Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dvdkon's commentslogin

This is very cool. Having to always set up a server is one major downside of Postgres, with cumbersome updates being the second. This solves the first and has potential to help with the second.

Is there a way to compile this as a native library? I imagine some of the work should be reusable.


Yes! I (experimentally) compiled and packaged it for react-native. Postgres on iOS and Android https://github.com/electric-sql/pglite/pull/774

This is such awesome work! We *are* going to get this integrated with the ongoing work for "libpglite".

Glad to see it working in react native. It always surprises me that RN doesn't natively support wasm. I've had to avoid other wasm-based libraries, like loro, for that reason.

Yeah, it's unfortunate but it's not really react-native/facebook's fault. Apple doesn't allow any sort of JIT to run on iOS outside of their builtin webkit js engine. That means that AFAIK there's no way to run wasm at reasonable speed on iOS, which means react-native can't really support wasm.

Took the words out of my mouth, i can think of many use cases for this.

Imagine being able to go from 'embedded' to 'networked' without having to change any SQL or behavior, so cool.


Native library is on our radar!

The code was floating around the Internet some years back, and was probably privately shared much sooner.

I just wish these groups making fan-made builds would share at least patches, so they don't become gatekeepers and others could build on their work.



At least where I live, there's no extra information being gathered. The only difference is that I no longer have to physically go somewhere to deal with that information, because I can sign in to government services online.

Information that was previously in paper form and scattered across various bureaus is now being digitised and centralised, but that's orthogonal to "digital ID"!


Centralized consolidation of PII IS THE RISK

Yes, but that means digital ID isn't the thing to complain about.

Both. Digital ID is so threatening it would require a perfect organization

Much like all technologies they have social impact at their roots and have to be evaluated together


I don't see how that's the case for digital ID by itself. I'm also pretty sure that we can analyse the impact of a single technology without also blaming it for the downsides of other, distinct policies.

You can't ID people on porn sites with what's implemented in most European countries either.

I feel like what you mean by "digital ID" is very different to what others mean.


How come not? I typically hear of some scammy Zero-Knowledge Proof promising the world and delivering either an easy-to-pass-around identifier or something readily able to be mapped back to you as a person.

I feel like we're talking about completely different things. What's currently implemented in various EU countries is basically OAuth, where user attributes are verified by the state. Being able to map that account back to a specific person isn't a bug, but the whole reason for the system's existence.

Here's a marketing page for a WIP pan-EU project to implement this kind of digital ID: https://commission.europa.eu/topics/digital-economy-and-soci...

There are also various plans for age-verification schemes that should (partially) preserve anonymity, but those aren't implemented and it's not what people mean by "digital ID".


I work in Zero Knowledge Proofs, and they are a great mathematical tool. But they ain't magic.

Yes you can, eID means that you can prove your identity online using your digital signature.

Can is the key word here. As implemented today, users can choose whether to use digital ID. In my opinion, problems would only start if the users had no choice and the government was the one choosing for them.

And of course absolutely no government ever, ever, decided that it was legitimate to choose for its citizens.

My usual impression of GitLab is that it has too many functions I don't ever use, so the things I actually do want (code, issues, PRs, user permissions) are needlessly hidden. What's your workflow that you find GitLab's UX to be nicer than Gitea's?

For instance I just got tripped trying to sign out of my gitea instance since the mobile design has two identical looking avatar + username blocks on top of each other, one being the org switcher the other being a menu (with no indicator) with the sign out button.

I went to a project page, and it auto focused the search input (???), causing a zoom in on mobile.

I just prefer the design / look + feel of gitlab more than gitea/forejo. It's not really a hot take, gitlab has been around a lot longer and has much more support.


That was my take too. It is a big project with a lot of functionality. But, I never needed all of that functionality, so it just seemed bloated to me. I switched over to Gitea for self-hosted code repositories (non-public repos behind a firewall) a while back and haven't had any issues thus far.

You can pin those you want in the left menu

Nice find. This looks like the best introduction to the language in the repo: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gvanrossum/abc-unix/refs/h...

Wow 2 * 1000 without rounding errors, 40 years ago this must have been super impressive, since I find that quite a feat of today's python.

2 * 1000 is 2000 ;)

I think you meant 2**1000

the syntax for formatting ate your star https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc


For anyone else who, like me a moment ago, doesn't know the meaning of ** but is curious: it's how many (but not all) programming languages express "to the power of", aka 2**1000 = 2^1000

> 2**1000 = 2^1000

The reason for using `**` is that `^` is widely used for bitwise exclusive-or. So commonly `2**1000 != 2^1000`!


I think Fortran used ** because EBCDIC didn't have ^ or uparrow. ABC and Python followed Fortran rather than C on this point. units(1) supports both.

C uses ^ for bitwise xor and a function for exponentiation, though.

No, C does not have an exponentiation operator! Possibly you meant "and not a function for exponentiation".

I should have said "followed Fortran rather than BASIC".


I meant exactly what I said. C uses a function for exponentiation. Nothing that uses ^ for powers follows C's lead.

https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/numeric/math/pow.html


Oh, I interpreted "a function for exponentiation" as being part of a list of things C uses ^ for. It didn't even occur to me that the sentence had an alternative parsing where it was part of a list of things C uses. C does indeed use a function for exponentiation. And time flies like an arrow!

He's explaining that C was not the reason for picking * over ^

BCD, actually, given that Fortran dates from the mid-1950s. EBCDIC only appeared more or less around Fortran IV, in the early 1960s. Many printers in those days had a 48-character chain/train. After upper-case letters, digits, and a few essential punctuation marks (like . and ,), you weren't left with many options. The 60-character set of PL/I was a luxury back then, let alone lower case.

Hmm, I guess you're right. Also EBCDIC does have ^ apparently, though not ↑: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBCDIC#Code_page_layout

But IBM's BCD character sets, including the 48-character ones you allude to, didn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCD_(character_encoding)#Examp... (though Honeywell's did)

There are a lot of decisions in Fortran that stem from the absence of useful characters. .LT., .LE., .EQ., .NE., .GT., and .GE. is another.


Interesting, thanks!

And != means ≠

Oh that's why i did not get any upvotes /i

Wow, I didn't know that you could write

  like
    this
      for
        code
          blocks

It’s been around since at least occam, maybe longer

Lisp has had arbitrary precision arithmetic since the early 1970s. So did dc on Unix, also in the early 1970s. ABC didn't arrive until 1987.

    Python 3.11.13 (main, Jun  3 2025, 18:38:25) [GCC 14.3.0] on linux
    Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
    >>> 2**1000
    10715086071862673209484250490600018105614048117055336074437503883703510511249361224931983788156958581275946729175531468251871452856923140435984577574698574803934567774824230985421074605062371141877954182153046474983581941267398767559165543946077062914571196477686542167660429831652624386837205668069376
    >>> _/2**999
    2.0

That was kind of par-for-the-course back then.

LISP had it, Smalltalk had it, Unix dc/bc had it.


Applying your argument more broadly, we shouldn't critique any product or changes made to it, and I don't see any reason why that should be true.

Caring about the products you use is pretty standard behaviour, and when the product changes under the user's hands, it's normal to complain. It can resolve the issue faster and less painfully than switching products would.


No, my argument is not what you applied here.

The fact of the matter is that Android is fully funded and developed by Google and you kinda don't have much standing to control what they do with their project and how - especially if all you can say is that their work is bad.

You can be unhappy about it, but it doesn't change that its their work and their money on the line here with very little relationship to you or your wishes. You're not even a paying customer.

This doesn't apply to "any product or changes" at large.


You said we can be unhappy, which is what the grandparent was being, but you took issue with that anyway. I imagine people in deep enough to care about the downstream release cycle of android are well aware of the power structures at play. Being under the thumb of a massive corporate is not an enviable position but here we are, and here we complain.


Sure, but they also get a full opensource operating system for free in exchange.


wym we are not paying customers? every person with an android phone is a paying customer indirectly and can complain about its development


You're a paying customer of Samsung et. al.

You don't become a paying customer of Linus when you get a Thinkpad with Ubuntu.


It's not the same lol I become a paying customer of Samsung and Google because Samsung paid for it (you have to pay for your device to be verified and access Google Play Services) and some of the cost is absorbed by me

I don't become a PAYING customer of Linus because Thinkpad didn't pay for Ubuntu (and if anything was paid I would become a customer of Canonical)


At least here in the Czech Republic, ISPs have to also list a "guaranteed speed", and it can't be less than some fraction of the advertised maximum. I don't know what part of the Internet that speed is supposed to be measured against, though.


I understand the complaint against coal power plants, but you're not saying that nuclear power plant or large dams cause health issues, right?


large dams do have pretty big environmental effects


None of them that impact people’s health.


Not even remotely true.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_failure#List_of_major_dam_...>

And that's just the direct impacts from failure. Long-term environmental costs are real, if indirect.

I write this somewhat reluctantly as hydro is carbon-neutral,* and affords one of the better energy-storage options, as pumped hydro. Even allowing that dam failures tend to occur under regimes with significant organisational issues (low trust, low public concern, low levels of organisation, conflicted interests), dams have a pretty horrific track record for direct fatalities. Almost all those risks are mitigatable, and the underlying root cause (organisational dysfunction) would likely create similar risk patterns for other energy modalities. But we have a direct history to point to.

I've written on this topic a few times at HN should you or others be interested, I do hope my thoughts come across as nuanced, as they in fact are:

<https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...>


‘Health’ is generally used to refer to things like pollution, etc. that cause long term chronic impacts.

Not individual sudden events which drown/murder massive numbers of people regardless of their general health status (except perhaps for their ability to run really fast and really far on no notice).

Those are referred to as ‘disasters’.


Death is a health risk.

So are cholera and other diseases accompanying flooding.

And other factors associated with reservoirs: desertification and lake evaporation can lead to increased dust, common where water is diverted or impounded (Aral Sea, Lake Powell, Lake Mead). Disruption of silt flows has various impacts, more on the general environmental side.

Generally, if your concern is overall mortality risk rather than a specific disease/pollution mechanism, dams do not get a free pass.


The public health department doesn’t concern itself with things like national defense, if skyscrapers are likely to fall over or not, and local gang violence. Those have their own specialities.

Otherwise, literally everything is a ‘health issue’, including agriculture and commercial/residential zoning.

And notably, no one has actually provided any examples of where any of these are actually in major cities. Because it’s absurd, hah.


Public health includes drowning……


Yeah, individually. Like in pools.

Dam failures are an entirely different department. Or just FEMA/military.


Nukes don’t often cause health issues, but from time to time…


I'll give one reason of many: Its fixed pipeline model doesn't match how humans think about data transformation.


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

Search: