skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For those trying to compare it to SemVer, ChronVer seems to have a different target. It mentions web applications and systems that see releases (with continuous delivery or not).

SemVer remains good for libraries, or anything where there's a clearly-defined API for consumption, because it clearly establishes a set of rules for what to expect. If you're using version 1.0.0 and upgrade to 1.10.30, with SemVer it would remain perfectly compatible, and no change should be required on your part (that's the ideal; of course developers are free to use whatever versions they want and pretend it's valid SemVer).

For applications though, I agree that ChronVer seems far more useful, because there's just no real "compatibility" contract with an application. After all, macOS 2017.09.25 seems far more descriptive than "10.13", which means nothing to anyone.
Honestly, I've been on a lot of online forums, and Hacker News is by far the most combative and jingoistic I've ever seen.
I'm guessing a population that can generate wealth (think age distribution, education).
I appreciate the ability to avoid having to enclose my conditions in parenthesis, and the main operand of statements like match, switch etc. to not be wrapped in parenthesis.
Oh, I think there's potential for virtual worlds, just not the SL/OS type. Something more like Sansar or Sinespace could still catch on.

Or better yet, something that can run in a browser.
Thanks for your kind reply.

Just to clarify, it's both infections OR dysbiosis (your own commensal bacteria, fungi and virus going out of control).

The infection + molecular mimicry theory of autoimmunity was already quite well established in the 80s, but commensal dysbiosis + molecular mimicry is only starting to emerge now, and it's likely to be even more important. See section 1 (introduction) of this paper for a whole overview:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2019.12.18.881433v1....
Except that it also happens with internal software, where there's no separation between developers and end-users. It's second-system effect writ large. "We'll rewrite this old, outdated software and add plenty of bells and whistles! This time will be different, we'll finally be doing it right."
What's the point? Why would countries bother?
I can't even get my kids to bed at 7 p.m., at what time do you get up?
Yak Shaving and Bike Shedding are some of my favorite sayings.
This isn't really anything new. Sometimes, it's important to get that hose or whatever the real-world equivalent is. The real advice is to not waste time on things that aren't important. To poorly extend the metaphor, this is running to home depot to buy a pack of gum. I've caught myself a few times tweaking my i3 config or something to "increase productivity" to procrastinate something I don't want to do. The important thing is to not do that. This advice, however, is already well-known.
"Doing it well now is much better than doing it perfectly later"

That sounds fine until hundreds of developers make this choice every single day, and your project is so riddled with technical debt that forward progress becomes hard to muster. I'll be the first to admit that I postpone or neglect Yak Shaving myself.

If we think about it the other way around, if we shaved yak every single time, then the herd would be shaved, and we'd be able to work without so many distractions.

I guess the big problem with Yak Shaving, at least for a dayjob, is that it doesn't always count towards making forward progress toward your goals or OKRs, or whatever we want to call them. I think we need to recognize the importance of Yak shaving and reward the shavers.
My tone is harsh because bad public speaking significantly damages your profile => your career => salary => $$/year.

ps: I just read your reply, in the meantime I edited/extended my initial post
This is actually part of the business justification for using SaaS/PaaS instead of rolling your own. E.g. skip implementing auth when just starting and simply use Firebase.
> I'm not able to find anything that gives a decent sense of how these were used in practice

Here you go, the id Software .plan reads on Blue's News. That's how a lot of people consumed id's .plan files back then (with id being one of the more famous publishers at the time). It's not pre-www, however it gives a pretty good sense (for those not exposed to them) of what .plan files were like to consume.

On the right side panel you can click through the emloyee names and then change the date with the "Archived Dates" select box above the names:

An example by Paul Jaquays:

https://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=8

Brian Hook from 1999:

https://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=7

John Cash from 2000 and 1998:

https://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=9

https://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=9&time=199811...

Paul Steed in 1998:

https://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=2&time=199806...

And John Carmack's .plan archive from 1996 forward:

https://github.com/oliverbenns/john-carmack-plan/tree/master...
I've been hearing this term probably since TFA was published, but it's only been recently, ~15 years into my career that I realized how much I'm guilty of this. It's so easy to get caught up in that PR for that upstream dependency so your code is a bit prettier.

I've also noticed that the low-level yak shaving I tend towards becomes much less tempting if I focus on decoupling what I'm writing. As long as a function/module I'm not super happy with is nicely isolated/decoupled, who cares? I can easily swap it out later if it becomes an issue.
Well yes, if these things represented different things, then the output of the program would be incorrect.

To put it another way, the original version was explicitly calculating the function ℤ -> { "", "fizz" }. The new version had the results of this function directly embeded in the source code (and hence precalculated as opposed to calculated at runtime). I just don't see the two of these approaches really being all that different
If you want things to be cheaper, more choices, this is what happens.

Not just software, see houses, furniture, consumer goods, etc.

I see no point in getting angry, you are in control of what you use.
The spark is already here. I work in a rapidly emerging domain where the trends clearly indicate that traditional concepts of centralized infrastructure cannot serve the required workloads: operational sensor/geospatial data models. Basically, machinery measuring and reasoning about the physical world at scale, often in real-time. Several aspects of these data models (technical, economic, regulatory) strongly indicate a globally federated implementation that allows for fast, decentralized, ad hoc cooperation of storage-dense compute elements at the edge. The aggregate data velocity is so high that the physics of data model centralization is untenable, so there is a certain near-term inevitability about it even though you can make a centralized solution work today.

There is active research into the theoretical and practical design of systems and protocols that will make this plausible. It has no precedent in literature and it is a very non-trivial problem but the sense is that a practical workable design is achievable in the not too distant future.

It is worth noting that effectively managing climate change requires implementing the same kind of data model with similar theoretical constraints. Building data models of physical reality at scale breaks just about every part of classic data infrastructure architecture.
Discover Python and Patterns (9): Pygame – Design Patterns and Video Games
It does't make sense to take wealth though.

The only way wealth can increase (in a usuable liquid form at least) is through income, which is already taxed.

If I eat beans and rice for 10 years to help save for a awesome retirement, I should be able to save that money.
> To put a finer point on it, software today is absolute garbage. I've been screaming about this for decades.

That statement contradicts itself. Is this satire?

> All of this bloated 'shitware' today is the result of it having been written by people who a) have no deeper understanding of what the computer is actually doing; also known as typical Python/Java/etc/etc/etc programmers, and/or b) simply not giving a damn about conservation of resources--as further evidenced by all of the other extremely wasteful and destructive habits they hold in their personal lives, and in their societies in general.

Everything has a cost / benefit associated with it. Pretending otherwise show how little you know about engineering.

> I'm working to construct, in my own computing life, something of a 'personal oasis', which is increasingly removed and estranged from all of the horrible things I see Other People out there having to suffer in their personal computing lives, thanks to talentless 'developers' who Just Don't Fucking Care. Some of these pricks actually have the audacity to call themselves 'engineers', even.

I dunno how far your head has to be up your own behind to actually believe this? It not like most developers these days work on large software projects that are normally poorly costed, estimated, planned usually with stifling restrictions because certain "enterprise" technology is mandated by some architect who hasn't written a line of code in a couple of decades. Most people like a consistent regular income which allows them to support themselves and their family. I suspect these concerns are more important then incoherent ramblings of some guy on HN.
For the author: home assistant has had a native homekit plugin for a while, so you could move to a %100 home assistant setup if your devices are not homekit native.
Here's a possible reason for why a crypto fiat currency with a distributed ledger might be attractive.

Currently, all fiat currencies operate with a central ledger at whatever central bank is authorized to print or destroy units of the currency. For example, every US dollar is linked through a chain of deposits and liabilities back to an account at the Fed since any bank operating in the US is required to hold an account with the Fed. However, this gives the US the ability to control the transfer of USD to use in sanctions.

Suppose you were an Iranian company that wanted to buy goods from the EU, to be paid in USD. In normal times, an Iranian bank with an account at the Fed would ask the Fed to transfer USD from its account to that of the EU bank to complete the trade. However, since Iran is under sanctions, the Fed can freeze the assets and refuse to initiate the transfer or confirm that the Iranian bank has the required funds. Without assurance that you can actually pay for the goods in USD, the EU company decides not to sell any goods and you're stranded from the world market.

Trying to bypass this by buying the goods with Euros doesn't work either, since the Fed can also threaten the USD accounts of EU banks too. Suppose the US catches an EU bank helping an Iranian company trade with a EU company in Euros. The US could then order the Fed to freeze the accounts of the EU bank or extract a fine for violating sanctions. EU banks get spooked away from helping Iranian companies deal with international payments due to the risk of getting themselves locked out of the USD system. All this is thanks to the power the Fed has over the one central ledger of USD that they can modify and freeze at will.

But with a distributed ledger secured with cryptography, the Iranian bank wouldn't have to depend on the Fed to modify their central account book when performing money transfers. They could cryptographically prove that they had a certain amount of USD in their accounts and transfer it to the EU bank in a way that all bystanders can observe and confirm. You would have a currency system with unblockable and unsanctionable transfers, as if you had teleported containers of physically verifiable US dollar bills from Iran to the EU.

This would be the key draw for countries trying to make their fiat currencies crypto. They could then advertise it as a currency that is impossible for the host country to use for sanctions. This boosts the cryptocurrency's viability as a reserve currency, and once enough countries begin using it then the host country could print money to improve their country's consumption, living standards, and economic clout without worrying about inflating the currency away.
On Earth, there have been previous life-forms which have died out, there have been more or less intelligent life-forms which have died out (various dinosaurs and exhausted branches of hominids etc.), there have been previous civilizations with varying scientifical/technological achievements; but there has never been a species on Earth which has created a civilization as advanced as humans have.

So, we are the first ones to reach this point on the Earth. Not the first ones ever, but first ones to get this far.

If we assume the patterns of evolution observed on the Earth are nothing specific to Earth and they repeat throughout the Universe, there are/have most likely been life-forms (simple and complex) of varying degrees of intelligence, as well as civilizations of varying degrees of technological advancement.

However, since we apparently see absolutely no trace of anyone else, either they failed to successfully bootstrap their colonies outside of their home planet/moon, or we got here first. It's unlikely, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but someone has to be the first. Maybe it's us, from our little blue planet.
Have also used OVH before, awesome company and great value.
Free WEBINAR Rethinking your organization learning using neuroscience
worth pointing out, i think, that that was the original justification for rust: that by building a safe language that still gave you the level of control you'd expect from a C(++) they could experiment with all sorts of otherwise difficult and subtle concurrent code to figure out what would actually work/help.

Much like Erlang's concurrency fell out as a consequence of needing to be confidently write high availability code, Rust's general safety falls out of needing to write concurrent code fearlessly.
It also messes up the Bitcoin mining economics for the rest of the world. If you see mining bitcoin as a way to convert CNY -> equipment and electricity -> bitcoin -> foreign currency, you’re willing to operate at a loss. Kind of like how when people launder money they accept they’ll only get 50% or something of their dirty money converted into clean, except in reverse.
Maybe as a retail trader, shorting has a bad risk premium. But in general, people short for only one reason: to gain leverage and reduce volatility. A hedge fund might go %100 long and 30% short for a gross exposure of 130%, gaining both leverage and reducing volatility (which they use to net risk premium through leverage). Or if you’re a quant, you use shorts to make your portfolio market neutral. While a fund might short SPY or QQQ in order to hedge a long position, I don’t think an acute investor would take on a short position of the entire market in order to make a directional play on beta. There are a couple reasons for this:

1. If you’re positive the market is going to crash in a specified point in time, you would want to be more aggressive and buy some puts or vix futures.

2. Beta almost always has positive returns and betting on entire market crashing is almost impossible. You would need to be very confident for it to mathematically make sense, and if you were that confident, you might as well go big or go home (using vix futures, etc).

3. Negative beta exposure historically has been a very bad investment philosophy. While it can make sense to hedge market crashes (though not as often as you would think, puts as portfolio insurance are almost always a bad deal), I don’t think it makes sense to actually try and make money off of it. Either you hedge out all market risk or you take on some market risk. It’s a suckers game to try and profit from negative beta.

Some other stuff he says is suspect too. Saying that Tesla can’t crash because the short-sellers will always take profits is a strange thing to say. It’s like saying a stock with a lot of long-interest can’t go up because investors will always take profits: historically untrue.
You could use WebTorrent which is P2P in the browser, the issue is exposing people's public IP addresses which I really don't like, so I would never run it in prod unless it was a user opt-in, but not a big priority for me at the moment.
TIL supporting the 2016 Republican presidential candidate was evil.
That loads all the data into memory, though. Fine if you're joining all of it, but with the Postgres example you can throw the whole SQL language at the data, and it will be streamed and pipelined efficiently just like with normal Postgres tables.
Magnetic sensor on the garage door is probably my favorite “automation” too. Notifies my phone, and I can close it remotely.

Other favorites are:
- magnetic sensor on basement freezer cabinet, has saved my bacon, literally.
- magnetic sensor on roof windows (good old fashion drying attic) that notifies me if it’s about to rain and windows are open.
- water leak sensors on everything that’s hooked up to water pipes.
I wouldn’t say it is ignored, more that it isn’t particularly useful. Shaky YouTube videos don’t allow for much in the way of study. Even more convincing sources, such as that video released last year of the Tic Tac UFO, were interesting, but not all that useful.
I haven't used Apollo Server lately. But the way you describe it doesn't address the core issue, which is the initialization of the intermediate objects in-memory. So just to give an example, if I wanted to query for the projects of listings of my company, I can write it this way in GQL:

me { company { listings { projects { id name } } } }

This will initialize: a User, a Company, Listings and Projects of all listings.

I can also write this in SQL using a couple of joins and return an array. The memory consumption is trivial in comparison to the original request.
The title is misleading. The post doesn't discover any dark sides of GraphQL. The post is about a potential performance problem with a library that implements the GraphQL spec. There might be a problem with the library itself. There might be a problem with the use of said library. The author states that it takes 19ms to fetch 20 recipes from a postgres database. This looks really suspicious. Why does it take so long to fetch 20 indexed rows? Maybe there's some general performance problem with the application?
Whether or not it's vanity, there's an element of enjoying being in the public eye--at least in some contexts. If someone really doesn't like being publicly visible they're mostly going to self-select out of being a speaker unless they have some other compelling motivation for doing so.

Whether or not it comes naturally or it's a persona they've developed for professional reasons, most public speakers like the energy of the crowd or other audience. (Personally, I'm much more comfortable live than on video--which is a somewhat different skill.)
Lobbiests + campaign finances
There’s one or two Perl5 modules that are version yyyymmdd.nn that expect you’ll only do less than 100 releases per day.

It turns out one of the more interesting problems with version numbers is tools that assume that each number will fit within 2^8, or 2^16.
Are there many talks about a single person's vim config? That seems like a poor topic to me, and I'm not sure how many people would consider it a good idea.
Ask HN: What are some great examples of software engineer resumes?
Could be any field or level of experience. What about their resume stuck out to you? Was it the content? Design?
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. The person actually states that they don't know how to debug, "honestly, I'm not 100% sure the best way to debug from here." They are just looking at Datadog stats and not finding the root cause. They could do some basic JS debugging of the open source library to figure out the issue. Blaming Apollo would be a stretch (which may not even be the issue since they haven't done any debugging), but the protocol of graphql is way too far.
What? No reference to country specific disconnected-from-the-rest-of-the-world Internet, a-la Russia's experiment a few days ago? To me, more government control over the Internet to the extent of governments basically sealing the Internet to within country borders with more regulation (taxes, anyone?) of out-of-country access seems like a no-brainer thing happening in the upcoming decade...way more than just the great-wall-of-china firewall.
Paths to Retirement and Financial Independence
No, both the vaccine receipient and third parties are at risk of getting a full-on paralytic polio infection from the oral polio vaccine. When this happens to the recepient it's called vaccine-associated paralytic polio. See for instance https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/vaccine-derived-p...

It's also worth paying attention to the precise distinction between vaccine-derived poliovirus, which is the problem this article was about, and VAPP. VDPD is basically equivalent to normal wild-type poliovirus in terms of its infectivity and effects, but only happens once the vaccine poliovirus has been circulating and mutating for a while and can be protected against via vaccination. VAPP is caused by vaccination and can affect the recipients or those around them, but unlike VDPD the people who suffer from it shouldn't pose any more danger to others than any other vaccine receipient.
You will be alive in 10 years!
Ok but when you say:

The failure mode of augmented switches, if the smart control stuff for some reason doesn't work or is not accessible, is super obvious and simple: they just revert to being a switch on the wall.

I can't help but think the failure mode of smart bulbs is super obvious too, they should just revert to being a bulb, but for some reason it doesn't seem to work that way whenever I hear about them failing.
So it's basically like seatbelt use. There are certain types of crashes where a seatbelt could cause more harm than good (such as crashing into a lake, the seatbelt gets stuck, and the victim can't get out). However these are rare enough, that the benefits of seatbelts far outweigh the risk, that most people decide to wear them (including the benefit of not getting a seatbelt violation ticket).
The efficiency of Internal combustion engine is about 25%, whereas a combined cycle power plant can be around 60% efficient. Even with transmission, storage and electric motor inefficiencies, EVs come ahead. Add the fact that more and more percentage of power is come from renewables each day, I’d say EVs are more than feel good BS. Sure, staying closer to work may be a better idea, but we can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I think thats stil managable, even simply by redundancy and sending fleets of ships. Also 3D printing of replacement parts seems pretty promissing and is already being looked into (there is a basic 3D printer or the ISS).
"The human genome is not very large"

I think this is reflective of a massive blindspot.

A program to print "hello world" isn't very large, but it doesn't compile itself or produce its own operating system or produce the hardware to run the OS to run the compiler...or produce the companies to produce the hardware and software...or produce the economy to produce the companies... Clearly there is information in the compiled program that is not in the source code or the language spec.
I'm so weary of this moral panic we've been having. There are so many other factors to be weighed against efficiency when it comes to making software. There are completely legitimate tradeoffs to be made that sacrifice performance. There are also programmers who write bad code on all dimensions - performance included - out of sheer laziness. But those aren't the primary cause of this hardware "waste". Demanding efficiency for efficiency's sake, ignoring all other constraints, is shortsighted and narrow-minded.