skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed, ORM is encouraged out of the box in many ecosystems... and sure enough, it is viewed as a silver bullet by many developers and this is a pity.

Some ORMs are powerful and even have subsets of language for data transformation, and so on... And now you have even another problem: another layer of abstraction that might fail or have their own bugs and security issues.

I miss writing pure and simple SQL queries whenever I'm forced to use an ORM. This is one of the things I enjoy in the Go ecosystem: if you want SQL, probably go with database/sql and write SQL directly instead of any fancy ORMs out there.
> They tax all electricity while subsidizing Nuclear generation.

That's different from subsidizing electricity for consumers to make it more affordable. Like many industries, nuclear gets some amount of subsidies, but so do renewables. That doesn't mean subsidies are the reason why electricity is so much cheaper in France. In Germany, wind energy is heavily subsidized - and it is paid for with higher consumer prices.

> Nuclear needs both daily storage and unused capacity seasonally, just like wind and solar.

Yes, but orders of magnitude less. You keep nitpicking nuclear while completely ignoring the fact that wind and solar fails miserably on these metrics.

> The issue with nuclear is it also costs vastly more per kWh and due to long build times you need over provision pushing that kWh figure up more.

Of course nuclear isn't the cheapest form of electricity generation, neither is wind or solar. However, as of today it's the only one that can sustain a grid for almost any country without simultaneously relying on massive amounts of fossil fuels or extremely expensive buffering infrastructure.

If that wasn't the case, everyone would be doing wind and solar everywhere. If wind and solar was so clearly superior, it wouldn't need any subsidies at all. The path to a green future would be clear. Unfortunately, it's not that simple.
regulation can't change reality.

It's about as realistic as having congress declare the world flat.
Did you actually look it up and call the number?
You can cheat by paying someone for the solution, and it also comes with a clear verbal explanation that you can read.

What GP describes is more common than you'd think. Not surprising when the prize for cheating is a 6 figure job, and there's no penalty at all for getting caught.
Show HN: Jackbox.Online – A Server List of Online Rooms for Jackbox Games
The users don't select content. The recommender algorithm does, and then it autoplays it.
Dee Stadium – The Birthplace of Professional Hockey
But software from 10 years ago is often just plugging along in a closet somewhere.
Not obvious for me. I'm cynical too but always assumed it was based on some combination of brand trust, user satisfaction, and price.
Are cows really our biggest problem? The hysteria over cow farts is laughable. When everything is an “emergency” and, as a previous poster suggested, “genocide,” it’s hard to take any of this seriously. It’s not unlike religious nuts on street corners proclaiming “the end is nigh!”
It would be interesting to advertisers put out competing adds and users having the choice to watch them. Potentially some lesser known names could emerge, because larger companies already have recognition and would be less motivated to create voluntary ads.
I agree with you for the most part, however, you keep claiming that relocation are not usually paid. I know that relocation packages are very commonly offered to programmers, even in entry-level positions, in the finance and oil industries.
Hey Developer, help your project manager manage your project
I'm happy we are starting to move on from all the AI hype and BS. Hopefully some of that VC money will start shifting to something useful. Mitigating climate change, or educating children, or feeding children ... Nah. Just kidding. VCs just want to pretend they are Tony Stark.
What a strange and puzzling response!

0. You seem to have misunderstood my electrical engineering example.

1. Why would an MSEE not qualify you to be hired as a junior electrical engineer?

2. Why would a PhD in the appropriate area not qualify you to be hired as a junior research scientist?
It’s a big of cosmic irony that cows will be eating what so called sea-cows evolved to eat by way of their natural environment.

The obviously this messes with cows’ gut bacteria. Wonder if it has any significant effects on cows or is it better all around?
Was in a Regus office years back and you could pretty well book a desk/office for a day anywhere in the world - some of which are in pretty cool locations (if you're into architecture).

https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x48761cad0a69294...
I saw some math once... not sure how correct it is, but it was something like given the co2-equivalent emissions of methane, even if all cows simply disappeared tomorrow, it would still only take care of about 5% of our global GHG emissions. So if that's true it wouldn't really be a gamechanger.

Still worth doing though (the seaweed, not the mass slaughtering)! And if everyone plants 350 trees then maybe we'll get somewhere.
For several months, Smith has been experimenting in her lab with cultivating the seaweed to, among other things, maximize concentrations of bromoform—the compound that blocks the production of methane in cows, sheep, goats and other ruminant animals.

"This is the sporophyte," she said at her lab in La Jolla, holding one of a dozen flasks filled with the red algae, dancing in aerated seawater. "In this case, the bubbles are not as vigorous, allowing these puff balls to get bigger.

"By just manipulating nitrogen and phosphorous, we have already seen that we can double the concentrations of bromoform in just a week," she added.

As commenters have noted previously, it seems like using synthetic bromoform would be cheaper and more scalable. The rest of the seaweed appears to be incidental to the methane suppression. But maybe there are regulations about introducing new cattle feed additives that you can sidestep by mixing whole algae into the food. Or maybe they're already developing this with consumer branding/marketing in mind; "seaweed" sounds better than "bromoform."
Would you please stop doing this?

Also, please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and don't submit stories like this. Garden-variety politics is dime-a-dozen and off topic here. "Committee issues subpoena" is not a significant story, let alone an intellectually interesting one—even less than "politician introduces bill".
where did you get this? i haven't read anything towards this end.
So you want to self-select for people who don’t care about the environment?
I have yet to enter the workforce, but as someone who has done a bit of programming for fun and really liked programming-interview type websites I think I'd be decently prepared for a whiteboard interview.

The thing is, I have barely any (read as: no) software engineering knowledge and don't know how to build any sort of programming product.
When Does Mortgage Refinancing Makes Sense – Chase or Bank of America?
About 10 years ago I went to an eye doctor with a small object in my eye, and she had to cover it after removing the small object.

Driving back home with 1 eye was scary even though I was going much slower. It is possible to drive with 1 eye, but much much harder than with 2 eyes.
From an environmental perspective, it's easier to directly consume fruits, vegetables and nuts yourself, rather than have an animal do the same, then eat the animal. That doesn't address the human appetite for animal proteins, but there is beyond meat.
> companies are allowed to lie.

And that's in no way scandalous?
Neutralize the negative mental side effects of social media
Seriously? https://timeforchange.org/are-cows-cause-of-global-warming-m...

It wasn't even that hard to find one article. It might not be perfect, but you can clearly keep going.

And yes, it's one facet. We won't solve our problems just by fixing this, but your attitude definitely won't.
You're at a level of consciousness that is super rare, you will likely get a lot out of this video and many others on this channel when you try to explain to naive realists that the universe's purpose is simply to be, and that being is it's own end. You have to be at a post-scientific, post-atheism level of awareness for it to land or it's dismissed as pseudo-devilry without examining the implicit metaphysics of that position.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE1yPCeF1Cc
Cheers, that's a bold opinion to share in an engineer's bar ...
No, that's not why. Some companies just do this for every engineering hire, even those being hired for senior or specialized roles. I came in to my current job with two and a half decades of experience across multiple specialties, nearly a decade on a project they relied on and for which I was an upstream maintainer ... and I still got the whiteboard. Maybe there are some exceptions, but I have yet to meet one. Even characterizing it as an "entry level assessment" already misses the mark. It's more about avoiding bias (or the appearance of it) by trying to apply a uniform process and standard across the board.

Some might say you shouldn't want to work at those companies if you don't like their hiring process, as though there's nothing to any company but the hiring process. It's like saying you shouldn't join the military if you don't like basic training. Nobody likes basic training. People join organizations despite those things, and I for one am not going to judge them or assume their reasons are silly just because I might decide differently.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20705449
> await only really replaces .then()s and can't (as far as I know) achieve an effect like Promise.all()

Although it's not completely equivalent to a Promise.all, you can actually use vanilla await with basically the same effect as promise.all(). Like so: [0]

const timeout = ms => new Promise(res => setTimeout(res, ms));

(async () => {
const startTime = Date.now();
const first = timeout(1000);
const second = timeout(500);
const third = timeout(800);
await first;
await second;
await third;
console.log(`Function completed in ${Date.now() - startTime} ms`)
})();

This should output the completion time as somewhere very near to 1000ms. The reason they aren't completely equivalent is if one promise fails in Promise.all they all immediately fail whereas this only throws once you await the failed promise. Of course you could also use `await Promise.all([...])` in async/await too. You could try this in your browser console (I got it to log the output in chrome, but not safari for some reason) or you could go to link [0] and try it on jsfiddle.

[0]: https://jsfiddle.net/johnsonjo4531/r5fasqdo/1/
Why? Do we assume seaweed lacks the cellulose and minerals various grass an land weed varieties do?
5% of a global problem is huge.
We're going to use the new icon we've designed, the first one in this image: https://twitter.com/secretGeek/status/1161965759846744065
Muslims also get Haj subsidy.
I still find async.js to be a superior tool for complex use cases than promises, async/await or callbacks. Think about it. A higher level abstraction designed for specific use cases, as for example to do sequential or parallel async operations is a far better approach imho than cobbling the same together using generic async language feature of choice.
They might make up for their electricity bill 1:1 but they'll never go neutral on the amount of carbon wealth they consume in payment for their services.

Imagine I have a business where I busk for money with my guitar outside of a coal plant and a single coal minor is my patron. I may be "carbon neutral" but in fact I owe my whole existence to coal being mined and burnt. Coal is my life blood and the sole source of wealth in my life. I may as well mine the coal myself and play guitar for myself, and if you consider me and the miner to be a unit it's obvious the two of us are living on coal and the fact that he does all the work while I play guitar hardly means anything.

Companies like stripe are sufficiently separated from coal and oil that they can believe they don't suck at the teat of fossil fuels, and that the only coal wealth they consume is whatever powers their light bulbs and servers. But ultimately you can track back the wealth that comes their way - all of it - to operations that generate quite a bit more emissions.

We can run subsidies and credits in little isolated corners of our economy, but it's like running a refrigerator in a closed room. Ultimately you're just burning wealth which creates a greater load on the wealth-generating machine that is the fossil fuel industry.

Real advances that make it possible to generate wealth without fossil fuel money in subsidies should be celebrated. These tech guys taking $1m of their $100m in profits (the coal miner pays the busker using stripe) to pay their $1m light bill is a shell game
Without making any judgement about this particular situation, this logic isn't sound:

1. I develop tool X, which is a simple popular solution.

2. Some company Y is hiring engineers to develop solutions that are far more complex and demanding than what my tool does, for instance because they have to support billions of concurrent users.

3. I deserve the job because most of Y's engineers use the simple tool X that I developed, even though the job requires far more advanced skills than I have demonstrated writing X, and I actually don't have these skills and will totally fail at the job if hired.
Amazon Uses a Twitter Army of Employees to Fight Criticism of Warehouses
Absolutely. I think we should shut down the stock market until we get to the bottom of it.
Transportation costs will make this a non-starter. Most of the cattle, in North America at least, are no where near the oceans.
I suspect this is yet another story sponsored by the Tesla shorts. Just saw an excellent two hour interview by Lex Fridman of George Hotz and he goes into details why he thinks camera will win over lidar.

But he also admits that presently Google is ahead of everyone in the race for level 5, but raises the question of whether they can ever do it economically enough to make money on it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwcYp-XT7UI 2 hours!

Money quote is when Lex tells him, ""Some non-zero part of your brain has a madman in it"

I'd argue that is true of many of the greatest inventors of our time.
It probably means that apple employees work for google too
My Subaru (not Tesla) can manage itself on the highway pretty well with me, a safety driver, behind the wheel checking in on it periodically.
Perhaps not. But saying, essentially, "you go figure it out" is a really lazy response. "You're stupid for not figuring it out" is even worse.
You don't know physics? You think you're not Nature? You think Nature doesn't know physics?
The discipline of science (and its sibling mathematics) has been one of the great achievements of human civilization. It has been so astonishingly successful, we can’t even fathom there being any phenomena beyond its reach, given enough time and enough foundational understanding. Because I like to stretch my mind in uncomfortable directions, I often wonder: is there something else? Something that can lead us to Truth other than mathematics and science? Has human civilization gotten stuck in a local maximum where it appears as though we now have a means for understanding the entire universe, but there is another whole level we are as yet too primitive to reach? I worry that as a species we haven’t spent enough time trying to answer this question.
Being less stable also avoids an ice-nine situation.
Or, get her an ipad.
We can measure methane emissions per farm from space. If there were fines for emissions, it would get fixed quickly.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/meet-the-satellit...
Chrome to Deprecate FTP Support
"I developed a simple popular tool that many of your employees are using, therefore you must offer me a job that requires far more complex skills that I cannot demonstrate."
I’m as anti-regulation as anyone but your comment is just silly. Regulation changes reality all the time.
True that that's a non-trivial problem, but seaweed farming is actually something that we could massively scale up. With vertical farms, a ton (metaphorically speaking; more than that literally) of food can be grown in a small surface area of ocean. Would be much more efficient for feeding livestock than relying on farmland that could be growing human food. (Although as an aside I'm personally in favour of a decent amount of natural grazing space and time for farmed animals, so I'd like to see a balance.)
My company is currently working to grow Asparagopsis Taxiformis, here in the US, for this purpose.

I agree with comments that we have big issues to tackle in regards to methane sinks failing, such as permafrost, and there are things to be said about people moving en masse to plant based diets – but, the future will always be a mix of tomorrow and today. Many people will still eat beef, and we need to ensure we reduce the negative effects of raising cattle as much as possible. We need a giant, mixed bag of tricks working in unison to slow the warming we have caused over the last 100 years.

Luckily, current research is showing that – not only does AT nearly eliminate methane from the bovine digestive process entirely when supplementing between half and two percent of daily diet – we are seeing early indications in research of some amazing additional benefits – improved milk production, increased immunity, improved food conversion ratio (meaning you can feed cattle less and have them pack on more protein). Studies are not finalized, but what I have heard of them sounds very, very good.

My background is in tech (founded and exited a TechStars company and have had a career in software and hardware startups) and my colleagues are in marine biology and phycology (algae science). My hope is that by approaching this problem from the perspective of a fast-iterating startup, we can get this product to market faster than the traditional routes of academic timelines and federal funding sources this industry is used to.

If you are an investor, beef serving restaurant owner, or in business related to cattle raising and finishing and would like to find out more, please email us at info+hackernews@goodalgae.com. And follow our newsletter for updates at https://goodalgae.com.

Cheers!
No they aren't the biggest part of the problem, but the difficulty is that we have to solve the whole thing. Carbon emissions need to get to zero and then go negative. That means ideally we need solutions for every contributor, no matter how small.
One way to measure would be to test if the net present value of the reduced interest (after taxes) is more than the closing costs. Assuming your closing costs are after tax
but can we address the water consumption?
Get elected President so that your refusal implicates a constitutional controversy rather than a fit of pique.
Also the fact it crashed on a Sunday when no one was supposed to be at work.
> everyone would have the excess power at the same time […] it only works at small scale when the rest of the system can absorb the inflexible power.

You know that nuclear power is pretty flexible right ? France actually pilot most of the load variations through its nuclear plants. You can see it here: [1]. The only thing you can't really do at scale is turning on and off a reactor every once in a while, but you can easily go from 100% to 50% power in a few hours. You can even go further (down to 25% with recent fuel) but then you'll start burning the fuel in a sub-obtimal way, so they limit the number of times they go bellow 50% power.

[1] https://rte-france.com/fr/eco2mix/eco2mix-mix-energetique
Cows may account for a small amount of total emissions, but they are responsible for almost half the methane released on the planet. Methane is a potent but relatively shortlived GHG. So, removing all cows would be a sizable but short term fix.
> near perfect 3D representations of the world with 2D images

This is ridiculous.

I am sitting in front of a monitor right now. Please explain how I can perfectly determine the depth of it even though I can't see behind it ? I can move my ahead all around it to capture hundreds of different viewpoints but a car can't do that.
You just quoted an article with no credibility and zero comparison to natural methane emissions. Mind reading before plugging links? That was the first thing that came up for me in Google too, and the reason why I said what I did.

Edit: just looked up EPA website and found this: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases#m...

- couple things to note: "50-65% of all methane emissions are caused by human activity" - I wonder how they define that though? Is feedback from human activities that flows into natural-seeming emissions such as permafrost melt considered natural? If it is, that's excluded from the 50-65% figure!

- Other thing: "Natural gas and petroleum systems are the largest source of CH4 emissions in the United States." - 31%

- Landfills - 16%, coal mining - 8%

That right there is 55% of human-caused methane and has nothing to do with cows.

I'm not saying the solution should not include all of the sources, but to what degree should we be worrying about cows vs. all that other crap? Shouldn't the focus be on natural gas and petroleum emissions?

Edit 2: I don't appreciate your personal attack on my attitude. If questioning sources and solutions that make the biggest impact is considered an attitude, then forget all civil discussion. Why bother commenting?
Three Problems with Promises in JavaScript
mypy has saved me from a lot of bugs. I use pre-commit to run it before every commit.
Thanks for the interest! (Cofounder of Clearbrain here).

The patent covers a combination of statistical techniques and engineering systems we built. The tricky part of this is the infrastructure needed to select confounding variables and estimate treatment effects for thousands of variables at scale in seconds. That was what we filed a patent on.
I think all of this discussion about whether or not LIDAR or cameras are better misses the point that really matters- Will cameras actually be good enough to get the job done? If they are then it doesn't matter which is better. You can always add additional sensors and get more information, but engineering has always been a cost vs benefit problem. If adding LIDAR doesn't give a significant benefit in scenarios that cameras are not already good enough, then they might not be worth the additional expense.
> regulation can't change reality

Sure it can.

Regulation changed the reality of passenger planes regularly falling out of the sky and being hijacked. Regulation made drastic reductions in road deaths via seat belts, crumple zones, air bags, and the like.
How to Build Good Software
I don't know, but if 10 companies are competing for one employee, then the 9 that inevitably fail obviously were using the wrong approach. You can't point to the similarities as evidence of the correct strategy, because by definition the differences were probative.
Our analysis runs over our user’s customer data (usually collected through either a tag manager or a CDP such as Segment), which is a few petabytes of data for some of our larger customers. The reason for using Spark is to quickly transform this massive amount of raw data into a ML-ready format. You’re correct that the regression itself does not need to be done inside of Spark.
Some variant of this same comment is on every single thread about this here.

We need to tackle all of the "only 5%" issues.
My inner child was disappointed to learn that cow farts are not the major source of bovine methane emissions. But saying cow burps is stilly pretty funny.

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/33/which-is-a-bigger-methane-so...