skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You assume they will move forward, when they most likely won’t. It’s not a tax, it’s a product targeted at a guaranteed line of revenue. If 3.x were ever deprecated, they would start charging for that version. There probably aren’t enough users for their 3.x version yet, so it’s free to try and gain adoption.
I agree that separating logic from side-effects is an excellent lesson that easily translates to less functional programming languages.

Another thing I tend to do now is order function arguments as if the programming language had partial function application. You can see this in JavaScript by comparing lodash to lodash/fp. I think once this practice is established on a team, it can help bring a more uniform feel to the code.
Potential security vulnerabilities? If I have a library and it works in 2 & 3. But I stopped working on keeping it 2 compliant because 2 is no longer supported. Than I will never bring a single fix to 2, even security fixes.
Due to code divergence it may not be even easy for me to understand if the issue reproduces in 2.
> But contrary to how WP expects to be installed.

No, this is incorrect. WP is compatible with no write access and recognizes it in the default setup workflow.
> This is straight up classic police legwork...

Which may be built on the back of a massive privacy violation. Should location data be made available to the government when they don't have a warrant? Should they be allowed to "go fishing" with our data?

> they weren’t suspected of anything but the agents asked for any photos they had of the events.

There are plenty of other methods available to the FBI to achieve this goal.
Heh. When did CL-HTTP get phased out?
I've done work from home pre-covid. Absolutely hated it after a month. My sleep schedule drifts off, I don't get to see coworkers, had to spent way too much time around relatives etc, I felt like I was trapped in that cabin from The Shining.

It's just way harder to organise going out for a drink after work if you're already at home. If you're in the office and it's a 10 min walk to the bar you just go. There's absolutely no spontaneity in working from home. At work you can have a conversation over dinner, or over a coffee or a smoke, it just doesn't work over Zoom.

Covid has been hell for my social life and probably at least 80% of people in my social circle feel the same. I honestly don't think any of this will persist.
Tesla accuses engineer of downloading 26k sensitive files in his first week
Brave literally injects code and alters the UI of sites you visit to sell dubious cryptocurrencies.

It boggles my mind when people recommend Brave in a privacy/security context.
We can correct the price or capacity by the efficiency for comparison, but on it's own 50% is not good/bad really. I'd take cheaper per-adjusted-kWh-over-usable-years solution even if it has 10% roundtrip efficiency since I normally get a lot of spare energy from solar.
Liner Transatlantic Crossing Times, 1833 – 1952 (in days)
I don't think that's a direct comparison. gov.uk looks closer to something like https://www.usa.gov/, which is similarly functional. The Whitehouse website is more political and maybe would be closer to to Downing Street's page https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-... which has more photos.
The second link is titled:

> How Object-Oriented Programming Started
>
> by Ole-Johan Dahl and Kristen Nygaard,
> Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo

The first link is "based on an invited talk" given by the author at the Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, with colleagues of (then-deceased) Dahl and Nygaard in attendance. That doesn't guarantee anything in particular, but it makes it likely that they are not making stuff out of thin air.

If OOP was defined by message passing, why was it necessary for Kay to note in 1998 that people had apparently lost sight of this (his) definition?

If you want to say that C++ programming is not OOP, be my guest, but your statements about the history of OOP are not part of some canon or bible.
Well, Python 2.7.2 works, but I have never been able to get pip to work at all in my install. Instead I get a circular chain of dependencies ...

So if it isn't in the standard library, I haven't been using it. Pity, because lxml seems like it would solve some of my issues.
I use wine to do the same, but I just finish off the bottle. Also get no complaints.
> TDD purists are just the worst

No, the worst are the people who never produce any tests (or even anything testable).
> I think we are talking about different things.

No, you aren’t. Wordpress has plugins to generate static html for all of the posts so visitors can be served without database hits.
Marketing? Legal? Support? Design? Tons more. This is a super mass market consumer service.
> Giving people more money doesn't make them buy more basic goods, just more assets

Under normal circumstances, in the limit as starting income approaches infinity, this is correct (marginal propensity to consume approaches 0 and marginal propensity to save approaches 1.)

In the limit as starting income approaches 0, OTOH, the opposite is true (marginal propensity to consume approaches 1 and marginal propensity to save approaches 0.)

While there may be some future society with the distribution of income such that the former limit is a decent approximation of average behavior, but for real current societies the latter limit is a fairly good approximation, with observed society-wide marginal propensity to consume in modern developed countries, IIRC, around 0.9 (90% of added income goes to spending, 10% to savings/investment.)

> so price of normal goods doesn't go up but price of assets do

Were that true, supply gluts in a commodity used for money (like, say, the result of Spain bringing in vast hoards of New World precious metals) would have no impact on nominal consumer prices while driving up nominal asset prices.

This is, empirically, not true.
Microsoft's OS division has essentially committed to supporting VB6 apps forever. I imagine that RedHat and etc will do that with Python 2, too much of the world is running on it.

(VisualBasic, like Python was the most popular programming language of its day and found its way into a lot of niches which are not developer-centric.)
Sure, but there are plenty of things out there that are just pulling the latest version by default (in our case it was the Vagrant ansible_local provisioner...)
It's a fair bet that AIR will be supported until Ruffle gets fleshed out (Harman is taking it over).

(AIR isn't an interesting solution for a big chunk of apps, but there's lots where moving out of the browser is fine)
"See the 'Bernie Bros' who flipped into full Trumpists ..."

There really aren't very many of those people.
Gutenberg sucks donkey dick. Matt should remove it asap before people switch in masses to another cms. Last I checked reviews are still sucking.
https://wordpress.org/plugins/gutenberg/#reviews
Then it’s not (edit: pure) TDD.

The TDD purists I’m familiar with think if you write any code before you write the tests, you’re doing it wrong.
>2. Managers like to be able to watch their direct reports because it makes them feel more in control than they are

Manager here. Initially, I had trouble with my inability to do this. Now that I've come to grips that I have NO idea if my team is actually at their computer, I now judge them based on if they actually get work done (vs are they "busy"). It has been a good shift, but not easy.
And I find a whiteboard a bit more intimidating. It kind of implies performing your writings in public.

A notebook is a very personal thing. =)
I believe this is part of a disingenuous attempt to link crypto currencies with crime.

Crypto currencies are undoubtedly used for money laundering and hiding. Dollars are undoubtedly used for money laundering and hiding. Euros and gold and car washes are all undoubtedly used for money laundering.

The question is, does the fact that an asset is used in money laundering mean it should be outlawed. I think the answer is fairly transparently no. But this is seen as the easiest rhetorical tool in the event that someone is already looking for basis to argue for banning crypto currency. Think of the children! And Terrorism!

Imagine a new country came into existence except it held no physical land, it produced no physical goods, it built no physical infrastructure, it paid no welfare, it's just an internet country. Well this country's currency is just as usable for money laundering as every other currency assuming it freely floats but because it has no structural economy behind it, money laundering makes up a disproportionate portion of it's total use. Does that mean it was invented just to launder money?

The point is: of course a new internet currency is mostly used for money laundering. That's one easy thing to do with an internet currency and the other use cases are still developing.

In the end it doesn't matter though, I believe the ability of governments to censor cryptocurrencies is drastically less than they project.

They can turn off the on ramps but they also know that could cause a rush on those assets that they could never reverse. And as the drug war taught us, throwing endless resources at preventing the sale of a commodity for currency on black markets works much better in principle than it does in reality.And in a world of floating converting convertible currencies, if they don't all coordinate a ban at once in an effective manner it's going to fail spectacularly, because there's always another currency on ramp that's just a money transfer away.
He didn’t say European police were more violent (in general). He said they are more violent during interrogations.
Let's not forget this is the government. You can't simply just build stuff. There are many levels of red tape. Software has to be approved, etc. It's far easier to stay with the status quo and use what's already been approved then try to convince management there are simpler, more secure ways of building sites.
It's a matter of balance. No simple rule of thumb exists.

Sometimes it results in a much better solution, great! Sometimes it's a new wheel but with more awkward square-ish corners. Sometimes (and this is the worst because it's hard to explain) it is actually better but still likely has been a waste of the engineer's time - high cost vs low benefit, also often cooccurs with lack of team's capacity to maintain the new thing.
Well said. And furthermore: Any quantum mechanical system (i.e. all systems) is ultimately just a vibrational pattern, so trying to assign persistent identities to "things" is impossible because it's like trying to label the peaks and troughs in some standing wave oscillating on some medium. The wave is a pattern only, and the peaks/troughs are merely emergent phenomena with no actual identities, that have a history or a future, other than at the exact time of some observation.

My favorite philosophical thought experiment to ask people is: "Do football stadium waves actually exist or is it merely people in two states (standing/sitting)?" The answer to that question is a superposition of both Yes and No. lol. It sounds like a silly question, but it actually gets to the heart of the deepest philosophical questions Physics.
That creates a good business model for someone to come along and charge a premium to fix security bugs in old code. I think it’s more likely something like that will happen, than everyone moving their code to work on 3.x.
I think this whole thread is an example of The Weak Man argument in action, it’s neat to see it in real life just after it was posted on HN.
Their track record's suggests these incentives are not sufficient to stop them from laundering money.
I agree. Dalio’s mission is to make more money for Bridgewater. Taking advice from an interested party whose interests you don’t understand is never a good idea.

I would want to understand how influencing thinking on the topic benefits Dalio. Then evaluate in that context.
I miss standup meetings where people actually stand. My experience has been:

Physical standup meetings that have exceeded 25 minutes: 00%.

Virtual "standup" meetings that have exceeded 25 minutes: 60-70%.
Post COVID WFH and flexible in office work weeks are the norm now at least in the Bay Area. I'm sure being in person is 10x more productive for some fields but software engineering is not one of them. If it were we wouldn't have had a year of tech companies performing exceptionally well.
If you are talking about shit coins sure. There is no shortage of liquidity in major crypto markets.
New Covid Vaccines Need Absurd Amounts of Material and Labor
> My notebook is full of unorganised notes that I jotted down when a lightbulb came to me one day, rough sketches or mappings of solution ideas, brainstormed lists of features etc.

This is to me the biggest benefit of using pen and paper, but it requires shifting your attitude towards pen and paper to treat everything you write as disposable. Just freely sketching out ideas and using paper as a place to dump thoughts without concern for quality, formatting, or even having them be cohetent, is probably the most productive way for me to solve problems - so much so that I have switched to using large post-it notes, rather than a notebook. The good notes stick around for a few weeks, and the bad ones go straight into the bin.
I found some here https://www.inwap.com/pdp10/emulators/

> This is the 5,376th access to this page.

Hope we don't hug it too hard
You didn't address the very basic issue: Why can't your team(s) have proper meetings? People coming on time, or at least not waiting for people to come on time? Why can't they maintain the discipline of not ratholing and going off into technical issues?

As I'm not necessarily in favor of standups, nor has anyone responding to you claimed to be, you're simply blowing hot air complaining about the purpose behind standups as opposed to addressing the comments they are making.

Not respecting people's time (frequently late for a meeting, meeting organizers making the on-time people wait for the off-time ones, etc), not being able to communicate well (cannot summarize, or meanders to off topic stuff) are all qualities of poor workers and poor teams. Such behavior is quite common, in my experience, but these are legitimate reasons not to work with them. Once you hit some minimal level of technical ability, the other skills matter at least as much in a team environment.

There are plenty of pointless rituals most people have to do in their life and work. Amongst those things, being able to handle a simple 15 minute meeting a day is one of the easiest. When people have trouble with it, it's a sign of a behavioral problem. Either some team members do not have the minimum bar of discipline/communication, or they are intentionally acting this way as some sort of civil disobedience against scrum. There are usually appropriate ways to make change - in most cases such behavior is just a sign of immaturity. Of course, there is such a thing as poor management, and sometimes such behavior is the only realistic way. But then again - it's still a good turn off for me not to work there.

As I said in another comment: Following scrum does a good job of exposing problems. And everything you describe sounds like problems in the team or the management.
I'd like to throw a thought out there: It is a problem if the government uses algorithms or ML systems that are secret and/or cannot be independently vetted by the citizenry.

Judges cannot just sign off on warrants and sentencing just because "the computer says so", for all we know the computer may be programmed to say "poor and non-comformist = guilty" or some other nonsense, and/or reprogrammed after every election. We need to be able to trust this stuff.
Stick with languages, tools, and techniques that respect the math theory. Category theory, type theory, set theory, relational algebra, 1st order predicate calculus, 2nd order predicate calculus.

The OP has intuitively gravitated to this side.

Theory isn't going to have an answer to every question, just don't willfully oppose it. Everything else (best practices, fads, etc.) is a convention at best, sometimes useful, but should never be regarded as having special significance.

And in this regard, don't micro-services fly in the face of Occam's Razor? Or as the OP stated

Monoliths are pretty good in most circumstances
There's nothing about this that's cool! Not even close.
get yourself some clams :)

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124403-500-clam-up-...
So I don't normally setup WP sites, but I have as a favour. A caching plugin just generates the HTML files and you configure NGinX / Apache to the appropriate directory. Historically I think most did it via .htaccess w/ Apache for shared hosts, but I've only configured it w/ NGinX. E.g. https://www.nginx.com/blog/9-tips-for-improving-wordpress-pe...

I think a lot of third-party hosts provide this out of the box, maybe even using their own CDN. WP is so popular that it's be difficult not to find a service that handled it all for you so long as you have room in the budget.
I think it’s slightly more meaningful, because not all dreams can be achieved. If software isn’t getting ported from Python 2 to Python 3, it almost certainly isn’t because it’s too hard to do.
> and you can't get a degree for working on rewriting code.

Which is sad, really, because we really could use more people who can do that. In fact, I really wish that every CS program had a requirement to take an existing code base and do material work on it; it's not like anybody's going to graduate from school and then get hired to do greenfield development, so it'd be kind of nice if they were actually trained for the things that they're going to do in practice.
This is awesome in terms of avoiding all of the weird things when a person typed pip rather than pip3 and module didn't seem to get installed anywhere. That said, watching perl trying to kill perl5 with perl6 (unsuccessful) and python trying to kill python 2 with python 3 (more successful) it struck me how ridiculous it is that open source languages have to put up with this. Clearly "major" numbers are insufficient, the only real answer is to rename the entire freaking language when you make incompatible changes to it.
There's another reason for using containers or pretested distributions. I just wrote an article for LWN about SciPy¹. To get what was supposed to be a clean install of the newest release, I created a virtual environment and used Pip to install the SciPy components. It was broken out of the box. IPython did not work because a module that it depends on, that does tab completion, had been recently upgraded and was incompatible with it. I mean it crashed frequently, not just that it didn’t do tab completion. To get a working system, I had to install an older version of the library. So people seek solutions that avoid the dependency hell that comes from maintainers releasing things at will, with nobody testing the combination of things that they nevertheless market as “SciPy”, which is supposed to be a bunch of stuff that works together. And whenever I install anything from the Python world, I am amazed when it actually works without the need to spend hours with Google or staring at sources trying to resolve conflicts. One of the many nice things about Julia is that their package system works.

So yes, once you manage to put together a working installation, you naturally want to encase that precious thing in the bubble of some kind of container, to protect it from an upgrade of some piece that will break everything. If you work with a lot of Python things, you may have a dozen copies of the same libraries, and a handful of Python binaries, taking up space on your drive. The concept of dynamic linking was supposed to save us from this. But the haphazard habits endemic to the Python community seem to have left us with the worst of all possible worlds.

[1] https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/842964/f7e2e5006c5efe36/
I doubt it.

Maybe those that haven’t been remote never saw this side of businesses, but as someone that will only work remotely, the options pre-Covid were exceedingly thin.

Almost no public companies allowed 100% remote work. Almost none. Honestly I can’t even name a single company that did, but I’m sure there is at least one right?

Also, it should be noted that when I say remote I mean they allow anyone, literally anyone that works at the company to work from Home. Not some one off anomaly for high performers (which I know companies like Google or Microsoft have allowed under certain circumstances).

Why companies have, and I think will continue to be , anti-remote and anti-worker is because of nepotism, elitism, and an over reliance on physical queues for communication.

It’s similar to how Silicon Valley is becoming Wall Street, with pay (often in clout) to play apps (ex: Clubhouse, which feels more like Harvard than an early social network - it’s also painfully uncool) and how they mirror closed minded and closed off business operations — these businesses and their yuppy middle managers rely on a physical presence to coerce employees into drinking the kool aid.

My hope is that employees start to reject these practices and instead force employers to accept remote work, but I’m doubtful since the leverage is mostly in the hands of business - think of the power FAANG companies have. Once they go back to forced commute work, everyone else will see it as an opportunity to do the same.
If you don't have a pipeline to update those static binaries, you're just giving yourself a different form of headache 5 years from now when you need to apply bug fix.
I'm not sure the numbers agree with you. Check out this recent survey: https://www.livecareer.com/resources/careers/planning/is-rem...

In particular, scroll 3/4ths of the way down to the "Remote Work Prospects and Employees' Expectations" section. 61% of now-remote workers say they want to stay remote. 29% say they'll quit their jobs it they're forced to go back. And few want to go back 5 days per week.

A year ago, I would have agreed with your analysis. Few would have chosen to go remote. But now inertia works the other way. After a year or more of not commuting, what's normal is staying home. Managers have gotten used to managing remotely. To switch back, managers will have to get 100% of a team to return to the office, which is going to be very challenging. People will quit. People will have specific needs where a manager will have a hard time saying no. And if one person on a team is remote, it'll be very hard to hold the line at one.

I think people will solve the rest of it on their own. Some will renovate or move, setting up better for working from home. There will be a rise in third places like cafes and coworking spaces, so people can leave the house but not have to do a full commute.

So my guess is that we'll see a permanent spread. Remote working will continue to be much more popular than before the pandemic. Many companies, including major ones, will drop the expected days/week in the office below 5. Those who go down to 1-2 will downsize office space, shift to desk hoteling, and treat offices more as places for meetings than work. Some companies will try to return to the old paradigm, but many workers will complain bitterly, and they'll have ongoing trouble with recruiting and retention.
I'm curious how that happened? Does `python2 -m pip install -U pip` result in a broken install?
It’s pretty easy to find the 20%. You look at the neighborhoods with new construction in suburban areas for 35-45 year olds with kids. Or the urban neighborhoods with new property and 25-40 DINKs or same sex couples. That’s the cohort that’s prospering.

Problem is the wealth is mostly house. Once you hit the groove, house value keeps you going. Those folks get derailed by layoffs at the wrong time or divorce.
Actually an ad for the composer TBD.
Show HN: Full text search Project Gutenberg (60m paragraphs)
Because work is a huge part of my life? At the end of the day, I choose the job that's best for me, not the other way around.