skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Which leads nicely back to my statement of

>What I hear from the Redux devs does not in any way line up with what I heard from Brad Traversy or Stephen Grider

This perception will continue (and only get worse) the more junior devs are educated in trainings/bootcamps that require Redux in your first project. This is the reason so many people have such negative reactions to Redux, they're not yet comfortable with React (which is a new way of thinking by itself) before Redux is added into the mix and it gets very overwhelming very quickly.
How deeply do you mean "entire record"? I am pretty sure that this concern only applies to those fields which have the same resolver
Companies and management are preferring devs with strong interpersonal skills that have weak programming skills, this leads to software that just works, slowly slowly slowly.
Hire
More
Autists!
Things have matured quite a bit. With Apollo Server it's possible to fully understand which fields are being requested before creating and running, for example, and SQL query. Fetching only the requested data for a given query reduces in-memory footprint. Most people get the whole data object and then allow GQL to select the subset of fields the user asked for, but for cases where performance is a problem there is another solution.
From a more general security perspective, I've recently been thinking about the attack vector of open source followers. If you are a malicious open source project owner, your project's follower/star list is a goldmine for potential attack targets. Likely the degree that someone likes/watches/follows your project is highly correlated to their use of your project personally/professionally. A bad actor could tailor their attacks based on this information.
The species the world lost this decade (2019)
Fair enough, I guess that's bad wording. Critic is better word here.
4g is still spotty even near metro areas for many carriers. 5g just means they get to serve more people with same equipment. It’s a cost cutting thing I think more than anything.
> I'm saying that they have systems in place to measure the impact of the code that they put in production on their bottom line

There's a story, and I think it was (re)posted here recently about a series of MBAs all optimizing the cost of the burger bums by removing seeds until there are three seeds neatly laid out at the top.

It might be measurable all the way but at some point it becomes ridiculous. For me that time was some months ago. For the rest of Internet they might manage to reduce the quality once or twice more before it becomes obvious.

This is my way of fighting back. By posting here and on my blog and getting upvoted a lot for pointing out what many can already feel. By letting people who read HN know that yes, that feeling they have that a lot of their ads are wasted because of bad targeting might very well be true.
I used to be a flash developer, started in 1999 with Flash 4 ;)
Quite strange, GQL server source code is literally just walking by fields and resolving promises, very simple and straightforward.

We had something like this in our backend, but this long times is usually meant that something wastes event loop and just blocks everything from execution.

It could be anything for example it could be async hooks that makes ~1000 times slower if you are using a lot of promises (since resolving fields often are just promises) since overhead is per promise. In general in latest nodejs you can do huge amount of promises and they have little to no overhead, but, again - something wrong with nodejs setup, some library populate event loop or something deeper in nodejs internals. It is not an issue with gql itself since if you have gql performance issues that means that your server is super slow in processing like anything. Our team was shocked by performance and it turns out that NodeJS is super fast and it is some libraries (like sequelize) that kills the performance, but gql is not one of them.
This (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jul/11/cia-fake-vacci...) did not help, adding to the already severe skepticism, and eventually that skepticism led to a backlash (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/02/150227-polio...).
My objection is that the author presents it as a totally different approach, but to me it looks like the same approach as the original but with constant propagation applied. (With a little time away from this discussion, i guess tbf i must admit determining the order of the group is a bit more than constant propagation)

Also with a little more sympathetic eye, i suppose the new version is more evocative of the underlying group and such representations are much more in line with the mores of functional programming. At the same time, i cant help but think its a bit pretentious to talk about being isomorphic to a cyclic group and otherwise evoke high level math, just to say, you know this program whose output by definition repeats in a very obvious pattern, well guess what, its output is cyclic.
Certain deer do, certain deer dont. Also, feel free to use a lower animal if that abstraction works better for you. My point is that if humans are some out of the way primitive life form it might make sense why aliens may know of us but not contact us (as in, there may be no purpose to explicitly contact us, as humans dont generally try to explicitly contact every deer herd).

It is not that humans are technologically primitive (which we are), it might be we are too intellectually/capacity primitive to be seen as "contact" worthy.
An Afterlife So Perilous, You Needed a Guidebook
I haven't ever tried running this on Windows. You may get lucky with Docker, but audio input might be difficult. A workaround might be to stream audio in: https://rhasspy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/audio-input/#gstrea...
> prevent a situation like Norway where the oil wealth is distributed to everyone and no longer able to be controlled by a handful of people.

Isn't the wealth distributed to the saudis to keep them happy and inline?
generating methane from co2 and electricity is fairly easy, mining helium from jupiter too. Once you have self sustaining colony on mars it can colonise the rest of the solar system far easier than earth can.
Turning lights off and on and adjusting speaker volume in most homes are such simple things, it's hard to get excited about automating them. The home automation tasks I'd like to see:
- cleaning gutters
- putting dishes away
- sorting mail
- taking garbage cans down to the street
- unboxing packages and breaking down boxes
- folding laundry

These drudgeries take time. They're obviously not as amenable to automation as simple controls on existing electronics, but, in contrast to automated lighting, they'd be worth the investment to solve.
I just googled for how many lab animals are used in reseach in the US, and the number was ~800K in 2017. But (and this is a big but) rats and mice (and birds and fish) are not counted. For some reason, guinea pigs and hamsters are considered more equal than rats and mice.

One supplier of lab mice in Maine provides ~3 million mice per year...

Yearly production (and slaughter) of chickens is something like 60+ billion. Not sure if sentient, but perhaps they deserve it as descendants of the dinosaurs that terrorized human ancestors...
Medium Micro Service Architecture Explained
Have you seen raylib? IMO (also using sdl, but making a 3-d engine and using opengl), sdl's standalone 2-d capabilities are--okay, but not great. It's capable enough, but the ergonomics aren't that great, compared to raylib.
My HN comment detailing several limitations of JMESPath: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16400320
You say "problem there is another solution" - what is the other solution? (I'm guessing it involves somehow telling Apollo Server which fields/related objects you will need?)
I don’t really buy into 4-6.

I don’t see any benefit for a country to turn its currency into a crypto asset. Either they are relinquishing a great deal of control in democratizing their financial system (also exposing themselves to attack), or it’s a crypto in name only that doesn’t seem any better than digital cash through banks except for a buzzword.

Decentralization is hit or miss. You get economies of scale with centralization that are hard to beat. I only see decentralization being useful for certain applications (namely, anything that needs to be censorship resistant/ can’t rely on the centralized infra for some reason) like it already is being used for.

Meat won’t be a delicacy unless we are not counting lab grown meat. Absolutely no way. I would be willing to take a huge bet on this. People all over the world love meat, it’s one of the first things people start spending on when they hit middle income (globally speaking). Plant based alternatives will become a lot more popular especially once they become cheaper, and we will probably start eating mostly lab grown meat, but meat will be consumed, at least by stubborn, older red-blooded Americans wary of technology and set in their ways that the author likely has little exposure to.
I've spent the first five years of my career at two FANGs, and I think the grass is greener in terms of amazing tech. Maybe I've been unlucky, but so much of my time is fighting with the enormous weight of the infrastructure to do anything. Builds, deployments, running tests, getting support from internal teams, using internal frameworks are all so stressful and unsatisfying to me. Not to mention I've never even sniffed any fun javascript framework or python work. It's been 99% Java.

Don't get me wrong--I've been lucky enough to work with and learn from some incredibly brilliant people, the work pays insanely well and lifted me from the bottom quintile to the top, and I don't have to worry about VC funding running out. But I also feel10% of the flow that I do when I'm at home cobbling together a javascript or python whatever. I understand that it isn't fair to compare my toy apps with the insane size of these companies, but still, I don't think your decision was that terrible in terms of just tech. Shoot, there are acquaintances who joined bitcoin startups when we graduated in 2015 and those people are probably worth a few million right now.

I wonder if there is anyone here who works at a unicorn and can tell me if Airbnb, Uber, Lyft, etc are a happier medium?
He's very good, I recommend the following:

Follow up: https://guzey.com/follow-up/

What to do with your life: https://guzey.com/personal/what-should-you-do-with-your-life...

How to make friends online: https://guzey.com/how-to-make-friends-over-the-internet/

You should start a blog: https://guzey.com/personal/why-have-a-blog/

(In fact, the latter has convinced me to begin posting more of my writing publicly on my own blog)
The Guy Who Invented Those Annoying Password Rules Now Regrets Wasting Your Time https://gizmodo.com/the-guy-who-invented-those-annoying-pass...
As a side project to get me back into lower-level programming, I've had the pleasure of working on a personal fork of Godot.

The engine's simply fantastic from a programmer's perspective. The code is readable, the architecture is quite intuitive, and with the exception of a few engine components, you don't run into much in the way of incomprehensible spaghetti code.

Adding features is more or less trivial, as has been merging upstream modules from more modern branches into the project.

I see a bright future for the engine, especially after the 3.1 update, and I anticipate that it'll start seeing significant commercial adoption in the second half of this decade (it needs a few more years of refinement and PR).

The release of the Vulkan renderer will be a massive boost to public interest, and developers will increasingly consider it for their next projects.

That said, I do have a few concerns about its development. I'll preface these critiques with the fact that I'm working from 3.1 stable, and have only merged from 3.2 as needed.

There's a wide-spread conception among the Godot community that Godot's performance (especially in 3D) is abysmal. This has been blamed on a number of factors, such as the memory model (largely heap-based), and the rendering engine (it uses quite a bit more cpu time than it needs to).

It is exactly the second-issue that has lead many community members to see the Vulkan renderer as Godot's salvation. I can't speak to that, but as is, many of the criticisms Godot faces are legitimate.

But among the projects I've seen where performance has been an issue, it's largely been the product of a developer's failure to understand how the engine is processing their content, and by extension their failure to architect their game around that.

This is an issue many inexperienced developers run into on just about any engine. Godot also lacks editor tooling that would allow anyone but a programmer to easily mitigate these issues in a scene, even if they knew where the performance issues were. This, compounded with the fact that Godot has largely focused on accessibility first and foremost has resulted in a lot of inexperienced community members without much understanding of the engine's internals to discourage people from even trying to adopt the engine for 3D projects until 4.0.

I hope that 4.0's release will be enough to minimize what I believe to be largely a PR issue, but I also fear that the inevitable bugginess that comes along with an entirely new rendering architecture may just exacerbate them, or that it will simply fail to live up to the expectations of many people who expect a more modern renderer to somehow fix their poorly considered code.

I'm concerned that this will slow the engine's development with respect to its tooling, as there are few people really testing the bounds of it's capabilities and workflows.
If you ride a rented scooter from e.g. Lime or Bird, your GPS location is being streamed in real-time to many of the departments of transportation in the cities in which they operate[1][2]. It's not a quantum leap to assume cars will follow, especially if they're autonomously operated by some central service, doubly so if they're rented (e.g. from Uber) and not individually owned.

1. https://slate.com/business/2019/04/scooter-data-cities-mds-u...
2. https://blog.remix.com/mds-gbfs-and-how-cities-can-ask-for-d...
The older generation in Hong Kong, if my friends there are in any way representative (all adults at 97 handover, like me) in what they tell me, simply hold the same resentments they did in 98, 99, 00 etc for the changes China has made to their home and how it is governed, and the constant chipping away at what they have. Some of those friends have been out on the marches and protests across the years, not just 2019's. First demo in favour of universal suffrage was probably in 98 when China dismantled the electoral system for the LegCo and replaced with the pro-Beijing weighted system. Universal suffrage of the Chief Exec was promised right back then.

It doesn't need an opposing mainland party to explain HK. There may be, but I see little evidence for it.
> We've already got a billion tiny data centers -- the powerful computers and smartphones in our houses and pockets.

With asymmetric up/download speeds.
The simulations in this article are compatible with the more abstract analysis in my paper at http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~radford/anth.abstract.html (see Section 7).

The brief summary is that we observe two things: (1) we exist, with the full set of memories we have, (2) these memories don't include any evidence of other intelligences (I'll assume - readers who think they've ridden on UFOs can draw other conclusions).

The existence of our particular civilization (in all its detail) is more probable if intelligent life is more probable in general (assuming one dismisses arguments about infinite universes containing all possibilities, so you can never conclude anything from anything).

But if intelligent life is generally more probable, it's more probable that we have seen other intelligent life, contrary to observation.

So the most likely situation given what we observe is a compromise - intelligent life is fairly likely (explaining our existence), but not really likely, or at least not really likely to explore other stars (explaining why we haven't seen any aliens).

One unfortunate possibility is that intelligent life reaching our technological level is common, but getting to the level of colonizing the galaxy is uncommon. But that needn't be highly likely. It's also possible that there's other intelligent life out there not far away, in which case it may well be within our ability to detect it with a bit more effort. That's what one would conclude from this article as well.
I agree except with your last sentence.
They have the biggest total pollution, but their pollution per capita is actually low compared to eastern countries, and they are investing and legislating aggressively for clean tech.
Which is rather my point, rather than a few vague sweeping generalisations of GP drawing parallels where none appear to exist.

It's always easier to explain collapse with hindsight. :)
Help me quit my day job
This article is surprisingly and disappointingly simple-minded to appear on a place called Hacker News. It's a list of things aimed at my mom, not at a "hacker", whatever meaning you assign to this term.

The most telling may well be section "5. Be wary of unknown sources" which recommends "You should never trust software from these sources". One of the key ways of making Android privacy focused is to install F-Droid and use the non-cloud alternatives it offers to all the standard Play Store crap.

Sorry, I would have expected more from something posted on Hacker News. I expect everybody here to roll their eyes when reading a heading such as "Use a PIN".
The last financial collapse had many companies claiming paper valuations of assets. Companies like AAPL/MS/GOOG/FB have significant net income with significant moats around their products that still have plenty of room to grow as they all move to subscription income.
Honestly though there's something to be said for an up and coming platform. I mean I just uploaded some stupid video of Bill Gates and it is on the way to 2k views on NodeTube right now, I think there is a first-adopters bonus to being the first to adopt a new platform. And I have some good plans for monetization as well, really the big issue is breaking the monopoly YouTube has. Maybe once that happens they'll actually not treat their creators like crap which would be a win in and of itself.
I'm going to tell you your future: You're going to lose money on those puts.

I know it's hard to face, but the markets as you know them don't exist. The algos own them. There are programs that watch every trade coming from any place where retail traders, such as yourself, can buy and sell from. Those trades are front-run on both ends and endlessly fucked with. That includes options and futures. You're going to get fucked because they are designed for that very exact purpose. You don't believe me but it is a fact. I've seen algos run prices up and down just to stop out a single retail trader. They know everything. The know if you have stops or not, they know your psychology, and unlike you, they have a plan of how they are going to manipulate the bid in order to screw you over. And it costs them practically nothing to do it.

You should not fuck around with this stuff. Just accept that it is rigged.

By the way, the guys in the Big Short who did win nearly didn't--Burry's investors tried to pull out and he was getting sued to allow them to bail out of his strategy. Once he won, he didn't win because the firms he bought the CDOs from refused to pay. He had to sue them to get his money, which he eventually did. Point being, if you think you are going to "go short" and win, you are a fool.
None of 4, 5, or 6 are at all likely either.
The overpowering desire is to make more money for your shareholders. That sometimes isn’t going to align well with the interests of end users.
I find (6.) somewhat anthropocentric in that it assumes nuclear weapons are the nec plus ultra of destructive power. You might as well have said in 1917 that we were incommunicado for inventing chlorine gas, or shotguns (whose use the Germans did object to as a war crime!)
Another interesting aspect is they might need to transition into a focus on their middle class or risk pricing themselves out of the labor market. Politically, I would think thats a bit of a catch 22 for the party. Empowering a large group would weaken the party, I would think.
Intel's Overclocking Lab: The Team Pushing CPUs to New Limits
International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening
I'd fully expect "11 reasons people speak at conferences" to include a lot of reasons associated with personal benefits. (And I'd actually only count 3 of those as being vanity: the rush, promotion, and recognition.)

People sure don't speak at conferences so they can spend more time at airports and on planes.

Many do also enjoy it for altruistic reasons listed. But relatively few people are going to take on tasks that aren't also beneficial to themselves personally.
Dominus calendar

https://blog.plover.com/calendar/leapday.html
Machines need to be maintained. Machines of useful complexity include such parts as microprocessors. To create new or replacement parts, nothing less than the full Earth industrial complex is required. It's not clear how to package all that in a ship, including enough reserves to bootstrap an industry up to the point it is possible to build microprocessors. I doubt that "machine life" could subsist on a small barren rock with more success than biological life.
I'd say that fuse/splitting the atom counts as a significant advancement in physics whether weapons or power generation. Next, I'd say solid state transistor physics (not to mention Lasers, LEDs, OLEDs) also count as significant advances. I guess we're APPROACHING a century, but we're no where near it yet... maybe another 30 years?

If we're talking about understanding the universe, strong/weak force (also Neutrinos have mass), dark matter/energy (and Cosmic Microwave Background), gravitational waves (and black holes) all seem pretty significant and happened after 1920.

What has happened is that the advances have gotten harder to explain and more ubiquitous in their effects. So maybe it feels like there's not advancement, because we're soaking in Moore's law and post WW2 economic growth?
This is not really that significant of a result, given that the measure of poverty they used is an income threshold. In other words, the study result found that supplementing income with direct cash payments reduced the percentage of people that fell below the poverty income threshold. Which is an obvious consequence of a uniform increase in people's income.
Check Oxford Dictionary or Websters. No redefinition.

I'm done here.
Dictionaries are descriptions of language not prescriptions. Thou doth protest too much, methinks.
Penicillin and plenty of others sure, but it’s a huge list and resistance has long been fought via the use of novel antibiotics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_antibiotics

USSR’s issues where generally more economic than technological. However, they did lag behind the curve in introducing new antibiotics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union#/m...
This is just semantics. What you're referring to as AI is often given the name AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), while many (most?) would agree that AI includes nowadays common technologies such as maps pathfinding and grammar checking.
Based on history. Except this time there are several global powers looking to either take over or keep it fragmented.
I don't know. We didn't have facebook the last time around.
I would enjoy seeing a BOM for the hardware. I am looking for PoE circuit designs to roll my own.