skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is utterly backwards.

The team owns it all - the process, the product, the technical artifacts, the code quality. If the team is looking to the PO or the Scrum Master to take responsibility for things, then they are going to fail.

The product owner is there to help the team understand what value they can deliver. The scrum master is there to help the team optimize the process. The team hopefully has developers on it who are there to help the team make well engineered pieces of code Maybe there are designers to to help the team make great user experiences. The team has specialists, but the team works collectively to deliver results.

If your scrum team has a bunch of engineers on it wondering how to get their voice heard over the product owner, you don’t have a scrum team building your software, you have a PO acting as a tech lead running a waterfall project.
Estimating is my Achilles heel. Always has been. I'm way too optimistic.

My workaround was to do jelly bean estimating. Get guesses from everyone, then use the average. Worked surprisingly well.

We did other things to meet that target date, honor that estimate, of course. But that's a longer story.
I'm not sure where you got that mistaken idea. The Scrum values explicitly call for "shippable quality" by the end of every sprint. Other than that, Scrum doesn't explicitly define testing practices so do it however you like. But I would note that you can't test quality into a product.
That's great! But I would like to give you a warning that I personally don't use npm any more. While they have improved leaps and bounds, in my opinion they are still far behind yarn in many areas.

Yarn has deterministic installs, an offline cache (the recent yarn/npm registry downtime of like an hour didn't stop our devs from reinstalling dependencies because they were in the offline cache), fantastic tooling around license checking and validations, and the workspaces system which makes it significantly easier to work with massive monorepos with multiple sub-packages.

If you are in a willing mood, and are already spending the time to try npm again, I highly encourage you to give yarn a shot as well. You can install it with `npm install yarn --global` if you want to just try it out (they have a ton of more robust install methods to choose from if you want to permanently switch), and aside from some different names (like you use `yarn add dependency-name` instead of `npm install dependency-name --save`), it's mostly a drop-in replacement and can even happily work alongside npm (one of the packages I maintain we provide both an npm lockfile and a yarn lockfile quite easily, while using yarn internally).

Hell just last week I used yarn to force a transitive dependency (it was like 4 levels deep in my dependency graph) to upgrade to a version which fixed a security issue in a library I maintain, then put that in the lockfile so all users that install that dependency through my package now get the updated version by default.

Still, kudos for being open to trying it again! npm has never been the best package manager by any account, but the one thing they do really well is improve.
I thought the point was that it became trusted code as it was transpiled into WA, due to all the checks and what not that could be applied.

So as you said a bug in the system would be a kernel exploit. How would this be any different than a exploit in today's kernels? The result would be the same, a bug fix to a kernel, or a fix to the transpiler.

My point is while user running programs in ring 3 protect from bugs and exploits from trashing the system, but they do not protect from bugs in the kernel from trashing the system. In this case you have semantically moved where the bugs can be from the kernel to compile time.

WEBASM engine bug would == kernel bug; if that system is working right then there should be no issue with running in ring 0. Think of it as compile time protection vs run time protection.

I have just woke up and feel I am doing a terrible job of conveying this.

(side note, is the ring system not just another sandboxing technology just facilitated by the CPU? And have we not just had major failures in some of those systems?)
It appears we'll need a guild of navigators, of sorts, to guide interstellar craft.
Yeah fair enough, I haven't read that book myself as I'd already learned the technique from other practitioners before the book came out. That author is just a practitioner (and self-promoter) himself and not an accomplished author.

It's a nascent area, so solid references are scant. I hope to remedy that myself some day.

A better known author on the topic is Bruce Lipton, whose 2006 book The Biology of Belief [1] introduced these concepts to a broad audience.

I've found the book insightful and helpful, but whilst he's a credentialed scientist himself (former cell biology researcher at Stanford School of Medicine), he gets hand-wavy about concepts like epigenetics and quantum entanglement and leaves himself vulnerable to attack from mainstream skeptics.

Still, I recommend the book for anyone who is able to overlook that. The science may be unclear but the core principles and healing techniques are solid, in my experience of applying them over the past 6+ years.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Biology-Belief-10th-Anniversary-Consc...
German butcher's GDPR notice
Why would it be a rip off? You act as if 'overcharging' for something is always a rip off. If I'm walking in a desert without water.. I'll likely be billing to pay (a lot) more than if I had a bottle with me.

Luxury goods often have more price elasticity compared to other items, but they still deliver value to the people buying them. Not that you need an entire Louis Vuitton collection, but splurging can be fun. It's really not your call to make whether spending on luxury items is worth pursuing -- depends on how high your income and wealth is.

Also: perception is everything in the world. Someone who is well dressed is generally taken more seriously than the same person in a hoodie and wearing sweatpants.
It's a sure sign of a bubble when there's a big swing up in bizjets. :)
I'm immensely grateful that my wife is from Hong Kong. Wedding gifts there take the form of cash in a red envelope, and it's normal to get married at a profit. When I explained to her that American weddings are usually held at a considerable loss, her reaction was to set the wedding budget to as close to zero as possible. I think the Hong Kong idea makes much more sense--a newly married couple needs a financial boost, not a debt burden.
Tech Ethics: Addictive technology
My company doesn't claim to be agile, I don't think. We just allow devs to work on whatever they find interesting. If something really urgent comes up, its urgency is made known to the dev team at large, and someone always steps up to the plate. Works fine for us! Also, we don't have deadlines. Things ship when they are "good enough".

Granted, we're very selective in our hiring process, but it means things just work without much need for fancy management practices.

If any dev managers are reading this, I can say, this approach works, and you should give it a try.
> the product owner often works alone and the development team simply receives a stream of backlog items that need to somehow be brought into a cohesive whole

This is the root of the problem in my opinion.

I am not interested in defending "Scrum", I don't like what I know about it, in the few experiments I've been involved in with it (not by choice), I agree it was disempowering to developers, trying to treat developers like commodities.

However, I am a fan of trying to do things agilely (iteratively, figuring out what to do next in relatively short chunks without trying to plan out the next year+).

In the experiences I've had where this _worked_ the product owner was _intimately_ involved with the development team, with lots of communication in both directions, with the development team's info and feedback effecting how the product owner prioritized and determined (and changed, agilely) acceptance criteria.

The product owner had to embrace/accept that this would be a significant time and energy commitment to them, they could not be looking to minimize their time here, and had to accept that "with great power comes great responsibility" -- that they needed feedback from developers to make these decisions properly.

On the flip side, through these good experiences, I also learned that a good product owner is _so important_ -- as a technical decision-maker I don't _want_ to be responsible for determining product priorities or acceptance criteria. I want my feedback to be taken into account, but having someone else (who is good at it) be _responsible_ for it let's me focus on applying technical excellence to achieve the goals set by the PO, and takes _so_ much pressure and anxiety off of me. Especially when I can trust them to know what they are doing it and do it well (just like they can trust me to execute well).

I _do_ think the development team needs a "technical lead" in addition to product owner, not just an amorphous bunch of people "self-organizing".
> Venmo was one of the few (maybe only) system that allows you to pay users who are not on their system. Say you need to pay Joe and you were a Venmo user but Joe wasn't. You could still "pay" them on venmo and they would get a text back saying if they signed up they would get the payment.

If someone "paid" me this way, there would be issues.
I get the appeal and plenty of others have commented on why it's so appealing so I won't add to that but I will mention that based on what I've found online the biggest negative seems to be that commercial airlines have a much better safety record, if anyone has any first hand experience with stats on this please let me know if the Google results are correct.
I started off as a quiet person (and in many ways still am) but have generally progressed to the point where I am comfortable presenting in front of senior stakeholders.

From what I've learned on this journey, the nerves don't go away but the fear does. The most powerful thing you can do is to acknowledge that yes, you have this fear now but through time and practice, it can go away because it's mostly in your head. When presenting, most people do want to hear what you have to say. Nerves are a great thing because it lets you present at your very best - you just need to find your way to manage it.

You can start with baby steps - i.e. speaking up in meetings, presenting in smaller groups, etc. and then work your way up.

What I've also found useful for dealing with any situation that makes me feel uncomfortable is to question why it makes me feel uncomfortable. And the more uncomfortable I feel, the more I have to conquer it. Perhaps through an overarching goal of some sort.
I've always liked the way debian/Debian based systems do updates. Older versions of windows were maybe a little too subtle (many users just ignored the small icon in the tray) vs. the large dialog box that pops up. It's also very easy to just hit accept and let it run in the background. I switched my father's laptop over several years ago (he only surfs the internet/email/scans/prints) and haven't had a tech support call for two years. I'm stuck on windows until there's a decent mechanical CAD avaliable, but good lord am I wishing I stayed with 7. This is the first time I've ever had to change the default in GRUB to windows in ~10 years of dual-boot, since otherwise I have to babysit the thing every update. Sad part is, I actually prefer the UX of 10 more than even MacOS, but for anything 'power-user' orientated it's just such a pain to administer.

Side note: has anyone else had problems with system settings reverting to default after updates? I've turned off the suggestion notifications several times, as well as neutering cortana.
No, it's the other way around: those arguing against SCRUM don't have to tell their reasons (bad experience suffices), but SCRUM proponents must come forward with logically sound and coherent arguments pro-SCRUM in the first place.
What feedback systems? The system described doesn’t seem that different of a regilar cruise control.
Yaya. Thanks for the links. Will review.

FWIW, I'm desperately trying to bring "TEST in PROD" style continuous delivery whozeewhatsit to my current team.

When in Rome, join the third millennium, old dog new tricks.

I still can't imagine I can get back to the 90s (quality wise). But if there's a way, I'm gonna find it.
From my experience though using DSDM end of day standups are better.

It also helps where team members have different commutes and stops wasting the time of early arrivers. I regularly used to be first in the office even though I had a 70 mile commute to London when compared to my co workers who lived in London.
This. And at the end of the day, deep learning is just a more sophisticated version of linear regression. (To listen to some people talking, you'd think if a machine just curve-fits enough data-points, it'll suddenly wake up and become self-aware or something? The delusion is just unbelievable!)
Not a complete solution, but a dampening feedback loop, giving humanity a bit more time to come up with solutions.
Is this AI Winter 2.0? I was hopeful that logic programming would have developed more and spread to a larger audience at this point.
Neighbors of Lottery Winners Are More Likely to Go Bankrupt
Ha ha! Unfortunately the Nozomi doesn't stop in Shizuoka, so there is a minimum fee for me to ride it :-) I actually thought it was more expensive, so I'm happy to hear it isn't.

And, yeah, this year has been hopeless for the Shinkansen record. I'll be interested to see how they report it...
Chess was already easy for computers. That's why Arimaa came to be.
Snap’s CEO weighs in on Facebook’s long history of copying him
Actually thought it was well written, except the women comment, and it was doing a good job of explaining how the technology worked. Pointing to the same limitations cruise controlle is facing today, hills feeling uneasy, too fast, or too slow as there is no context, etc.
He's wrong about Lisp not being capable of handling heap exhaustion through "exceptions" (conditions in Common Lisp).
Agree about futility of testing towards quality.

Source: Former QA/Test manager.
I remember reading psychologist studies where doctors are twice as likely to diagnose a woman with depression compared to a man with an identical profile, and on average women have a higher chance of correctly getting an diagnose of depression.

I also remember seeing a study that sent identical profiles to general doctors but with the profile gender randomized. The result as I recall was that female patients were more likely to be believed in regard to pain and self-reported symptoms, but those men that did still get diagnosed were more likely to get active treatments.
Show HN: Nextein – Static site generator with Markdown for NextJS
Tell HN: Why do we software engineers put up with this?
This is the 'inventions' clause of an employment agreement that was presented to me recently, by an NYC based company. The role was software engineering for a non-software tech company.

I understand that “Inventions” means discoveries, developments,
concepts, designs, ideas, know how, improvements, inventions, trade
secrets and/or original works of authorship, whether or not patentable,
copyrightable or otherwise legally protectable. I understand this
includes, but is not limited to, any new product, machine, article of
manufacture, biological material, method, procedure, process, technique,
use, equipment, device, apparatus, system, compound, formulation,
composition of matter, design or configuration of any kind, or any
improvement thereon. I understand that “Company Inventions” means any
and all Inventions that I may solely or jointly author, discover,
develop, conceive, or reduce to practice during the period of the
Relationship.

The "biological material" bit actually cracked me up and reminded me of a work by William Shakespeare.

After 'discussion' with their head of legal, it became clear that they really did consider entitled to "review" any mind product of their employees with the verbal assurance that "of course, if you write the great American novel, I will certainly not recommend asserting ownership over it". This said by the same person that had tacked the following in the very same agreement to enter into (apparently) total servitude.

"This letter sets forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties relating to the subject matter herein and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous discussions, understandings and agreements, whether oral or written, between them relating to the subject matter hereof."

"Everyone in our company has signed the same agreement." emitted the said shyster. Apparently everyone in their company is a chump.
Related is 3 sided chess, which is a little more complicated because it's hard to figure out who wins and when the game is over: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-player_chess
I will recommend one amazing food dish per month for $1
I am so happy “that. “boyfriend is back” he left me 6 months ago. but with the help of dr_mack@ (yahoo.) com“ my relationship was restored instantly.—–“
NEW YORK.UNITED STATES
Yes, we also have these screens in our office elevators. They show the weather, pictures of office views better than yours, and ads. I find the brand name "Captivate" depressingly accurate since you are trapped in a box with it.
I'm in the same situation and it's really worrying.

Deep learning is the method of choice for a number of concrete problems in vision, nlp, and some related disciplines. This is a great success story and worthy of attention. Another AI winter will just make it harder to secure funding for something that may well be a good solution to some problems.
Are audio cues also analyzed here? ie: "We observe that use of the audio signal in CMC results in more
emphasis being placed on key items and their location in the inventory"
Startup idea: Wedding air.

Get an air compressor and bottle the air at the wedding. Sell bottles of the stuff so people can catch a whiff of the big day later.
I learned to drive in Colorado (plenty of snow and ice in the winter), where I was a poor college student driving a typical poor college student car (old, beat-up, no modern safety features like ABS, etc).

Now that I can afford to drive a reasonably modern/safe car and live in Florida, I still can't bring myself to not instinctively pump the brakes when making an emergency stop.
Ha, I thought we were the only ones. My wife and I have never worn our rings as it just seemed stupid and also I found it uncomfortable.
Mono on AIX and IBM i
> I agree that that aspect isn't relevant to what I would call memory safe. But how do you get from "espeed claimed something unreasonable" to "Rust looks more memory-safe than Zig"?

Well, there are several reasons. For instance:

- Rust tries very hard to prevent accidental mutations through aliases. In all the common cases and most of the uncommon ones, it works quite well.

- Rust ensures that your memory can't be deallocated twice and that you can't dereference a dangling pointer.

- Rust ensures that any object that needs to be accessed from several threads is either read-only or somehow protected.

- Rust ensures that a context may not deallocate an object it does not own, nor mistakenly believe that it still has ownership of an object after it has transmitted this ownership to another context.

At this (early) stage in the development of Zig, I have the impression that these aspects of memory safety do not exist in Zig, hence my comment.

Now, I realize that Zig has at least one memory-safety check that `unsafe` Rust does not have, so it is entirely possible that both languages concentrate on different aspects of memory safety and/or different implementation techniques.

I also believe that Zig is interesting and has lots of potential. But I suspect that Zig needs to grow a little before anyone can claim that Zig is more memory-safe than Rust (which is what I understand from the comment I was answering).
You must be a catch. Depends what you're looking for in life, I guess.

There's a difference between shopping until you drop, and giving the woman you love the occasional gift to show that you love and appreciate her.

Yes, it's not required, you don't _NEED_ expensive jewellery or fancy weddings, but if you have excess money that you are not investing, why not?

On the flipside, I also like getting nice gifts. Don't you?
I am so happy that Dr_mack@ yaho o. com was able to save my marriage after 3 years of heartbreak, my husband is mine again...Loved
Besides the fact that most people don't have any savings cushion, making this terrible advice for them, you're neglecting the social pressure aspect. Many people feel compelled to overspend on weddings by the expectations of their friends, family, and society. Discussions like this one help to ease that pressure, to allow people to make wedding decisions with less fear of what people will think.
Show HN: ColorDatabase.org – database of colors and color gradients
Why couldn't you though. The ONLY reason now is that it's not as liquid as cash, but that's sort of the point and what's so exciting about the layer of automation that the crypto platforms are bringing. If it has value you can use it directly in a trade, and if the receiver wants to hold there value in a different token, the exchange can be completely automated. This brings freedom to the holder, they can hold there value in anything they want, it's not longer determined by what the buyer will accept.
Announcing APEX 18.1 – Develop beautiful, responsive, data-driven apps
Aurelia: a battle-tested front-end framework that stays out of your way
3D printed human corneas created at Newcastle University
Why do you claim this?

1. Hardware sandboxing (i.e., ring not-0) isn't much better, as seen by Meltdown.

2. Most production-ready UNIXish kernels have had support for running untrusted code (namely BPF bytecode) in the kernel for decades.

3. Do you really trust all the code currently running in ring 0 on your computer? In particular, do you trust the executable loader. which handles complex untrusted input? What's the line between "code" and "not code"?

4. On most desktop machines, there's a single user, and malware being unable to get to ring 0 isn't particularly stymied; it can still exfiltrate your files, stream your webcam, log into your bank, etc. Why is ring 0 more of a concern than untrusted code elsewhere? (In fact, on most Linux desktops, malware can wait until the user runs sudo, inject itself in, and then run insmod and get to ring 0 directly....)

5. These same machines make a practice of running untrusted, JITted JavaScript and WebAssemy all the time inside the same sandbox you think is too dangerous, and the sandbox works. Not perfectly, of course, but also certainly much better than, say, the Linux kernel protects itself from local privilege escalations. Why is the same software sandbox too dangerous for use in kernelspace?
I'm sure someone is already working on a mod for Stellaris that does exactly what you describe.
Probably not a good time to propose decitime, I guess. (No pun intended.)

Day is the basic measure.
Deciday = day/10. (=~ 2.4 hour)
Centiday = day/100

Either could be used in place of the old fashioned hour.

Milliday = day/1000 (=~ 84 seconds)

Milliday seems like a good replacement for the traditional minute.

Centimilliday to replace seconds? It's a but unwieldy but could be abbreviated as cmd (similar to the commonly used 'sec.')

Years are a little troublesome. However with sufficient energy input a Kiloyear could be made to be 3 years. With sufficient precision (and perhaps occasional correction) it could resolve that leap year and occasional leap second issue.

There would be some ramifications. For example the Newton is defined in terms of seconds so there are some units beyond pure time that would also require revision.

Let's get rid of this madness of 24 hours, 60 minutes and 60 seconds. And 365.2425 days was just plain wrong from day 1.
The increased acidification isn't excellent, though.