skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Exposed to the compiler doesn't imply exposed to everyone else to see.

Personally I care about true, hard dependencies much more than that "exposed for everyone else to see" fluff (the latter being only a subset of the former). Probably that is because I don't do business software, don't work in big teams etc.

What really matters to me is reducing hard technical dependencies, and recompile times and ABI compatibility may only be the two biggest reasons.

You're probably aware that I program predominantly in C, and "sitting in an ivory tower" is not a word that I would apply to typical C programmers. I wouldn't apply it to Java programmers, either. It's normally a term for the academic world, the world from which languages that focus on type theory originate.
Unfortunately:

"DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION. Both the client and server are known to have serious reliability issues including memory and file descriptor leaks as well as crashes. There is also no HA story as the server is a SPOF. You are advised to run 2.0 for any production quality system."

https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok

NB I've used ngrok and think it's very useful, but it's not really open source
I’d be remiss if I didn’t tell you to max(value). :-)

Basically, I agree with you. If you don’t want to talk with me, I don’t want to waste your time and mine. Generally, I’ll try to supply whatever I can to you via email and propose a phone call or f2f if there are some things which need clarification. If my product (semiconductor manufacturing equipment) isn’t a fit, it is usually apparent pretty quickly and everyone can move on with their lives.
Employ a Ben Hughes
Radiators. Need pretty big ones if the computers want to run cool.

Probably would be better to manufacture most of the stuff on some asteroid or on Mercury and have the computation radiation shielded by a significant mass.
Then should all languages have all features?

As the author explains in the article, I don't think all languages should try to solve all problems perfectly.
> with little to no countermeasures available.

In the short term, maybe. But it wouldn't take much time to put in place comprehensive defense for such a system.

In a world with ICBMs, a weapon like this is not really something I'd be worried about. It'd be a pretty stupid weapon to use for an initial attack

The only thing I'm worried about is accidents or hacks.. if that's made impossible it should be fine
> The thing we suggest, though who knows how you implement this, is having people vote on the things they value.

What if people's values depend on what they think is true?
Introduce Static Analysis in the Process, Don't Just Search for Bugs with It
I did a quick search on the Energy Returned on Energy Invested calculations. The following site https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/03/space-based-solar-power/
gave an ERoEI of 10:1 for solar panels on earth vs ERoEI of 4.2:1 for solar panels in space. Which would indicate that we would still be better laying solar panel on the ground as long as we got the appropriate empty space.

What did I missed? Have we realized enough progress since 2012 energy-wise, that the threshold has been crossed, or does it only make sense economically due to lower launch prices.
You can! I do this all the time.
I've been using elm-css on a project lately. Pretty cool with typesafe CSS. Also inline, but since everything is functions it's easy to compose/reuse as well when needed. (Compared to the string templating shown in this article)
My top 2:
1. Interview customers to discover the right segment and if they care enough about the problem you want to solve.
2. Use a landing page to validate the solution and marketing channels before you build it.
I would add risk, essentially security.

Some companies have gone light on this because the liability/cost of failure was not so much.

But at some point, some of those risks become real.

The costs aren't always apparent, because that's the nature of 'black swans' - but the systematic risk is.
Depends on the idea itself. If it's a business idea, talk to people in your imagined target group and validate that the need is real, and that the way you want to solve it isn't wrong in an immediate sense.
It sounds like from the blog post that the OP opted out of EM in favor of solutions architect but this is still great advice and an accurate portrayal of who this person is (i.e. a junior director not an EM).

The only thing I would push back on is the 1:1s - evidence shows it's most effective to meet weekly[1]. Delegate the 1:1s to your team leads (effectively making them the real EMs) and then have your problem-solving meetings become your 1:1s. Now you're managing managers, which is what makes you a director in the traditional sense.

[1] https://www.manager-tools.com/2019/01/manager-tools-data-one...
aka geoengineering. The latest IPCC report is quite critical of it.
> It's actually not that expensive

> it is not difficult or expensive to acquire

For reference, these options are more than the replacement cost of many business PCs. I'd say that's pretty expensive.

And especially when you note that loss of support is often the only reason they have to change, it starts seeming a bit unreasonable.
Not even close. (81 megapixels is 9000 by 9000, and the moon only takes up about the middle 1/9th of the image, so it's about 3000 pixels across. So that's over a km per pixel at the very front of the moon, and even worse at the edges where the surface is at an oblique angle to our view)
They can call 80-100 people / day, so it can still be a fairly scattershot process.
Depending on how close it is, you could destroy or at least damage the sattelite without even needing to launch anything. As a weapon, it would be downright silly to threaten a major world power with it. Of course if your goal is just to terrorize countries and groups without a space program, and assuming (big assumption granted) that other countries don’t interfere, then it would be a fairly exotic way of terrifying people. VERY expensive though, and diverting it from power generation to “kill” mode would be even more expensive.

All told, a country that could use this as a weapon doesn’t need to use this as a weapon.
I'd say either resort to code generation or pick another language that fits better your use-case.
Your styles are coupled to your UI logic anyway, even if you go out of your way to make them implicit by separating the CSS and JS into their own files. It's better to have the relationship explicitly defined in code instead of hiding it. That's the whole reason why CSS sometimes breaks in unexpected ways: you fail to realize the implicit coupling of the styles and the UI logic, so you fail to reason what changes need to be made both to styles and the UI logic to make your change.
Strength is generally an evolutionary drawback, in most cases the benefits of extra strength doesn't outweigh the calorie cost of building maintaining it.

For very costly things like strength and brainpower, evolution is ensuring that we have as much as we require, and not a single bit more; and has all kinds of processes for actively reducing strength that you had unless you have both extra calories and the demonstrated need to use that strength; because it saves calories.
I would use this to mine cryptocoins in space, it's way easier to send information back to earth than power
The 27” Dell I have at work won’t see my Mac’s signal if I install an update and reboot or boot up from cold shutdown — I have to physically unplug the monitor from power and then replug it and then it’ll pick up the signal. Feels like a monitor firmware issue.
Disinformation and 'fake news': Final Report [pdf]
In finance, uncovered short positions happen all the time. Short selling and the options market being prime examples.

Also, most debt ( especially fractional fiat debt ) is an uncovered short position. When you are lending something you don't have or own.
And this is how we end up with https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
Even witness statements ought to be given under the counsel of a lawyer.
This sounds like an awful idea.

Just put your CSS in a .css file where it can be cached, delivered by CDNs and can easily be edited in a single place.

Separation of content and presentation has been around for a good reason. One should always avoid mixing logic and design because it will break some day, no matter how well you think you handle it.
No, we really shouldn't. Our civilization will be dead if it doesn't distribute across planets and other stars, it's just a matter of time. A concern about political issues between colonies is just putting the cart before the horse.
> there are compromises, mainly around durability and repair costs.

Apple has proven that they will trade repair cost & repair-ability away for anything. Even nothing.
How's the trackpad compared to the Mac's? I don't need force touch. Just smooth precise scrolling. The trackpad is actually one of my top considerations when buying a laptop because I rarely use a mouse any more.
Hmm, then this definition of physical would also include traditional notions of deity, spirits and soul, since all are thought of as having indirect sensible effects.
I think they just degrade the same way they do on Earth. This PDF from 2003 talks about a 0.5% yearly degradation, which, if I recall correctly, is similar to ground based pv.

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/n...
You underestimate developers; they can make it work without JS if they have to. But why should we constrain ourselves?! I mean, there is nothing wrong with JS when used properly.

In fact, JS is extremely useful in the browser. It adds to the richness and interactivity of webpages. We must collectively appreciate this, and stop denying this! Even HN is a better experience with JS.

Some sites do give JS a bad name, and poorly used JS is something I hate too, but JS as a concept is something that I wholeheartedly support. Thankfully, the web is mostly opt-in - if you don't like the way a site employs technology, just don't visit it. Simple.
You have gotten it exactly backwards. Vacuum is a great insulator, getting rid of waste heat is a huge problem in space.
How do you find customers to talk to? I have one user who gave me a good idea (happened by accident), I think it will work. But I am no expert in that domain and I don't know how to find more users to talk to, before writing any code
Solar panels in space also work during the night and while it's cloudy. Did your calculation include the energy costs of storage?
Aw crap. So the link says "friends_link" right in the link itself. Maybe they turned it off because it's already got like 4K views. I'll send an message to support. Thanks.
It's worked pretty well for things like universal healthcare, in those countries that value it and continue to fund it.

Maybe the idea is designing an efficient bureaucracy that prevents the agents acting within it from corrupting it.

I think making clear the mutual benefits of eudaemonia is a way we can progress towards more equality.
That's also what we do here on a dozen of apps and it works.

Each component has its own folder with its own css file and each rule starts with .name-of-the-component.

For dynamic properties, we either create conditional classes (e.g. 'success', 'error') or pass the rules through 'style' (e.g. dynamic height).

For dynamic themes, we create an object at the root of the app

const theme = { header: { backgroundColor: black }, button: { backgroundColor: black }, ... }

Then pass it down to the related components

<header className="default-header" style={theme && theme.header}>
<button className="default-button" style={theme && theme.button}>

That being said, I tried styled-components once and don't really have negatives about it. It's a viable option.
To me, despite the name, _Generic(...) doesn't really count. It's more like a switch statement that lets you switch on a type instead of a value. You still have to manually write all your own implementations, which leaves you firmly in territory covered by the 2nd option I listed.

Maybe I'm missing something, though. On the rare occasion that I write C code, I stick to C99, so I haven't had much occasion to use it.
Let's hope the opinion of your neighbor doesn't cause a constitutional crisis.
That's fine: the intention was not to do something else, but to avoid goto while still doing the same functionality.

Plus, it might be slightly more convoluted than goto, but is less convoluted than the original over-nested code, which was the intention.
I would love to see a Reddit/HN clone where it matters which people I personally vote up. I know it gets me closer to a bubble, but I don't care about that Twitter is somewhat good for this, but it's the opposite end: not diverse enough for me to get enough content.
The 'scanner' personality type comes from Barbara Sher's book, "Refuse to Choose". I read it because I also identify as a generalist. It's an interesting read, if a bit pop-sci. One big thing I took from it was that it's incredibly valuable to spend time organizing your environment to make switching between projects easy. The other big thing was that if you're a generalist, it really helps to find a career where you're able to work on a broad spectrum of projects that touch on lots of different fields.

Having a kid that's kindergarten age, I can see being a kindergarten teacher as fulfilling for a generalist. Every day can touch on a new concept, a new skill. At the same time, it can allow for a deeper specialization in pedagogy. For me, it's been app development – through it I can incorporate a wide variety of interests, while going deeper and deeper on the core skillset.

Personally, I've gravitated towards 'tidiness' over 'minimalism'. When Marie Kondo's book first came out, we decluttered our lives and it was liberating. I haven't seen the Netflix show but it sounds like her philosophy has gained a new level of fame recently. As a generalist, it's been particularly 'life changing' because I'm someone who can end up collecting a lot of things for 'some day'. By decluttering, I'm actually more inspired because it's easier to see the various projects and things I'm interested in. I.e., it's easy, as a generalist, to fall into the trap of thinking that everything is important and worth holding onto for some future endeavor.
It takes a good while to detect preparations for an attack with this kind of weapon & take the decision ("Mr President, the station has slightly shifted around, should we nuke it now?"), and it takes long time for any physical weapon to reach it.

A decent weapon would be space-burst version of ICBM. For intercontinental ground attack, the flight time is typically 20 minutes, but the most reasonable spot for the station is a geostationary orbit - some 36'000 km above equator. With a sensible speed on the order of 8km/s, it would take our missile around 1h25m to reach geostationary orbit assuming a naive straight-up trajectory; with any realistic trajectory it would take way longer. The space weapon would be able to rain terrible destruction in the meantime with impunity.

An alternative would be using ground- or space-based lasers, which give near instantaneous hit, but you'd need to precisely hit a proper part to guarantee fast disabling of the weapon. Merely hitting a random spot on the dish would probably not destroy it outright. You still have to account for the time to make the observations & take the decision. And the current breed of [high power] lasers is single-use only due to the destructive nature of generation of the large energy needed.
If you did it, you should especially never talk to the cops. However, you should always tell your lawyer the truth, so they can help you in the most efficient way possible. E.g., convince you to plea instead of wasting money on a jury trial.
I think this is a big issue with such JavaScript and load heavy web-sites & apps. They forget that they have users without 1GB connections and who can't afford, weather financially or location based, the download the 500MBs of data required to load their web-site. That and hiding CSS inside of JS feels like a sneaky tactic to keep people from editing it? Or does it actually create the CSS on the fly? I wasn't quite sure after reading the article.
You Can’t just rename your IT Ops team and call it “DevOps”
Eink looks great, but the refresh rate puts it out of the useful zone for a main display. People want more than 60hz and I don't think Eink can do 6
Even though I shared this - I’d like to add I’m having trouble believing it. I’d really like to see replication on this one.

Although it’s possible to change cells, once a cell has taken a form, it’s used resources. Having a cell shift to a new form seems nuts.

It may be possible, but I’m dubious. I find it more likely that their experiment(s) were contaminated, which seems relatively easy to do in this case.

Anyone with more experience have any thoughts?

I minored in bioengineering, but that was years ago, so I have limited knowledge.
I wanted to get angry at this article, but he made some good points. Still, I’ve found some organizations are more concerned with technical excellence, and others see it as mastrabatory acts that get in the way of being agile to outlive competitors and putting resources only where it will obviously help the business. Obviously a lot of us like
to build things that are correct, efficient, safe, and easy to maintain and not just “meets minimum requirements to keep the ship afloat” after so many years in school learning to become good engineers.

It also seems like markets and disasters can seem random from a SWE point of view. You can build a great system and people just might not take to it, or the whole thing could topple over because of a third party component, a really determined hacker, etc.
Pretty much all the LogicBoard Chips soldering are done though machines, I just don't understand why Apple had to charge the insane amount of money for those parts other than "Because They Can". I could understand they want to maintain margins etc, but it was so much higher than their usual margin it is as if they don't want you to do it.
> Delete the widget? Delete the file.

This rarely happens. I would argue that creating an automated system to enforce "rules" should be favored over forcing every developer to know the rules and abides by them.

It is much easier to understand the relationship between css and js when the css is just a js variable.

Having built many large applications using the CSS file method, css modules, each widget gets its own file, co-locating css files with the js, I much prefer using `styled-components`. It provides a ton of flexibility, it opens doors for dynamic css by leveraging js (the hacks I've seen, had to write to get css dynamic is astounding), and I don't have to look very far to see how it's being used because the CSS is literally attached to the component I'm using. All I do in VSCode is cmd+click and bam, I can see the CSS for this component. There's no need for naming convention, there's no worry about global css variables getting into your styles, and there's no digging around looking for css that might be influencing your component. The best part for me is: when I delete the component, the CSS is gone as well. There's no thought put into scouring the FS to find lingering CSS that used to be used.

I love `styled-components` and most of the designers I work with also enjoy it.
It's not like bottled beer goes off, so unless you were planning to buy 2 bottles and then never buy beer ever again, I don't see the problem.
2.7M medical calls breached in Sweden
The original and open paper is a good read: https://www.cell.com/stem-cell-reports/fulltext/S2213-6711(1...

Obligatory “in a Petri dish” codicil.

Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1217/
This does not appear to be the case, the serial numbers reported in System Information are different.
>Error handling in C without those primitives will almost always result in horrible code

They don't care for nice code. They care for easily statically checked and verified code.
We built a relatively large social media management platform, and for one of our major features (a streams page that shows social media activities from different sources), we put a lot of our css in JS including all the logic for stream sizing/resizing and page responsiveness. I can honestly say that this approach is terrible. It is a maintenance nightmare. Even the smallest changes require a ton of time. We're now rebuilding the page from the ground up because it has gotten so messy, no one on the team is interested in touching it.
It's misleading to say "nothing prevents people from using them" if it's a crime to buy them, and if it's a crime for someone to sell them to you.

Furthermore, for other drugs like cocaine and heroine, in many countries not only distribution is banned, but also possession and use itself.
WooCommerce Marketing Techniques
True; in many ways, the world has become smaller, thanks to the internet. However, things would diverge rapidly if we go interstellar, unless we somehow break physics or quantum magic can be used for instant communication / travel. The Expanse explores a nearer future where humanity has colonized our solar system, and already there's big tensions there.

One part of mutually assured destruction was that nuking the shit out of one country would cause a global nuclear winter which would / could kill 90% of the population - even without retaliation. That's not as much an issue if there's a healthy self-sustaining colony on e.g. Mars. Nowadays what keeps the world reasonably stable is mutual trade dependency, up to a point anyway.
You shouldn't need to be asking yourself that as you shouldn't be going around committing crimes?

But even then, talk to an attorney if you want to confess something and he will tell you how to do that. I dont know the situation in the US, but I would assume it would also involve the prosecutor instead of the police.
Show HN: Feastflow v2 – Handcrafted leads for freelance designers and developers
This link works now. File is 291 MB

https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1lGDV6jOHc0v5UdkxcqYShqhKBz_U...
What you are effectively saying is that the answer to "who decides" is you. I can see why you would think that is a satisfactory answer, but can you see how a reasonable person might disagree?
All of which is happening on the planet earth. Not sure how your argument relates to colonizing space
The discussion was about Uber's overall revenue. I imagine a far larger percent of their revenue comes from NYC tourists than Traverse City tourists. Traverse City gets about 3.5 million tourists a year [1] compared to 63 million for NYC [2].

[1] https://www.record-eagle.com/news/local_news/tourism-region-...

[2] https://nycfuture.org/research/destination-new-york
It would be competitive, if there were no nuclear power or maintenance costs or manufacturing costs. These are not counted in launch costs.

You have to launch replacement panels pretty often due to trash collisions or put them in a less than convenient orbit.

The space solar module with a good enough battery and emitter would cost about as much as half a radiotelescope... Because it is one.

And consider we have problems covering sizable area with wires and cheap panels which are easy to maintain.
How to Juggle Multiple Web Development Projects
An understandable position, however given that why governments appear to be the cause of problems appears to be the same as why my self-described “revolutionary Communist” friend thinks that businesses are the problem, I’m inclined to instead blame inheritance — both plutocratic and aristocratic — from preventing true meritocracy.

http://wondermark.com/c1135/

Well, that and Goodhart’s Law.