skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm really interested in getting a pair. If you don't mind, I have a few questions:

1 - If you put regular non-Apple earbuds in your ears and talk, does your voice sound different and off-putting?

2 - Do the Airpods Pro do this, and how are they for phone calls in general?

I'd really like to have them for phone calls and Zoom meetings, but regular earbuds make it hard for me to talk without being super conscious of how it sounds. Regular Apple earbuds don't have this effect, but they hurt my ears so I don't think regular Airpods would work for me. I don't think everyone has this problem though.
If the git CLI is difficult, there are some good GUI git clients like Sourcetree and Git Tower that I would recommend. I still use Sourcetree pretty regularly if I'm working on a larger project and want to get a better picture of everything.

However, as others have said, I would recommend giving git a fourth try. It really is the standard tool in source control.

Somewhat related idea: I feel similarly about vim/emacs. Most senior developers in my company work in vim/emacs, and while I can definitely use either, I am MUCH more productive in something like VSCode. Will this hurt me in the long run? Is it worth the temporary reduction in productivity to make vim my primary editor?
I don't understand, the IDE for Godot is created with Godot.
To me personally, 14" is the sweet spot for laptops. I used to want the numpad on a laptop, but more recently I've noticed that my desktop keyboard doesn't actually sit centered in front of my monitor--the right side of the keyboard is usually more or less lined up with the right side of my primary monitor, almost centering it.
You can still run it today on a Raspberry Pi (amongst other things):

https://www.riscosopen.org/
Your statement is like claiming there is no scientific basis for family. Two people of the same race are more genetically related than half-siblings born to the same father and mothers of different races. The categories we call "race" are genetic clusters of populations who developed in different regions/environments. It's the level of taxonomy below species and above one's family. Overlap between these clusters does not invalidate them any more than the existence of purple invalidates our ability to describe something as "red" or "blue".
I understand that lung scarring for the "lightly" symptomatic can be ... not insignificant.

I know it is for me (age: 55 y.o. or so), and while it isn't being currently problematic, but I have no idea about how it might present in 20 years.
Visual Paper Summary: Accurate, Large Minibatch SGD: Training ImageNet in 1 Hour
TortoiseGit can make your life much easier if you haven’t yet found it.
Leetcode interviews are more of a sadistic entrance ritual than anything approximating a fair gauge of skill or experience. I see no other reason to make proven developers study textbook problems during their free time (they sure aren't implementing knapsack algorithms from memory at work).

It often goes unmentioned that these interviews test the wrong skills for software development and even instill bad practices. To wit, those artificially handicapped online IDEs force you to memorize language APIs which any real IDE would handle for you -- forget that the JS lowercase string call is "toLowerCase"? Too bad. Also, since time is of the essence, and no debugging tools are provided, you better be using an interpreted language (read: JS and Python -- and really only the former unless you can import the correct libraries) and littering your code with print statements.

Other companies opt for the ostensibly fairer "take home CRUD app assignment" but this too is a facade to lend credence to a preselected candidate pool. No matter how well you complete the assignment with all enterprise grade best practices, you'll still playing the lottery (and this time with a five hour time sink).

Bottom line is don't interpret a lack of success in this draconian system to a personal defect. Ideally, seek employers who assess candidates fairly and qualitatively.
I can't read the linked article without logging in but in my experience its not ideal for several reasons.

Game engines are designed around game loops executing code every frame and not around power efficient layout caching.

Orthrographic hierarchies are how UIs are usually laid out and its a mild pain to move to a system that's depth sorted, with custom shaders etc. You can do more but you need to think about more and its harder for the UI system to know what parts of the screen can be redrawn. Games usually just draw it all every frame.

Specifically for a game engines, they usually don't do things like OS integration for accessibility, subpixel font rendering, that sort of thing. In theory they could but usually game engines seem to roll their own system for this.
If the browser correctly explained what you were doing, and warned you that this is an attack unless you are in control of the entire network and the machines on it, I don't see the problem.
Small anecdote, but good experience with DARPA and SBIR both. One thing I liked - they seemed pretty low overhead / low hassle and outcome / objective focused.

That contrasts VERY strong with most govt contracting which is under allowable cost or cost reimbursement setups where the absolute most important criteria is to bill enough costs to draw contract in the right cost buckets (which can be super annoying if local agencies require super complicated budget mod processes).

In the cost based contracts, the focus really focuses on the accounting for the costs and other compliance related items. Ie, did you send someone to a conference with govt money, how can you prove you didn't use the govt money in this way or that way etc etc. Bam, welcome to personal activity reports with fund codes that no one understands (ie, major universities have an insane number of codes), and all the nightmares that follow including a fair bit of rule pending that even normally ethical folks find themselves being asked to to get through the paperwork.

Seriously, you deliver the product at 50% of cost? You will get a nasty note from the head of your agency saying make sure you draw full contract because agency budget depends on the indirect portion of this award (ie, 30% to overhead) and even the govt agency supervising (who also budgeted based on a cut of full contract) AND other folks for whom leftover money makes life difficult (harder to close contract etc) AND because a lot of govt funding is on the repeat what we did last year model so drawing down everything avoids a cut next year when you may really need it.

You determine it would be cheaper to do x vs y and that required a budget mod? Wait 1-2 months for commission approval if you even bother trying to fight it through (changes < 10% often ignored thankfully).

I don't know how the accounting for SBIRs etc work, but somehow those projects always seemed more results oriented (so a LOT more fun to work on, focus is on getting a solution going).
Thereby increasing corporate profit at expense of the worker and taxpayers. Moreover, it benefits the Ivy League at the expense of all other universities. There’s a need to differentiate and the Harvard name becomes the criteria rather than the education or diploma itself.
==Spend some time around a lot of universities and you’ll see it in action. Rampant cheating, “bird” courses, mass dropping of challenging courses.==

You make a great point. In my experience some of this is intended thinning of certain majors. For example, P-meds at my university always got a kick at how many people gave up that major after their first Zoology class.

Those kids now have to catch-up in order to complete their art history or general business major that they never wanted in the first place. The whole process we have created needs to be re-evaluated.
Ha! We don't know! It's new! Give us 5~20 years, and I'll get back to you.
If it were possible, a closer reading of history might provide additional lessons. For instance, ARPA took a hit in the early '90s under Bush. Some silver linings, but that's a transition which might illuminate process tradeoffs.

There was (at least back then) an ongoing meta discussion about how to do better. So it might be useful to explore not just the organizational designs which were realized, but also the space of things considered. For instance, before Bush hit, there was discussion of tiny "fix that!" grants. Like there's one person who is an outlier in understanding how to do X, and their book just isn't getting finished. So rather than society waiting years on diffusion and reinvention (which is what ended up happening), it might be worth paying someone to sit outside their office, and stand on their desk, and be a forcing factor on making the book happen.

At least back then, with a failed attempt at a commerce ARPA clone, it was thought important to have a clear metric to prioritize projects. "What's better for DoD?", rather than the far less tractable "what's better for the commercial economy?".

Perhaps I missed it skimming, but a major issue has been the death valley between research and commercial impact. And attempts to address that making things even worse (ie, researchers encouraged to think commercialization, sacrifice impact by holding things close, and then commercialization generally fails, so there's no offsetting benefit). And there's the unfortunate pipeline from research to patent to unsuccessful startup to dominant company having yet more anticompetitive ammo. I wonder if it might be fruitful to broaden focus to the research pipeline rooted in ARPA? Because a successful clone would presumably again face this difficulty. And there might be some other design point that is less ARPA-like, but does impact better.

How well ARPA works comes and goes. It's not a stable equilibrium. So instead of asking how to create a successful clone, perhaps one might ask how to create something viable in the vicinity of success, and separately, how to increase time spent less distant from success?

The difference between an old-school autonomous PM, rolodex and checkbook in hand, showing up on your doorstep and saying "I've heard you interested in doing X - what would you need?", and say NSF exploratory grants of "groups with the following characteristics, may submit grants addressing the following issues, with a deadline of mumble, and the following logistics"... is really really big.
You seem to be reviewing this essay as though it is about entertainment narratives.

I see it being a fairly scathing critique of the disingenuous narrative of modern day middle class bureaucrats.
Learn git properly instead. It can be done. Sit down and start reading all the `git help` pages. As you read, clone a repo and try things out until you understand them. Experiment, read, experiment some more. Set a goal, like "I will make a branch, commit some changes, then merge them back". Try to predict what will happen before you run a command. Try to get back to where you were before. Try to achieve something in more than one way. Write an explanation for what just happened, then verify by repetition and more experiments that your explanation holds up. Find somebody to ask when you really can't figure out what is going on. But don't just get a solution in the form of strange commands, keep at it until you can reproduce the problem and the solution yourself.

Git isn't magical. Everything you will need to learn it is already at your fingertips.
It isn't either-or though. Yes, we should do whatever we can do right now, but we should also be looking for ways we can do better in 50 years time.
The paywall is stopping me from learning Herzog appreciates the Fast and Furious franchise as much as I do.
I don't think it's bullshit. "Professionals today would never self-identify as bureaucrats" seems exactly right.
In fact, I invented a new kind of Lisp macro, the parameter macro, which decorates functions, but at compile time rather than run-time, and with much more flexibility.

https://www.nongnu.org/txr/txr-manpage.html#N-00B4065C

An example is given of a memoization parameter macro that you invoke simply by adding :memo to the front of the parameter list, as in (lambda (:memo ...) ...). This inlines everything; the function itself rewritten to do the caching with open code, rather than wrapped with a caching function.

TXR Lisp's support for keyword arguments is also implemented as a parameter macro, using the documented define-param-expander public interface.

http://www.kylheku.com/cgit/txr/tree/share/txr/stdlib/keypar...

This is possible because the parameter macro can introduce identifiers into the scope of the function, and rewrite the parameter list.
As another commenter said, Git is so pervasive that learning something else would put you at a big disadvantage.

That doesn't excuse Git having an unintuitive UI that makes it very difficult to learn. It has that in common Vim, Emacs, the command line itself... and programming in general. What they also have in common is that once you get used to them they're wonderful tools.

If you don't practice using branches, resetting, rebasing, etc., you're not going to get good with them. Create a dummy repo and practice. There's no "easy button."

I was terrified of Git when I started using it. All the time, I would call in senior colleagues to resolve Git issues that went over my head.

Nowadays, I use Git for coding as well as writing, vector graphics, datasets, and anything else that isn't stored in binary. The time it took to get here was well worth it.
When you say that ‘DARPA’ “works”, what precisely do you mean by that, and how do you measure success? It seems to me that it primarily works by throwing large amounts of money at academics and then claiming credit for anything they invent, whether or not it contributes to whatever DARPA is trying to accomplish.
DARPA is effective, but this document paints a rosy picture that is far from the truth. I've been a part of DARPA projects both commerical, university and on the government side.

The real process is:

1. PM gets picked due to knowing someone or being a former employee.

2. The biggest test of a program isn't if it's doable or a good idea, but if its able to be transitioned to another government agency with deeper pockets.

3. Most contracts are lost before you begin writing, as people have insider information about what the PM wants. This is done through just talking with each other (remember that most of the PMs come from the same companies), and not through any other formal process.

4. DARPA has some really cool stuff, but fails to transition it well enough (leading to 2.)

DARPA is not without it's problems, but has a better track record then NSF (NIH has them beat). What is funny is that you quickly realize how much bunk there is in scientific research and how many papers are not replicated.
Exactly. I think fb ads are a waste of money for big brands anyway, which they know.
Routing is scary magic. DNS is scary magic. Wifi is scary magic. Everything in computing is scary magic until someone writes an app with good UX for it. It's not a fundamental problem.
Why is it sad? If they offer no value and users move to an alternative or go off social media it will die a natural death. I mean the market will kill it. E.g. MySpace and others that came before it. They're not too big fail. To their credit they seem to be trying to extend their lifespan by buying would be competitors.
I wish I could have Professor Galloway as a board member, however I'm afraid that I would to often hear undeniable truths about my management tough to digest
Hey everyone, author here. It seems like this post have been flagged, but I'd like to add a little comment here so it may clarify things.

First, a little over a week ago we were having a similar discussion here [1] and I promised I'd post my article about it. This is the article.

Second, I want people to understand that this is a complex issue and the solution might/should be as complex. It's not a case of, OK let's hire 20 more black people and it's over. The reality is that, well first you have to find them, and then you have to see if they qualify for a job you are actually hiring for.

But one thing that anyone one here can do is get up from their chair and look around the office, you immediately notice that black people aren't there. This is what this article is doing. It's asking why?

Every anecdote I brought up about treatment is something that happened to me on multiple occasions. Now I'm getting hundreds of emails with people saying "you pulled the words out of my mouth." And some examples sound innocent enough and could be interpreted in many ways. But like Joel Spolsky once said, "it's the tiny little frustration that add up"[2] and at some point you are angry and don't even know why.

This is a call to be more understanding and for all of us to be aware of the challenges black people face. I don't have a solution to end racism, and I don't pretend I do. But when we all understand each other a little better, racism tend to start fading away.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23544856
[2]: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/10/controlling-your-e...

Edit: typo and my mistake, this post is not flagged as of writing.
It's interesting to see the shift on this --- you can just use the search bar at the bottom of this page with the term "HATEOAS" to see people, many of them quite notable, arguing forcefully that HTTP APIs should be hypertextual. One person compared resistance to hypertextuality to resistance to PUT and DELETE.
Pretty interesting, I didn't realize the pricing was the same and you get bandwidth.

This bandwidth pricing is very interesting because if you have apps that ship a lot of bytes, you can just run like haproxy on lightsail and get those bytes very very cheap instead of paying standard egress data pricing at like 9 cents per gig...
Apparently there's evidence for domesticated chickens appear Mohenjo-Daro by c2000 BCE. That may be the first paved road that a chicken crossed. There would have been plenty of dirt paths all over the world well before the advent of the chicken, and I shouldn't be surprised at all to find a timber trackway in east Asia 4000 BCE or earlier. (There's one in Britain from that time.)
Wow, rooster identification as sort of a "Marco-Polo" is rather ingenious.
Under EU rules (the CAP, which uses a large part of the EU budget) basically every farm whether dairy or crop is subsidised. For many dairy farms in upland regions, crop farming isn't economically viable due to the terrain, so cows and sheep are farmed instead. Even then many farms are only viable due to the subsidies.
Exactly. The Jews run the world through their control of the banks and media.
use github/gitlab (you mentioned not having backups? git is your backup). there really is no substitute to git, but there are supporting tools that can make life easier: a good ide like intellij, github desktop, to name a couple. dedicate some time to learning it well (hopefully there are some good learning resources posted in the thread) and once you get over the hump it will start to pay dividends
I've worked on 10+ person teams over the past 5 years, on 10+ year old codebases with hundreds of thousands of lines. About 8-10 total years of software engineering experience in general. The best flow I've found, and the one my team uses now is:

1. Make a branch from master called `yourName/featureName`
2. Work on the feature for a day or two max
3. Merge it right to master

CI/CD runs all the tests, builds it, deploys it to stage. All the other engineers and product people can see exactly what master looks like at any given time. On our newer projects we skip the stage step entirely and just deploy straight to prod. Yes, no stage, right to prod. These are sites that get millions of hits a day.

This makes it so:

1. Engineers stop making big scary PRs REAL QUICK. Engineers always feature flag everything, de-risking changes drastically. There's something about the psychology of knowing your code is going straight to stage or prod that instantly causes people to make smaller changes. It's great.

2. I'm the best person at git on the team (probably because I set up all the CI/CD stuff), and I feel like I pretty much know nothing. I've watched like, half of an advance git tutorial on Frontend Masters and I'm light years ahead of my 2nd most knowledge coworker. I've realized 99% of people only have a surface knowledge of git, so the simpler you can make things for everyone the better. Everyone understands how to branch from master and merge it back in. And if they don't (which is OK! Engineers I've trained with < 1 year experience sometimes struggle) I can teach them within an hour.

I've been on teams with release branches. Nobody in my experience ever really gets it right, I might have been unlucky though. Usually it ends up a a merge conflict mess merging to master and a show stopping bug when it's deployed.

I recommend watching a couple of videos on git on a Sunday afternoon to make yourself feel a bit more confident, but honestly don't sweat it too much. The KISS rule (Keep It Simple Stupid) really shines with version control on git here.
On the other hand, when it comes to WinRAR, the majority of people use it not because of its unique features (like the RAR format) but because it's considered the mainstream archiving software and they don't know any better.

WinRAR isn't losing much sales because it's easy to use without paying; if it was harder to use without a license, people would simply use alternatives such as 7-Zip and it would become the mainstream archiving software and WinRAR wouldn't have the brand awareness they have now. I'm assuming RarLab knows this because otherwise they would've patched the loophole long ago.
Thanks for the info. It's a dilemma when allocating instances because I want the full per-core performance but I don't need a full socket's worth of cores, so I just have to hope my neighbors aren't running huge jobs all the time.
May be if you can give some examples of screw up you had, we can understand the exact problem and provide some help. My advice would be to understand how git works under the hood, after that you will be easily able to visualize git commands in you head and execute them with confidence.
This applies.

>Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
> We have no interest in commercial partnering arrangements with accompanying legal shenanigans

There are none, you're looking too hard for road blocks! All that stuff only comes into play if you become a "real" Microsoft partner by paying them lots of money and attaining one of the competency tiers; for the Action Pack, you just give them $400/y (or whatever it is, I don't recall precisely).
Well, the sketching ideas on a paper and the iterations with the designer are actually what costs money.

If you are able to have good starting ideas and having someone making the changes for free iterating over it is $20, otherwise you will have to pay for that.

BTW I find the logo really cool.
Fossil: https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki

Mercurial: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/

There are other tools, as well. Search for SCM (software configuration management). Research and try them out.

If a tool isn't helping, look for an alternative. Git is such a tool that does some things well. But it isn't for everybody and everything.
IDK NSS seems to have code to verify it:

https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/security/nss/li...

As does webpki:

https://github.com/briansmith/webpki/blob/482627c40dad2148da...

But haven't tested it (or checked other libraries).