skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll give you an upvote for that as it is thought provoking. Thinking about I fell down to my previous position though as otherwise I would have to consider the Western society to be torturing humans - and women in particular - by expecting them to go back to work within weeks or months after giving birth. Compared to the much shorter lifespan of cows and the much longer time it takes for a human baby to become independent I think some cows spend more of the important time with their offspring than certain human mothers do.

You might say it is voluntarily but I know that isn't the entire truth and I'm tempted to say as my socialist friend that slavery is still slavery even if it is wage slavery and the slave got to take responsibility for a whole lot more than they used to like feeding themselves, choosing a prtner in life and making sure they have a place to live.
Rules of thumb are just that. Developers still have to understand the underlying motivation (incidental vs inherent duplication).
Another way to think about this topic is that China's CEO is Xi Jingpin.

There are a few distinctions between calling China a company and calling Apple a nation:

- A nation uphelds the law whereas a company uses proxies (lobbying) to make laws

- A nation has diplomatic rights, a company has to abide by export controls

- A nation has a treasury, has control over interest rates and can prosecute violators, it ensures a level playing field. A company has equity and can fire employees, but has to maximize profits (shareholder interest) and eliminate/beat competition.

- A nation has hard physical military and ability to go to war, a company has office security and HR

- A nation can prosecute criminals, a company can layoff people.

I don't think this analogy provides any interesting insight into Apple besides drawing loose connection between secrecy and censorship.
I think banning dollar stores will just mean people buy their honey buns and hot pockets elsewhere.

Curtailing liberties like this seems to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The actual problem is not the substance, but the abuse of the substance. Drinking too much, smoking too much, eating too much junk. We abuse because it's gratifying. If only the delayed gratification of moderation could compete on the daily.

I think the most productive thing that can be done right now is to discuss what we as a society could do to support people who are in pursuit of delayed gratification. How might we add components of immediate gratification to delayed gratification?

For instance, if you're trudging through something and the end is still out of sight, just hearing a, "you're doing a good job", can be immediately gratifying.
This is a proxy for having a well-defined purpose for a function.
And yet we think it's absolutely normal for companies to be run like oppressive regimes.
Lambda School is Silicon Valley's big bet on reinventing education
Show HN: Blatta – User Feedback in Seconds
> Thinking about I fell down to my previous position though as otherwise I would have to consider the Western society to be torturing humans - and women in particular - by expecting them to go back to work within weeks or months after giving birth.

The OP was referring to "torturing" cows for milk, and you are referring to "torturing" women with respect to maternity leave.

What is your definition of "torture"?
I was expecting someone to mention the Crystal programming language.

In Crystal, types are non-nilable and null references will be caught at compile time.

https://crystal-lang.org/2013/07/13/null-pointer-exception.h...

I certainly recognize that many bugs in Ruby programs announce themselves as `NoMethodError: undefined method '' for nil:NilClass`. So to be able to catch that before releasing code is a very welcoming addition in my opinion.
For a software engineer, emotional attachment to code is inversely proportional to net worth.
Fresh vegetables aren't cheap if you cannot keep them from spoiling. You assume everyone has adequate refrigeration.

Beans and rice and lentils are cheap: But you have to have the cooking utensils and time to cook them. It will help greatly if you have storage containers and freezer space. Hopefully your electric/gas aren't turned off in the meantime.

Discount meats aren't too bad, but you have to be able to shop on the days they are discounted. Plus, as above, you must have adequate refrigeration and cooking stuff - and hopefully you are making soup. You are also completely neglecting that making these things taste of anything besides, well, meat is expensive. Spices aren't cheap. The cheapest place to buy spices is, well, at dollar stores (in general).

This advice is like telling folks to buy in bulk - but it doesn't matter if the 10-pack is cheaper if you only have the money for the 2-pack and don't have the means to save up or take from other things.

If we want folks to eat better, we should really give people the money and time to do so. Stronger safety nets and better public transportation and better workplace scheduling laws, for instance. Better supporting housing. Schools the can't pay for basic maintenance or have enough computers for students can't very well install kitchens to teach kids how to cook. To be fair, though, I'm over 40 and had "cooking lessons" where we learned how to set a table, made maybe one meal a week, and cooked as a group. We were 12 or 13. I was already cooking at the time, so it wasn't helpful. My sister failed one for changing a recipe slightly: It was cinnamon toast. These classes aren't really all they are cracked up to be. Plus, if you are in a poor area, you can't really give homework without providing food and making sure folks have access to cooking stuff.
That is a reasonable question. You may have noted that I left some details vague, so all I ask is that you trust me that the overall story is true.

Of course if you don't trust me, that's cool too! ;-)
As a Berliner, dog poop (like litter in general) is very localized. There are large parts of Berlin (especially in the south west) that are very clean and if you e.g. live in Zehlendorf and work in the nice/wealthy parts of Charlottenburg you will not be overwhelmed by dog poop and grime.
Latest 'Intrusion Truth' data dump peels back layers on Chinese front companies
Creator or litegraph here.

Visual programming works very well when you have data flowing, but it doesnt work when you have loops and branching. But it is nice to support graphs for some tasks, it really speeds up some processes.
Author here. After developing several small side projects as a hobby, I've noticed that getting user feedback is a bit more complicated then I'd like. Talking to colleagues, I know I'm not the only one having this issue.

So, for my current side project, I've made a very basic site which lets you integrate basic feedback/bug reporting functionality into your web app in seconds.

No accounts, just browse to the page, click a button and copy/paste two lines of code to the pages where you want to collect feedback. Oh, and don't forget to bookmark the URL, otherwise you'll have a hard time actually reading the feedback.

Free to use. Please let me know what you think.
Having to pay $13000 after embezzling $11000 is not excessive.
That is a rather excellent piece of work and a great example of "Jansson wrote children's stories for adults."
> Mind blown

Totally. TIL that I can call my blanket a tent and everybody will know what I'm talking about, being that it's the same thing, just nailed down.
Practical Common Lisp - Peter Seibel

[1] http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
Oat milk? Shouldn't that be oat juice?

Oats aren't animals that produce milk for their offspring.
It is interesting to see a list of organizations compiled in one place, to get a sense of what is going on in the world.

But I read the headline wrong. I saw the words "Mapping" and "landscape", and was expecting actual maps. I thought I'd be looking at visualizations of where in the world each organization is having an impact.
Just how meritocratic is the selection of corporate leadership anyway?
Doesn't Apple need the secrecy to survive? Imagine Nokia getting hold of the specs of the original iPhone early before its release, how would the world be today?
I feel both sides are making reasonable points. On the one hand, telling people where they ought to buy their food from does seem like government overreach. On the other hand, there's considerable evidence that people's nutritional choices are terrible for their own and their children's health.

But there's an obvious way to resolve this debate! Run these laws as A/B trials across demographically similar neighborhoods. Track people's health outcomes over the course of the experiment. If the laws seem to be working in making people healthier and happier, keep them. And if they don't, just drop the law.

We're drowning in data! There's no need to go back to the world of Socrates/Plato to try and figure everything out via thought experiments in one's own head!
I have a very different view to this. As a disclaimer: I am working in a smaller team where most code is non-trivial, may be it is different in very large teams on large code bases.

This isn't a question of ownership in the sense of a private property. It is about how you interact and respect and professionalism. First of all, a larger change to code a teammate wrote has a ring of saying: it was badly written. So this is partial a matter of social interaction. If the code is badly written, it needs to be fixed, but one should be reasonably polite about that. Usually, the better way of doing this is having a quick chat with that person where you explain why and how you think the code should be changed, before you just do it. Also to pass on any insight you have about the code, the creator missed.

On the other side, there is the big elephant in the room: unless we are talking about rather simple code, the code perhaps was written as it was for a reason. This often enough isn't apparent on the first glance. So a refactoring without checking with the author always bears the risk that you introduce a bug or at least get into the way of planned changes, which would be incompatible with the refactoring.

So there are many reasons to quickly check with the author before doing significant changes. If the proposed changes are good, then the author will be happy about you doing them, if not, then its better to have talked about them before doing them. And in any case, it is good to have communicaton about major changes.
Not sure if there are any jobs left that don't require voice interaction over phone/skype/whatever. Heck, any kind of realtime multiplayer gaming neither!

I can telephone but it's very unreliable and tiring. Am self-employed and it helps, but still any communication is constant source of anxiety - voice contact has became universal habit.
You can define AppStreams/modules that are parallel installable. Indeed, that's how the Python AppStreams are set up right now.

However, the default way an AppStream is made eschews parallel installation support.

Red Hat will make parallel-installable AppStreams whenever it is needed. And they can incorporate the content of one AppStream in another if need be.
I think that what Burlesona is suggesting is more nuanced (and effective) than the rule of three. We can easily imagine situations where code used twice warrants a refactor, and situations where code used three times does not.

The rule of three suffers the same problem as the pre-emptive refactor - it is totally context insensitive. The spirit of the rule is good, but the arbitrary threshold is not.

Similarly, 99% of your comment is bang-on! My only gripe is the numeral 3. But pithy rules tend to become dogma - particularly with junior engineers - so it's best to explain your philosophy of knowing when to abstract in a more in-depth way.
When you put it like that, it almost certainly seems like torture. What's interesting to think about -- if a species/animal isn't capable of comprehending this emotional loss, then it is torture? Furthermore, how do we measure/know if an animal can actually feel such a deep emotional loss? Many animals cannot communicate. I am so interested to know what a cow thinks. What any animal thinks. It's easy to know what humans think because their informational bitrate is huge.

IIRC cows can feel postpartum depression, so it makes sense that this would be torture. But if we did this to bacteria (maybe even bees), the moral dilemma seems to disappear.
Rather than focus on the dollar stores, the city should focus on itself and its role in the problem. The structure of the street, zoning, parking requirements, vast distances between living places and stores, etc. are key to the existence of the big box stores.

The structure chosen by the city planners years ago literally makes the big box store feasible to economically exist, and reduces the feasibility of mom and pop stores with healthier options. Besides encouraging terrible food options, this situation has generated numerous other social and health-related problems.

Take a walk in the poorest neighborhood in your region which has small-width streets, walking distance between homes and stores, stores on the sidewalk, and terrible parking options. In that neighborhood, you will find fruits and vegetables being sold by mom and pops, and far less prominence of dollar stores.
Poor Mr Graham-Cumming. Both an hyphen and a word banned by Lyft.
The examples here pale in comparison to what I see. Rather than dealing with "ugly" code, I often come across incorrect code. For example:

function do_add(a, b) {
return a - b;
}

This is an obvious mistake, one would think that the solution would be to simply fix the do_add function, but that will end up breaking a tons of other stuff that relies on the broken functionality, and instead what you get is this:

function do_add_real(a, b) {
return a + b;
}

Yes, seeing this in production code is infuriating. But simply "fixing" the issue is generally not possible.

A sign of a seasoned developer is to see this type of horrible code, take a calm breath and focus on the issue at hand rather than scrambling to fix something that works but is ugly.
We've devastated absurd quantities of woodland, marshland, plains, rainforest, river, beach and ocean ecosystems. Devastating a few microscopic specks of desert ecosystem seems like the least of our worries.
Rather say that google _took_ everything else. Few realized the value of what was up for grabs at the time but by making life easy for web developers with g-analytics google created a firehose of user data. By using g-analytics we gave the web away.

Where is this firehose of health data is going to lead to?
A German national taking care of injured cows for 40 years in India [video]
Sometimes it feels like I am living in an alternate reality. After I started using Arch Linux as my main OS I was fully prepared for it to break every few months. But it's been more then 2 years (maybe even 3 or 4 ?) and not one breakage. Also keep in mind that I update it every single day. From time to time I check the Arch Linux news site to see if anything needs manual intervention. So far I haven't needed to do anything.
Hah! Totally do, I'm just nerd sniped by the details I guess :-)
Free webinar shows you proven method to make up to one thousand dollars
Maybe, but Whats worst than useless are Inc. clickbait articles.
> ... nice one Jony ... design a brave and “beautiful” open plan workspace for a paranoiacally secretive organisation.

I feel like it's worth pointing out that Steve Jobs was still running Apple when this building was designed. I don't work for Norman Foster so I have no way to know how much changed internally after he died, but I doubt the balance shifted too wildly given the logistical constraints of massive construction projects.

As an aside - and I don't mean this in reference to office layouts - were I in charge of a global consumer products company that competes in multiple cutthroat markets, I'd want to foster a corporate culture of extreme openness and collaboration inside the walls but absolute silence outside. That's not exactly what Apple is today, obviously, but it's within the realm of possibility that it's their goal.
I've been using it for 2 years with very few problems.
Lots of advice in these threads and no one has mentioned anchoring yet so I'll staple it here; if you're a big company who can afford an HSM and the overhead of the key ceremony stuff to manage it (managed stuff like AWS cloud HSM simplifies this a fair bit) a great option is using an HSM as an anchored one-way function.

For whatever reason this seems to be seldom discussed but the general idea is as follows in hand-wavey fashion:

Set up HSM with a non-exportable symmetric key, set key usages to "encrypt only" and as one step of the hashing scheme you use, encrypt your hash through the HSM. Protected HMAC key would work too.

The result is that an attacker who compromises your password db cannot perform offline attacks on your passwords anymore - they now need to do key extraction on your HSM or remain in your infrastructure and keep running guesses through the HSM where it is relatively easy to monitor what is going on and they can't do a bajillion operations per second anymore.

Wish everyone running large user dbs like yahoo or linkedin etc applied anchoring to their password hashing - it's a relatively simple measure for an org "at scale" to make hash dumps alone useless.
You might be surprised to hear this, but I would agree with that perspective. Most humans are just like cattle from the perspective of human society and throughout our lives will have resources extracted from us one way or another. The way I've seen some humans get out of this cycle is by becoming the ones who do the extracting. I don't think cows are capable of doing something so cruel though.
Unrelated -- I love how the domain name is literally the average Google query for when this becomes breaking news. Clever to make your domain name a literal Google query if you want to spread an idea...
There is definitely a split between the people who think it's interesting to program in Scheme and the people who think it's interesting to program <i>a</i> Scheme (particularly to do so in Scheme itself). For the second group, the Scheme language is more of an aesthetic object than a programming language.

The length argument is also a stand-in for the argument about Common Lisp versus Scheme. CL is pretty carefully defined, so the CL spec is pretty long, and some Schemers used this as an argument against CL (that it was bloated). Now suddenly the Scheme spec was also long, so that argument was gone.
> don’t extract repetitive code right away, try and build the feature you’re working on with the duplication in place first.

I have a similar rule of thumb: when you do a thing the first time, just get it working. When you do a similar thing a second time, just get it working. When you do a thing a third time, pull it together as a cohesive abstraction.

This is a silly generalization, but the point is that you generally need to see a handful of examples of a thing before you can make any useful abstraction. What's more common is people creating abstractions during the first iteration, leading to features that are never used, and others that were never considered.
Not really - industrial espionage is really rare. Google is much more open and their technology doesn't get stolen. Sure, product designs leak before their release, but that doesn't really matter much.
It's like gun bans. Anyone who thinks these type of illusions make sense need to shake their heads.
They should spend one hour to have HTTPS on their front-page though.
From my experience, I would start with a more compact implementation first in hopes that it would save me time. This usually ends with me having to do more complicated operations in my head to plan the code. It's tempting. It's like trying to do math in your head to save time - often leads to a mistake. Now I believe there's no shame in trying out a solution first and rewriting it later when I get a feel what the problem is really about.

John Carmack once said something like "If you're not sure which version is better, code it both ways and compare".

The only downside of later optimization is that in commercial environment they often don't let you clean up.
This raises the question of whether infections trigger our bodies to get rid of bad cells such as cancerous cells as the immune system handles it?

If we are never sick in a clean environment does the cancer rate go up? Has this been studied?
> I'd want a corporate culture of extreme openness and collaboration inside the walls but absolute silence outside

Aspiration driven design it is so ...

EDIT ... with no consideration for the practicalities of what it takes to achieve those aspirations.
Virtualenvs don't protect you completely. If any of the modules in the virtualenv depend upon libraries on the host system, and a lot of Python modules do either directly or indirectly, then there is a chance of breakage if any of the ABIs of these modules break or there's an incompatible ABI between any of the modules.

Even virtualenvs themselves can cause the breakage. Take "pylibtiff". It embeds a copy of libtiff. But, it's old and incompatible with other libraries on the base system. This can be libraries it depends upon, or it could be another copy of the same library. Either way, virtualenvs can cause more problems than they solve.
Also poor people when given the chance will eat junk food. Many poor people are not poor by chance but poor by stupidity.
Should your employees take over any company you found?
New design patent shows Xiaomi may double down on surround screen phones
Because rebuilding everything all the bloody time is expensive.

Virtually every Linux distribution and BSD share this concern. We've all complained about it to Rust upstream, but they don't care. To them, it's cheap to rebuild every Rust project every time the compiler is updated or the standard library needs a fix.

See for yourself: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/600

What's worse is that a lot of people are forgetting why we do it this way in the first place. While part of it was about saving disk space, the major reason we do this is for being able to fix things in a cheap way and have wide-ranging impact. Without this, things like security fixes to zlib, libvpx, or other important libraries would require finding all their reverse dependencies, patching them, and rebuilding them to incorporate the fixes.

It's incredibly important, but because nobody cares in Rust and Mozilla, we're all doomed...
Depends what you mean by reference. In Python they are indeed synonymous. C++ references are different in that the binding / object identity can be changed through the reference, eg when you pass a reference to a function.
Nokia's woes were on software side, not hardware. Building a competitive software stack proved too slow an undertaking for a hardware company. It was Android in the end that ate Nokia's pie, not Apple.
SpaceX has done extraordinary things and criticizing Elon's design taste shouldn't be conflated with the rest of the efforts.