skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> General purpose programing languages are getting more expressive by the day

You know, once upon a time, we understood that declarative approaches to software engineering were superior to imperative approaches, when declarative approaches are feasible. Declarative approaches are much safer and easier to test, at a cost of only being able to express what the tool accepting the declarative approach can understand. Imperative approaches are strictly worse for any problem set where a declarative approach solves the problem within performance requirements. The additional expressiveness of languages like Pulumi is the last thing I want.

YAML is a horrible language for declarative system configuration because a) any sufficiently complex system will require you to generate your declarative codebase in the name of maintainability, b) generating code for any language where whitespace is significant will lead you to an early death, and c) stringly-typed languages are fundamentally unmaintainable at sufficient scale. But this is not an indictment of a declarative approach! It is an indictment of YAML.

> Configuration is code not data.

Data > code. Data does not need to be debugged. The best code you can have is deleted code - deleted code does not need to be maintained, updated, or patched. Code is a necessary evil we write in order to build operable systems, not a virtue in and of itself.
If you're running on a single host anyways, why not just use init scripts or unit files? All Kubernetes is giving you is another 5-6 layers of indirection and abstraction.

EDIT: Quick clarification: still use containers. However, running containers doesn't require running Kubernetes.

> learning Kubernetes can be done in a few days

The basic commands, perhaps. But with Kubernetes' development velocity, the learning will never stop - you really do need (someone) dedicated part time to it to ensure that a version upgrade doesn't break automation/compliance (something that's happened to my company a few times now).
Everything I hear from friends at all these companies is that for stress, Amazon > Apple > Netflix > Facebook > Google. Netflix seems far less stressful than Apple from everything I've heard from employees that have worked at both.
QuestDB (https://www.questdb.io) might help. Import your file(s) by drag and drop directly into the web console. Once data is loaded, you can run SQL queries in the console to order, format, concatenate, join (including time-based joins), etc. Once finished, you can export your formatted results back to CSV. Also, it's pretty quick!
Cracking the Google Product Manager Interview
It's circular to call that considerate. You're saying it's useful because people care, I'm saying people care about something useless.

You can apply the same logic to an obese person as chronically under-dressed/fashion-averse one: They ought to be considerate enough to show their attention to detail through managing their health better and careful calorie intake.

I stand by my point that it's a shortcoming of our culture that we give those signals (i.e. "t-shirts aren't very professional!") any weight at all.

I won't claim an inverse trend but I've worked with enough relatively-useless and very well dressed people that it's basically noise.
"temporarily storing the waste" is mostly what the US have done since the late 70s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage#United_States

Yucca Mountain was supposed to be the solution this temporary storage; but the budget for Yucca Mountain got suspended, so the US are back to the temporary solution.

But postponing forever in the hope of a better solution is a bad solution; because in the meantime they are in unsafe locations.
The first time I visited Amsterdam it blew my mind. I don’t know why the rest of the world doesn’t use their streets as a model for more bike friendly cities.
Ask HN: What Happened to the Monarch CPU Project?
Sometime in ~2005 a new type of CPU was announced (built by Raytheon), named Monarch (Morphable Networked Micro-Architecture), which seemed revolutionary / super-impressive at the time, but I haven't heard of it ever again. Does anyone know what happened to the project? Was it abandoned or is it actually used somewhere?

Links:

http://investor.raytheon.com/news-releases/news-release-details/raytheon-develops-worlds-first-polymorphic-computer

https://archive.ll.mit.edu/HPEC/agendas/proc06/Day1/05_Vahey_Abstract.pdf
http://strictlypositive.org/Idiom.pdf

https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/G...
> Note: I think the idea is horrible, any moderately complex program written this way would be entirely unmaintainable in my opinion. The author touches on this towards the end, but I think they are completely minimizing the down-side.

I agree so much. I can't help but think that modifying code you don't understand by injecting more code via hooks is a recipe for disaster, and the next person maintaining the composite product has to chase down all (ab)users of these events like we once had to hunt down abusers of global variables to understand what the hell is going on.

I don't even agree with the premise that this thing is less dependent on structure. Arguably, it is more dependent. It's just that instead of structure at the syntax level, we're now dealing with structure at a higher level, structure that is opaque to syntax but nevertheless present. Those named events and synchronization mechanisms make up their own structure.
Sure, fine, but Google blows up hn here and there with horror stories but because of search and I guess the fact that 2024 is when they're possibly nuking cloud anyway, the companies in question still got deleted.

What's the alternative you're proposing? Are you just saying Cloud Bad?
> Mirantis is just some cloud hosting provider and from what I can tell it has no connection to Docker. I'm generally interested in why all the FUD around Docker and Swarm. Can you support these FUD statements with some legit news stories or blog posts from the people involved at Docker?

https://www.mirantis.com/blog/mirantis-acquires-docker-enter...

> Today we announced that we have acquired the Docker Enterprise platform business from Docker, Inc. including its industry leading Docker Enterprise and 750 customers.

> What About Docker Swarm?
> The primary orchestrator going forward is Kubernetes. Mirantis is committed to providing an excellent experience to all Docker Enterprise platform customers and currently expects to support Swarm for at least two years, depending on customer input into the roadmap. Mirantis is also evaluating options for making the transition to Kubernetes easier for Swarm users.

Mirantis owns essentially all of Docker, outside of Docker for Desktop (someone correct me here if I'm wrong), now. They are saying that Swarm is not the future of Docker. It's entirely possible that the remainder of Docker, now a developer tooling company, will continue with Swarm, but it seems unlikely. Also possible the community will keep it alive. None of those maybes are things I'd bet my platform on though.
Isn't this completely irrelevant to the discussion?

Linus's only point was that ZFS for Oracle reasons can't be included in the kernel (despite what Canonical thinks). ZFS may have some nice features but is not worth the headache to rely on a possible copyright infringing, out-of-tree model backed by Oracle.

I have thus far seen nobody who disagrees with this. Instead people seem to got hung upon nitpicking or their own ego. E.g. but the features are important to me and not buzzwords. Good for you, every non-BSD OS thus far lived without them.
Or "unmaintained". Of course it has maintainers, but *BSD switch to basing itself on ZFS on Linux because they don't have enough.

TLDR: Hyperbole != wrong and nobody disagrees with the substance just with the tone.
I dont think, the correct answer is to change your stack to fit some vendor
There is also quite a gap between what current users want (mostly no surprises and stable software) and what new users think they want (more features, I believe many have the mindset "it does all this but I really want X before I commit").

And of course journalists only want new releases and new large features. Which is why getting features is usually only feasible on launch.
Is that swarm in general, or v1 swarm that predated the current "swarmkit"?

https://forums.docker.com/t/is-there-a-roadmap-for-docker-sw...

https://github.com/docker/swarmkit/issues/2665
The Dark Web: What You Need to Know
A major problem with Aadhaar is how UIDAI has completely discounted the fact that Aadhaar will be used by people who have zero idea about technology/computers. "Most" of the scandals with Aadhaar has been social engineering to gain access or clueless government officials printing the data and putting it up publicly on their department websites.

99% of the cases I see is humans being completely inept at handling data - most of them probably don't even realize the implications of such a central repository of data.

Fortunately, UIDAI has made some improvements. You can lock your biometric authentication and every request to verify will fail until you unlock for 10-15 mins. They have implemented a virtual ID over Aadhaar which can be used for verification without handing over your original number - but here's the problem, institutions have no idea that these numbers are valid too!

I do believe that a system like Aadhaar is necessary for India BUT govt institutions like UIDAI cannot and should not declare their end of responsibilities at just the technical level (which UIDAI frequently does by claiming that data is housed in secure vaults and encrypted and blah blah). If you build a system which will be responsible for a billion lives, you are also responsible for teaching people safety and enforcing requirements which minimise, if not eliminate, social engineering.

At the end of the day, you are a government institution, not a company.
Most Data Science Job Descriptions Should Stop Requiring a PhD
That's actually kinda nice of them. Instead of waiting till we were totally and completely locked in to play big bad wolf, they've done it earlier while there's still time to get the message out.
Unraveling the Complexity in Programming
An awful lot of server systems can tolerate a hardware failure on their one server every couple years given 1) good backups, 2) "shit's broken" alerts, and 3) reliable push-button re-deploy-from-scratch capability, all of which you should have anyway. Lots of smaller shops trying to run to k8s and The Cloud probably have at least that much downtime (maybe an hour or two a year, on average) due to configuration fuck-ups on their absurd Rube Goldberg deployment processes anyway.

[EDIT] oh and of course The Cloud itself dies from time to time, too. Usually due to configuration fuck-ups on their absurd Rube Goldberg deployment processes :-) I don't think one safely-managed (see above points) server is a ton worse than the kind of cloud use any mid-sized-or-smaller business can afford, outside certain special requirements. Your average CRUD app? Just rent a server from some place with a good reputation, once you have paying customers (just host on a VPS or two until then). All the stuff you need to do to run it safely you should be doing with your cloud shit anyway (testing your backups, testing your re-deploy-from-scratch capability, "shit's broken" alerts) so it's not like it takes more time or expertise. Less, really.
There are plenty of left-wing propaganda channels. They just push "woke" agenda items and not financial ones.

Some of this is because, like with the right, it's easier to push emotional issues than abstract financial ones -- how many average voters understand Glass–Steagall?
Apart from Swarm being slowly decomissioned, what would the benefits of Nomad vs Swarm be ?
I'm not so sure about that; it's also fairly common for a database migration in the early days of a product to shuffle row IDs.

This is the reason my reddit user number is lower than spez and kn0thing's.
It's the difference between a screw that can be tuned to performance, or a nail that is hammered in place permanently. bonuses differ from raises in that their isn't an element of entitlement or a long term commitment from the organization.

It's not about being squeamish about eliminating a position, companies have no concerns with that.
Disregarding of Swarm's merits why would anyone care what Mirantis has to say? As any other vendor Mirantis has its own agenda and promotes their vision of cloud stack. Does not mean it is the best solution for any particular user.
> what they've ditched is cache coherency. That certainly makes it simpler to implement but now the cores have to be responsible for their own coherency.

Like the quote says: “There are two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors.”
As I was reading this, I had two thoughts:

1. The author must be young. That's a really small font.

2. The same could be said for teaching a class. No matter the class, even a basic undergrad class, I always try to work a few new research results (not necessarily my own) into the lectures. Edit: I was specifically referring to "Learning with intention" in this part of my comment.
Bytekey – Lexicographically sortable serialization written in Rust
Algo stock trader: How to protect intellectual property when joining a company?
I'm a profitable automated stock trader. I've been supporting myself trading for 5+ years, averaging 40% annual returns. I'm active on the algotrading subreddit, and was contacted by the investment arm of a wealthy family last year. I've been trading a small amount of money for them, and they are happy and ready to ramp things up.

They just offered me a job with a base salary plus profit share, they want me to head an internal hedge fund (low 7 figures to start) and build a track record for a year, then they will raise the capital invested. I would also be in charge of hiring and heading a team. This position requires an overseas move.

I've spent ~10 years writing my trading codebase (70,000 LOC), along with extensive backtesting resulting in roughly 10 different profitable patterns (systems) that I trade. I want to protect myself and that IP.

I want to say that there haven't been any red flags in this process. I've met several of their people, multiple times, and they are excited and want a long-term relationship. They've looked for a person like myself for this project for a while, and recognize my expertise.

They are a bit naive in the coding/tech domain (their family money is in mining and real estate). They just sent me a (boilerplate) contract which gives them rights to any property "developed in the course of the engagement" along with property "relating to the Proprietary Property."

I am fine with giving them access to anything I develop while being paid by them, but it will be tough to separate from my existing codebase and systems, which I will use to trade their money, presumably on their server. (I lease my own VPS now, and their brokerage account is connected to mine via an advisor account.)

I'm excited for the chance to run this fund, but am a bit overwhelmed by potential legal and financial missteps.

TL;DR: Has anyone ever been in a situation where they needed to use old code for a new employer, without relinquishing IP rights?
"Writing is Nature's way of showing you how sloppy your thinking is" [0]

Writing is my primary tool. I keep a blog... and journals. I keep a journal for my reading: what I've read, what I thought about it, choice things I'd like to recall. I keep a journal of my mathematical reading, thoughts, and work. Programming too!

Keeping your writing in a blog and sharing it with others puts a bit of pressure on you to keep a public persona but it's worth doing, as the author points out, to keep one honest. It has taken a while for me to learn this as evidenced on my blog but I have taken it more to heart in recent years.

Be careful writing with an authoritative voice if you yourself have not researched the topic deep enough to convincingly defend your findings! It's much easier for your audience to accept your work if they know you're in the process of discovery when they find an error or omission. It makes you more credible as well.

The more you know, the more you realize how little you know.

[0] https://www.azquotes.com/quote/721037
Personally I find it amusing Hossenfelder is now invoking the need for learning philosophy of science, given how hostile she's been to it before. See for instance

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-unbearable-ligh...

that begins with: "Philosophy isn’t useful for practicing physicists. On that, I am with Steven Weinberg and Lawrence Krauss who have expressed similar opinions."

Though to be fair, she clarifies that she wishes philosophy wasn't so useless, and that:

"Philosophers in that area are necessarily ahead of scientists. But they also never get the credit for actually answering a question, because for that they’ll first have to hand it over to scientists. Like a psychologist, thus, the philosopher of physics succeeds by eventually making themselves superfluous. It seems a thankless job. There’s a reason I preferred studying physics instead.

Many of the “bad philosophers” are those who aren’t quick enough to notice that a question they are thinking about has been taken over by scientists. That this failure to notice can evidently persist, in some cases, for decades is another institutionalized problem that originates in the lack of communication between both fields."

This is the sort of reasoning that got me reading Hossenfelder in the first place, not the conspiratorial posts she writes now... :(
I couldn't agree more. I've built a lot of sideprojects on Kubernetes and couldn't be happier with it. It's incredibly cheap (basically free in terms of resource usage), low-touch, and abstracts away so many pesky problems that I had to deal with before. My cluster has been running for 12+ months without a single application-level outage - containers simply restart and get rescheduled when something goes wrong, and external logging and analytics solutions are a breeze to integrate.
5A is an amount of current. It's nonsensical to talk about in isolation. I regularly replace 20A fuses (among the smaller ones) in my car.

5A in the US gives you 550W, not enough to power a microwave. In most (if not all?) countries in the EU you get 1150W from that same 5A.
Same deal over here. We wrote a little bit of tooling over the last few years to help automate various tasks regarding getting our code into production.

We have found that minimal touch is the best approach when it comes to infrastructure and tooling around it. The core of our business value is ultimately in our codebase. The infrastructure only serves to host it to our end customers, so we don't like to spend too much time on it. By keeping things very simple, we can hop between instances and even cloud vendors without much headache. We built self-contained deployments at the code level, not at the infrastructure-level (I.e. docker).

How many businesses (aside from hyperscalers) derive their principal business value from infrastructure itself? Is it worth spending all this time and frustration on various competing declarative infrastructure approaches? Surely with the amount of time it takes to get all this mess set up, someone in your organization could have purpose-built something from zero that accomplishes the same or better for your specific business concerns.
No. "Embarassingly parallel" just means you don't need to share intermediate results.

You still need to create all the parallel threads/processes/fibers/whatever, divide the work between them and collect or merge the results.

And if you work in an environment where state is mutable and shared per default (i.e. your typical shared-memory multithreaded Java/C#/C++/Ruby program), then it's still very easy to mess up somewhere.
I'm not much of a functional programmer, so I don't deal much with monads. What I can tell you, is that for simple use-cases this looks an awful lot like map-reduce, except you're not necessarily mapping a list of inputs, but evaluating a series of checks on one input. Let's call it eval-reduce.

But even from a non-functional perspective, I think the article is reinventing the wheel. We have a name for that sort of behavior: Object Orientation. Not in the UML/Java/C++ sense, but the original idea that centered around message-passing. Think erlang or elixir, those work in a very similar way already, and it's why people love them so much.

There is certainly some inovative thinking in the article, but that's mostly relating to the syntax and the specific semantics, not the overall idea of evaluating conditions concurrently and joining them in the end.
How do we handle errors? Race conditions? Re-tries? Anything beyond the boundary of our executing process is veering into distributed systems.

From what I can tell that's exactly what a 'module' is. By weakening the contracts between modules and turning synchronous execution into asynchronous calls, you've taken on creating a framework / language that takes the difficulties of distributed systems and made them local, so every bit of important logic is a distributed systems call.
Well, I think that's pretty easy:

- student reviews
- consistency with publishing
- faculty peer review

If a professor isn't liked by the students and is lagging in publishing, there's a good chance they're mostly dead weight. Likewise, if their peers consider the professor's research worthless and teaching ineffective, they could actually be harmful for the University.

In essence, does the professor still fit the reasons they were granted tenure?

That being said, I don't think that's the right place to focus. I heard that there's a ton of overhead that could be trimmed, such as administration overhead (probably dealing with financials). It would be interesting to compare private and public schools to see what their costs look like and see if maybe we can simplify things to cut costs.
Is that not just an FPGA?
Davis, CA?
This is why big incumbent car companies will lose against people like Tesla. The amount of organisational energy and capital required for a project like this is huge, and it's pay off..? Not so sure.
Difference is that any point in time you can add things that "must not occur" ex. forbidden scenarios. If you don't understand a specific execution you can block it and work on replacing it with another one that is more appropriate.
The timestamps are from when the photos were posted, not taken.
The preparation is still fiddly and the press itself is still a drippy wet mess. The inversion method doesn't change the fundamental design of the process or the machinery. The aeropress has to be used near a sink and the sink will need to be cleaned after use.
Why Customer Network is the next big thing that every startup needs to master
>I'd probably buy an iPhone if it cost like $300 and didn't have all the bells and whistles.

The iPhone SE came out at $400, and dropped to less than $200 (locked) a couple of years ago.
If you’re already a private pilot: http://www.atopjets.com/
The foundations of physics you are talking about sound more like foundations of scientific method, and are not specific to physics. Most people rightly call the theories and corresponding fundamental physical equations to be fundamentals of physics.

Also, you really wrote a bit too much.
Shouldn't it say "presentation slides are <judgement>", it doesn't seem like the point specifically applies to PowerPoint. (also anecdotally having a bad presentation with or without a tool doesn't matter, having a good presentation seems to help having visual aids and mediocre presentations would be helped if they stopped following terrible advice)