skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's also the international issue. Different countries can have conflicting trademarks. So if you've got a valid trademark for "ACME, inc" from the US, and someone else has a valid trademark for "ACME, inc" from the UK, who gets the ACME domain/TLD/subdomain/twitter handle/etc? Both can get legal judgements in their respective countries!
Do you live in the West? If so, the US is the one of two super powers which is most closely aligned with western, and most likely your, values. No other western country has the ability to project the soft and hard power required to protect these values, and I for one am indeed very concerned about their internal affairs.
This isn't true, you''re supposed to use proprietary DirectX libs that interface with a virtual DirectX device, as shown in this architecture diagram provided by Microsoft:

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/wp-content/uploads/si...

From https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-heart-linux/

I'm not even sure where mesa comes in. Can you elaborate where you got your info?
> What is going here is both really funny and typical of HN groupthink. Every one is criticising blasphemy laws but virtually no one even dared to mention the legal corpus which justifies it here: Islam, referring to ‘religions’ or generally to ‘blasphemy laws’.

It's not just political correctness and being afraid to single out Islam. Christianity had many similar problems in the past. Even now, all Judeo-Christian religions are based on a book that would be considered an extreme example of hate speech if written now. Indian traditions have the caste system. Buddhism is in a better position but even there have been cases of abusing it. So if you just limit your criticism to Islam, it's not entirely fair, even though many consider it the most problematic religion in the world at this point of our history.
I don't think 6 months is super frequent, even for a healthy person. I go at least once a year, whether I need to or not. I'd go up to every 6 months without hesitation, if my doctor recommended it.
> Windows is not painful and sluggish compared to Linux GUIs. It's on par.

30% longer compile times than on Linux on the same hardware.

Using git takes time compared to being instantaneous.

Running "hello world" written in .Net takes 3-5 seconds compared to <<1 second on Linux on the same hardware.

> If your GUI is sluggish it's because you're letting stuff like letting crappy antivirus and malware detection run in the background or you have an underpowered machine for what windows needs.

As I mentioned above, Linux is amazingly much faster on the same hardware! And brand new 2018/2019 hardware at that when I measured last time.

That said antivirus is a real problem. Part of the problem is that mandatory Windows OS often signals sysadmins that doesn't care, so you often get tragically bad antivirus, possibly misconfigured at that.
Haha all too true. I say this as a user of psychedelics.

In any case, just for posterity, the actual event may well have happened, I'm just commenting on whether "HN believes it" has any impact on the truth of whether it happened or whether that company's reputation is shot.
Yeah which is why I mentioned existing level of training and adoption.
Commit to deliver only one thing in a weekly long sprint. Insist on written specifications prior to acceptance into a sprint, including finalised wireframes.
Expand from there.
"I work at Facebook"
no you don't
We had a saying in our house we all live by.
Practice makes you mediocre, perfect practice makes you perfect.
And yes, even with creativity.
I think GP meant syntactic compatibility. Objective-C is an embedding within C and C++ code and has to be (mostly) compatible with them for the free mingling of each language. Swift is freed from that need, but that doesn't mean it isn't designed for interop (calling between each language).
Given my work experience, what should I do?
I'm 36, have a degree in engineering (biomedical, not software), an MBA, and went through a coding bootcamp. I've been at a high-growth B2B SaaS startup (Segment) for the past 5 years in various technical, customer-facing roles, most recently Sales Engineering and now a pure Sales / Account Executive role.

I made the move to Sales because I enjoyed the Sales Engineering role at the time, and thought I wanted more of the Sales side of things because 1) it's a more generalizable skill-set not tied to my company specifically, 2) more autonomy, 3) more earning potential, and 4) I thought it'd be more fun. I thought this would be my career path that I would be successful in and eventually grow into management.

The problem is that I'm not that good at it (yet). I'll probably get better, but will likely get fired before I really get up to speed. Part of this is on me, and part of it is the stage that the company.

I'm now having a bit of an existential crisis because of my age and not knowing what to do now. I could try Sales at another SaaS startup, but I've questioned that path as I don't relate to the average salesperson as well as more technical folks.

Going back to Sales Eng isn't exciting. Customer Success seems like a slog. Product could be an option, but unsure how good I'd be / I don't have product experience. I've always been interested in the startup scene, so the VC space is interesting, but no experience there / hard to break in to.

Given the space I've worked in, a job like Customer Data Platform manager would be a good fit, but limited opportunities there; also potentially a Growth or Analytics type role at another startup. I previously did analytics. I also feel a bit behind career-wise as I haven't managed people.

I thought I figured out a good path forward career-wise in Sales but realizing that I'm not as good as I thought has been a punch in the gut.

Any advice / types of jobs I should consider?
What I talk about is what "amadeuspagel" also describes in a post here.

And to confirm that experience, until participating in this conversation, I also didn't know that it could be possible to efficiently use Emacs with the key combinations of some "more familiar to common people" editor.

And I'm still confused: if you say "Keep in mind that all three combinations are central to Emacs 1) C-c is used in million combinations 2) C-u too 3) C-v scrolls a page down."

What then? Does it mean that I can't use the "million combinations" if I want Ctrl-C to mean copy? What is then the start of "a million combinations"? Why should't help system simply adjust to display the "start of million of combinations" as the thing I selected at the start? If I like Ctrl K instead, couldn't that be "the start of the million of combinations"?

And why should I care that "C-v scrolls a page down"? The keyboards since at least 1987 have a physical "Page Down" key, why should I not use that then?

(And they surely don't have a physical "Meta" key).

I hope that's a usable example of what confuses at least one kind of a beginner.
Existing hydro (not pumped) also acts as storage: a decrease in the load on a normal hydro dam means more stored power... and all the infrastructure exists including grid connection.
Oh that's a good rule, been thinking about it as a solution, so good to know that people do do this.
> It’s mundane and uncontroversial to state that open plan offices fail to save money.

I've never heard this before so I certainly don't consider it the self-evident fact that you do. If you agree that open offices are denser in terms of workers, would that not imply you are paying for less space and thus it is cheaper in terms of rent? And if you don't believe that open offices are denser in terms of workers, why not?
When moving from a dynamically typed language to a statically typed one, about the only thing I end up missing is hot reloading.

In gamedev, static types don't help when you have a constant value you have to change that tweaks the gameplay buried inside a compiled class that you want to balance out. Changing that one constant means either putting it in a script, which is usually written in a dynamically typed language, or recompiling the whole program, testing, changing the value, and repeating.

The only real reason I choose dynamic languages is because I spent hours on that last cycle just recompiling the whole program and throwing away all the state for a single small change, then getting the engine back to the previous state I was debugging in. I still don't understand if it was a bad habit or just how my mind wants me to program. I expect to be able to interact with my program and see how changing things affects the behavior very quickly, and a compile cycled shuts down that mode of thinking entirely. I remember Steve Yegge's essay that mentioned this, that "rebooting is dying." [1]

There were a lot of times I could write scripts, but the fact was that most of the time the code I wanted to tweak slightly was compiled, and that required a full module recompile every time. The fact is that if some of my code can be compiled, then I will probably end up changing the compiled code at some point, and that means a lot of waiting.

If C# had the ability to hot reload a class like a dynamic language to cut down the recompile cycle, I would be happy, but it sounds like it isn't possible. The old code will be mixed with the new code leading to instability.

So I've been spoiled by a dynamic language (Lua) while acknowledging I made a trade-off for one single feature. In my case if I used a statically typed language I would lose out on certain things and gain others, but dynamic program rewriting seems to best coincide with how I think, and I'm not sure how if I should change that.

[1] http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/01/pinocchio-problem.ht...
I agree.

And you also see many dynamic languages working around lack of types by describing the types anyway in the documentation. Like jsdoc in javascript before typescript became popular.

You are already doing the hard work of describing your types anyway, but because your compiler doesn't know the types, it can't help you out.
+1 for spacesniffer (and the old spacemonger)

I wish there were more disk space analyzer like it that use rectangular blocks of space rather than circles which I find harder to read how much space they actually take on disk.
PySwip[1] makes SWI Prolog more accessible, by allowing much of a system to be written in more familiar python. Something analogous for Picat might be interesting, but seemingly stumbles a bit on lack of dynamic predicates.[2][3]

[1] https://github.com/yuce/pyswip
[2] http://picat-lang.org/download/picat_compared_to_prolog_hask...
[3] https://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/man?section=declare
you could possible write an IDE plugin that hides the types information and only show them on hover etc. I don't think this reason is that strong of a point IMHO.
Same experience here. He didn't listen to my feedback and didn't answer any of the Workers-related question i emailed him on his request.
First, sprints are dumb. You don't hear Usain Bolt running sprint after sprint, right? Second you have nobody that is senior. Yes expensive. But as you can see cheaper than the current situation.
Similarly, I "took over" https://github.com/tasuki by simply messaging the customer support. They said it wasn't being used and I could have it.
Or just required the use of the true FQDN - "google.com."
California's weak-sauce electric cars plan
Who knows what can go against physics - I generally dislike the simulation hypothesis, but this feels like the right place for it, among other near impossibilities.
It also doesn't even make sense. If you had to pay to get rid of fresh water, why wouldn't you just put it back in the ocean?
SignUp to Ask a question? WTF?
'The Social Dilemma' and the Last Fucking Thing I'll Ever Write About Facebook
I use it to reverse engineer the DWG format as described here: https://savannah.gnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=9203

It's perfect to declare the known facts, and let it find the best possible answers automatically. Not as strict as with prolog, but with loops. Much easier to work with and extremely fast. I create the facts automatically.
No, but they're releasing new frameworks with Swift-only APIs. They're not "jettisoning" Objective-C, and I'm sure teams at Apple will continue to write stuff in Obj-C for years to come. It'll likely never disappear entirely. But that number will continue to shrink.
DistantFinds is a side project I have been working on for the past few years and recently launched.
It is a website where customers of Chinese shopping sites (e.g. AliExpress) can post product reviews/Q&As and converse with one another.
There is a demo video on the landing page to show some features only available after sign up (i.e. submitting content).
Any feedback is greatly appreciated!
> I wish there was a word like "cowardice" except with 10x the magnitude.

"Bootlicker"
For #2, I can’t speak to your values. It seems unlikely you’ve never taken any risk in your life. Of course, not knowing you, I can’t say for sure, but I’d bet you only choose to pursue “sure things”.

I’ll save you the philosophy about missed gains, but instead ask—what if your “sure things” were only 99% probable? They’d be at least somewhat risky, no?

Would you still do them? And, for the things you have done, how can you be certain of the outcome, any outcome, beyond that level of confidence?

Maybe for someone as risk averse as you, #2 is beyond the point of diminishing returns. But for anyone who doesn’t fit that bill, I’d say #2 is critical.
it's inconsistent with how judges & justices like Scalia often found in favor of litigants he despised

That doesn't describe Scalia at all. Scalia applied originalism when it suited him, and abandoned it when it interfered with his ideological goals.

Scalia like most SCOTUS justices, cared little for the actual litigants, since they were largely irrelevant to the matters at hand other than as vessels for bringing the matter to court. Due to the length of time it takes cases to get to the Supreme Court, many of the named litigants aren't even the original parties, the original parties having long since died or left office.
> I kind of feel like a microservice that takes JIRA tickets as input and outputs code these days.

That sounds like a symptom of a deeper problem—insufficient autonomy? no "seat at the table"?—that is, at most, being exacerbated by remote work. What specifically about your culture makes you feel this way? What makes you feel this way more now than previously?
> every sprint we either fail to deliver the work we commit to

Are you committing too much volume? Too much complexity?

You say that half the team is quite junior: I have found that junior developers often have a more difficult time judging how long something will take more than they do actually shipping a feature. They haven't been through the weeds like senior developers so they don't have that experience of "okay, well this can go wrong this many ways" yet.

> deliver work that ultimately fails the QA process

Hearing this makes me think that it's a complexity problem, tied in with bad estimates.

It sounds like you're committing to too much complexity and doing that with too much volume. Reduce scope, reduce volume and I think you will see better results.
I won't speak to opportunities; I agree with you that there's a lot to be said for specialization.

But, to the point about getting older: There's a fair amount of evidence that learning new, challenging (as in, outside your comfort zone) things is a big part of maintaining your mental acuity as you age. Doing crosswords is good for your brain, but only if you're relatively new to them. If you've been an avid crossword puzzler for decades, not so much. Learning a new natural language is another example of something that is supposedly good for keeping the creative juices flowing.

I wouldn't be surprised if challenging oneself with a new programming paradigm behaves similarly. Which would mean that learning Haskell might make you a better Rubyist, not because (as people often like to say) Haskell teaches you specific things that you can't learn while using Ruby, but because the mental challenge of learning to work with such a drastically different programming language just generally helps keep you sharp.

That said, I would not go so far as to speculate that this effect is any greater for learning a programming language than it is for learning Esperanto. Just pick the one that sounds more fun.
I also like this article about gimjang: https://guide.michelin.com/en/article/features/gimjang-kimja...

Kimchi is important enough to get its own appliance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimchi_refrigerator
Ah, a lightly-disguised ad hominem political article.

Just in case there are any sincere readers out there who regret buying a dual-motor performance Tesla, please respond to this note. I'll help you find a way to rid yourself of it.
It actually does take that much thought though! Social dynamics are extremely complex to model, and they are way more important than we think. There is a lot of complex game theory and metagaming going on. Most of it goes over my head, but people's "gut feeling" about others takes a lot of things into account(what they know that I know, etc...). Communicating while maintaining good gut feelings is not easy! We basically need to hack our own minds to get things right.
We have to move people to space (filled with old weird lab and office rooms) and are considering open space simply because it’ll be many months sooner we can move, since only demolition is required.
Get paid to charge your batteries, then get paid later to discharge them! Elon is smiling. https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/neoens-revenu...
Upvoting so that people who need this may see it and benefit from it.

However, it's not that I'm not aware of features available to my editor of choice, it's that I specifically don't want an editor with those features. I don't want that functionality as part of my workflow. I prefer to reduce the noise and distraction so that I can keep concentrating on what's currently important to me.

Bringing this back to what the root parent was talking about, a significant part of code maintainability comes down to how we design our classes, services, etc. It's not so much about static or dynamic typing--both can experience their fair share of problems--it's about approaching our code in a way that makes it easiest for future readers and maintainers to pick up where we left off. That's a difficult task, but one that makes a huge difference. Saying that specific editors can alleviate some of those problems misses the point: that the underlying code itself is not well designed. What I meant to add is using these editor tools not only fails to fix the underlying problem, but that it also forces developers into tools they may not want to use.
My best guess is that it looks like a typo for "keycombo".
Laser-Blasting in Front of Hypersonic Vehicles Could Unlock Unprecedented Speeds
Crazy how the irs can do this when the feds own the largest exchange!?!?!?
Kaleidoscopic Rainbow Pattern Generator
> The previous method used XML (in XIB files) and needed special tooling (Interface Builder)

This isn't really true. Interface Builder was an alternative to writing UI code, but programmatic UI is still allowed and is well-supported. Many developers prefer it to IB.
How Humanity Came to Contemplate Its Possible Extinction
Yes, if the equipment isn't too expensive.
Building Search Engine Teams
I was an engineer as well early in my career. As an entrepreneur now, I've been doing sales for the last 8 years. I've never been formally in any sales role prior to running my own business, so I mostly learned on the job and on my own through trial and error.

I think when most people hear the word sales, it usually has an adverse reaction. Someone mentioned here that being a consultant is a good way to approach it and I've found that to be true.

I've recently heard of a great acronym that helps you think of how to approach sales:
S - Serve - go in w/ a service mindset
A - Ask questions - don't go yapping about your offerings just yet. Find out what their pain point is. This way you know what to offer and what to skip
L - Listen intently. I think a lot of times, I'm very guilty of "waiting to speak" vs listening.
E - Emphathize - with the customer and their pain. This is why they are coming to you.
S - Summarize in your own words what you heard.

Then you can "do your thing"
No, it is accurate. Notice I didn't say interoperability, I said backwards compatibility.

Objective-C is a superset of C, so any valid C code is also valid Objective-C code, including all the pitfalls and footguns.

This is similar to the relationship between C and C++, however C++ isn't strictly a superset of C.
There are many reasons to favor Swift over Objective-C, but "Swift is less visually noisy" is both subjective and not weak. Conciseness and expressiveness can be a reason, sure, but the article also lobs the tired "look at all those square brackets and lack of syntactic sugar" critique.
Show HN: Trades from the House of Representatives in 2020
Since it's election season it's a good opportunity to introduce a pet project I've been working on. Since 2012, the financial disclosures of congress have been made public. Considering what has happened recently with Richard Burr and Kelly Loeffler (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-i...), I was curious to see if members of congress might make superior investments due to the information they are privileged to.

For now I only have data for the house of representatives, but it's still fascinating to data mine this huge trove of hard to get data (1500+ pdfs so far this year). Some representatives like Hon Alan S Lowenthal made 100% gains in the past 6 months in niche sectors like solar companies.
Only if the company doesn’t have any other shareholders. I think John Lewis is run like that? Devil is in the details, and I’ve never had reason to look closely in their case: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership
I did Java dev for a while, after being C before then. I felt like everything needed a pile of typecasting in front of it to work, even though these were often objects for classes you'd think should all play nicely. I realized only after dealing with it for so long that Java wasn't supposed to work that way, but how things can work when well written, vs old apps where half the code is written by a long line of 4-month co-op students, are two very different things.

Ultimately I think people just weren't given any credit for making good, reusable types, because then the next dev who submits a better feature faster using your work gets a raise, but you look like a kook ranting about best practices who doesn't do anything "business".
I don't know about the US, but here in the Netherlands a bottle of 300 x 10mcg pills costs €2.50. I doubt the current costs are holding back usage.
This doesn't conform with any of my experiences in non-trivial JS codebases. Migrating to TS tends to reveal previously overlooked implicit typing issues. Also, I find the "upfront productivity loss" of TS to be overstated: adding in annotations here and there doesn't take much time at all, and pays dividends quickly. Many hours have been lost tracking down some elusive runtime bug stemming from a typo in a vanilla JS property access.
Concentrated power in Big Tech harms the US
C++ Conference 2020
NFC can trigger an interrupt to launch code/app, so proximity is sufficient. NFC exists on multiple platforms. QR codes would require launching an app to read the code, it would be faster for the user to launch the automation shortcut directly.

There is also the issue of security. Which platform hardware+software would you entrust to pull the trigger on an automation sequence with physical side-effects?
The burden of proof absolutely lies with you if you're going to make such claims. If you can't or won't back them up with a source or citation then I'm just going to ignore you, what you write can't be trusted.