skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thinking about it some more, I suspect the disconnect between us is that you think the primary way of getting sick is breathing the airborne virus. Whereas I think the primary way of getting sick is touching your eyes (or picking your nose). So you want the filtering to be good, but I just don't want infected snot droplets to be blown everywhere.

Now, I'm sure someone will throw an obnoxious "citation needed" reply...
The queen isn't in charge of the civil service.

People in Britain absolutely do blame the cabinet (the UK's executive) and particularly the prime minster when they fuck up, yes. I mean, obviously.
Not sure about fat retention, I don't think there's any evidence for that.

But I agree with the claim that companies are trying to game the numbers now and the products might not be healthy.

Back in the day you had companies advertising low fat products as healthier, however humans have an innate desire for foods high in calories or salt, so they had to compensate with sugar or salt.

Nowadays you have companies advertising low calories or low sugar products via use of artificial sweeteners.
At least one artificial sweetener that I know of is carcinogenic. Sweeteners can also have a laxative effect since the whole point is that they aren't absorned. I have IBS-D symptoms and for me that's not good.

These days, even if I have a preference for less sugar, whenever I feel the need for sweets, I'd rather have the sugar.
Your comment reads as if regulations are some binary thing, the nature of regulation is critical to any meaningful discussion. Regulations can be reasonable guards against harm (fraud, pollution, safety, etc.) and they can also be part of a defensive moat that protects existing businesses via otherwise unjustified restrictions and imposes a "tax" on economic activity that hurts everyone.

SOX isn't the be-all-and-end-all of financial regulations and my understanding is that there is considerable regulatory nonsense inside SOX. Doesn't mean that there aren't good parts just that that the details do matter.
Git can be as simple or as complicated as you make it. A lot of people make it more complicated than it needs to be, usually because they're trying to follow patterns that don't need to be applied to the project they're working on.

I was able to get a small team who were uncomfortable with git and had weekly tangled messes in their repositories to start using it problem-free pretty quickly. It was just a matter of using a simpler branching system and clearing up a few misconceptions.

So my suggestion would be to write up a post, here or on a blog or something, describing exactly what went wrong, and ask for help. But git right now is the de facto tool for software version control pretty much everywhere; I think you'll be hurting yourself by avoiding it.

Two books that might help:

Pro Git, https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2, available for free download.

Git For Teams: https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/git-for-teams/978149191...

Other reading:

Patterns for managing source code branches: https://martinfowler.com/articles/branching-patterns.html

Oh shit, git! https://ohshitgit.com/

The guts of git: https://lwn.net/Articles/131657/ (some common errors are caused by misunderstanding how git works behind the scenes)

Merging vs. Rebasing: https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/merging-vs-rebasing

A simple git branching model: https://gist.github.com/jbenet/ee6c9ac48068889b0912 (2013, still relevant)

And better client software might help too:

Fork (Mac and Windows): https://fork.dev/

GitKraken (Mac, Windows, Linux): https://www.gitkraken.com/
I have JS off by default and the site still loads -- in fact it's exactly the same (including all functionality) except it's got a mobile layout? When I enable JS then it lays out like a real newspaper. That's interesting.
Going to have to disagree. High school education in the US (and I suspect in many other countries) is done by folks some of whom shouldn't be allowed within 300 yards of a high school. I'm seeing it play out with my own kid. Math and chemistry teachers sucks beyond belief this year (and they can't be fired for bad performance - unions), so we hired tutors who fill in over Skype. This happens every year, with different subjects. This is not something a lot of other people can afford to do. Do you reject all those folks for "quality" reasons? Or do you admit the reality that the expensive US high school system is not where it needs to be and try to salvage kids harmed by it by letting more people in and offering remedial classes? You can still maintain quality by doing exams later and getting rid of people who can't pull their weight. Where I have problem is when they won't even give people a chance, even though doing so is technically possible in year 2020, through university administered MOOCs and such.
Git being the low level layer was the idea initially. People tried to create user friendly layers on top. I believe they were called "porcelain" in contrast to "plumbing". That never became popular for the command line.
This article appears to be a less-well-written and less thoughtful version of the wonderful Ribbonfarm article "The Premium Mediocre Life of Maya Millennial":

https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/08/17/the-premium-mediocre-l...

Recommended.
I've thought about it, but it seems overkill for what I'd really use, and I have Mac/Gnome keybindings burned into my fingers, so Emacs feels really alien. (I know about CUA-mode and other options, but it feels like fighting against the current to change everything from Emacs defaults style keys.)
As a counter point to the author:

* Half baked in-house implementations of things are often filled with bugs and broken edge cases. Especially when it comes to security and concurrency.

* In a larger code base, you won't understand everything whether it's in-house code or third party code. The in-house code was written by someone who quit 5 years ago and is now a monk in Tibet.
The key is to understand the underlying data structure is a directed acyclic graph, to install a tool that lets you visualize that graph, and to practice commands and predict results until you can prove your mental model matches reality.
If you can make it through this video and do the same command line exercises, you will have a pretty firm understanding.
https://youtu.be/1Iijw4xR6lk
The one I chose for this edition was this scan: https://archive.org/details/lifeopinionsoftr02stern/page/24/...

Marbling was a relatively new technique at the time, and each copy had a different version as they were done by hand rather than printed. It’s there as a reference point for the preceding page, quoted:

You will no more be able to penetrate the moral of the next marbled page (motly emblem of my work!) than the world with all its sagacity has been able to unravel the many opinions, transactions, and truths which still lie mystically hid under the dark veil of the black one.

It would be nice to write an algorithm to randomly generate them. Ebooks are extremely limited in the randomness aspect, but potentially I might be able to hack the SE toolkit to supply a seed every time the book is built.
The article focuses on technical skills and people who need to acquire them. Which may be a problem but I don't think it is the root cause of the COBOL problem as a whole.

There are organizations which dug themselves into the COBOL hole. What are they doing to get people to learn the skills necessary to deal with the next crisis?
Looks nice and inviting :- )

Took a while until I realized what to click, to jump to the actual discussions. What about showing a "NN comments" clickable link at the end of the articles? But: "... the master branch. SDF, 1" — then not so obvious what to click.

This "HN newspaper" could maybe be a good way to make people interested in tech, if anyone wants that for some reason
Well, yes. But -inside- those countries, everyone uses them. Obviously it only really applies if you live there.
This strikes me as a good definition of a bureaucrat (or middle manager for that matter) "But their actual day-in, day-out work involves the coordination of various teams and resources across a large organization based on established administrative procedures. That’s a bureaucrat."

I meet a lot of product managers and business people who call themselves creative--and some are. The test is whether they are wedded to "established administrative procedures" or they are able to take risks and run experiments that depart from past practice in an effort to explore for possible improvements and better outcomes.
Being offended by completely speculative offence theoretically been taken by ill-defined third parties is one of the Internet's weirder trends.
Maybe look at https://gitless.com/ . It provides a simpler interface and workflow, but you can go back to full git anytime.
I believe there is. Observed universe shines on us in a broad spectrum of electromagnetic and gravitational waves and particles, so knowing it well and expecting what may come from it is important, because we utilize more and more of this spectrum. If you build a neutrino detector, you are looking at the whole universe and trying to separate your own signal from the background. In space some strange recurring radio signal may interfere with satellite communications, you may need to distinguish it from something else. It’s all practical right now, even if we are not yet building machines to exploit some new physical law.
Why I, as a black man, attend KKK rallies. – Daryl Davis – TEDxNaperville
I think it's inevitable if your business operates under specific environments that force you in that direction- for instance, often when a company takes VC funding and is required to make certain returns.
That essay is all over the place. I just started at the beginning.
The built-in !DRAW app was surprisingly powerful. It was clunky, but with practice it was possible to do some sophisticated stuff with it.
Sous Vide immersion circulator & vacuum bagger. Extremely versatile, makes cooking things that are hard to get perfect much easier (eg pork), not excessively expensive.

Instant Pot. Similar to above, but for a different set of foods.

Hot air rework station. SO MANY electronics repairs become possible with one of these.

Pet birds. I love them. Definitely not for everyone.

Engagement ring. The ring itself is just a symbol, of course, and the relationship can't be purchased. But it symbolizes a significant moment.
Short video from the FT reporter who was investigated by German authorities and followed by people working for Wirecard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-8-QbDpqqw
If you are using Mac, Use [Gitbox](http://gitboxapp.com/), it is a godsend.
Why do you think consumer products at a similar price point used to be more reliable or performant in the past? I don't think that's true at all. In the 90's, software was riddled with bugs, you saved files every five minutes because your word processor regularly crashed, you had to restart your computer multiple times a day when the OS hanged, and starting Photoshop easily took a full minute.

Also why do you think the ability to push updates results in crappier software? In the 90's, if your copy of CorelDraw or Windows had a bug, you lived with that bug for years. Today, if it's a common showstopper, it gets fixed quickly.

To my eyes, everything's gotten far better.
One of the greatest documentalists of our time. A favorite quote that has a double meaning in this context:

Storyboards are the instruments of the cowards

(For the record, I don't believe the above is true for iOS development :)
There's a dissertation and thousands of articles(one if which this comments section links to) that go into all the minutiae of a "proper" REST implementation. My comment poses the idea that an understanding of the proper or pure implementation isn't as important as the broad concepts that you are saying define the whole idea of REST. On the crux of the argument, we are in agreement - those academic details don't really matter.
It has a domain, so its legit :)

https://trunkbaseddevelopment.com/
I just want to sympathize with you. I’m part of a large-ish team, and some of our most senior developers are still just using the most basic of GIT functionality (basically, creating a branch and merging it back to master) because if you go more advanced it’s so easy to fuck up.

For me, GIT fluency is not related to your technical skills. If you’re bad at GIT it says nothing about the quality of your work.

Basically you need to understand the concept of GIT (not easy but not impossible either) and then also learn to map that concept onto the terminology used (rebase, blame, stash etc...it’s a lot).
How Respawn/EA make informal payments to streamers
I'd say it's borderline fraud. They've been retweeting app screenshots with that emoji combination on it[0], retweeting people saying someone took their "username on that emoji app"[1], and directly tweeted "we’ll see what we can do about an invite" if people donated and sent receipts. And now they're using this publicity to gain employment and sell merchandise.

This team mislead people to "support causes" and is now profiting off their newfound fame. I have nothing against non-profits getting more money, but...I'm not sure if I'm happy about this situation here. The ends really don't justify the means.

[0]: https://twitter.com/itsmezhi/status/1276617354013626368?s=20

[1]: https://twitter.com/itiseyemoutheye/status/12764265029435187...

[2]: https://twitter.com/itiseyemoutheye/status/12766503684207656...
Put some BLM, antifa and communists in there. They will burn down the place is an afternoon.
I would highly recommend learning git to a deep level as it confers a huge force-amplifying power for both day-to-day development as well as the long-term maintainability of a well-constructed commit history.

The CLI is definitely obtuse, but the underlying data model is quite simple and elegant. Once you grok the primitives you can learn the idiosyncrasies of the CLI at your own pace, secure with knowing that you always have reflog and cherry-pick as a safety net. My recommendation is to use a client like Sourcetree to visualize branches/commits as you learn new operations.

Having come up in the CVS, and then Subversion eras, I acutely remember in 5 years of using Subversion that I never truly understood the underlying data model (a branch is a tag is a directory!?) as well as I understood git after 3 months. It's a very very good data model.

Mercurial is arguably equivalent with a better CLI. I won't argue the comparison here, but given the mindshare git has it seems like you'd be losing a lot by constraining yourself to a different version control system. I promise git is extremely usable once the primitives click in your brain, and likely to outlive most of your other dev tools like editors, languages, other toolchains, etc.
You may be right, but it may be a distinction of low relevance.

The technological advances made to support particle physics may not have been possible without the effort to do the particle physics.

I.e. they are actually a result of the effort to understand the universe, even though they aren’t written down in the standard model.

It’s not at all obvious that we would have devised them any other way.
COBOL was like so many 4GLs: easier for starters and vanilla tasks, but makes things increasingly difficult as you need to grow out.
KVM switch with PIP?
When COBOL was invented C did not even exist, it only came to be about 10 years later.

The alternatives were Assembly, FORTRAN and ALGOL.
> why is our society so inefficient when it comes to spending money?

There's no recipe for that - it's a gamble. The amounts of money that are spent in science have been increasing rapidly for decades to great proportions, but there's no law that says that the returns won't be diminishing.

Also, covid has been politicized and nationalized so you 're not likely to see a concerted effort , even if it costs way more that way. Human crowds it seems are not wise enough to be efficient.
Git is immensely popular, so using an alternative probably isn't worthwhile in the end.

Having said that, a couple of alternatives that are more modern and less complicated (by design that is, not necesseralily implementation):

- http://darcs.net

- https://pijul.org
This is especially tragic given the variation in career opportunities from different colleges. Many of the most highly compensated, high-upside careers are basically only accessible to graduates of top-tier institutions. Particularly in consulting and finance.

In my experience talent is way more evenly distributed than the recruiting practices of some industries would indicate. The best people whom I've worked with went to a mix of extremely fancy and very ordinary colleges. A few didn't go to college at all. It's a real shame.
This is great. It reminds me how much I miss the straightforward, full screen width layouts from 15+ years ago.
To Dr. Hossenfelder, climate change is more important that a bigger collider. But to the people actually funding the research with their own money, the perception may be the opposite.

Oh, wait, the "people" funding it are actually governments who fund research using other people's money. That might explain why so much expensive nonsense like colliders or Neanderthal genomes is funded! Maybe we should change that.
French Revolution: remains discovered in walls of Paris monument
If you decide to give Git one more shot, you might enjoy John Wiegley's Git from the Bottom Up (https://jwiegley.github.io/git-from-the-bottom-up/). It didn't teach me how to use Git, but it did teach me how Git works, and that was key to solidifying my own knowledge.

As others have mentioned, the version control space has been effectively monopolized by Git. Mercurial offers roughly the same data model with a better interface, but you're still fighting an uphill battle with limited tooling support, etc. Fossil is notable for being the SCM used to develop SQLite, but again, it's relatively unknown outside of that space.
There used to be something called subversion ...

Git has massive usability problems and a culture of overly complex workflows.

However if you stick to trunk based development (aka just work in master and only branch out if you really have to) and use some of the many support tools (github, visual code), then you should be alright.
Mercurial definitely is easier and prevents a lot of dangerous behaviour, but it's also unfortunately not quite supported enough to do much CI (unless you also want to maintain your own Jenkins setup) and isn't supported by some IDEs (looking at you, Xcode). The 2018 StackOverflow survey[0] regarding Version Control also shows how Mercurial fares, even against zip files (!!).

It shouldn't prevent anyone from learning it or using it, but it's important to keep those things in mind when considering any kind of work with existing companies (or on the flip-side, any recruitment of staff when creating a company).

[0] https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#work-_-versi...
This is why I like long-established technologies. You can build most anything with typical POSIX utilities and time-worn libraries. And they will be there for you in 25 years. Who knows where Rust and Go and Node will be in a quarter century?
One thing that can help is using a GUI tool to view the commit history. My favorite is gitg.

For cleaning up mistakes it might be helpful to look at `git rebase -i`. It lets you delete or reorder commits, as well as move a branch to a different starting point.
> That's funny, I find the moderators stifle talking about the rules on Hackernews via secret shadowbans, post rate limiting, and other secret punishments...yet here you are.

I'm on HN because dang and the others in charge of moderating repeatedly make good faith efforts to explain their moderation philosophy and keep the rules updated and visible.

If Twitter and Reddit moderators were as public as dang were I would feel far more comfortable relying on them to make decisions for me.
There are absolutely terrible problems of inequality through nearly all levels and areas of society. Unequal opportunities, inherited economics, social class - these things harm lots of lives.

But no, it is not realistic to expect higher education to magically fix all of this at the end of the pipeline by simply having a wider mouth. That's going to/already has significantly harmed the actual value (and signaling value) of a higher degree. It just doesn't fix the problem to more widely apply a treatment that only works when certain prerequisites are in place - competitive programs look for those prior experiences because they really do prepare you for deeper study.

There of course should be (and are) undergraduate institutions that are not that competitive, whose charter is to educate those with relatively less opportunity earlier in life. The 85/87% numbers in the original parent comment however suggest that they are discussing either a competitive department or graduate program within a university - and their charter is and should be to advance the truth and quality of their field.

In other words - yes, give folks a chance. But don't expect higher education to fix a bunch of upstream socioeconomic problems (try to get primary education fairer first), and "give folks a chance" means "broad access to general undergraduate education" (and then still some standards, i.e. being willing to fail folks or guide them to alternatives), not "open all the gates to everything and scale it up."
I noticed that anytime I thought I was clever by using memoization on a function with side-effects, that it in fact could become very complicated very quickly. It's a bit similar in your situation: What if someone actually wants to send the same message twice? Depending on your codebase it could be hard to debug the issue which will arise.

One thing where I do think it is kind of safe is for loading a file into a class instance. The memoization will avoid defining (1) a method to check to see if the file is loaded, (2) a method to load the file and (3) a class variable which points to the loaded file.
I stopped using the term REST for anything I've worked on/with years ago. I just call them Web APIs and no one has ever cared beyond that. REST as an idea is still ineresting, REST as a buzzword feels as dated as "Web 2.0" at this point.
The Art and Craft of Scientific Glassblowing
Beyond Pluto: the hunt for our solar system's new ninth planet
Teaching them Visual Cobol or NetCobol, :)

https://www.microfocus.com/en-us/products/visual-cobol/overv...

https://www.fujitsu.com/global/products/software/developer-t...

Who knows, that cool Kubernetes microservice deployed on Amazon might have been written in Cobol,

https://www.microfocus.com/media/success-story/trasmediterra...
I did a little round-up documenting some of the times that Respawn/EA, who make Apex Legends, made payments to streamers. It's a fascinating gray area for me between legitimate payment for marketing and an outright bribe for good social media buzz. Thanks for the read!
everything you just named had little to do with what is today called "entrepeneurship" and more to do with either rigorous corporate scientific activity (the automobile), solitary tinkering (the lightbulb, early advances in software) or was simply the byproduct of genuinely, informal scientific pursuit.

None of those inventions were made because of VC hypecycles, or two billion in bogus bank accounts, or marketing and customer aqcuisition. In fact everything you named predates the era of high risk venture capital. It wasn't primarily a culture of entrepreneurship but a culture of tinkering and invention that got us those fundamental technologies.
>EV certificates might be harder

EV certs are completely worthless (as in they provide no extra value above that provided by regular DV certs) so nobody should care if they're harder to obtain.
I'll echo what they're saying. I'm not getting SSL either.