skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Those ads aired so long ago that they referred to Windows Vista, they hardly seem relevant
America lacks the population density, even in the northeastern corridor (which I have ridden by the way, DC to Boston) to make the investment make sense. By the way, the price was too high, and it kept having to slow down near every city.

Tokyo to Osaka, for instance, is a relatively short distance (300 miles), and both cities are larger than any city in the US, with Nagoya at the half-way point. The quantity of humans that can serve is an order of magnitude higher than in the same distance in the USA, even on the eastern seaboard.

It just doesn't work for us. The dramatically reduced costs of infrastructure for constructing mounted tubes on pylons, with each section being a fungible, mass produced item, makes rail obsolete. Understood that a lot of the tech is "unproven", but it's too promising to let curmudgeons focus on the stupid, expensive fool's errand of high-speed rail in the US because they are too unimaginative to see what's available to us in the future.
> You have to figure out with every commit what actually changed and based on that change what needs to be tested and built.

I feel this problem and I wonder, is there any ready-made solution for that?
The Only Women Awarded by Pakistan and India – Neerja Bhanot
It's an absolutely gorgeous airplane. For that reason alone I hope they succeed
Twitter: Monorepo
Facebook: Monorepo
Google: Monorepo
Amazon: Multirepo

Of these companies, compare AWS and the number of services, new features and quick turn around time with their competitors, and get back to me.
Isn't that the same thing that the [-] sign doesn in HN? Works the same way for me.
The questioning seems to imply there's a split among party lines. Is that a coincidence or is there some political aspect to this?
When I was a student, all I could afford was the $10 or $20 bus, which was uncomfortable as all heck.

Now that I'm an adult with some money, I'm willing to pay $80 on the train ticket. I agree with you, way more leg room, much less stress.

There's a train that departs every hour in the day (and every 2-hours during midnight hours). I don't even need to plan anything. Just walk up to the train station and go. If you do that with airplanes, your costs double or more.

-------

Once you account for the ~1 hour in airport security, you're basically at the same speed as a train anyway. Then the significantly inferior location of LaGuardia vs Penn Station comes into play (you really can get to far more locations from Penn Station than LaGuardia).

--------

> The trains are also more comfortable than [coach] plane seats by a long mile

I did take the higher-end Acela Express once, just to see what its about. The prices are way higher, but you get an entire table for you (and your family).

Its very expensive, but if I were ever going to take children to NYC, I'd probably consider it.

I found a review for the Acela, it matches my experience:
https://thepointsguy.com/reviews/acela-business-class/

When I took the Acela Express, families were out playing board games during the train ride. Train-level comfort is far superior to plane comfort.

I'd say Coach Train seats are comparable to Airplane first-class. And first-class Train seats are... well.. you can see the Acela review for yourself.
Hyperloop tubes are pipe dreams, nobody has actually ever build one, so all the pros you cite are purely speculative.
I would wholly expect Amazon to sue over S3 implementations by Oracle, IBM for SQL, etc.
I would want the whole industry to target Oracle. Get their pound of flesh.
I think they meant that companies don’t want to share their data. If you look at things like the Twitter API and how it’s been slowly locked down over the years, it’s clear that this is the case.
A real team would have certainly cost much more than what they’ve currently been paid.

Yes, but that's a shared premise in this subthread already.
Hyperloop! Take me home!
No, please, no. It will end up like youtube: spend one evening watching chess videos, and suddenly all your recommendations are chess videos. And afterwards on a meta level there is anxiety with everything you click on and how it might influence your filters.
The unimpeachable approach for the software industry is to setup consortiums to define open standards for APIs, file formats and wire protocols, instead of relying on replicating the most popular proprietary ones. In fact there already exist such consortiums, for example https://www.w3.org, tasked with standardizing WWW, or https://www.cncf.io for cloud computing standards.
Great point about dynamic secrets. This is an area we currently don't address, but it is definitely on our roadmap. There is a segment of the market for which dynamic secrets are an absolute requirement and we fully acknowledge that.
jamesblonde's article tried to answer the question:

> isn't this just a data warehouse [DW]?

My understanding is that the addition of a RowStore to the DW/ColumnStore addresses the training phase of Machine Learning.

I come from a Data Engineering background. I struggled with the Data Science centric terminology. Uber's 2017 post [1] was helpful in establishing the motivations and terminology of their Michelangelo machine learning (ML) platform. The main distinguishing feature of a Feature Store seems to be that it supports efficient batch downloading of row data that is used as the training dataset. The discussion made more sense once I figured out that feature refers to a column or data field.

Figure 4 in the Logical Clocks whitepaper Hopsworks Feature Store [2] helped me understand the architecture better. The architecture appears to be what I would call a Hybrid Transactional/Analytical Processing (HTAP) [3] engine with MySQL cluster acting as the RowStore and Apache Hive acting as the ColumnStore. I'm assuming that the Hopsworks Feature Store periodically merges the MySQL updates into Hive and also provides a mechanism to perform federated queries.

The use of Hive seems outdated (vs. say Presto) and I wonder if the use of MySQL is required compared to directly accessing column oriented files like ORC/Parquet/Kudu.

[1] https://eng.uber.com/michelangelo-machine-learning-platform/

[2] (PDF) https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5e6f7cd3ee7f51d539a4da0b/5ef...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_transactional/analytica...
Thanks for posting. I was curious about the potability of the diamine compound and your post answers it perfectly :)
I might quibble a bit about:

"They could derive historical insights into the business using BI tools."

A lot of work in some traditional BI tools (e.g. Oracle Hyperion) is actually about collecting and aggregating forward looking data (within forecasts, budgets, scenarios) that are then compared with actuals.
FWIW they almost certainly didn't write on a cigarette package in this instance ;o)

It's just the name of that type of maths because people used to use whatever small, available, piece of paper was around - so cigarette packs some time ago (you definitely could write on them with a ballpoint pen (ie un bic).

Getting tangential, napkins to me in the UK have always been cloth, and we have serviettes (a French word, meaning sheet IIRC) made of paper to wipe our mouths with.

Our language gets more and more influenced by USA "English" usage, so perhaps youth would just call it a napkin. People do say 'paper napkin' but without the qualifier it's a fancy piece of cloth [to me].
>That seems contradictory to me.

Not necessarily, it could mean that the people that need to get tested aren't all getting tested.
British Columbia is in Canada, which as a country has had about 175,000 cases total and under 10,000 deaths.
It is usually in the interest of the designer of the API to have as many users as possible.

BUT in this case we are talking not of using part of an API (say the Math library to implement a physics engine is assembly and link it) but of reimplementing a whole language which has, as of today an when the events discussed took place (even if we agree to hate it) an owner.
Why would that be so bad for Google? Can you please explain?
Kind of a similar dilemma to strikebreaking
Issue count != time spent. I found about a dozen issues in a day once. And once, it took me three days to find one.

Always found at least a medium severity issue though.

Big engagements were typically a week, max. Usually one day of kickoff / getting “in the zone” for a project, three or so days of intensive testing, then the final day is usually writing reports (ugh, reports) all day.
To play devil's advocate: Architectural diagrams/design specifications for physical buildings are copyrightable. The implementation is obviously whatever the builder does. But in general, I think that is a pretty close analogy to APIs and implementation code. APIs also capture some sense of overall system design as well. So that may lend further credence to support copyrights.
We don't have a solution for flying without oil based fuels (yet). We might get there, but it makes sense to try to develop much faster ground based transportation in parallel. If they efficiently can hit 600mph without risk of obstruction on the tracks, it becomes a contender. Money will become available to develop the infrastructure if flying becomes prohibitively expensive due to carbon offsets and/or dwindling reserves. As a 25-50 year plan it's fine.
I've wanted something like this for a long time, and had resigned myself to using the algolia search, sorting by votes, and looking at the previous week. This is awesome. Thank you for making this!!!
I'm stuck between learning Clojure and Elixir (for a backend that will power a web app). The one thing pulling me towards Clojure is ClojureScript, and the fact that I'd be able to write a frontend and backend with the same syntax.
Yeah this is the point right here that seems to be so easily forgotten.

You lost every non-programmer at “okay download this binary and run it from the terminal with these flags”
Ah, I was there pre-Euro.
eBPF Turns Linux into a Programmable Kernel
This is a big win for Apple because in my experience most internal security teams are BU specific and never get to throw a wider net. Most security engineers probably realize that there are many gaping holes around the company but they never have the time or bandwidth to go broad and find issues in areas outside their BU. Ultimately, this kind of bug hunting, though lucrative for bug bounty people, does not realize true gains for the company because you are doing bug whack-a-mole all the time instead of trying to fix problems systemically. The joke at a big company I use to work was that its easier to pay thousands in bounty then trying to fix systemic issues because fixing those issues would be more costly. Not saying that this is the right mentality but leaders try to do cost benefit analysis and a bad bug is mostly just a bad PR day without any loss of value to the shareholders.
Nice change from the typical American chain hotel.
Chinese Whispers – Wikiwand
A couple of disclaimers first.

1. I've only used monorepo professionally once in a big org and it was SVN based
2. I'm going to look at monorepos from the perspective of git and github

The main argument I can think of in favor of monorepos, is to maintain the cohesion as high as possible between different parts of your system. For example, if you want to make a change to the load balancer regarding TTL, you can also go and make the same change in your API and your mobile clients and in the end you create one single PR and you have your tests run against that single revision.

Compare and contrast the same scenario in the traditional multi-repo approach: You make your changes to your `infra` repo, then you make the same change in your `api`, `android-client`, `ios-client` repos and in you create 4 PRs, that need to be reviewed at the same time. Which one would you prefer to do?

Potential arguments against are:

1. Too much noise - If multiple people are working on the same repo, you'd be getting emails for PRs for parts of the code that you may not care about.

2. Longer clone/pull times - In the same vain as before, the initial `git clone` and maybe every `git pull` after that will be bringing in a lot of code that you may not care about, increasing the time of each operation and increasing your frustration.

3. Access control - How do you limit who has write access to which part of your repo? AFAIK this isn't possible in git but it may be possible with codeowners in github, I don't know.

4. Organization - How do you structure your monorepo? Do you know in advance how many components it's going to have? How is a restructuring going to affect your history and/or dependencies between different components of your code?

5. History and code sharing - With a monorepo it's more difficult to share/open source just part of your code and keep the history intact.

Having said all that, I think the monorepo is a good match at a service level, not at an organization level. I know Google and Facebook have gone all in at an org level, but first of all they don't use git and second, they have the luxury and the resources to make it work for their use case. At a service level you should have a good idea of your boundaries, your applications and your infrastructure and assuming a relatively small engineering team (~10-12 people) eventually everyone would be confident enough with all parts of your system.

Personally I really like the idea of having one hash define the entire state of the world. I have a few common utilities that I use across my projects and I find it too annoying to keep them all up-to-date between different repos. I hope that eventually I will find some time (or be annoyed enough) that I will converge everything in one repo.
Yea, this is a big one. Every time I move, it's different recycling rules to learn. Do we put paper in the blue bin or the green bin? Can we recycle cardboard in this city? What kinds of plastics are OK here and what kind aren't? It changes from city to city.

At one place I lived, I watched the truck come along and they just dump both bins in the same section of the truck. So you've got me agonizing over which bin to sort things into and then the waste management people just re-combine them. I guess I'm the sucker here!

As usual, the USA's un-coordinated "let the states and local governments figure it out" strategy fails again.
This is Bloomberg. They wouldn't make stuff up.

/s
What's your favorite thing about AppSumo?
Just recently I've partnered with AppSumo to offer my E-Book "Start With A Side-Project" on their marketplace, and I'm liking it. So far I made few sales with minimum marketing efforts, I'm looking forward to get some Sumolings reviews and respond to the readers!

What's your favourite thing about AppSumo?

BTW if anyone wants to check out my E-Book, it's on a limited time discount on AppSumo - https://appsumo.com/marketplace-start-with-a-side-project/
Well someone is still paying for opensource.. the maintainers and developers. The contributors. They're mostly paying with time, but there's some direct cost too.

It's why we want to be good users of open source and contribute back, whether that's donating or helping write documentation, manage issues, etc.

The cost of open source is the direct cost - what it takes to build an adblocker in this case. The cost of a for-profit product is the direct cost and the profit margin - a higher number in every situation. Instead of the for profit company paying that, it's some external party and if that isn't you it's.. well, still somebody. As the saying goes, if you aren't the customer, you're the product.
AMD Zen 3/Ryzen 5000 announcement [video]
The original Hyperloop concept avoids the things you mentioned.

It does not use vacuum:

> The problem with this approach is that it is incredibly hard to maintain a near vacuum in a room, let alone 700 miles (round trip) of large tube with dozens of station gateways and thousands of pods entering and exiting every day. All it takes is one leaky seal or a small crack somewhere in the hundreds of miles of tube and the whole system stops working.

> However, a low pressure (vs. almost no pressure) system set to a level wherestandard commercial pumps could easily overcome an air leak and the transport pods could handle variable air density would be inherently robust.

It does not use MagLev:

> A viable technical solution is magnetic levitation; however the cost associated with material and construction is prohibitive.

There are still challenges, but because of the Hype any company doing anything related just calls their system 'Hyperloop' as well.

> It boggles the mind as to how investors are falling for this idea.
> But perhaps marketing and branding are where Musk/Bronson's talents lie when it comes to high-speed rail? Please tell me otherwise, as I would love to see better rail infrastructure in the US.

Musk has not asked a single investor for money for Hyperloop. He likely knows its currently not a great investment.

Bronson is a guy who jumps on anything related to Musk and makes a bad copy of it that gather lots of money and then doesn't do much with it.
Why not screw heads and threads, too?

Apple wouldn't have to just use hard-to-find screwdrivers, they could just make a new screw shape, copyright the design, and then it'll be even harder to open their gadgets.
It's probably less expensive than, say, Maryland or northern Virginia, more land available, cheaper labor, etc.
Nice catch! Pricing page is updated.
It depends. At a high level, "at scale" you'll have to solve all the same problems for both, to the point where you have a dedicated team or teams solving those problems. Monorepos don't automatically solve issues of version skew or code search or code consistency, and multirepos don't automatically solve problems of access control or performance or partial checkouts. All a monorepo strategy does is say that all your source files will share the same global namespace, and all a multirepo strategy does is say that they can have different namespaces (often corresponding to a binary or grouping of closely coupled binaries). Everything after that is an orthogonal concern. As far as it goes, conceptually monorepos appeal to me, and they offer more discoverability and a simpler, more consistent interface than multirepos. It's also worth considering that there must be some kind of trade-off if you need to pull in the abstraction of "separate repos" to handle code: typically you have fewer guarantees about the way source files will interact when they're in separate namespaces, which makes some things harder.

But if you're just starting out, you're going to be going with off-the-shelf components. Usually this is git hosted on GitHub, GitLab, or something similar; there's a good chance you're going to be using git. Vanilla git works sub-optimally once you reach a certain number of contributors, a certain number of different binaries being generated, and a certain number of lines of code, as a lot of its assumptions (and the assumptions of folks who host git) focus on "small" organizations or single developers. You aren't going to have a good time using a vanilla git monorepo with tens of millions of lines of code, and hundreds of developers, and dozens of different projects, even though in principle you could have a different source control system that would function perfectly well as a monorepo at that scale.

My general approach would be to start with a git monorepo, do all development within it, and once that becomes a pain point migrate to multirepo.
Yeah, it was events, the file system, watchers. The new version is great.
Google makes it pretty easy for basically anyone in law enforcement[1] to get data on users, even without a warrant.

1. https://lers.google.com
If you pour a glass of milk at home, do you throw the glass away afterwards?
Even with untyped, I'd argue that you want it to be in your face that you cannot change the front and the back ends together. Getting them in one commit will not get them in one deploy.
>And things like something being non-commercial, such as a lot of open source software, is a major factor in determining whether or not usage is fair.

Why it should? It would mean that implementing commercial Java runtime without Oracle license is not possible?
A modest low pressure in the tube would become high pressure in the tube when you start pushing a piston (Hyperloop car/capsule) down the tube. Where would all the air piling up in front go? This is why the original concept drawings had large fans on the front of the cars, however this concept seems to have been abandoned, leaving this problem unsolved.
You always have a monorepo whether you realize it or not. The only difference is how your monorepo is organized.

If you split your codebase into lots of little SCM repositories and manage dependencies by pushing prebuilt artifacts here and there, all you've done is create a new meta-repo system on top of your SCM. And usually, this dynamic meta-repo coordination system is not only implicit, not only undocumented, but also not even understood by any single human being --- yet your project's success depends on the operation of this meta-repository built accidentally and unconsciously from coordinated development in tons of little repositories.

I'm strongly in team formal-monorepo. Just make a single big repository that holds everything you depend on. Be honest and direct about the interactions of your components --- explicit, not accidental, as in a microrepo ecosystem.

The performance-based arguments against monorepos don't apply as strongly as they once did: Mercurial and Git (moreso the former) have seen a lot of work for optimizing big repositories, and both support a sparse checkout model that allows people focused on specific tasks to focus on a small part of the larger repository without splitting the repository apart.
> and both cities are larger than any city in the US,

While Tokyo is more populous (I assume that's what you mean by 'larger', if not Houston and LA have a few words for you) than any city here in the US, Osaka is not - however New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago are far more spread out than could ever be possible in Japan.
Can they not even say what they're not allowed to say?

When prompted about how many warrants they've had, why not just respond with "We are not legally allowed to answer"?

And what is the justification for a gag order like that in the first place?
Most Kershaw knives are pretty cheap.

The company that owns Kershaw also owns Zero Tolerance, which is a higher end brand. They use steels like S35VN and 20CV, which are fairly high end steels. 20CV is roughly equivalent to M390.

Not many steels sharpen really easily and stay sharp long. Usually you lose edge retention for ease of sharpening. M390 and 20CV are hard to sharpen but hold an edge really well.

My personal favorite is M4, it has superb edge retention, is tough to sharpen, but isn't as stainless so is often coated to prevent rust. Definitely my favorite though. It's just a joy to use.
And then Oracle sues Amazon and IBM back for implementing some API or other that they own through one of their billion acquisitions...
As an ISV, why would I have any reason to help anyone who isn't paying me?