jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Thanks for the thoughts. I've worked with Go enough that I know pretty much all of the language features, but not enough to be comfortable with idiomatic programming, so it's nice to see a more experienced perspective.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this doesn't seem that hard in Go. Plugin 1 can add a new type which implements whatever interfaces it wants to. Plugin 2 can add a new interface which other people can implement, or not, as they choose. Once you get away from the idea of type hierarchies, this stops being difficult.

Yeah, it's not so hard if you allow operations to be optional, but I think there are some cases where you can't get away with that. As a more concrete example, let's say we're writing a flexible compiler and we're hoping to provide two extension points:

* People should be able to add support for additional architectures. They do this by writing a new function (or something conceptually equivalent) that takes a syntax tree and outputs a list of instructions in some particular instruction set.

* People should be able to extend the language by adding new syntactic elements (new cases for a syntax tree node).

If one plugin adds do-while loops and a completely separate plugin adds ARM support, there won't be any code for compiling do-while loops to ARM, so the compiler would simply be broken for that case (there's no acceptable "default behavior"). But I think that's a fundamentally hard problem that can't be solved with any language feature.

But if we assume that only one plugin is allowed (or that plugins have a strict ordering), then I think either of the solutions you mentioned (type switch or wrapper types) sound pretty reasonable, and they're more flexible than sum types because sum types would force the syntax tree format to always stay the same. Still, I don't think any of these solutions is perfect. For example, when using wrappers, the Sum, Mul, and Eq cases would still point at the non-wrapped types, so I think you'd have to do a bunch of conversions. With the type-switch (but only for plugins) approach, the built-in x86 code generator would be implemented in a completely different way from the ARM code generator plugin, which seems weird to me. Also, neither of your approaches has a way to enforce at compile time that every case was handled/wrapped.
> I think this is something that should be understood far more - I've seen far too many developers basically give up when the execution of the code they're debugging goes into something they didn't write or an exception happens in there

Those other devs may be suffering from a kind of "appeal to authority" fallacy - they assume that this release-grade third-party code section must be correct.

Or, it may be that they know that even if the problem does lie in the third-party binaries, the only fix is to submit a bug report. Since a bug report with a comprehensive steps-to-reproduce is more likely to get addressed than one with an ASM trace, it makes sense to focus effort there.

Or, it may be that they're clock punchers/overworked, and tracing someone else's code jeopardises them leaving on time/shortening their "in" tray.
"Designing a dream city is easy; rebuilding a living one takes imagination."... so true. Thank you wallflower
I'm just a sample of one but I literally did this. My employer started forcing us back into the office as soon as it was legally permitted. We were only allowed to be at 30% capacity, so management ensured that this quota was always filled.

We were all complaining about unnecessary risk to personal and public health. We couldn't even take advantage of the office, we were doing everything through Google meet anyway because meeting rooms were restricted to 3 people. Eating areas and water coolers were also out of bounds.

After a couple of months I landed a fully remote job and made sure management knew that this was why I was leaving. A couple of days after the CTO announced that fully-remote work will be allowed indefinitely for developers, and I'm quite pleased I was able to win that for my ex-colleagues.

Moral of the story: voting with your feet, it's a great way to balance power between employers and employees. Overall I think it's good for society to have this attitude.
That's really neat. Is the CSS file readily available (for others to use), or something you'd prefer not to give out?

(I realize I could probably crawl through the source on your page and just take it, but that seems rude without asking.)
Man, Facebook is just crushing it with the open source UI libraries recently.
Good digging, and I think you're right, this certainly explains how the data could have inadvertently made it from Referrer into the request.
Care to share your CI tech stack? Specially the deployment bit automagically updating the balancer. We are internally building that kind of setup at the moment and some insight from experienced people like you would be very helpful. Thanks.
A 10x increase in the user base of WhatsApp would make their user base every single human on Earth, give or take a couple hundred million. Probably not going to happen. And even with 1/10 of Earth as its user base, it was making <$1B/year.

I'd argue that the upside of making launches happen at 1/10 the traditional cost, with the potential for easy reusability with minimal refurbishment (which will allow much more than 2x launch volume, and a much greater cost reduction) is larger than WhatsApp's to a hilarious degree.
Success! It works now, thanks!
To be fair that's for England and Wales, not the UK.

In Northern Ireland (where as far as I'm aware the gun law is the same) it's 6.82.

It's interesting that England and Wales features in 7th lowest spot for death rate whereas Northern Ireland is 7th highest.
You've got it. The specifics tools & languages might be wrong but this is where things are headed.
This is seriously crazy work, very awesome.

Bummer it only works in Firefox.
Programming is craftsmanship.

At scale and with long-term projects it requires knowledge, mastery of tools, foresight, experience, intuition, creativity, planning and many judgement calls.

This is not special. The same is true for many other occupations. Be it carpentry, electrical engineering, finance or, yes, even marketing.

In a lot of ways it is easier than others, because (non-architectural) mistakes can be corrected a lot more quickly, and there is a plethora of (often free) learning materials, knowledge resources, tools and and projects to build on that other fields can only dream of.

I think many programmers have minimal experience with other jobs, and assume that coding is somehow more elevated or demanding than other professions, while the reality is quite different.
My first thought was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WinFS
Possibly the biggest differentiator that Sublime Text has going for it is its lack of bloat/overhead compared to it's rivals, which use Electron or the JVM. If you hand-wave away the performance cost of Rosetta you are eliminating their biggest advantage.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.

Cost issues aside, I've always maintained that the absolute best experience is a hybrid/flexible schedule and location policy. I'm currently full time remote (I'm on the East Coast working for a West Coast company). My previous company had its main office in my current city, but allowed a super flexible choose-where-you-work-from policy. It was the best.

Didn't feel like dealing with the commute or had a ton of heads down work to do? Stay at home. Wanted to go in to be present for meetings? Easy. Start the day at the office and go home to finish off the day and avoid the commute? Sure.

Of course they made it possible by actively managing it. No meetings before 11am ET (to accomodate those in different TZs). Every scheduled meeting required a Zoom/conference link. Dedicated offices were set up as "conference rooms" so remote people could call in. And of course, people all the way up the ladder worked from home at least some of the time.

Being full remote doesn't work for everyone. Providing a space for those who want it is such a huge quality of life bonus imo. But the biggest factor is creating a culture of inclusion, despite your employees working preferences. This is the hardest thing to do, especially at scale.
> How does Barrier differ?

The people who work on it give a damn
> we've seriously fucked our own society in ways that aggravate this

My money is on this option. We have so much more things to cope with, and so much more change in these things to cope with, than we would have had 1000 years ago. I can imagine that this constant information overload would push some people over the edge that would have functioned well in an earlier society.

(Disclaimer: I'm not a specialist in psychiatry or anything like that.)
Reg T only covers initial equity leverage for retail investors. It probably doesn't apply to anyone you hear about in the wsj.

There are basically no all-encompassing, market-wide regulations for institutions.
People in the comments criticizing "remote work" seem to focus only on the 2 extremes of the pendulum "work from home" and "work from the office". Co-working spaces are a thing.
The memory management of large blocks of text often uses a recursive data structure called a "Rope". It may be difficult to guarantee good memory properties without manual management of some sort.
Every consultant has a favorite hotel chain. I’ve heard some say “i just sleep better in [Hiltons, Marriotts]”

I wonder if this is part of the reason - familiar surroundings
Is it? The atmosphere is thin so convection won't work well. And water is mostly what we use for conduction on earth, which mars doesn't have much of.

I think deep in the ocean or on antarctica makes more sense.
An African central bank is suspicious of cryptocurrency. How is that somehow evidence that wire transfers are difficult?

I guess if the use case is “I want to send $1M from Iran to an American who will distribute the money to Nigerian accounts”... Then yes, that is presumably easier to execute in crypto. But there are also pretty good reasons why countries want to keep an eye on that kind of flows.
> I managed remote, multi-national teams before COVID.

> I suspect HN's opinion on location-based pay might change over time as Americans realize that US salaries are the outlier on an international scale

The world's most valuable tech companies still do the vast majority of development work in their home countries, and the trend to keep core development at home has only accelerated in recent years. A lot of things would have to change - including that - in order for this belief to age poorly.

Also fwiw, we built our team fully-remote pre-COVID as well, with location-agnostic pay. It only becomes clearer that this has been the right move with each passing year, and we're continuing to lean into this as a result.

I will say, though, that this can depend on what type of company you're building. If your company's core competency is something other than software (e.g. sales), building an extremely high-performing engineering culture may not be the most important thing to your company, and the tradeoffs you have to make in order to do so may not be worth it.
>>This smacks of outright detached privilege only HNers can conjure up from its ivory tower, go to countries that suffer from hyperinflation and still suffer from severe capital controls after that period all of which prevent wealth creation before you make such a claim.

Hyperinflation is merely the symptom. If you think you can cure a failed state by treating it's symptoms you are just going to make things worse through ignorance.

>What you have just said is just beyond belief and I cannot seriously take what you say serious.

The unfortunate reality is that the problems lie much deeper than in just something as irrelevant as the currency.

Think about it. If you can buy 10kg of laundry detergent for $1 how come that country didn't simply export its ultra cheap products and grew its economy that way? You know, like China. Why is China different? It's easy. China had competition in Hong Kong and an easy model to copy and most importantly, the government did copy the working model and invested into a capitalist China.

Here's the thing. Governments can make and break their countries. A crappy deflationary currency will never achieve anything.
I’m reading Plato and this might look fun to try out.
Well, a lot of resources have been put into reducing compilation times, and large improvements have been achieved. It's not just perennially 'around the corner', the improvements are tangible and happening right now.
“Look at the evil ideas that people in the tech community are flirting with” is one more argument towards NYT’s overarching thesis that Tech is too powerful, doesn’t deserve its power, and must be smacked down.
The Nielsen ratings timelines show a fact not a motive.

It is factual that viewers of one channel tuned out during an opposing viewpoint, viewers of the other two channels did not tune out during an opposing viewpoint.

Your assertion may be why MSNBC/CNN didn't tune out during house presentations, but doesn't explain why they didn't tune out during defense presentations.

---

Meanwhile, research on "approach-avoidance" behavioral patterns suggests there is a partisan difference in the degree of partisanship one needs one's sources to exhibit:

There's also good evidence that this kind of "selective exposure" is disproportionately powerful among Republicans. "One study found that adding the FNC logo to a news story increased the probability that Republicans would choose to read the story by 25 percentage points, whereas adding CNN’s logo or NPR’s logo reduced the chance by 10 points," Grossmann and Hopkins write. "No equally strong effects occurred among Democrats."

http://pcl.stanford.edu/research/2009/iyengar-redmedia-bluem...

The concern I'm raising is not that, but this:

"Thus, as the audience become polarized over matters of politics and public policy, rational media owners stand to gain market share by injecting more rather than less political bias into the news (Gentzkow & Shapiro, 2006). ... A further implication of voters’ increased exposure to one-sided news coverage is an ‘‘echo chamber’’ effect—the news serves to reinforce existing beliefs and attitudes."

The system needs a way to systematically correct for this.
You are entering a very long and deep rabbit hole with a 2000 year history. Your questions are the central issue in epistemology, a branch of philosophy. The philosophers have endlessly discussed the validity of reason and logic which ultimately reduces to defining a valid theory of concepts (or abstractions). The best overview of this history is the introduction to Rand's book "For The New Intellectual".

>By abstracting a system we can work with the essential relationships and features without getting caught up in details and exceeding our working memory capacity.

You are on the right track here. In Rand's "Introduction To Objectivist Epistemology" (where she spells out her theory of concepts) she identifies this as a fundamental cognitive need. As she put it, concepts are "space" savers that allow us to condense the world of experience into a manageable set of abstractions/concepts. The fundamental epistemological question is how do we define/use concepts without falling into contradiction or thinking in a circle.

BTW, Rand is not popular on HN so you won't get much discission here but read and judge her work for youself.
> people are making judgements about an OS that aren't really caused by the OS

That's why I add the word "ecosystem." I'm sure that most of the big problems I complained about can be traced to a 3rd party, but the fact that something isn't really Microsoft's fault doesn't mean it isn't their responsibility in the sense that it would be different in the mac ecosystem and therefore should affect my purchasing decisions.

* Broken activation: maybe a 3rd party program overwrote a registry key, maybe I reinstalled the damn OS too many times and their servers locked me out. Either way it's not Microsoft's "fault" per se, but Mac OS X doesn't have an activation mechanism to break, so it's a win for the Mac ecosystem.

* Broken fsck: there was really no excuse for this, it falls squarely in the MS's-fault bin.

* Broken major updates: I didn't mention the broken 8.0->8.1 update because it's evidently common knowledge in the Windows ecosystem that updating without doing a clean install approximately never works and it was therefore "my fault" that I tried it. Guess what? It approximately always works in the mac ecosystem, and that's a win for the mac ecosystem.

* Broken linker: Undetected virus? Registry overwrite? Clearly it didn't affect everyone, so it must have been something specific to my computer, and therefore probably wasn't MS's fault per-se. Still, during that install I had been extremely careful about being gentle by not installing non-default drivers, system tools, etc, so it must have been the fault of an app, possibly one I downloaded by fumbling while running the download-button gauntlet. Guess what? That kind of BS simply doesn't exist in the Mac ecosystem, at least not nearly at the levels that it exists in the Windows ecosystem. Microsoft's fault? Not really, but I'm not a charity or a judge, so I don't really care. If things are better on the mac side of the fence, that's reason enough for me to return.

> Comparing the cheap hardware put in the budget-line laptops to the (mostly) decent hardware put in the line of portable Macs is pretty foolish

Fair enough, but once you're buying the expensive PC hardware the Microsoft ecosystem no longer wins by default on price so it comes down to personal preference and things that are Microsoft's fault.

> 99% of the problems that people actually report as 'problems with Windows', aren't.

True but irrelevant.
They're definitely advancing engineering. They're also significantly improving space transportation infrastructure, which is crucial to getting more space-related science (and that includes a lot of stuff that is of terrible importance to biotechnology, which is likely to be The Next Big Thing after IT). Apart from that, they're directly working towards making humans interplanetary species and - as we just learned - fixing communication infrastrucutre before that.

Add to that the amount of interest they generate among people - they're beginning to achieve what Star Trek did once, making space cool again. I personally know people who are dreaming (and some moving towards) aerospace career because of SpaceX, and with the amount of hype you see around the Internet, I'm pretty sure we'll soon have a generation of engineers inspired by Elon's companies.

Oh, and they do all that for dirt cheap.

I don't know how good they're on an absolute scale, or compared to the next best alternative, but they're definitely very cost-effective in terms of current and potential benefits to humanity.
Since most ads are effectively blocked at the domain level, I doubt your scheme would provide much bang for the buck.
This is a common propaganda claim in American right-wing media: they’ll talk about “open borders” as if there’s any significant group calling for open, visa-free migration but it’s just not true. A majority of Americans support various reforms - e.g. for the large sectors of the economy which depend on undocumented migrants - but that’s all in the context of relatively minor tweaks the existing system, not getting rid of border controls entirely.

If you aren’t aware that this is a common trope it sounds nonsensical because it’s so detached from any real proposal but people who don’t break out of that media bubble are convinced it’s real.
What is this? You claim that people are only comfortable in cars because they've learned to be, and then someone responds providing all of the ways that cars are actually more comfortable and your response is "being uncomfortable makes for a great story"?

I mean, sure, you make some good points, but they have nothing to do with the completely valid statement you are responding to. If you're going to completely sidestep their comment, just man up and admit you were wrong before you move on to other arguments supporting your position.
Anyone know if this opens the door to non-nVidia implementations of the CUDA APIs?
This is a fairly common pattern among home builders. Start John's Construction, make some money, live the high life for a few years, homes start to show signs of issues, go bankrupt, then start Jon's Construction and begin the process over again.
Well, sure, but I wouldn't call it "severely misleading." It led me right to the point. Anyways, title is changed now.
Reminds of Bro Lang changing to Zeek. Not clear on the reasons for the change but I think there’s some overlapping concerns
The fact that this is an issue tells me how english-centric is the software community! culturally and linguistically speaking.

Why do some folks have to change it's project name regardless of it's meaning in another language? Coq's name wasn't meant to be offensive.

What would happen if the new name is considered an offensive or uncomfortable word in any other language? would that be a good enough reason to reconsider it? Or we only care about english speaking minds?

If coq's team is fine with it, I'm fine with it (maybe they want to have more users and thats a legit reason to change it).

But this sounds like some sort of peer presure to change it.
Well, no. Remember I went looking for that material and did not find much.
The complexity meme doesn't really make much sense.

k8s is a the centre of a lot of transformational stories, where companies that couldn't do things like CI/CD have been helped making the leap, because it pretty much forces you to do IaC and makes it hard to screw up.

It's harder than clicking on the GUI, starting a VM, ssh'ing to a box and running a process, but is it harder than doing the same with terraform on AWS?
It's just a pity that it's on the "If you have to ask, you can't afford it" level of expense.

I'd like to try Pernosco, but we don't use it at work. There's no way I could afford it for my open-source projects, and I can't lobby for it without first trying it.
I think you might be overlooking the depth of cultural attitudes and the size of cultural differences between populations. From the stuff you're taught in school, to what you learn in the family, to common sayings, to the shape of your cities: everything contributes in building a slightly different worldview and different ways of reacting to events and changes.

On the other hand, when politicians say "the people want it" it's almost always bs. What they mean is that, in the best case, they have a slight absolute majority- but often only a relative one. But that doesn't really count much- the issues they talk about are already within the frame of what is culturally possible in that country. Trump was elected with less than 50% of the votes, so he doesn't represent "the people"; however, he would have struggled to get 5% in Germany- so in some sense electing Trump does represent "the American people"- about as much as Hillary Clinton does.
Nah, he's been doing that for other projects.
Nu.nl is the news-outlet with least journalistic activity of all publications in NL. It is basically a one-on-one copy of AP.