to silence a dissenting opinion could be controlled by the majority of people, free speech would not be such a rare thing, let alone need to be written into law.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wanted to downvote 'funny linux command lines'. When I couldn't find the downvote arrow my first instinct was to upvote everything else.

<comment><USER15> Perhaps you could start a news.yc Vote Exchange website. I liked the funny linux command line story, so in exchange for me not upvoting it, you can not upvote something else!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> related question: i've seen comments here that have, say, -2 points. if you can only vote up, how is it possible for a comment to ever go below one point? my guess is maybe you get a down-vote button once your karma goes above a certain score?

<comment><USER17> You've got it, but you can only downvote comments. And you can't downvote replies to your comment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wrote a reddit post on this <http://reddit.com/info/gg2w/comments>

... although most other commenters didn't agree.

Summary: up only voting measures personal interest. It tends to promote anything that has a constituency. Up and down voting measures community approval. It tends to promote group-think.

</comment><comment><USER19> I think the up/down voting system is intrinsically flawed. A better system would be something like a monetary system.

<comment><USER20> An information market?

<comment><USER19> I've thought of doing that; I assume when you mean "market" it implies trade. So one way is to invest in shares of a piece of information and get returns to fluctuate based on the demand for that piece of information. But that would die given enough users, so implemented something simpler, but similar.

<comment><USER20> A prediction market like <http://us.newsfutures.com/> works by having an ultimate arbiter of value: Either the event in question happens or it does not happen.

I wonder how one would implement a market based system for recommending articles. Could you elaborate on your ideas?

<comment><USER19> Sure. If all information was traded like stocks, then, the person who speaks with the most authority would get the most investment. If they become senile, then they lose value. In terms of the recommendation system, then, it would simply recommend whatever/whoever has the highest market value, plus whatever metrics you added in.

You don't have an arbiter though, because information keeps increasing, and at very little cost, and is not limited by resources in the actual economy. Also, you aren't making a yes/no prediction, so you are not measuring something like accuracy (which is measurable). You are measuring a subjective valuation. Steve Jobs might be only 60% correct that the iPod is the best music player in the world, but a fan would think he's 120% correct. Even though the prediction market says he's 60% correct, in the actual market, he earns lots of money. Something like that.

It's not so far from the karma system, but the karma system is inherently flawed because it's based on democratic principles. When you see a likeable merchandise, you don't think in terms of "buy" or "not buy." You think in terms of value, relative to some baseline. A better system would give users the power to express this.

<comment><USER20> Sorry, I still do not get it.

Could you explain the incentive structure?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> On a hacker site, why not make all the important tools only accessible to hackers?</comment>


An Hour with Safari Content Blocker in iOS 9 - <AUTHOR> http://murphyapps.co/blog/2015/6/24/an-hour-with-safari-content-blocker-in-ios-9 <comment><USER2> "Now, this was fun little project to mess around with, but it does give me a moral dilemma. Do I care more about my privacy, time, device battery life & data usage or do I care more about the content creators of sites I visit to be able to monetise effectively and ultimately keep creating content?"

Once we show content creators that we're willing to block their unsupervised invasions en masse, they'll come back to us with a better deal. The illusion that blocking is binary - either you allow egregious privacy invasion or you fail to support the content creators is one that the content creators have created!

<comment><USER3> The content creators has a dilemma too. Without ads, no money. The party who can solve that are the ad networks.

We need a disruptive ad provider that offers non-shitty ads (like ads before the Flash era) and pays reasonable ad-money.

Blocking all ads is bad for everyone in the long run. Adblockers should block only the bad players like Antivirus blocks bad players.

<comment><USER4> Like the original Google ads? Before they bought DoubleClick, they were just plain text and people actually _liked_ them.

Or, better yet, reddit ads. Honestly, I feel like I'm missing out when I turn reddit ads off, so I don't do that anymore: they make an excellent subreddit discovery engine, so they're actually useful to me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have basicaly been running this "experiment" for the last 20 years. It began with (e.g., text-only) browsers that do not source content from other domains automatically, then I started blocking ads via DNS in response to today's "locked-down" computers like smartphones. I just do not see ads. I often need not even visit a webpage. I just download the content I want, directly, using a custom filter.

Do long load times, visual distractions and page clutter matter?

I posit only when you are accustomed to _not_ experiencing these things.

For me, it is difficult to voluntarily choose 38 connections (how many DNS lookups is that?) and 11 second load times after experiencing 2 second load time and connection to one IP only.

I still find it shocking how many connections today's "average" webpages make to third party domains. It was not always this way. I doubt it would have been feasible with yesterday's bandwidth and memory. Somehow things ramped up to the point of absurdity and it's as if no one noticed.

If there is a "moral dilemma" it should amongst with the ad/tracking folks.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I have been using HOSTS file adblocker for years and it performs better than AdBlock Plus. On iOS, you can set your own controlled DNS server with a blacklist of ad servers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> 9 seconds of page load for ads is unacceptable. Mobile browsing has become a pita because of all those poor ads network, and i think once again (after the flash controversy) apple is going to save the web by making radical decisions like this one.

It may very well be that mobile web content browsing becomes even more pleasant than using native apps thanks to that, since they too seem to fall for the trend of putting the maximum number of ads possible. Only with native you'll never be able to block anything easily.

<comment><USER8> Apple isn't doing this to save the web, they are doing this so developers will be forced to create a native app to show ads and make some money.

Easiest way to show ads in a native app on iOS... oh wouldn't that be iAd service in which Apple gets a cut of the profit?

<comment><USER9> I really don't get your point, with a native app the developer has full control of what is being shown, if anything ad ad-blocker would steer users more towards a clean web browers than an ad infested native app.

As a real world example, the (otherwise excellent) Twitch app on iOs serves unskippable minute long video ads with an annoying frequency, so much that I often prefer using the service through an ad-blocking web browser (which btw DO exist on the App Store, and have been for a while already).

<comment><USER10> I think neor ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9776826)'s](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9776826\)'s) point is the intended impact on _developers_ , not on _users_. I believe that the contention is that Apple hopes to coerce developers—or, rather, content providers—into taking down public-facing web portals that are out of Apple's control, where their ad revenue will plummet, and creating instead an app that is to some extent under Apple's control, because that will become the only effective way to get ad revenue. _Your_ choice as a user will then go away; there are already some, though fortunately not yet many, sites that _must_ be accessed through apps (for example, my bank accepts deposits only through their app).

(I'm not endorsing this point of view myself, although it sounds more than a bit plausible to me; it's just, I think, what was being said.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I really think a kind of lightweight collective bargaining is the answer here.

The way it works is simple. You install an ad blocker, let's call it QBlock.

Then, QBlock goes to the websites and the ad networks to negotiate. If you want to reach our 1M users with your ads, you have to play ball with us. e.g.

* Keep ads to 15% of screen space

* Don't autoplay audio

* Don't exceed 15% of network traffic

* etc.

If you comply with our guidelines, we'll let your ads through. If you don't, tough.

Of course this assumes there are users who would prefer an ad blocker that lets responsible advertisers through as opposed to one that doesn't, but I believe that enough people do that it could work.

<comment><USER12> That is very similar to what Adblock plus did. Many of the users were very unhappy, leading to forks of the project.

This policy, for good or ill, annoyed many of the users: [https://adblockplus.org/acceptable-ads](https://adblockplus.org/acceptable- ads)

Ultimately, it lead to the popular fork:

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/adblock- edge/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/adblock-edge/)

<comment><USER13> There was a huge controversy behind the acceptable ads feature. I think an application like "QBlock" would still stand a chance, but it would have to be transparent and enabled for all web users.

<comment><USER14> "Collective bargaining" and "all web users" are never, ever going to go together. That kind of consensus is just impossible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> A 9 second speedup! iMore should be ashamed of themselves!

Edit: Before anyone says it's not their fault, they can't control slow CDNs. Yeah, it is their fault. It's their page and they are responsible for the User Experience.

</comment><comment><USER16> While I usually am fine with Ad blockers, Apple's position here is completely incoherent. They decided not to pay artists for a trial period, they've decided websites don't deserve to advertise.

Why it's almost like the only way to deal with Apple users is to sell to them through Apple, and therefore give up at least 30%.

<comment><USER17> _they 've decided websites don't deserve to advertise_

To be fair to Apple (or to be generous, depending on your point of view) the Safari Content Blocker isn't an ad blocker. It'll block _anything_ you define in a JSON file. If that happens to be ads then so be it, but it could just as easily be malware, or images, or Javascript, or anything served by the government, and so on. If Content Blocker is Apple deciding that websites don't deserve to advertise then so are the developers of NoScript, ImageBlock, FlashBlock, GifBlock, CookieBlock, etc - but most people see those as privacy tools rather than anti-advertising tools.

 _Obviously_ people will use Content Blocker it to block adverts, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's Apple attacking the ad industry and Google. Remember that Apple own an ad network of their own, and this feature will hurt that too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Sure, Apple may have reasons to do this to hit Google where it may sting some and also seemingly putting more effort in their own search. Additionally, it may be a reason to increase the incentive of getting products off web ads and more into their own eco systems of apps.

All this while getting applauses from end users who reap the benefit of ultimately getting a better user experience.

Apple is in a position to pull this off. Is it evil? Well...

No matter what - this has the potential of forcing more innovation around ad related business models. Especially since so many products (especially news/journalism) rely on a business model (ads) that is largely in conflict with their product (getting people to consume news). More innovation around "native advertisement" where the ad offer is actually something adding value to the end user rather than distracting from the core product. Hopefully...

</comment><comment><USER19> Eleven seconds to load a single page is hilariously bad. Javascript puts far too much blind trust in developers.

</comment><comment><USER20> Sadly, this won't be the end of intrusive advertising. It will just go underground. I think as a result of wide-spread ad blocking we'll see three worrying trends develop.

1\. More paid-only content

More content will go behind pay gates and login gates, like the NYT site, as sites scramble to monetize. This is bad for society as a whole as we lose free access to information.

2\. Advertising goes server-side

Advertising will become more subtle and not understandable by the end user. The good thing about Javascript-based advertising tags is that you could kind of understand what was going on.

In the future, ads will be indistinguishable from content, and already shaky wall between editorial and advertising will collapse completely.

On top of that, the worst part of modern advertising - data sharing - will be completely unobservable to us. Even small publishers will maintain databases of a wealth of information about you, tied to your logged in email address.

3\. The collapse of many cottage hobby websites

You can forget about small blogs being a worthwhile side biz for many small groups. No more dropping in a simple JS ad tag and having some revenue to pay off your hosting bill.

<comment><USER21> > In the future, ads will be indistinguishable from content, and [the] already > shaky wall between editorial and advertising will collapse completely.

If anything, that should give us even more reason to attack this new form of advertising. Ad-blockers were born out of a pretty mild inconvenience. But hidden ads are far more sinister, and thus - should result in far more people coming up with ways to remove them.

> No more dropping in a simple JS ad tag and having some revenue to pay off > your hosting bill.

At this point, hosting is basically free. You can either pay for it with pocket-change (as is the case with S3), or you could host it on GitHub and use GH-Pages, or even host a non-static site on something like 000webhost (I'm sure that there are more free non-static hosts than just 000webhost, but I haven't looked for one in years).

But yeah, it is a shame that people can't make a little cash off of a side project using something like ads. We should come up with a way to fix that... like Flattr or Gittip (Gratipay) have been trying to do.

<comment><USER22> We're not talking about a little side cash. All independent (most of the web) middle-sized publishers like me would have to lay off people (who are not all college kids, some who support have families).

I caution people who think ad block is "sticking it to the man" because only corporations are going to survive a sudden drought if the ad-supported model dries up. It will kill the indies almost instantly and corporate will just figure out a way around it after they're done picking up bodies at a discount.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> On my old iPad 2 I use "Weblock" which blocks most ads and makes browsing on Safari bearable...

Apparently it sets up a "Proxy Auto Configuration" that has a blacklist, any ads get routed to > /dev/null (but its not a VPN, I think its the same approach as uBlock but not sure)

Anyway not affiliated at all but find it very useful on iOS...

</comment><comment><USER24> Thought experiment for anyone not yet tired of the "is blocking ads unethical" discussion:

Imagine there is a news website with content you want to read.

When you go to the site for the first time, you're presented with the following text:

"This site and it's content are entirely supported by display advertisement. You are free to consume this content as much as you like as long as you agree to allow our advertisements to be displayed in your browser. If these terms are unacceptable to you, please do not continue consuming our content. No hard feelings."

Would it be ethical to block ads on this website?

</comment><comment><USER14> Relatedly, I could _really_ do with an in-app ad blocker for Android, because some ads I'm getting bounce me out of the app without user intervention and into a spammy web page.

<comment><USER25> For browsing, there used to be Chrome extensions but those are mostly gone now. Firefox for Android works with ABP, Adblock Edge and the rest of the common adblockers and has for a little while now.

As far as system-wide, I typically use Adfree Android. There are some places it doesn't work (like pre-roll ads in the Youtube app) but otherwise it's been great. It's just a variation on the old blacklist + hosts file method but it blocks the annoying popups and banners in a majority of apps.

I think I ran across one game (Crossy Road) that wouldn't even start if you had Adfree installed but frankly, if your game can't even run without hitting some dodgy ad server then I don't need to play it. I understand the revenue model but I gladly pay $1-5 for any enjoyable game that doesn't put that stuff in to begin with.

Adfree Android - [http://adfree.bigtincan.com/](http://adfree.bigtincan.com/)

The site is just a super-simple mobile site but it's the author's site where you can get the latest download.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Looks good to me; more control in the hands of users.

</comment><comment><USER27> Aww. I was hoping he also took care of the App Store banner using the content blocker. Would be great if those banners could be turned off.

<comment><USER28> Unless I'm misunderstanding you, the App Store banner is gone after the content blocker is run

<comment><USER29> yes, but if you read the article, the author states that was not blocked by the content blocker, he was just unable to get it to reappear.

<comment><USER30> If you look at his script the blocking system lets you hide html elements with css, too hide the app store banner all you have to do is inspect element in chrome, find the element id/class and set it to display none.

<comment><USER31> App banners are outside the DOM.

<comment><USER32> I'd be curious to know if it's still possible to block them, however. The banner itself is outside the document, it's a UI element rendered by the client, similar to a toolbar on a desktop client.

However, it's invoked by a head/meta element within the document, so it may still be possible (eg, when the document is parsed, this element is invoked, and the filter is invoked - which comes first?)

Unfortunately there's enough random forums that offer me an app when I'm only visiting for a one-off google result, that I can see a genuine use-case for this.

<comment><USER33> You need a proxy server that removes the meta tag for the app store from the HTML file.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> So now that Apple is saying you can't make money on the mobile web with iOS, everyone will have to make an app with unblockable ads. Great for the app store. What happens to discoverability when your content isn't on the mobile web (and with google penalizing you for not having a mobile friendly site)?

<comment><USER35> As a publisher I envision redirecting all iOS users to an app download page. Which means Android users would happily browse the page with free content while Apple users are forced to install an app. Not really the best sales argument for Apple? Especially if you consider that the app probably requires permission to get a lot more of your data than any webpage ever could... Nicely done Apple! :-)

<comment><USER36> The user will just refuse to give the app those permissions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I wonder what will happen if ad-based content websites will start blocking Safari iOS 9.

<comment> SG- Remember what happened to Flash? Turns out there's not only a lot of iOS users out there, but iOS users end up using the web more on their devices in general too.

Ideally they should come up with better ads that don't try and take over your entire or system resources (this is even after some extreme JS and display optimizations happening over the years in JS and browsers).

Also unless I'm mistaken, this is about putting more control in the users's hands, he can choose to enable ad-blocking just like on a desktop browser.

<comment><USER37> The only way I see to circumvent this "problem" is to have the ads as integral part of the content, indistinguishable from it. I'm not sure if this will make "better ads" though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> When I'm viewing safari, is it visible that content-blocking is going happening? What happens if multiple apps all try and content block the same page?</comment>


Revenge, ego and the corruption of Wikipedia - <AUTHOR> http://www.salon.com/2013/05/17/revenge_ego_and_the_corruption_of_wikipedia/

<comment><USER2> The last edit to this article is very satisfying.</comment>


Core progress in AI has stalled in some fields - <AUTHOR> https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6494/927 <comment><USER2> Interesting looking article, but could you share the content behind the paywall?</comment>