skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What happens in that case is simple and obvious: the existing global trade barriers and protectionism will get worse.

The US will move to lock Airbus and China out of its massive, wildly profitable domestic airline market through protectionism. Which is exactly what China is guaranteed to do, either directly or indirectly, as it pushes its own airplane manufacturing efforts to the forefront in the pursuit of its economic self-interest.

How many Soviet-made jet planes did the US buy from 1950 to 1990?
> I, too, am in favor of a 100% wealth tax upon death. No more freeloading failsons.

I am very far from an economic leftist, but the elimination of inheritance seems to me the fastest, fairest, path to equality of opportunity (the disposition of the confiscated assets is a separate argument). Tax the dead guy.
I know it is a rhetoric "nobody", but I did. I almost never use a browser on my phone if possible because the experience is always terrible.
I disagree with the idea that you can't maintain a robust system/codebase in python, mainly because nearly our entire distributed computing stack is written in python.

Granted it isn't 10s of thousands of lines, but it isn't small either. It does a lot of things ranging from webapis to data pipelining with ingestion and egestion of large datasets. One batch job can result in 10s of GBs in output files. It has to be performant too, 10s of millions of "operations" in one batch job is common.

Admittedly the process/threading model can be painful to work around at times, but totally doable, and is honestly somewhat friendly to distributed systems to an extent because it somewhat forces you into an actor model paradigm.
You're actually reinforcing the OP's point. Coding to an interface is ideal but we are reluctant to do so because it involves more boilerplate that is a pain to manage.
> > it did not happen because of "egos" on the Unicode Consortium, or because of "national egos", or politics, or anything.

> Did someone say that?

Yes, u/kazinator did.

> Anyway, it's pretty obvious why it happened. When a person invents new hammer, the second thing they do is going looking for all the other problems it might solve.

That's not why decomposition happened. It happened because a) decomposition already existed outside Unicode, b) it's useful. Ditto pre-composition.

> Unicode acquired it's warts by attempting to solve everybody's problems.

Unicode acquired its warts by attempting to be an incremental upgrade to other codesets. And also by attempting to support disparate scripts with disparate needs. The latter more than the former.

> Instead of making it more and more complex, they should have ruthlessly optimised it to make it work near flawlessly it's most common user: a programmer who couldn't give a shit about internationalisation, ...

They did try to ruthlessly optimize it: by pursuing CJK unification. That failed due to external politics.

As to the idea that programmers who want nothing to do with I18N are the most common user or Unicode, that's rather insulting to the real users: the end users. All of this is to make life easier on end users: so they need not risk errors due to not their (or their SW) not being able to keep track of what codeset/encoding some document is written in, so they can mix scripts in documents, and so on.

Unicode is not there to make your life harder. It's there to make end users' lives easier. And it's succeeded wildly at that.

> > And we haven't even gotten to case issues.

> The "case issues" should not have been Unicode's issue at all. Unicode should have done one thing, well. That one thing was ensure visually distinct string had one, and only one, unique encoding.

You really should educate yourself on I18N.
There's hope. Microsoft somewhat turned it around after a change in directors.
Figure 7.1, Health insurance coverage for a core set of services – Percentage of total population

Total public coverage: Israel 100%

Figure 7.2, Private health insurance coverage, by type, 2013 (or nearest year) Note: Private health insurance can be both duplicate and supplementary, in Australia; both complementary and supplementary in Denmark and Korea; and duplicate, complementary and supplementary in Israel and Slovenia

Israel: type = Supplementary = 82.9% .

What is supplementary?

“Most OECD countries have achieved universal (or near-universal) coverage of health care costs for a core set of services, which usually include consultations with doctors and specialists, tests and examinations, and surgical and therapeutic procedures (Figure 7.1). Generally, dental care and pharmaceutical drugs are partially covered, although there are a number of countries where these services must be purchased separately (OECD, 2015)”

“Private health insurance offers 95% of the French population complementary insurance to cover cost-sharing in the social security system. The Netherlands has the largest supplementary market (86% of the population), followed by Israel (83%), whereby private insurance pays for prescription drugs and dental care that are not publicly reimbursed.

So this doesn't mean that 83% of the market is private, you understand? It means that 83% of the market (whatever that market is) that isn't covered by government access is covered on a supplementary basis. How large is that portion? If you look at the 2019 publication: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/4dd50c09-en.pdf?expi...

Figure 7.11. Health expenditure from public sources as share of total, 2017 (or nearest year)

Israel: 64%

What's important here is that the % in the US (wealthiest country in the world) is 50%, far below the OECD average of 71% which is the point being made here.

don't view the world through the anecdotes of your friends and family. They are not a representative sample of the world's population. When quoting statistics make sure they are the correct ones.
Happy to help either through our gitter chat or help@metaflow.org.
This article is just wrong. First, there were no Aryans in the Steppes; only Proto-Indo-Europeans.

A branch of PIEs migrated south and southwest, and ended up in Iran and India. This branch is called the Proto-Indo-Iranians, or the Aryan branch of PIEs. This happened some time before 1500 BCE, because we have evidence of Vedic gods in things like the Mitanni treaties.

Regarding the point about Aryans not caring about the content of scripture, this is again wrong. First, the Iranian branch came up with Zoroastrianism, where this deep focus on sounds never happened, and in fact Zoroastrianism is thought to have been the progenitor of the monotheistic view of later Abrahamic religions.

Second, the “sounds” of the Vedas are accompanied with actual intricate ritual sacrifices. These ceremonies ran for multiple days, and involved a number of precise steps and timed incantations. Yes, there is a big focus on correct pronunciation of hymns, but these are only granted power by the actual execution of the ritual.

The rest of the article talks a lot about a Indo-Aryans constantly viewing life as a struggle between themselves and others. Yes, the scriptures contain a large amount of text on struggles between Arya and non-Arya, but it’s not clear how much of this actually reflects the common person’s reality vs the attempts of priestly composers trying to maintain their hierarchy at the top of the caste system. (The idea is that, priests, being the arbiters of religion, decided what was Aryan and what wasn’t. It was thus in their interest to declare their own knowledge as Aryan, while declaring indigenous religion, or even religion of other PIEs in India, as non-Aryan)
The meaning of that amendment turns on the phrase "the people". Who, exactly, are they? Many constitutional cases have determined that you are a member of "the people" by being either physically in the US, or outside but a US citizen.

See also FISA.
I'm really not looking forward to the google web...
The thing I hate about java the most is:

-that generics don't play well with primitives and arrays?

I understand that jep218 aims to fix the first one. But it's been quite a few years now and why was this not done the right way from the start?

> equals() and ==

I think these should've been switched.

A general principle in languages (not only in programming languages) is that things that are used often should be short.

Plus

- get() and charAt(), instead of [].

just why?

- verbose naming conventions:

Excessive redundancy does not increase safety or improve maintainability. Having one blinking red light is useful, having a thousand lights of different importance will just make you filter it out. People will simply gloss over and skip long identifiers.

we are humans and we can't operate at full attention the whole time. if something has low information content, we simply go on autopilot.

Easy things should be short, so that the hard things popout in the code.

- Obsession with software engineering and OOP Principles?

Instead of thinking about the data structures needed and the alogirthms chosen, time is spent just making a millefeuille of abstractions.
Unfortunately not many developers are.
I did this, and then switched back to just running the code on a test database. I found I was writing two sets of tests: one that tested the code to see if it injected the right parameters into the SQL, and another to see if the SQL worked. It just got easier to test them both together.
I still don't get it, what exactly was flagged that caused the domain to get noticed by... Who exactly? Did it have anything to do with the owner logging into his server? What is the sequence of events in bullet point format? I know the author tried to be clear but I'm confused as to what actually happened.
InertiaJS: Build single-page apps, without building an API
I quit sites all the time. Take trip advisor, great website, completely unusable if you are not on a high end desktop. Its a website ffs! I refuse to open pages unless I really need them. I find them using the duck since google is: to slow.
If I understand correctly, the author has written a program in their pet language, translated it directly to Java, and complains that you have to write a lot of boilerplate to do 1:1 translation from their language to Java.

I think the right consideration is that they have simply done a poor job writing this program.
It's nicer than the original AMP setup, but still awful for publishers.

For any user that navigates to your AMP page from a Google search...

The publisher gives up the most important piece of screen real estate, and Google highjacks left/right swipes to navigate to your competitors. And, they hijack the back button post swipe too...back equals "back to Google"...not back to the page I swiped from.

It is pretty much like early AOL. A semi walled garden. It offers some speed benefit for users, but way more benefit to Google.
Surely this is better suited for a blog post rather than a series of hard to follow twitter comments.
And yet I've bought many items with patience at those prices. There was a bike I wanted originally listed at $1800. I offered 1000 as that's what it was worth. Every week it was relisted $50 lower, every week I dropped my offer by like $25. Ended selling buying for $700 (I emailed the seller so much they were chatting with me). Took 7 months but the demand was just not there. At the end guy was like sigh should have sold for $1k.

Some people list at a fair price. If that's what it is I'll not even haggle. like bought a fully CNC taig mini Mill with computer software and 4th axis for $900. Hand cash walk out. Fair price.

Other shit is obviously over priced and so you negotiate.

Sold a lathe recently for $1400. I had firm on the price. Took a year to sell. Sold firm.

It also depends on the product here. Consumer popular shit like games and cars have a lot of negotiation. Some tools. Other shit is less negotiated.

Some shit is high demand and lots of haggling like motorcycles. I just enjoy the hell out of telling people no.

"That offer is offensive and I've setup a block list for you"
This is how I feel about the language! Modern Java works well enough to me that the frameworks are nearly never justified.
What Should Your Search Document Be?
This is a fairly well known practice. Voir dire is one of the realms of voodoo in the legal system where defense and prosecutor alike are given the chance to engineer a jury.

This is actually the process surrounding the concept of a jury of one's peers, and one of those things that I really wish people would realize is not a big deal unless you truly think skin color or racial identity matters.

If you do, shame on you. You shouldn't be doing that. We illegalized that back in the last century. Whether or not everyone else has caught up doesn't matter. In the eyes of the law, it is verboten.

Hence the voodoo part of voir dire. If a hypothetical client is an African American male who grew up on what is colloquially considered the "wrong side of town", do I want my client's jury saturated with people from a gated community? What about the inverse? Same AA male, from a gated community, do I want to saturate the jury with people from the projects?

Take that type of dilemma and expand it to just about any other aspect of your client's circumstances, and you get what goes on in voir dire. Your prosecutor and defense both jockeying for the best jury they can, and the result is assumed to be something somewhere in the middle. The prosecution and defense get the same number of strikes.

Whether or not that always happens; or that one side starts off with a more favorable pool than the other given the random selection mechanism for jury candidates is an open and valid question.
Just to add that there is also an official monthly thread for job posts. The latest are in https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=whoishiring

@OP Find the correct thread and post there, or wait until next month.
Convert your code to Kotlin (idea will do this for you). It won't get rid of the boilerplate automatically but it will de-clutter your code and then put you in a position to refactor to be more idiomatic Kotlin. Once you get that sorted, you can start thinking about creating a DSL for things you do a lot and get smart about eliminating boilerplate. IMHO javascript/typescript looks more boiler plate heavy these days than well written Kotlin.

I know bashing java for boilerplate and verbosity is popular but a lot of its reputation is people doing repetitive stuff without reflecting on better ways to do these things. I see the same patterns and mistakes in other languages. The best code is the code you don't need to write.

Likewise needless abstractions and over-engineering are a problem in many places. Java certainly has seen its fair share of that and its a reason I avoid the entirety of the Scala ecosystem in principle. Nothing wrong with the language but it seems to provoke over-engineering.
Yep. And JavaEE that came after has actually made things a whole lot better. Idiomatic JavaEE can easily be <10% boilerplate.
On the other hand consider this: suppose you’ve built retail business out of your house, then it grew well. And now all those conveyor belts come in very handy, right?

Sometimes project is big enough to have a lot of code, boilerplate or not. And then all that IDE automation suddenly becomes essential.

I’ve been to some huge Scala codebases, it was much harder to navigate or make changes there than shove around Java cruft with IDE.
What I observed among groups where public criticism is discouraged:

- Pressure on the good actors to communicate using the protocol. Basically being positive at all costs. It creates depression as feelings are constantly suppressed.
- No pressure on the bad actors to correct their behaviour. Unless someone with the necessary authority notices the issue and had interests in taking the required action.

A game of fools, because, if a team is mostly made of good actors, then the frustration is tolerable, and perhaps the bad actors can be raised to the level of "good".
There is a tipping point though, I've observed, where if the ratio of bad actors gets high, there is less and less of a incentive to do the right thing. Since criticism must be kept to none, or made in private, it becomes a battle of alliances. Things are said quietly. People end up spending more energy in sculpting a great image, rather than becoming better.

It's a game of fools. Fool participants, it's even contagious.

It also somewhat serves management as they only are to then decide how to compensate, promote, lay off every individual without risking any questioning from the contributors (everyone is equal by the sound of things, really)

When I say good and bad actors, I don't mean a category of people is bad while another is good. It's not about the intent, but about skills, performance, agile abilities, knowledge and wisdom.

It's important to have some tact, and respect. But I don't see anything wrong in calling out someone on poor execution. He may learn from it. And so what if it is made in public. Perhaps everyone needs to know. Again, tact and respect, it is not incompatible.
I'm skeptical of a recipe that calls out its gin, but not its vodka, and also refers to a lemon twist as "a large thin slice of lemon peel." Not so skeptical that I won't try making it with several types of vodka. But skeptical nonetheless.
Carpano (at least Carpano Antica, which I think it their common vermouth) is also a very strong flavor. IMO if you're doing equal parts gin/campari/carpano you're totally obliterating the gin flavor.

For a classic and smoother negroni, try:

- 1.5oz gin (Tanqueray is fine, but I'd recommend Ford's)

- 1oz campari

- 1oz sweeter, less intense vermouth like Contratto Rossi or Dolin Rouge

If you want to use your Carpano, I really like this negroni variation called a Kingston that uses rum:

- 1.5oz Smith and Cross rum

- 1oz Campari

- 1oz Carpano Antica
Nothing against Kotlin, but please spare us the Kotlin hype. Groovy was streamlining Java long before Kotlin even had a name.
>that mid-20th-century laws that put brakes on this feedback loop have been removed;

I don't believe that the purpose of mid-20th-century laws was to promote equality. Things were more equal then because: a) World Wars I & II destroyed huge amounts of capital, and b) fighting wars requires lots of money which requires raising taxes on people who can pay, since borrowing cannot fully fund general wars.

Economics are cyclical in the sense that in normal times people with power and wealth accumulate more power and wealth. Then a general period of war/revolution/epidemic/famine breaks out which disrupts power relationships and consumes wealth. This is the pattern in Europe since the 1300s and it also applies to dynastic changes in other societies, such as China.
Speaking of war. Just to show how effed is the definition, here is the article where they try to decipher between war, armed conflict, whatever else they've come up with: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/is-it...
Which Came First: The Loan or the Member?
It’s illegal to pretend to sell drugs. It’s illegal to sell fake drugs. (in the US)

You don’t have to worry about a customer complaining to the police. You have to worry about the police attempting to buy and collecting evidence against you.

The question comes down to how good is your op-sec and how unlikely are you in collecting LE attention?
Strictness of what, exactly? Of all Java code being belched by IDEs?

“Code should be written for humans to read and only incidentally for machines to run” (paraphrasing a famous quote by Harold abelson)
As far as I recall they fixed that, now the problem is that they the measure for speed they use does some weird tricks around partial loads; as long as you display _something_ soon they are happy and the fact that a page might be useless for many seconds is weighted less
I'm a fan of Alexandra Lange's newsletter about design and architecture. She's also a good photographer - alexandralange.net
The only Java boilerplate that really bothers me is getters/setters. Lack of properties in Java is depressing. And even more depressing lack of any plans to add properties. There are records for Java 14 which somewhat solve the issue, but they really aimed for a bit different use-case (which is not even that important for me, personally).

Honestly the only reason I would choose Kotlin over Java today is properties. Everything else is nice to have, but absolutely not important.
Checked exceptions should just be removed entirely from Java. It's a completely failed experiment.

If you really want something like checked exceptions then (anonymous) intersection types or row polymorphism would be much better approaches than the adhoc thing Java does... but I suspect that that wouldn't well with the variance system in Java.

(Thankfully it's only the Java compiler itself which imposes checked-ness, so other languages on the JVM thankfully don't have to deal with the insanity.)
AMP made me switch to DuckDuckGo on my phone.
In analyzing a stock price you need to look at what other people perceive about it, which is not the same as objective facts. So in this case it tells us that other people don't think the company's sales will be hurt much. I believe they are wrong (and sold most of my Boeing stock right after the second crash) but only time will tell.
Well, for Airbus there is this where it looks like problems were swept under the rug
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296

... though from the same era, there is this for Boeing which seems much worse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues
Love the comment by Kathleen:

> My dad, a mainframe guy for the army in the late 60s-early 70s, claims that the (men) programmers knew which of the (women) punch card operators to take your deck to, because some would thumb through and say “sure you want to submit yet? I think you have an error... here.”
I can identify myself as a strictly Java developer (nowadays) and my experience with Spring can be summarized as either:

> I imported that autoconfiguration library and everything works!

> Damn it, the imported autoconfiguration library does not work (or I need to change something), now I have to spend a day around Spring docs and stackoverflow to find how to get it working. Than I have to create a new class, override some random methods and inject my ugly code which feels like a hack now...
Agreed, it is yet another Google data collection method created under the guise of a beneficial offering
ditto for Go. Huge fan, but it does involve a lot of boilerplate.

Not that I think that's a bad thing. I prefer it to "magic" (I never got on with Rails because of this... what just happened? why did it do that? where does it say it should do that?).

And you never know when you have a class/use case that needs the boilerplate to change. Having it the same 99% of the time so that you have the option to change it for that 1% edge case is a good thing, imho.
REE | Berlin, onsite | ree.technology

We are committed to redefine how people move (autonomously) in big urban areas in a fast and sustainable way. Besides the customers of Ree all people in a city will benefit from the positive impact of our solutions.
For our approach to autonomous mobility, which is very different compared to the other players in that market, we are looking for people in:

Perception - Path Planning - Embedded - Backend - General SWE - Hardware - Functional Safety - and others: please check our website!
> a program that queries a database, gets a specific user by ID, and prints the number of letters in that user's name to the console

I'm not a Java programmer but why would you actually need all the boilerplate for this? I'm under the impression that this should be doable in any language with just two lines of code: fetch and print.