Archive for April 22, 2022

Friday, April 22, 2022 [Tweets] [Favorites]

Discussions in Brave Search

Brave (via Hacker News):

Discussions are a different entry point to real-human conversations on certain topics, especially ones suffering from a glut of SEO content. This content—so prominent on Google that one recent viral blog post asserted “Google Search is dying”—is driving people away from search as their go-to source of info.

[…]

With Discussions, search results on Brave Search are augmented with actual conversations related to the query, pulled from popular forum sites like Reddit. This allows users to easily see what the community is saying about a topic, rather than just reading content curated by websites.

[…]

To serve these Discussions, the Brave Search ranking algorithm detects queries where a discussion forum might give an alternative or complementary viewpoint to the search results. This “discussion worthiness” score is based on a variety of signals, including:

  • Freshness (or recency) of the topic
  • The popularity of the topic on a given forum
  • The quality of the conversation (as measured by user engagement, such as upvotes or responses)
  • The search quality score (which measures how relevant the discussion is to a query)

It also uses StackExchange as a source.

Previously:

A Cautionary Tale From the Decline of SourceForge

Greg Wilson (Hacker News):

There are thousands of books in print today about starting a business, but only a handful about ending one and moving on. [Tamburri2020] is a deep dive into one particular (and not yet complete) ending: the decline of SourceForge, which was the first (and for many years the largest) open source software forge. Over the course of 22 pages, the authors look at how organizational siloing, the lone wolf effect, and other factors within projects interacted with things like its ill-conceived DevShare program, frequent changes of ownership, and the steady accumulation of technical debt in the site itself.

Damian Andrew Tamburri et al.:

While once mighty keepers of open source vitality, software forges are rapidly becoming less and less relevant. For example, of the top 10 forges in 2011, only one survives today—SourceForge—the biggest of them all, but its numbers are dropping and its community is tenuous at best. Through mixed-methods research, this article chronicles and analyze the software practice and experiences of the project's history—in particular its architectural and community/organizational decisions. We discovered a number of suboptimal social and architectural decisions and circumstances that, may have led to SourceForge's demise. In addition, we found evidence suggesting that the impact of such decisions could have been monitored, reduced, and possibly avoided altogether. The use of sociotechnical insights needs to become a basic set of design and software/organization monitoring principles that tell a cautionary tale on what to measure and what not to do in the context of large-scale software forge and community design and management.

Previously:

CalDigit Element Hub

Eric Slivka:

The Element Hub features a total of eight ports plus a DC-in port for powering the dock. There are four Thunderbolt 4/USB4 ports, which include one upstream port for connecting to the host computer and three independent downstream ports, each of which can support a full 40 Gbps of data transfer, though obviously not all simultaneously. On the opposite side of the dock are four USB-A 3.2 Gen 2 ports that support up to 10 Gbps of data transfer.

While the Element Hub is certainly a compact docking solution, it does require an external 150-watt power brick that’s significantly larger than the dock itself.

It’s $249.99 and includes a Thunderbolt 4 cable.

Colin Cornaby:

[If] you’re using the [Studio Display] with this Thunderbolt hub, plug the display into the Thunderbolt port closest to the power input. The hub prefers to pass DisplayPort from that port. Things like boot pickers work better.

Previously:

Why Do New Macs Have a /AppleInternal Folder?

Jeff Johnson (tweet):

The /AppleInternal folder, as its name suggests, is used by Apple engineers for internal development purposes. Some people external to Apple have discovered that creating an /AppleInternal folder on your Mac can cause behavior changes in macOS that may be useful for development purposes.

[…]

I’m not the only person who’s seen /AppleInternal on a new Mac. Michael Tsai told me that he saw it on his new MacBook Pro too. And there are reports of it on the web, such as a reddit user who found /AppleInternal on a new M1 MacBook Air.

[…]

Although you can’t remove /AppleInternal directly, you can remove the folder /System/Volumes/Data/AppleInternal with the command sudo rmdir /System/Volumes/Data/AppleInternal in Terminal.

Previously: