jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I am not sure who in their right mind will buy BTC at $48K a piece! There's nothing major that's has happened, yet, the bubble has inflated from $6K to $47K only because it's now harder to steal electricity in China and the rest of the world to mine bitcoins. Every week in Bulgaria we hear for a new electricity thieves who got caught and have stolen electricity for millions - often in the middle of nowhere like in small villages, farms, etc. Didn't China started to crackdown on miners last summer [0]? And, yes, all marketplaces are manipulated by the same miner cartels. I am not sure how China has allow this so far - especially when many used Bitcoin as a vehicle to export capital. So far, Bitcoin is wasting as much electricity as Argentina, but if this bubble keeps inflated so that the Chinese miners can stay in business, where are we going to end up soon?

[0]: https://news.bitcoin.com/chinese-government-crackdowns-and-c...
This is already a thing (tracking + derotator+ ccd in alt-az), but it’s super expensive and doesn’t work as well as just using an equatorial mount in the first place.

More basic tracking dobs are used for planetary and lunar astronomy though due to the shorter exposure times.
The jokes on you because it’s worth $1M.
The reason excess deaths are only 3x higher is because of our precautions. If we let it burn through the US, millions would die and the ratio would be more like 100x (30,000 vs 3 million). Obviously depends on some hard-to-model assumptions. Your conclusion might be right, but your argument is terribly misleading .

(Plus, letting it burn through the whole population comes with downside risks of more mutations.)
I'm in active development on my startup at livelearn.tv that should be able to work though i haven't yet tested it with 50 ppl.

No cost. Shoot me an email if you are having problems and I'll help set you up for tomorrow.
> This is one of those "software engineering best practices" that sounds nice but has no basis in reality

Are you a programmer? What languages?

> Where your code is located on the filesystem is incidental complexity.

Incidental complexity is still complexity to deal with.

It isn't easy for me as a developer to find such and such routine if you've thrown everything into a big bucket named "main".

You also omitted the fact that I didn't only refer to files. I mentioned the size of functions, too. Now functions ARE logical units of code, and if you need to scroll ten screens and names are as vague as "ProcessEvent" (which is not broken down into subroutines), this doesn't speak very well about the overall design.

Thanks for the links - but it's hard not to notice that they both refer to FP languages, however (Erlang and Scala).

I wouldn't step out to judge the quality of an Erlang codebase, because that's not a paradigm I'm well familiar with.

Go, however, doesn't belong to that family. I see no reason why SRP and other oldschool principles wouldn't apply here. I'd be happy if someone told me (that's why I asked at the beginning - "or is that the language"?).

The other commenter (@mod) implied that since the project is experimental, it's done quick and dirty but that's because it's prototyping.

Note that I've never said the author of the project is a sloppy programmer, I only wondered at the code being so messy.
Ok guys, let me speak for the sane people of the world: Who cares???

I mean, what are we even talking about? Pearl "won"?? Won what, exactly? The internet? The.... money? WHAT THE FUCK! Please stop this, ok? This makes no sense at all and it's probably the most ridiculous discussion on the planet right now.
Respond to email and read HN.
why wait when you can use it today with 6to5 or traceur? obviously you'll need a build step, but if the app is larger than tiny, you probably already have one.
I've noticed the same thing about some car owners, I'm not sure who is doing more servicing, the car or the owner.

Makes me wonder if cars are in fact domesticated.
I think this would be possible, but then again it would also mean you the employee would have to setup your own company to be able to work remotely for another one, and although the UG cost only 1 euro to start, you need to set aside 25% of yearly earnings until obtaining the base 25k for ensuring your newly founded company (GmbH). So this means a lot of hastle for what? The remote companies would need to offer serious perks to get people to jump through all these loops.
You mentioned Stalled Tabs. I am wondering if you have so many tabs opened the Network detected it as some malicious traffic and starting slowing you down.
I just spell it the rude word it shares the first three letters with, swap out the k with an h, and then add "sia" to the end.
After struggling with OCD for decades, and trying medication, I got therapy. One year of weekly CBT paid off. The obsessive thoughts didn’t go away, but I can recognize and deal with them better. OCD no longer interferes with my life or causes conflict with others.

OCD manifests in different ways, and can range in severity from annoying to crippling. If you think it’s interfering with your life, causing conflict, or nudging you into depression, get help.
The startup time for netcat is less than for yt-dl/yt-dlp.

Plus I can request multiple video pages over a single TCP connection with netcat.

For example, in a single TCP connection, with a list of 30 videoIds, I can get initial sig and n values for 413 videoIds. No wait time for netcat to decompress or startup. Using netcat is quite fast. Then I have utilties written in C to extract URLs from stdin. As such, all I need is a utility to update the sig and n values in the download URLs to make them fast ones instead of throttled.

How long would it take to get sig and n values for 30 videoIds let alone 413 with yt-dl or yt-dlp over a single TCP connection. The startup time for yt-dl/yt-dlp plus the time waiting for the downloading of each video page makes it much, much slower. These are "do-everything" scripts that are as a result quite inflexible.
"All"[0] in the revision of historical examples sense. Unless one really thinks that filter bubbles have no overlap with censorship.

Maybe i was only the few that cared more about the filter bubble angle and less the "we're selling bottled privacy™" angle [1] and am not interested now that `yegg` has clearly reneged upon the former

[0] https://techcrunch.com/2011/06/20/duckduckgo-to-google-bing-...

[1] https://pictobar.tumblr.com/post/63785124046/the-banality-of...
This goes back to what I said earlier: If the work environment is dysfunctional, then you should either work towards fixing it (especially if you're a senior engineer) or work towards finding a better job. Software engineers are one of the few career paths afforded the ability to do so and it would be better for us as a whole if there was less normalization of awful development practices under the guise of 'everyone else has experienced this or does this'.

This goes doubly true for startups in my opinion because rushing things like this and having a shaky foundation just adds another point of failure to your organization. Remember for every startup that succeeds, multitudes of others fall flat on their face due to a build up of problems.
It's an almost universal practice now for consumer SSDs. Intel's consumer SSD product line was the last one where I was pretty sure they weren't doing this.

Companies want to build product identities that can last for more than a year, but also want to be able to react to changes in the supply chain. Fixed BOM guarantees really aren't viable in this product segment, but you can often get such assurances in the enterprise, industrial or client OEM SSD markets.

Most of the time, swapping in a newer generation of NAND flash memory is a net improvement for a drive's performance and power efficiency, but when the newer generation increases the capacity per die there will almost always be a downside in some corner-case benchmark. Those swaps aren't worth worrying about, unless you're trying to abuse a consumer SSD for the kind of workloads enterprise SSDs are designed for.

Likewise, controller swaps are usually nothing to worry about—aside from some instances where performance downgrades stemming from NAND downgrades have been misattributed to a controller change, the most harmful examples in recent years have been when the amount of DRAM is reduced from the usual 1GB per 1TB ratio down to something more like 256MB per 1TB. The consequences of such a change are easy to demonstrate with synthetic benchmarks, but almost impossible to measure let alone notice for real-world usage patterns. Other times, a controller "downgrade" simply swaps in a cheaper controller that is still more than fast enough for the NAND to be the bottleneck.

It would be nice if we could universally get more detailed spec sheets and a guarantee of a new consumer-visible model number when the major components change, but the consumer SSD market has proven too price-sensitive and the technology and supply chain too dynamic for that to be a competitive business strategy. For the most part, you do get what you pay for, except that a few of the top brands also command an undeserved price premium.
I don't know if you know this - all rights are made up. To the extent that we can convince others to adopt/agree to them, they can be considered universal, but otherwise they don't mean anything. It remains to be shown, but I would imagine plenty of people would be on-board with having the right to inspect inner workings of things they purchase - including firmware/software as most products have become heavily or completely reliant on software. I think there is a role for commercial proprietary software in our society and so I don't agree with the mission of FSF, but I respect anyone willing to fight for their beliefs.
I am merely here to advocate for the position that words have meaning and that (in this case) they have well-defined meaning. I could not care less whether what I’m saying makes censorship look appealing and reasonable to you, I am perfectly fine with leaving room for you to advocate for censorship, even if I wouldn’t do the same.

But it is censorship. Moderation is not censorship. A moderator in a debate does not censor, he directs conversation. The fact that we’ve appropriated the term to mean censorship doesn’t mean that the definitions actually change.

Censorship is simply preventing people from saying what they would like to say.
Being senior also usually comes with some measure of specialization.
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Remote: Available
Willing to relocate: Open to discussion
Technologies: C++, Rust, TypeScript, SQL, Java SE, Python 3.10,
TensorFlow, Deep Learning, Jupyter, Networking,
Game Programming
Résumé/CV: http://jjfreibel.github.io/Resume
EMail: jj.f.reibel@gmail.com
Not just you. I'm a cyclist and runner, who dabbles in yoga and other stuff.

Currently, I have one of my bikes mounted in the basement on a $1000 Wahoo Kickr smart trainer and use Zwift for $15/month (which I cancel over the summer).

When I do yoga, I want a live class because I want the instructor to adjust poses based on my skill/flexibility. Mindlessly cycling through sun salutations does nothing for me.

A few family members who aren't fitness buffs have Pelotons. They all slowly stopped using them over time. So the bike is basically a very expensive coat rack.
You can use 11000000 and 11000001 as sentinel bytes; since a sequence beginning with them can't possibly be minimal.
Policing misinformation is not a thing. This isn't a genuine term, it's only censorship. Censorship is never fairly applied.
Sorry, but the breathless way, that maths is often discussed on HN, makes me feel uneasy.

It feels strange to see adults that opine on every subject, from nuclear fusion energy, to virology and financial markets, like they know it all, to suddenly "I was never good at math", like a clichee party conversation.

I mean, I get it: It first feels strange and magical, since even the explanations of some of the vocabulary take more time than we are willing to devote to a single thought. But instead of digging in and looking up what "Borel measurable" might mean, the HN crowd rather watches the x-th numberphile video/emotionalized Quanta blurb.

/rant

More to your points:

> Your kid has a greater chance of being a multi-millionaire NBA player than being smart enough to understand this stuff

There are >5000 math phds each year, so no, getting into the NBA is harder.

> Even 18th century math would be a challenge for many math grad students. Just crazy

Not sure, what this is supposed to mean. Certainly as a math grad you should be able to _understand_ 18th century math. Now, to _come up_ with the stuff is something else entirely. But I'm not sure how many engineers would claim they had discovered the telegraph, were they be born instead of Gauss.
Scala is not necessarily a detour in this discussion. It's arguably the most functional language among mainstream ones. And for better or worse its ecosystem seems to be influenced by old Haskell hands much more than one would expect. So what we have seen in the last ten years is probably a good proxy for using a real functional language in the industry.

Akka comes to mind as another example of what you said about Finagle. It works great and even has voluminous documentation. But every time I try to click through it in Idea to see how it works I kind of don't see it. This contrast with most other libraries is very real. From speaking to other people I know that I'm not the only one who feels this way. Broadening horizons aside, I'd rather not have production issues with such a codebase.

Personally I don't doubt that Haskell developers are smarter than me. Though I strongly suspect that they come from a hard to reproduce background (PL theory majors? CS postgrads? theoretical physicists?). And not that many companies require this level of sophistication.

There's a huge disconnect I see in the real world. Intellectual bottom scrapers such as JS/golang are increasingly popular. Yes, we see golang catching up with Java ten years later than was necessary but it only confirms the observation. Scala and even Kotlin (F# too?) are not that widely used for how practical they are. In this world I see no place to be found without a looking glass for something as esoteric as Haskell, lazy evaluation and all. And we've had this exact conversation for a decade already.
I can see your point.

But at the same time, I have never seen a project built along the lines you discussed that has not collapsed under the pressure for expedience, and it's just as vulnerable to issues in libraries (which any project of any complexity will use).
It's not really how Apple does acquisitions.

They prefer smaller companies who aren't going to overwhelm the culture of the company.
Actually it's $210/month (40% discount off list prices) per employee.
Obfuscate the emails that are clearly visible on github.com? I think by this point it should be pretty clear that email addresses, like domain names, are not secret information. Obfuscating the data would have mangled useable information for a goal of blocking people who would have had no trouble gathering that information anyways.
I had an amusing time optimizing a byte-scanning loop in Java a few months back.

The initial loop was a lot slower than a naive byte-by-byte, non-unrolled version in C. I implemented an approximate version of Duffs device, and did the unrolling by hand, improving it by a good 50%. But it was still much slower than C.

On a whim, I went back to a naive loop, but simplified the core. This was strictly speaking algorithmically more costly, but it hit a JVM optimization code path specifically tailored for searches through byte arrays. Suddenly my code was about 40% faster than naive C (still run through gcc -O3)! A peek at the disassembly showed the JVM had done all the relevant loop unrolling itself.

A key part, IIRC, was something to do with the loop bounds check; it was simple enough to be proven to always be less than the array length.

But it did feel a bit like stumbling around looking for a magic incantation. Tools like manual loop unrolling, while they help, still incur relatively heavy costs in array bounds checking that you can't easily escape.

If I ever have to write a loop like that in the future in Java, I'll start out with the simplest loop, measured in a micro-benchmark, and try and iteratively modify that loop to the final implementation without losing the sweet spot of JVM optimization. Doing it from this direction is much easier than the reverse.
Perhaps, but Long Island is definitely not what I'd call inexpensive.
Love it. We talk about you guys often with our customers. Its a great example of education through gamification. I'm still waiting for my Visual Studio achievements. :)
Much discussed already in previous submission to HN:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2475854
I've never spent more than 5 minutes to select a film on Netflix streaming. That would be absurd.

In all seriousness, the suggestion feature of Netflix is amazing. I've seen and enjoyed a much larger variety of films, documentaries, and TV shows than I ever would have had I been left to pick from the massive library myself.
You can use the dictionary method "get" and default it to None.

http://docs.python.org/library/stdtypes.html#dict.get
Why would it be wasteful: Lack of economies of scale.

If you claim that states or municipalities can get together to leverage such scale, then you've just reintroduced bureaucracy and waste. This is why centralized control is useful. The US Federal government, one of the largest employers in the US (cause there is a lot of stuff to do for citizens) can guarantee health insurance to its workers because it's big.

This is what frustrates me so much about republican/conservative free market rhetoric. They hate government because it interferes with markets, and then they try and hobble the government's ability to use market forces to save tax payers money. And then they accuse the government of being wasteful.
I just read "Linked" by Albert-Laszlo Barbasi and he talked about different kinds of networks. One example is the number of inbound/outbound links you find on a highway map versus a map showing links between airports. The highway map gives rise to a normal statistical distribution with only a few towns having so many or so few roads in/out that they fall far from the mean.

The airport map is a different story. There are many airports with just a few connecting flights and there are just a few airports with a large number of connections. When you make a plot that shows number of connections on the x-axis and the number of airports having that many connections on the y-axis it shows a power law. The graph is very high near the y-axis and drops off as you move to the right. Finally you get to the large airports like LAX, Chicago, and New York.

I bring this up here because I think the issue of programmer pay and productivity has similar properties. The salaries are distributed normally with a mean and the vast majority earning within 2 standard deviations. If you could measure productivity of each programmer and make a graph that showed the productivity level on the x-axis and the number of programmers working at that level on the y-axis then I don't think the graph would look like a normal distribution. Rather I think it would follow the power law just like the graph of airport hubs.

I know this is somewhat speculative on my part but I think it could also be that the top programmers are so productive because they are highly connected in terms of programming concepts and techniques. The article mentions their ability to come up with alternative solutions. I think they get like that by working on different projects over time. This is also how the power law networks (also called 'scale free' networks) are thought to form in other areas according to the book.
This is silly for several reasons, most notably the fact that dynamite blows up scissors. A friend and I added dynamite and pencil to RPS a few years back and worked out they dynamics. Dynamite is your thumb sticking out and pencil is your index finger sticking out. Scissors beats dynamite (cuts fuse) and paper. Dynamite beats rock and pencils (blows up stack of pencils). Rock beats scissors and pencil (smashes the lead). Pencil beats paper and scissors (pokes and you drop scissors). Paper beats dynamite (smothers fuse) and rock.
Basing the reply rate on the number of followers that an account has is fairly nonsensical. One the one hand, you have bots and inactive accounts, and essentially read-only use cases, and on the other hand the tweet went out to more than those 400,000 followers when you take into account retweets.

For example, I tweeted about the completion of my Toy Story 365 set to my roughly 40 followers last year: http://twitter.com/#!/Alanfalcon/status/9318186977595392

I also @ mentioned some influencers who might care about that sort of thing (Lee Unkrich, Disney/Pixar, the Pixar Blog) and so my tweet got retweeted by Lee and Disney/Pixar, which means the number of followers to whom my message was broadcast was more like 1,000,000 than 40. That day I had 23,874 hits on my flickr page (see the screenshot on my blog here - http://www.syncingdreams.com/2010/12/reward-for-project-comp... ... note that those numbers are not 23,874 uniques–many people clicked through all 365 photos, many more clicked a handful of them). I also had a dozen re-re-tweets and @replies to myself on Twitter, and maybe 6 comments added on my flickr stream itself.

Would you say that my community of 40 (43 including the @mentioned folks) resulted in 6 decent quality replies? 10 replies (including both flickr comments and twitter comments)? Or that my potential audience of more than a million resulted in just 10 replies? How would you determine the potential audience size anyway? By adding all the followers of those who retweeted my link? Do you go through and remove all the duplicates who are following more than one re-tweeter?

Anyway, all of this to come to the conclusion that the numbers presented in this post are pretty much useless without a lot of context, and also to present my own useless numbers as a kind of counter-point.
More like the FBI is aware that American Airlines has confirmed that one of their pilots made a voice report of something he could not identify.
Interesting, that is one definition of partisanship:

> the quality or state of being partisan : strong and sometimes blind adherence to a particular party, faction, cause, or person [0]

Didn't know that, thanks.

[0]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/partisanship
Teams has good features. Lots of good features. Too many good features, really. And they're assembled in the most confusing/annoying/exhausting way.

I've given it a fair shake (probably in the hundreds of hours of video conferencing) and I still feel like I don't understand how I'm supposed to use it for anything but pure video conferencing.
As someone who ported a game to Linux, and the person in the office who debugged most of the issues, my experience is the exact opposite: users run fringe configurations and get angry when we don't support their exact use case. Or get angry that we use certain middleware. Or replace a random .so file with another one and then blame us when things crash. Or countless other support requests.

Some concrete examples of tickets that were more unique:

* Game doesn't work on ratpoison (turned out to be an issue with focus management, turns out that WM is not ICCCM compliant)

* No sound when using OSSv4 (sorry, we support ALSA only)

* Chat box does not work (turned out to be an input method issue, user was using fcitx, the toolkit we were using only supported ibus for text entry)

* Game graphics are glitchy (bug in Intel mesa drivers, reported upstream, still unfixed https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/issues/2565 )
Schrute Farms mode.
That's literally the job of the clerk, not you.
Such clean presentation, refreshing.