jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Many problems with this attitude.

First, just let go. You're building something for someone else, and making money for them. Treating it as your own "child" and being so psychologically invested will do you no good. In the grand scheme of things you're not "changing the world" with that new photo app or enterprise CRUD plug-in.

Which ties in to the next point. Have a life outside work. Don't let work define you and be your only claim to personal value. It's insane that American programmers put up with so little free time. They want you on call? Then pay for every on call night and weekend. Anything less than 20-25 days off per year seems madness from Europe.

And that leads to the next point. As the TFA says, naive, enthusiastic devs are often not motivated by money, but the joy of creating and they like to feel valued and thanked. TFA suggests giving awards and thanks and bullshit like that. No! The only appreciation a boss can give towards their employee is money (bonuses and salary increases). Everything else is manipulation. I don't care that you are super non-greedy good-person who doesn't care about money etc. It doesn't matter. What matters is your boss does care about it. You see, talk is cheap. I can print you all the award you want and will laugh behind your back what a loser you are. If you don't want the money then spend it for charity or frame the Benjamins and hang them above your bed. Or give it to your local homeless guy or your grandma. I don't care, but in business (not in personal relations), respect is money and money is respect. The earlier you learn it, the better. Nobody will take you seriously otherwise and you'll be seen as childishly naive until you understand money beyond it being the thing for the douche-y suit types.
We ran a clinical trial of a very common antidepressant. Blinding was difficult because on the active arm damn near everyone had observable side-effects within 40 minutes of administration. Clearly not related to the placebo effect in this case, only the pharmacist knew what was in the capsules until the nausea started.
Big discussion of original source yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21606415
Yes, it's a surprise that he ended up dead. Where did you hear 13 years? I've only ever seen 21 years without a suicide at MMC, and that was the only one in 40 years.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/epstein-new-york-lockup-suicides

> Prior to Epstein, the only other reported suicide at MMC occurred 21 years ago, when Philadelphia mobster Louis Turra hanged himself with a bedsheet tied to the window bars of his cell.
Or he could be an adult in a multiracial society who isn't cripplingly defensive over issues of race.
This is great. I wanted to do this for a while myself. Couple of questions:

1- Why livestream?
2- What was the viewer count? I ask this because; was there audience participation?
3- What software did you use for streaming?

Thanks!
It has been interesting to see the evolution of rent-seeking behavior. Some of the downsides are becoming more apparent (poor adoption rates for less obvious ideas).

The MPEGLA site has this caveat " Up to and through date of last patent expiration" and I'm wondering if anyone knows that date? I couldn't find the definitive list of patents in the license product on any of the 'open' pages.
The Guantánamo Docket is a relaunch/redesign of an NYT project from 3 years ago.

Andrei Scheinkman, Alan McLean, and Archie Tse of the Times, and Margot Williams of NPR, all deserve far more credit for making it happen under an impossible deadline.
This article is twice on the front page, note to pg it would be nice to have a 'merge' refs capability.
We speak of Real-GDP, but the day when China overtakes the US in RGDP/capita is still a very long way off.

Still, probably a good time to start learning the ol' Mandarin.
I'm afraid that only a handful (< 20, so far) of the newly released documents have been redacted and published thus far. You won't get too far trying to build that tree.
I keep hearing this repeated, and it's completely false. Even if the Chinese educational system only turns out rote memorizing robots incapable of the kind of creative, breakthrough leaps of discovery the West prides itself on and will never evolve due to cultural momentum and restraints (which I don't buy either but that's a whole nother argument), being economically dominant will enable China to build world-class research facilities and import world-class talent.

The US benefited from such a scientific talent immigration trend after WWII. The European theoretical physics community is benefiting similarly from LHC and the short-sighted cancellation of SSC. Any area of research that requires massive, long-term, blue-sky funding will be dominated by governments willing and able to provide it, and will attract the best talent from all over the world.

The major problems China will face in this instance will be the language barrier and reticence of some scientists to work for a more authoritarian, censoring government. The former is easily solved, the latter is problematic but not insurmountable - even scientists have their price and plenty would convince themselves to work under such a regime in the exact same way Google did (change it for the better by 'engaging' it), especially when the alternative is a stagnant career and dead-end research due to lack of funding elsewhere.

This conceit that many in the US and West have that the quality of our science and research is innate and unimpeachable is both ignorant and complacent. Where there's a will there's a way, and China certainly has the will.
I didn't love the accountant analog. Part of the problem, aside from measurement, is impact. A great athlete can make outsized impact. And while I'm sure a horrible accountant can make an outsized negative impact, it's unclear to me if a great one can make an outsized positive impact. What would that impact even be? Programmers impact can be felt with rev speed, quality, maintainabilty, performance, etc. It's hard to measure how much one person on a team can affect those things but at least they all matter and are felt, even if difficult to measure.

I'd like to know more about elite researchers. Or surgeons. Or oncologists. Or long term value investors. Are there folk in those types of professions who have outcomes who seriously outstrip the top 10% of their peers?
One of the commenters over on reddit gave an example of the kind of person who might be considered an elite accountant.
Probably no (but IANAL): To quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missionary_Church_of_Kopimism

"The religion's association with illegal file sharing has been said not to be a sign that illegal file-sharing will be excused from Sweden's zero-tolerance approach to the controversial matter."

The German wikipedia is even more direct (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Det_Missionerande_Kopimistsamfu...):

"Der formale Status der Kirche ändert jedoch nichts an der strafrechtlichen Belangung von Mitgliedern bei Urheberrechtsverletzungen, wobei Gerson jedoch hofft, dass der Glaube der Kopimisten in der zukünftigen Gesetzgebung berücksichtigt wird."

Trying to translate:

"The formal status of the church makes no difference of the criminal arraignment of members for violation of copyright [note: "Urheberrecht" means something different than "copyright", since "Urheberrecht" is centrally based on the concept of "Urheberschaft" (authorship), but this is probably nevertheless the best word to use for the translation], where Gerson nevertheless hopes, that the faith of the Kopimist will be considered in the future legislation."
Yes, they do: http://www.construx.com/10x_Software_Development/Origins_of_...

Eric's article is a prime example of what's wrong with software development writing: lots of opinion with a few anecdotes and analogies tossed in for good measure, but absolutely no reference to any scientific study to justify any of it.

I'm not trying to pick on Eric, but it really bothers me the extent to which we listen to, discuss and ultimately adopt the unsourced opinions of our peers. How much of what we do is done simply because someone like Martin Fowler told us to? Why do we so seldom ask, Where's the evidence?
It can be 1% and still be what keeps the majority of farms from going under.

15% is absolutely "I will go bankrupt if I don't have this" territory.
That assumes you are using free software without a support contract where the vendor has no incentive to maintain long term support for libs by only applying security patches but not adding any features to old versions. I understand this goes against the culture of using only the latest or "fixing" vulns by upgrading to a more recent version (which may have a different API or untested changes to existing APIs).

That makes sense for a hobbyist community but not so much for production.

In a former job we needed to fork and maintain patches ourselves, keeping an eye on the CVE databases and mailinglists and applying only security patches as needed rather than upgrading versions. We managed to be proactive and avoid 90% of the patches by turning stuff off or ripping it out of the build entirely. For example with openSSH we ripped out PAM, built it without LDAP support, no kerberos support etc. And kept patching it when vulns came out. You'd be amazed at how many vulns don't affect you if you turn off 90% of the functionality and only use what you need.

We needed to do this as we were selling embedded software that had stability requirements and was supported (by us).

It drove people nuts as they would run a Nessus scan and do a version check, then look in a database and conclude our software was vulnerable. To shut up the scanners we changed the banners but still people would do fingerprinting, at which point we started putting messages like X-custom-build into our banners and explained to pentesters that they need to actually pentest to verify vulns rather than fingerprinting and doing vuln db lookups.

Point being, at some point you need to maintain stuff and have stable APIs if you want long lasting code that runs well and addresses known vulns. You don't do that by constantly changing your dependencies, you do it by removing complexity, assigning long terms owners, and spending money to maintain your dependencies.

So either you pay the library vendor to make LTS versions, or you pay in house staff to do that, or you push the risk onto the customer.
Oh, I completely agree, especially with the point that most end users wouldn't notice the under-the-hood changes (except maybe for apps working better when connectivity is scarce or missing).

And yes, the world is heading into a dystopia. All of us that care better prepare some big ZFS clusters for redundant data and well-connected ISPs so we can still exchange data in an encrypted and decentralized manner.

But I feel that it's a lost battle. We missed the train. There's still time but it is shrinking every year.
That was the first thing that came to mind for me.

Shouldn't it also have a companion utility named peek?

:-D
Do you actually think that’s the norm in Japan, especially for animators making $12K per year? In any case, the exact same logic applies to the US where there are more two household incomes. The claim that the US has 10X higher costs than other countries in the developed world is simply nonsense.
This is a fair point. I hold that there are still scenarios in which opt-in text could sway users one way or another, but given that individual apps can make their case before the user sees the interstitial here, I don't personally see anything wrong with the phrasing of "Can this app track you?"
I use it regularly. I find it extremely useful to repeat a request without any initial cookies. Without permanently removing the cookies I had

Some people probably don't have a use for it, but I'd be amazed if I'm the only one who does.
I feel you’re focussing too much on the graphics part. Sure, some carefully crafted graphics will usually be helpful to improve a reader’s comprehension of what you’re trying to say. But too much focus on the graphics part ends up with the same pitfall as modern software UI/UX, that seems to be optimised for having fancy, clean, modern looking screenshots on the product landing page and marketing materials, rather than actually improving the user’s experience when using the [software/contract]. I.e., the unstated actual goal of the UI/UX is to improve the vendor’s experience marketing and selling the product, instead of improving the user’s experience achieving the product’s intended purpose.

In my experience, “legal design” frequently reduces complexity, not by carefully understanding and clearly explaining what is meant or by improving the underlying process or agreement, but by just deleting complex things altogether and only keeping the simple stuff. This ignores that even the most boring transaction can actually be pretty complex, in the same way that implementing a seemingly small feature in software may actually turn out to be a lot more complex when actually writing down functional requirements, let alone the technical implementation. It doesn’t help to have someone eagerly drawing some fancy graphics that only tell 5% of the story and deleting the other 95% as if it’s not relevant. Sure, it looks good at first sight but it completely misses the point.

However, I am hopeful that more and more companies are realising that it makes business sense to actually improve their standard contracts. It just doesn’t make sense to have lawyers drafting a document that no one reads but that actually governs the client/supplier/employee/... relationship, and then spending a lot more money on creating a completely different set of materials (e.g. FAQ, help pages, standard support ticket responses, ..) that are actually read and (hopefully) understood but which are (almost) meaningless to determine the parties’ actual rights and obligations. It seems entirely logical to have these people working together to create a single set of materials that is both understood by all users AND the ultimate “source of truth” governing the relationship. The direct cost of creating this single set of materials will likely be higher than creating two sets, but the indirect benefits and cost-savings should be well worth it.

Obviously, there are limits to this. In a lot of cases, mostly for non-commoditised enterprise products, ambiguity between the non-binding (transactional) marketing materials and the actual contract that no one reads, is not a bug but a feature. But that’s a different story...
The one killer feature I'm still missing from Blender is real-time simulation. I absolutely adore using Blender for hobby and art projects, but as a full-time robotics and computer vision researcher, Blender just still isn't quite there when it comes to being able to generate images in "real time" (even with Eevee) for robotics sim applications, and I'm still using hacked-together tools in game engines like Unity to achieve this and render images. Would really be great if the Blender Game Engine effort could continue as a part of the main branch, but I understand the need of a software to limit it's scope.

Never hurts to dream...
I bought a linux laptop from System76 early this year, and aside from a fiddly trackpad, everything just works. I've seen a lot of people say the same about thinkpads.
Truth be told, I'm feeling the same urges. The golden age of my Mac was years ago. I switched to Macs in 2002, and had the most amazing computing period of my life between then and approximately 2011. Since then the random reboots of both the uncontrolled variety and controlled (though forced through needing to kick a random weird glitch) variety have increased to the point that I no longer consider my computer to be stable.

Frankly, it feels like Windows in the 1990s. No, I don't have rose tinted spectacles of nostalgia on, something is broken in the way Apple produce OS X now, and I just can't with good conscience recommend a Mac anymore. At least weekly I experience random lockups, reboots, temporary freezes, full freezes that require cold cycle, etc.

Yes, my computer passes all diagnostics. No, Apple haven't found anything wrong. Yes, I'm incredibly technical and have decades of experience. Yes, I have fully re-installed and re-formatted and been through no end of measures to correct a phantom problem. No I'm not imagining things.

OS X just sucks compared to what it was a few years ago.

I'm not quite ready to abandon the platform, simply because I haven't done the home work to find another hardware supplier to run some other OS on.

Does anyone have any pointers or suggestions regarding laptops of comparable build quality and design as a MacBook Pro? This physical device and form factor is the thing keeping me in the Apple world. Otherwise, I'm ready to jump ship.

To those on here with plenty of access to people who could shake things up, perhaps with a league of hardware engineers and industrial designers, and a healthy dose of funding, mark my words, there is room in this industry for a shakeup right now. I'll bet dollars to donuts I'm not the only one awaiting a viable alternative.
I'm going to use this opportunity to transition my users off social loggins altogether.

I used Google and Facebook when first building the webapp because I simply didn't want to do the work of building an authentication system. It's lots of work to get right.

About a year ago I had a lot of users complain my site _only_ had social logins so I had to implement my own anyhow.

Now I have it, I don't see a lot of value in keeping the social logins around.

I just need to ask users to add a password to their account and they can login using email/password combo.
+1 I feel the same way. HN moderators have basically ruined the website. All kinds of silly news and stories have been on the main page for quite some time now. Forget about all the hacker quality content anymore.
Odd. Some of us have happily used Linux on various laptops since an i387 coprocessor was desirable upgrade.
CO is unique in that it isn't (yet) the fundamentalist-borne legal cesspool that CA is.
To be fair the CIA operatives likely saw the chip bag trick in a movie. Art emulates life emulates art.
This type of art is not about the visual result (which can be generated by a computer more easily), but about the fact that they spent a lot of time creating it by hand. It is, indeed, art but also a massive cliche in the fine arts world.
Actually, deplatforming a world leader has less power. He could call a press conference and say whatever he wants at any time. He could order his staff to setup a 24x7 conference call and just literally pick up a phone and rant about anything he wants at any time, and have millions of people listening.
The good thing for them is that Microsoft Windows' quality decreased so much that I decided to buy a Macbook for the first time in my life.
That's only a result of the resources made available by the inhabitation of rural lands being under-valued on the market due to subsidies. Say goodbye to affordable food prices if we don't subsidize rural locales.
Cool, they must have changed their comp structure then as the previous model was an immediate "no-no".
The cause and effect you describe hasn't applied to significant investors in oil or coal up to this point that I'm aware of, despite the disastrous effect those two revenue sources have had on the environment. I'm not sure why Bitcoin would be significantly different when its negative externalities are effectively invisible and a bunch of the mining occurs in mystery data-centers overseas, outside of the reach of central banks.
According to this:

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

US has fourth fastest vaccination rate per capita, behind Israel, UAE, and UK.
Yeah, and they aren’t a ‘company’
Bitcoin's energy usage isn't determined by the transaction count but by its valuation. Raising the limit of transactions on the Bitcoin network wouldn't affect the energy consumption (but it would have other trade-offs).
I don’t think kubernetes ever promised to be a turnkey system at least outside of cloud. There are many commercial vendors though willing to fill that gap.
Pretty overrated.
There is a "tap to switch lane" which can do your lane changes but it's not automated (since there's only forward facing camera)
Personally, I switched to Linux in the late 90s as my full-time daily operating system, and kept it that way for nearly a decade. Then I was issued a Mac at a new job.

And... I don't understand the "control freak" comment, because OS X quickly became my daily OS. Adjustment consisted of learning a couple new GUI conventions, and the BSD-ish flavor of OS X's underlying Unix tools as opposed to the GNU stuff I knew.

Ten years ago I spent most of my productive time in a terminal window, running irssi, Emacs and a variety of shells inside screen. Today I spend most of my productive time in a terminal window, running irssi, Emacs and a variety of shells inside screen.

For non-productive stuff, I went from having a browser, music and video player, and some games to having a browser, music and video player, and some games.

Steve Jobs never broke into my house and uninstalled stuff or DRM'd my existing music collection. OS X has never said "I can't let you do that, Dave". Stuff works how I expect it to, and I have access to a wider variety of non-progammer-y software now, plus an OS that's easy to keep relatively safe when I want to recommend to a non-technical friend or relation.

So perhaps you could elaborate on what "control freak" elements are affecting me without my knowledge?
To be fair, most business laptops in the $500-$700 range are pretty shit, with 1366x768 screens.
That's a good guess ... but I still think there's a bit of hyperbole going on. I'd think a gigantor-laptop would be similar enough to an ultrabook that the kid would figure it out. If I recast the question of 'what it was' to 'what is that hunk-of-junk looking laptop?', then I guess I could believe it.

On that topic ... many of the chunky plastic boxes are actually great machines. We have a choice from a few machines at work ... and almost no engineers choose an ultrabook. While ultrabooks are good for some things (watching videos, basic productivity like word, small excel workbooks, etc.), I wouldn't want to compile an operating system on one. I have a gigantic brick of a 'laptop' at work (I think it's a Precision M6700), and I wouldn't trade it for anything. It's nice to be able to slap it on and off a dock, to be able to connect it to four monitors without any janky USB video cards, and to be able to install tons of RAM.
I think the article explains where has it been - buried under the pile of papers and red tape and still unable to come out.
Good article, i discovered it right after i bought my violin (could have been after i got a viola, can't remember). I think you can apply these tips to learning, say, rust programming, or convex optimization. I also think a random beat generator is sort of similar to backing tracks i record in Garage band or ableton, and you should leave pieces/charts you're learning out on the stand next to your computers, and look at them often, 5x/hour.

Another tip, always remember the first time you tried to play a clarinet, cello or violin (if you can). Those for me were special moments.

Here's some other (comprehensive) books about practicing, which go from mechanical prescriptions about washing hands and brushing teeth beforehand, to the zen, in the vein of the motorcycle and archery books, like long tones/long bows/drone notes/son filé (the last is Galamian's term, his violin technique book highly recommended).

Kenny Werner, http://www.amazon.com/Effortless-Mastery-Liberating-Master-M... (recommends pianists practice long tones ?!)

Sterner: http://www.amazon.com/The-Practicing-Mind-Developing-Discipl...

Bruser: http://artofpracticing.com/book/ (Gerald Klickstein' book is also good, i remember)

Julie Lieberman has soem good violin-specific eg http://www.halleonard.com/product/viewproduct.do?itemid=6954...