skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> in figuring out how this zoo of exotic integer types interact with each other consistently and correctly

You just allow to copy them from one to another and allow other operations to only be done on the same types of integers.
Discussing, especially online or in politics, is often not for convincing your conversation partner, but for convincing the silent readers. I feel like this objective is more easily reached if you always assume good faith arguments.
As societies become developed the resource consumption will increase. That metric of richest 10% includes the global population making over $35k - generally people living a modern lifestyle. Other countries are moving toward this modern lifestyle too. Look at India's and China's development over the past few decades - electronics, vehicles, air conditioning, etc. I don't see people willingly giving up those things.

The concern over CO2 is only a small part of the issue. You have the mining, refining, manufacturing, trash, housing, etc. Arable land is shrinking, trash output is high and takes up land, water scarcity is expected to be a major issue in the next 30 year - especially for agricultural areas like the western and middle of the US that use groundwater faster than it replenishes.
Realtime audio is tricky without hardware acceleration.
Two things.

Wage slavery and lack of ownership of the means of production are huge problems, among many other problems.

However, there is no single, prescriptive utopian panacea; this would be an unserious, rhetorical ejaculation. If it "worked," anarcho-syndicalism would be everywhere. What works sustainability in the real-world is between socialism and strongly-regulated capitalism, but with highly-engaged participants and co-operative owners who get dividends and a stake.

Banks need to exist, but not as they are predominantly in concentrated wealth, power, chicanery, Wall St. speculation, and economic warfare. Credit unions, nonprofit networks and investment funds.

In order to make any lasting changes, first the power expressed by the 100k or so of the $100M+ to billionaires must be removed as the aristocratic cabal who buy power outright through lobbyists, politicians, tax dodges, PACs, and legislation favorable to themselves. Any real change must first eliminate the influence of their reckless, antisocial, vampiric greed.
I think you're arguing about definitions.

If you define a functional test as perfect, that it will never break unless the actual functionality changes, then sure, functional tests are purely good. But that's not what most people end up writing when they try to write functional tests. They don't get them right, they write code-change tests. I've seen some large systems crippled by code-change tests disguised as other types -- functional/unit tests that rely on implementation details that aren't related to the actual behavior being tested, and that make it harder to refactor code, not easier.

My criticism with the author isn't that I think they're wrong about the dangers of functional tests when poorly written, it's that the author seems to be over-eager to recommend unit tests as the solution. Unit tests can be just as problematic if they're poorly written; in fact they can be even more problematic if they're relying on a lot of fragile mocks.

One of the biggest issues I see in large codebases maintained by large teams is people building single-purpose mocks for each test that rely on implementation details. This is especially common when team members are mocking components that they haven't built or that don't have clearly defined public interfaces. The end result is that people end up building tests that are too 'specific' -- they rely on behaviors that are subject to change that we never intended to test in the first place (like translation strings, styling, results from 3rd-party data sources, etc). This slows down development, but more importantly, it actually masks bugs because after a while people start assuming that all code changes will cause tests to fail.

You can say that those aren't real functional/unit tests if you want, you can say that they're poorly written so they don't count. It doesn't matter -- that they're poorly written is the point. People write bad tests when they aren't trained how to write good tests, and an organizational policy that only focuses on increasing test coverage without focusing on the quality of tests being written is bound to fail in the long term.

We spend a lot of energy in some orgs training people to write tests without training them on how to write tests, or conceptually talking about what a unit/functional test is supposed to accomplish. We don't have good education in this area, especially on platforms like the web.

In the worst case, I've even seen managers argue that testing static constant files and translation strings was good policy because, "forcing devs to update a constant in two or three files instead of one will mean that they think harder about the change." Needless to say, that policy did not end up reducing bugs.
Well, for one, those bugs aren't an issue on non-shared devices, and anything else outside of x86. That is not insignificant...that is still the majority of devices.

Two, the benchmarks for IPC usually include the cost of cache invalidation. This one [0] for SeL4 clearly shows the difference on Skylake for the kernels compiled with Meltdown mitigations. Still in the sub-microsecond range.

[0] https://sel4.systems/About/Performance/home.pml
I drive past fields of legumes in western Victoria out near Horsham that gets shipped up to Queensland to feed feedlot cattle.

It's certainly not insignificant
My initial reaction was to downvote you for your last sentence - I think OP has obviously worked on medium-large systems, and is just strongly opinionated.

However, I agree with your first sentence.

> If fixing a bug breaks a functional test, then either the test was correct and you changed your expected system behavior and the test saved your bacon, or the test was a change detector test not a functional test.

And I think this is a _hugely_ valuable for medium-to-large systems, which typically have many, many layers of abstractions.

I used to work on one such system that had a lot of, what this author would refer to as, functional tests. Sometimes, changing a couple of lines in one of the core modules would cause 50 tests to fail. While this is just a "change detector", it's still really valuable, say about 20/50 of these changes in behavior are unexpected but acceptable, 5/50 are actually intended, but 25/50 of these are actually regressions in ideal behavior. This means the layer at which you made the change is just wrong, or you didn't put sufficient nuance in your change.

It's a big time-sink for sure and made many new developers angry, but honestly the gain was that the overall product had fewer regressions.

I'm somewhat unsure what I would replace these "functional tests" with.
At this point I'm honestly thinking the EU should just stop negotiating with them and let them go. We don't want barbarians that torture political prisoners, let them be friends with Russia and China instead.
As is the authoritarian governments and the growing resistance and reorganization to combat them
Running Python in the Browser with Web Assembly
Fixed wireless internet and satellite internet do exist now - there have been barriers to deployment, some of which have been put up by traditional terrestrial ISPs.

There have recently been well funded pushes into satellite internet such as Starlink and Project Kuiper.
https://www.protondb.com/app/57300
> https://spotthetroll.org/

Fake accounts, especially for swaying public opinion are not that easy to spot.

I failed at spotting several, and I used to spend more time than average dealing with user content.

It's hard to look at an account and simply say "this isn't a person.", perhaps more so if you have a broad view on the range of possible human behavior.

Maliciously formed content works hard to be indistinguishable from normal behavior, Its essentially a pseudo turing test. Can we mass produce social media accounts that pass for human to both humans and automated systems.

I'm really not sure how someone can identify this unless they are trained.
One cool feature is LIMIT WITH TIES so that if there are more rows with the same value sorted on by what would have been the last row, it shows all these rows of the same value.
You should look at numba. In some special cases, you can actually write for loops in pure python that are faster than C loops.
IANAL, some will say it is OK under the private use cause in Article 30 as long as you print it yourself, but some will say it's not since you're wearing it in public thus it no longer become private use. I'm not aware if the private use cause in situation like this ever been tested on court. Ghibli saying "within common sense" doesn't help clear this case either.
Assuming he survives until the trial, that is.
Porting Guidance for Apple Silicon
FB is known to throttle successful content in order to force blog owners to buy adverts instead of relying on organic growth.
It's not upon release. It's upon 2 decades of release.

Upon release that number is much higher, in the 100s of times, and after two decades it's close to zero.

Anyway, no, don't expect a large impact from this alone. Most of the methane emissions happen on the fossil fuel extraction and processing, not on agriculture. But it's something, and as a bonus it improves every other kind of efficiency too.
Australia is not going to ban meat consumption any time soon. It is a positive step that they are at least bothering to try and mitigate huge potential sources of GHG emissions.
If given two choices them being "stuck in discussions 'cause major perfect changes on a global scale are really hard and complicated to implement" and "anything that helps even if just a bit is welcome, incrementally we go further" I would pick the latter any day. The software patch culture in modern society should work better than unreal expectations with the type of education the average human being gets around the world.
For the enterprise software you need to support old hardware simply because clients (especially Swiss ones) often have a very old VMware environment running on Xeons without AVX. This is either because CPUs do not support AVX or there is a compatibility layer enabled for live migration that disables it.
Everything the author is complaining about is done even more poorly on Teams, which is the de facto “modern” communication solution in the enterprise.
> Atleast the guy there for the snacks was getting snacks until recently

IMO destroying civil society for snacks is a worse reason than destroying civil society intentionally. The pettiness of the tradeoff makes evil people look good by comparison.
Hopefully Chinese (and other non-Western) users will help to counterbalance this lunacy, if it does happen.

Also, I see a lot of container build files not being pinned to a specific version, which automatically implies "latest".
Yeah man I'm sure that they are going to ban you for this. For sure, that's definitely how the world works right now

Please stop imagining things you are making up things in your mind just so you can get mad at them
It seems clear that the US would always try to make a case against him. I'm not sure how anyone could think otherwise.
Leak reveals $2T of possibly corrupt US financial activity
should ebay tell you if you purchased something from a fraud account and it's never going to arrive?
While cpython doesn't have a jit, there does exist an amazing library called numba which will run a subset of python code through a jit built using llvm and make it crazy fast (and multi-core)

Intel has has a library that lets you use pandas in numba code, so it's I feel pretty confident using it in production without breaking cpython compatibility
By definition it's not a unit test if it uses a database. Unit test means to test an individual method or function, and specifically without testing anything else.

> I wish there was some authority

It's an interesting idea since we do have authorities for things like language specifications. In this case though I do think the definitions of different types of tests are pretty well established in our industry. [1]. You can find the same definitions at that source in literally thousands of other places around the web, and I would be very surprised to find someone with experience claiming that unit tests should hit the database. That's not to say tests should not use a database. But that's a different type of test.

[1] https://www.atlassian.com/continuous-delivery/software-testi...
Well, I assume that it is a possible result. Those wars could always escalate to a nuclear apocalypse, with a combination of famine and climate disasters picking off the survivors.
The error is in believing that people are "trying to get to your site". Be real. What people are trying to do is "get their shipping status".

If you want to say that eliminating steps and allowing people to get what they want without having to go through your site means that you lose the opportunity to push other sales on them or something, then okay, fine, make that argument. But be honest about it, and don't try to frame things as if your foremost concern is for what the people want, instead of what it really is—which is trying to optimize for conditions that are best for you, the party that the people are otherwise made to deal with.
Its quite rare for beef cattle to be 100% range raised.

Beef cattle generally start out in rangeland or pasture where they eat grass with supplementary grain feed for a year or so. Then they get moved to an extremely dense feedlot or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation where they are fed mostly grain based feed for the next 6 months or so.
This was back in 2017 where cloud-native/ops jobs grew on trees.
Of course it isn't innocent. That doesn't even measure up to Occam's Razor, let alone some critical thought. There's political and intelligence participation clearly visible just beneath the surface every step of the way in this persecution. No reason to believe it stops here. I'll readily agree it's scary.

Who wants to bet there is some extrajudicial (ah, sorry, "secret court") system to force prominent online actors to perform acts of covert censorship, in the name of national security or whatever? This would be an easy logical step from PRISM.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. I do appreciate that in the Apple ecosystem, "I'm not the product". There is a level of trust with their products and services that I do feel thankful for and will continue to pay for it.
I do not want a different app store.
I do not want to have apps direct access to the fundamental iOS services.

Don't get me wrong, I really like a lot of the companies that have formed this coalition but I don't think their ask is right. I cannot honestly read about the impact to democracy, primarily because we are unable to define and protect what is private data and what is public, and then agree to what is being asked for by this coalition of partners.
However they promise to safeguard the data, I don't think they have a sound business model / sound business principles / a long enough pedigree of protecting user data for me to trust them.
I also see what all of this is about - just a redistribution of the pot of money. This is not about anti-competitiveness, this is not about an Apple Tax hurting consumers (https://www.theverge.com/21445923/platform-fees-apps-games-b...)

I honestly hope that if Apple does lose the anti-trust case, that they split the iPhone into one that allows these non-Apple stores and services and another that offers a Apple managed ecosystem.

I for sure will chose the one that is governed by Apple.
`Atomics.wait`, `Atomics.notify`, `Atomics.waitAsync`
Curling robot able to beat some professional players
Yeah, chiming in from the Mid-West, the Trump base is out in full force. Lots of Trump signs in yards (with varying degrees of offensive slogans), seeing Trump flags flying from the back of pickup truck beds and yards everywhere... one gets the opposite impression. Whether the 'silent-majority' is truly the majority or actually the 'extremely vocal minority' will decide the election. However, there is no denying Trump has a very energized base out here. I have a feeling the Trump will lose the popular vote, but as 2016 has shown, mid America will be the deciding factor.

The other troubling thing, as related to the article, is the huge role conspiracy theories like Qanon will play in this election. Just as the article describes, through FB's algorithm, people engaged with traditionally left-leaning communities (non-GMO, alternative medicine etc) are getting sucked into this madness. FB's work to suppress this is not only too little, too late, it also creates a self-enforcing narrative that 'the elites' are actively engaged in a cover-up. It's pretty scary stuff. Not to mention, the cognitive dissonance is only amplified by civil-unrest and a global pandemic. The psyche of the body politic has been absolutely ravaged by the events of 2020, creating a perfect-storm for the unexpected to occur.
Tesla cuts battery cost on road to $25K model
Indeed. -ftrapv is no longer the best choice for overflow trapping in GCC anyway; in my experience it's pretty inconsistent handling e.g. compile-time overflows.

-fsanitize=signed-integer-overflow (part of UBSAN) produces more efficient code, provides better coverage, and is more flexible. By default it provides a diagnostic message; you can instead simply abort with -fno-sanitize-recover, or execute an undefined instruction with -fsanitize-undefined-trap-on-error (equivalent to Clang's -ftrapv). Regardless of choice, addition is performed inline.

See: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/aGo6WW
Great release! Still waiting for zedstore though.
> All features included with lifetime access for 3 websites

How does the financials & costs for lifetime access work? Is it during the whole life of the website?
I can't speak for any other countries, but from the American perspective, civics education in this country is really lacking. If citizens don't understand the basics of the American government works, it's very easy for people like Trump to lie to them. Media literacy classes would also be helpful. A lot of citizens are not capable of separating fact from fiction.
Serious question, to you and the many other people who make points like this on these stories: what makes you think these pissing matches and other toxic engagements increase ad revenue? Why do you think people in the midst of these will engage with the ads? What advertisers do you think want to have their ads and brands associated with these engagements?
NYC is a corrupt disaster? It's one of the largest economic centers in the world. It's fine. Maybe you just don't like large cities.

The MTA is struggling but it has nothing to do with "Democrat rule" and everything to do with the fact that everyone wants to build but no one wants to maintain. No one gets reelected for a maintenance project that'll improve quality of life 5-10 years from now. They get reelected for adding two new lines to an already struggling system. That's why the United States has bad infrastructure top to bottom.

If the United States were a company, we'd be run by product managers perpetually trying to get promoted next performance review by releasing a new, half-assed product every single quarter.
Its not harder than supporting android tablets and phones. Its even simpler in someways.
OpenAI is giving Microsoft exclusive access to its GPT-3 language model
> the US is special

In the same as "No timmy, you're not retarded, you're just special"
It’s “the first 5 prime numbers”, native speakers of Eastern European languages often get “a” and “the” swapped around or left out completely in English.

What prime numbers are was explained earlier in it, and what first 5 is ... probably assumed that was clear enough?
It's an extradition hearing, not a court case or hearing.

The judge only has to establish a few things:

A) is it likely that the accused will not face a fair trial (this has to be proven, the burden of proof is on the accused to do this)

B) the accused likely faces the death penalty (it is insufficient if death penalty exists or it is unlikely they will face it)

C) they're being accused of something that is a crime in the UK as well

D) the accusation goes beyond simple doubt (this requires no actual proof, only that there is enough proof to run a court case)

There are time limits to extradition hearings, they're not supposed to replace a proper trial and they are not a proper trial.
Is this actually someone just testing what % of people read the article before commenting?

It does make me wonder, given the deceptive nature of the title and obviously emotive topic of whether devs should use bleeding-edge tech...
I haven't experienced that problem. I've experienced the problem everyone else seems to have, too: Too many unit tests makes things brittle over time. One small change breaks a bunch of stuff in some mechanical way. Perhaps a required parameter got added to a function, or perhaps a class got too big and needed to be split up. Either way, you sometimes end up with a slew of tests that don't compile.

Testing at a higher level should help, because the tests are more coupled to the behavior and less coupled to the implementation details. To the extent that you've achieved that, tests breaking due to a change shouldn't be spurious, because the breakage is due to a legitimate change in behavior that needs to be accounted for in the tests' expectations.

Wild guess: The difference in experience here can be explained by the first three words of the article. A contractor who isn't sticking around on any one project for long isn't going to see consequences of their design decisions when they take many years to incubate. And a contractor who's seen this at "no less than six different companies" probably hasn't been a long-timer at many of them. Unit testing has only been de rigueur for 20 years, tops, so, even assuming those were the only six companies, I think it's safe to assume a maximum of 3 years per company. Subtract a year or two from the incubation time because it'll take a while to comprehensively revamp a test suite. A lot of Shakespeare's plays seem to end on a happier note, too, if you always leave the theatre right after the third or fourth act.
I prefer branching. Interrupt is inconvenient especially if you mean not panic and die but do some recovery. Conditional jump after arithmetic operation could be as cheap as one instruction, branch prediction could make this instruction to cost almost nothing in terms of execution times (at least if overflows are a rare thing), and you could point this branch anywhere you like, so you could process overflow and try to recover from error without going outside of a current stack frame.

It could be ugly in a high-level languages though. Instead of (a+b)*c you might get something like

a.checked_add(b)
.map(|x| x.checked_mul(c))
.flatten()
.unwrap_or_else(|| do_something_to_recover(a, b, c));

At the same time there is nothing to forbid a syntax like:

((a⊕b)⊙c).flatten().unwrap_or_else(|| do_something to recover(a, b, c));

Just people do not like to use unicode in programming languages.
Two minutes!?

You can write good microbenchmarks that run in as little as a few nanoseconds.
I've been programming C++ for 25 years and never had to use CMake in any professional context.

I don't think there's any point in using CMake if you're not forced to support Windows.
How Iranian diaspora is using old-school tech to fight internet shutdown at home