skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you fail, it's not the world that's hard or unfair (it naturally is both), but again it's a personal failing on your part for not trying hard enough

Thing is, if you just strip the part about 'not trying hard enough', this is actually true in quite a lot of cases? Yes the world is hard and unfair, but that doesn't mean people make mistakes for which only they are themselves to blame, that also is completely natural. No not all burden lies on you, but it's perfectly possible a lot of it actually does. Yet, I have a feeling in some circles there's this tendency to always try and blame something or someone else, which is almost living in denial. Maybe I look at things in a different way sometimes because I'm in engineering, were hard problems just lead to mistakes and in most cases it's obviously my mistake so you learn to deal with that. But to give some examples: people getting lawyers to fight teachers which gave bad grades to their children even when it's obvious the children just didn't perform well where the rest of the class did. My neighbour blaming the trees because the leaves fall on his lawn, despite the tree being there already when he moved in. People going to live next to a river and then starting action comitees becasue their basement floods when it rains a lot. Etc. Don't get me worng, I know in a case like the last it can in fact be nuanced and it can be possible there are actually upstream problems, but these are just examples to give a gneral idea of cases which I see where I think 'maybe, just maybe, there really isn't something else to blame and you should just accept it'.
I like BASIC and recently been thinking it might be nice to do some modern game dev on BASIC. My father got me into programming on a TI-99/4A [0] machine, so the BASIC language always has a place in my heart.

However, I recently also came across a nice game development course from Harvard, CS-50 [1] (an excellent course, much recommended!). And for CS-50 the Lua language is used in combination with the LÖVE [2] framework.

After previously dabbling with SpriteKit [3] and Swift I have to admit LÖVE has been extremely pleasurable and fun to use. It's really nice to get some quick results. And you can easily build for multiple platforms (iOS, macOS, Windows, Android, ...)

I also love that I'm able to develop just using SublimeText [4], a very lightweight editor and pretty serviceable for doing Lua dev ... no IDE required, just like BASIC.

It's a nice change of pace from the normal heavy-handed Xamarin (C#) / Xcode (Swift/Objective-C) dev that I do in my day-to-day work, making "boring" business apps.

---

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_TI-99/4A

[1]: https://cs50.harvard.edu/games/2018/

[2]: https://love2d.org

[3]: https://developer.apple.com/spritekit/

[4]: https://www.sublimetext.com
I don’t about these new build tools, but I’ve usually found ninja to be faster than make in most situations at least.

Also curious to know, is there no work done in the realm of developer productivity inside the FPGA world?
Glad you liked my review. This is a big part of my own and my family's identity.

I've calculated this before and should be able to reproduce.

This year, we've bought 14 flats of organic strawberries at $16/ flat = $224.

Once destemmed and washed, it is about 9-10 kilos of fruit, so rounding up, we need 10 kilos of sugar. Sugar is cheap but I get organic (although there really isn't much difference) and I get it from Costco so it's about a buck/pound, so two bucks/kilo, so about $20
All canning needs an acid like lemon juice otherwise it's just too sweet. I buy nice lemons and squeeze them (more expensive). Assume about 20 lemons at a ~1 each, so $20. You could get away with just lemon juice (cheaper).

The jars are $15 for 12. New ones come with lids, but if I reuse it, I have to buy lids.

That made 16 jars of strawberry (I pack it pretty tight) and another 20 jars of syrup (I consider that a waste product, but it does make good lemonade)

If you just count the costs, you are looking at $224 (fruit) + $20 (sugar) + $20 (lemons) + $15 jars = $279, ahh let's just round it to $290. That's ~$18/jar in raw materials.

It takes a full day to do this. Few hours for stemming, couple of hour for cooking, sterilizing jars, an hour for cleaning. You have to do it in batches. My children labor for destemming is free (I'll pay for it come college education time), and so is my wife. There is some cost of gas stove running and electricity and water for cleanup. Considering how highly compensated my time is ordinarily, the cost per jar climbs up.

As I said, it is not a way to reduce your costs. If one wants cheap, you go to Costco and get bunch of Smuckers ;-)
I've tried that a few times- then I got lost and had no gps or ability to call anyone (and my city does not use the grid system). Eventually I stopped in a random suburb and knocked on a few doors until I found someone who was willing and able to tell me how to get somewhere I recognized. I was hopeless before Waze and similar apps became ubiquitous; I've always have to print out mapquest directions just to go to the store. For some reason, routing and directions can be very difficult for me.
Generally we use the term real to refer to objective claims and consider subjective claims not to be real. You can certainly use the term real in a broader sense if you'd like. I don't think the concept of reality is particularly useful or coherent, but to the extent others use the term, probability is not real in the sense it's being used in.
Well, that's altering the 'language' that you're measuring the KC against. For instance, in the language that CS majors use the phrase "Kolmogorov Complexity" is sufficient to encode the concept of KC itself. And in the context of that language plus the concept of KC and adding in this entire thread, the letters KC themselves encode Kolmogorov Complexity in entirety.

So the 'real world' version isn't so easy to tell in absolute terms like that because the languages can differ. But if you were thinking of it like a compressor/decompressor pair, then moving things into the language is like moving things into the compressor/decompressor.

Naturally then you conclude that the "human complexity" depends greatly on the humans since any pair of humans creates a new universal description language that we can see as some base language plus the jargon that they are both familiar with.
Yes. I have two. Haven’t we all?! I feel like the meme.
I can understand this level of pearl-clutching when we’re talking about social media, but I just don’t see Apple as the five-alarm fire it’s made out to be.

Practically speaking being “locked” into a system would only be a possibility in a world where highly distributed, massively supported OS’s (Windows, Linux) didn’t exist.

Anti-apple people have a hard time fathoming the degree to which many other “power users” are okay with privacy/security trade offs if it results in a more robust/stable environment that just works.

Problem is, it’s being framed as some sort of Faustian bargain when it’s really not that big of a deal.
cat to terminal is kinda not enough. I can own you very easily if you do just that and think you've seen all the code that will be executed.

Save to file, and read the file in the editor.
Huh, so they did. TIL.
Are you referring to this [1]? I had to click Documentation to get here and still didn’t see any code...

[1] http://sinatrarb.com/documentation.html
> I can't really think why anyone would think Apple would lock down macOS.

Because they keep introducing new security features that get progressively more annoying to disable. Have you looked at how difficult it is to modify system files these days?
Hmm, let me count my currently open windows at the moment.. 24 windows from 12 different apps.
I can confirm we got the Personal Health Dashboard notifications.
I agree. I forget when I first started playing around with BASIC, but it helped once I got to high school and had a TI graphing calculator. Those calculators have a variant called TI-BASIC and I had a lot of fun coding and playing my own “Guess A Random Number” game.
Website not responsivevat least
> The domain was registered on March 15, 1985.

Oldest domain registration is not the same as oldest website.
How a Kickstarter for a simple plastic product fell apart
Libstuff: All the stuff you need to build a C++ application
That article is a big red flag. Do not work for this man. He doesn't respect you only the perceived effort you put in.
I wonder if the new wonders coming out from linux (io_uring...) would have made this a better design, but that work in the kernel is still in active development.
A few sample build configs of varying complexity would be nice to see at a glance to understand what you are getting into without digging through the weeds.
Intuition and accumulated wisdom work well for me.
All x86_64 Windows processor manufacturers are supporting the Microsoft firmware that offers secure attestation about whether your system was booted securely or not, so if by lockdown you mean “I can make undetectable changes to my system”, that’s coming to an end as rapidly as they can bring it to market (before Apple locks them out of it). You’ll still have the option to alter whatever you please, but software and websites will have the option to refuse service to your modified system.
A Rant About “Technology” by Ursula K. Le Guin (2004)
MP-DCCP multipath tunneling and congestion control in congestion control
>Interestingly, someone only observing results of a probabilistic event will eventually learn to predict events with an accuracy approaching ideal

This relies on various unstated assumptions.

I would deny the assumption that an event can be probablistic in nature. There are only ever predictions. The distinction between a probablistic world and a deterministic world is incoherent.
Would be interested how feasible it would be to replace Jenkins with this?
Hey Apple stuff is also proprietary garbage, why are you using it for your development work then?

Two weights, two measures?
European here for perspective. During this time I've lived in four different countries, all without Amazon warehouses:

2020: 6

2019: 4

2018: 1

2017: 0

2016: 2

2015: 8

2014: 3

2013: 14

2012: 12

If I lived in US/UK/DE/IT or wherever they do have warehouses the numbers would probably look different.
The distinction between objective and subjective collapses under your usage.
It’s a lot harder to smash LEDs though.
To be fair, when I started to think every day about the life I want to live it slowly started to happen. If I knew what I know now 5 years ago, I would have never believed something like this would be possible and yet here we are. Of course there are limits to anything, for example if you dream to be a commercial pilot and you are 50 now, then that's kind of too late.
So we just pay the losers a fee to go away.

If that means giving Exxon, BP, Shell ... a trillion dollars to just cap all their wells and F'off.... fine. Amortize it over 100 years and pay it down with the tax revenue from carbon.
they have!
A server JDK running under Rosetta is actually not too bad, performance-wise.
I went through this recently at a startup. I was extremely passionate about their mission and product at first. Company slowly started bringing in external management, and with them, all of their "battle-hardened" management practices. What once used to be a vibrant culture turned into one without transparency, with rampant bullying and "1-up" culture, perpetuated by the CTO (a naive bully, not a leader). They then used their product as a way to inhibit growth in engineering, despite claiming that the product was there to help us grow.

The lesson is that if the company shows me that they no longer care about me or my co-workers, and try to pit us against each other, then I immediately stop giving a damn about their mission and product. If you want your employees to "give a shit" then you absolutely must make it clear that you "give a shit" about them, and that they "give a shit" about each other. That startup has a lot to learn. Culture should be motivated by love, not fear. So I have to disagree with the viewpoint put forth by Scale AI.
The true probability requires an infinite sequence of tests, so it's by definition unknowable. But it's what any sort of statistics attempts to approximate.
They also do this "just show up with the item" sort of return system with The UPS Store, which is probably closer to some people than Kohl's.

(Allegedly you can also return to an Amazon Locker. Never tried that)
I never met Tony but I saw him speak at an event in 2009 (Startup School 2009) in Berkeley.

I just remember before his presentation he had TechCrunch up on his laptop and one could tell he didn’t have the pretense of any other speaker (and all the speakers that day were very successful like him). His talk on Delivering Happiness was good. It was memorable how unique and kind of a culture he had created throughout Zappos. That was unique in that it was the only talk about doing moral things, from the only startup that was successfully employing these practices.

But before he started, the most memorable part — and to be honest the saddest thing now - was just seeing him browsing TechCrunch real quick on the screen in the auditorium in front of everyone. I remember thinking — whoa he is just one of us. Nor was he concerned about not being who he was in front of other people. You could tell he was very good at socializing but slightly introverted (moved quickly around the room but wasn’t much for small talk).

And that behind a very successful entrepreneur was just a person trying to figure it out like everyone else and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the point (ie unconsciously or not if leaving TechCrunch up on the projector briefly wasn’t intentional).

It meant a few things to the audience: (a) it doesn’t matter what people think (b) we’re all human (c) there’s nothing special about my success (d) other than I’m so focused on doing important things with it it doesn’t matter what you think.

And that was way more of a leadership by example situation — for a few brief moments — than anything else (and there were a lot of great talks that day).

Rest In Peace.
i would hedge on ammo cans being the next item of need, they are fairly common and cheap for the durability and water proof rodent proof storage of food items, things you want to isolate from contamination such as facemasks air/water filters firstaid/ adv.firstaid kits, masonjars full of food etc.
This makes me sad.

You hopefully have tried out many other build systems by now, been frusted with all of them, and only then made your own. And with all that experience with the status quo, marketing should be easy.

If you haven't done that, this project is a net-negative on the world, because the proliferation of build systems exacerbates Conway's law and balkanizes our software commons.

NIH in FOSS is not free.
Makefiles operate at a low level of abstraction. The Makefile abstraction is "run this command when the output files don't exist or are older than the input files." You manually specify every tool to be run and all of its arguments.

These tools operate at a higher level of abstraction. The BUILD file abstraction is something like "I am declaring a C library with these sources and headers." The build system then turns that into a set of commands to run. This higher-level abstraction provides a bunch of compelling features:

- Reliability: it's easy to write Makefiles that are fragile, for example one that works when run on a single CPU but fails when run with -j, because of undeclared dependencies. When the tool is in charge, it has more control and can sandbox each build step so that undeclared dependencies simply won't be available in the sandbox.

- Reproducibility: similar to the previous point, it's easy to write a Makefile that produces incorrect results with an incremental rebuild. For example, unless you implement your own header scanning (or manually list your header dependencies) "make" won't know to rebuild a source file when a header changes. These tools can ensure that builds are reproducible and incremental rebuilds are always correct.

Besides that, working at a higher level generally means writing less code to accomplish the same task, and the code you do write is closer to expressing your actual intent compared with a Makefile.
Yeah, maybe. It's still hard for me to envision giving up a 2014 and 2015 MBP. They both work flawlessly and don't compromise on any of the useful features, like having USB A ports, SD card slot, MagSafe, no touchbar, reasonably sized touchpad and so forth.
That is pretty obvious. But believing you will succeed is still very different than believing you have a non-zero chance to succeed.

If I remember correctly, Musk even had the mindset of "I will probably fail, but something good will come out of it, even if I fail". I think the details on this mindset matter on the "believe" part.
IMO (I should have defined this) the true probability would require an infinite sequence of tests to determine.
> If you're familiar with Blaze / Bazel, Buck or Pants you will probably find Please very familiar

Yes, so why would I use Please over any of them? I've spent close to 10min reading and have no idea why this exists or why anyone would use it. It looks like Bazel with a different config format, in which case why wouldn't one just use Bazel?
Of course not. If you're a frequentist you can say your best estimate is 100% heads with an unknown variance, and if you're a Bayesian you work out p(a|b) = p(b)p(b|a)/p(a) and update your priors (which will not give 100% heads). The more coins you flip, the better you can estimate the true probability
> so much as fallout from much more recent segregation policies.

The existence of slavery and the view that Black people could be treated as livestock are why we had segregation policies.

The existence of slavery fueled white anger towards the idea that the "livestock" were suddenly being allowed to go to the same places and use the same services as white people. The generations of people who owned slaves raised the generations of people that enforced segregation, and those generations raised the people today who enforce racial discrimination and oppose racial justice.

And like you said, this isn't far-back history, segregation in the US was recent. People have this flowery view that racism just went away and that slavery just suddenly stopped mattering. But the effects are still very much with us today. A few generations isn't enough to eliminate a culturally pervasive, harmful ideology.
Is there a good way to get around location tracking without losing out on having a phone?

Even a feature phone would have location tracking from your cell service provider which I'm sure they would monetize because they can. Are there more privacy based cell providers that people could switch to? I know it's possible to make your own ISP for home internet but can that be done for cell phones too?

I primarily use a smartphone because my job makes me use one for VPN. If it was possible I wouldn't mind keeping a useless smartphone with no data plan sitting in a drawer at home and going back to a feature phone (especially one with a slide out keyboard :D).
A So-So Physics Student Finally Won His Nobel
Very true. Years ago I tried canning italian plums. I didn't think anyone else in my househoold will like them, so I decided to experiment.

I thought I'd try for a light syrup so I used 1/3 of the sugar - some recipes in the 1939 Kerr canning cookbook that I have called for that, with paraffin on top. Plus, I decided to reuse some of the previously used lids, being too cheap that specific year. They turned out beautiful to look at and went into my pantry

Well, about a month later, I was awoken in the middle of the night by explosion from downstairs. 2 jars exploded, most of those jars were fermenting, some had really nasty organic growth scum on it, and the cleanup was quite terrible. I think it was the lack of sugar, not the lids, but lid reuse didn't help.

Key takeaway - always use the right amount of sugar (1:1, even if it seems like you're pouring white death on), and never reuse lids.
Marketing can be hard not because you don't have something worth marketing, but because marketing is a skill-set largely orthogonal to software development.
It doesn't matter what you "should" do. In aggregate, all the people who take the margin where cheaply available will outcompete all the people who don't. It's less about you and whether you can be replaced by a facsimile of you who does all the same things but this one thing differently.

At the margin, that facsimile is a superiorly-adapted species and evolution then takes its course. You have to modify the environment in order to make the unmodified you more competitive than the doppelgänger.
Make is only good at one thing: calculating how to execute a dependency graph to produce a specific target.

Everything else that is needed for a modern build system is lacking:

- expressive scripting language

- platform-related configuration

- feature-related configuration

- handling hierarchical projects

- properly handling rebuilds when the Makefile itself has been changed

- dealing with dynamically generated parts of the dependency graph

- handling third-party dependencies

- build reproducibility

- etc... the list is very long

This is why people these days mostly take the path of generating Makefiles, because make is only good at one thing: executing a statically defined dependency graph.
Make has a laundry list of problems:

- Cannot handle multiple outputs for a single rule

- Does not rebuild when flags change

- Make rules may contain implicit dependencies

- Slow for large codebases

- Does not understand how to build for multiple platforms, sucks for cross-compiling

- Recursive make sucks (job control does not work across recursive invocation boundaries)

- You must create output directories yourself

- You must create your own rule to clean

This adds up to a fragile & slow build system, where you have to do a full rebuild to have a reasonable level of assurance that your build is correct—incremental builds aren’t safe.

There have been a few attempts to make a “better make” over the years like Jam, SCons, Ninja, Tup, etc. each with their own pros and cons.

The new generation of build tools—Bazel, Buck, Pants, and Please are all an attempt to redesign build systems so that the design is resistant to the flaws that plague Make build systems. You can use a shared cache (shared between different users) fairly easily, and you have reasonable assurance than incremental builds are identical to full builds (so your CI pipeline can move a lot faster, developers almost never have to "make clean" when they change things, etc).

Personally I’m working on a project right now that uses Bazel (which is similar to Please) and is for an embedded system. It’s been a great experience, and I can pass a flag to Bazel to tell it to build for the embedded target using the cross compiler or for the native host--that makes it easy to share code between tools and the target system, and I can do things like write tests that run on both the target & host. Anyone who does any cross-compiling is missing out if they are using Make—but, do note that setting up a cross-compiling toolchain in Bazel isn’t exactly a cakewalk.
You're saying that the parent claims that hard work is what matters, but secretly has other expectations they aren't expressing to their child? Yeah, that definitely sounds like a failure mode to be aware of and avoid.
Some people really dislike the JVM, and Please is written in Go.
Sorry, don't know what point you're making here.

"However, IBM required that Intel find a second-source supplier because production had to be guaranteed and it was too risky to rely on a single company as the sole source of its chips."

https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-archit...