skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I strongly disagree with the OS remark, a device is nothing when not operating, device and operations should be free to be designed built and sold together for best customer experience and safety with no regulatory waterline falsely limiting progress by discriminating between behaviors/logic implemented in memory, firmware, or silicon.

First sale means I’m free to break my device, fine, but cannot mean it must be left more breakable.
Android phones are approx. 2.5x more than Apple phones worldwide

Also Play store has 1.5x more apps.

So almost 8x difference for developers. (per person)
I've had my fair share of X11 builds at different work places.

The typical use case is when you have to work on some Linux dev box which does not have any (or a somewhat recent) X11 and the distribution is either too old to get one, or simply you're not root.

In these cases, the simplest (though annoying) solution is to rebuild X11 and a wm from source on the box as user.

Given OP mentioned he was doing his studies, I guess he was required to work on some old boxes and wanted a decent modern environment.
storing secrets in environment variables

This is exactly how a lot of frameworks tell you to provide secrets, and it's also how at least some cluster management tools pass secrets into apps as well. It always seemed strange to me that the environment was considered "secure".
Although the earliest A1000s didn't include EHB mode
Slavery as class struggle seems a popular method of argumentation, but it's hard to pin down that logic when any discussion of it generates anger instead of explanation.
You’re not counting dividends here.
Lambda used to charge by chunks of 100ms. When they switched to charging by the millisecond, without otherwise changing the pricing, that was a universal price drop.

More granularity tends to mean cheaper for you. Your lawyer doesn't charge you by the second because charging in chunks of 6 (or 15) minutes is more profitable for them.

If you're a very small player you're unlikely to care about the savings in question because they'll be single-digit, if that. But I'd argue that using AWS if you're a very small player -- and don't have plans to expand -- is a poor idea. Digital Ocean, Heroku etc are far more adapted to those use cases.

AWS is a poor choice at tinyscale because of how flexible it is. It's a bring-your-own-everything service. You have to set up policies in order for AWS's own services to access each other and features offered in the web UI to work properly. Their billing systems make a ton of sense for the companies that spend millions of dollars.

You would not be happy doing your grocery shopping at the warehouse that provides your local shop; and yet it would probably be cheaper overall as you'd be cutting the middleman. Of course you'd run into a lot of other issues. AWS is not stopping you from using it but still. There's a reason their most successful sales program is one that can afford dumping $100k on startups: "It's not for you."

(Disclaimer: There's a fuckton of awful, actual billing issues with AWS that obscure the bill for no good reason. Most small players complaining are not talking about those, aside maybe from the egregious bandwidth pricing.)
No one is demanding equal amounts of criticism and praise. The argument in the article is that several valid and noteworthy criticisms of Obama are simply missing. It's hard to see it other than as a whitewash.
Less crazy when you learn why:
"There are no public policies in France that target benefits or confer recognition on groups defined as races. For many Frenchmen, the very term race sends a shiver running down their spines, since it tends to recall the atrocities of Nazi Germany and the complicity of France’s Vichy regime in deporting Jews to concentration camps. Race is such a taboo term that a 1978 law specifically banned the collection and computerized storage of race-based data without the express consent of the interviewees or a waiver by a state committee. France therefore collects no census or other data on the race (or ethnicity) of its citizens."[0]

tl;dr: such data was used during the Nazi occupation and France helped deportation

[0]: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/race-policy-in-france/
Scott Alexander is condemning woke culture in the essay you quote but the specific reason woke culture cycles through words is the euphemism treadmill.
There is a small per object/month charge for Intelligent Tiering. The 30 day minimum, even for objects in the Frequent Access Tier, can also drown you in prorated charges if applied to a high churn prefix.
Do you eschew mastery of skills, of topics? Does it make your fingers itch? Fooooooor fuuuuuuuuucks saaaaaaaaake! This is the lamest generation.
> who is enforcing this

Let's not exaggerate, they just changed the default for new repos, everyone is free to continue naming their branches "master" or "stable" or "trunk" or whatever they want.
I read a few years ago that only about 0.01% of Android apps make enough money to cover development costs. It isn’t the end of the world if there were slightly less competition driving down peoples revenues
So I'm a european white guy and I know that Identity Politics covers topics which make it extremely hard to find a consesus, but here are my two cents. Please share your thoughts with me.

Tackling huge problems in society (and in general) takes time. It's good do discuss the direction society should move as whole, and act accordingly in the future. But it's also important to act _right now_ as best as we can to put the fire out.

Will adjusting our language get rid of social problems? No. Will it help getting rid of social problems: in the longterm, maybe? I don't know. But I know that it doesn't hurt you to act considerate towards other people. So why not just do it?

The thing is, it shouldn't stop there. Inclusive language is just a small step towards a more peaceful society. We'll need many of those.
I have never met anyone who does this. Have you?
Even older and studied investment a bit. I'd say most people don't think "stonks can only go up" but do think the markets are a random walk with an expected return of 7% or so pretty much regardless of when you buy. But that's not true - markets swing between expensive (say 25 PE) and cheap (say 7 PE) and they mean revert. As a result if you buy expensive your expected 10 year return is not much (say 0%) and if you buy cheap it's a lot (say 12%). Jeremy Grantham / GMO are good on that stuff.
The default is the right way to play it then, if you want EGA graphics.
Biden is socialist because your boss said so?
Yeah...What one person considers deep understanding about something, might seem to another the most basic, superficial knowledge. It's all relative. It's like:

Beauty is as relative as light and dark. Thus, there exists no beautiful woman, none at all, because you are never certain that a still far more beautiful woman will not appear and completely shame the supposed beauty of the first. - Paul Klee, diary, 1910

(And yet, there is light, dark, and beautiful women..)
>Being able to explain it in 5 minutes doesn't necessarily mean it's not complex.

I second this. Evolutionary biology is a complex topic. But all it took for me to understand the basics of it was the Carl Sagan video about the japanese crabs.
A lot of us have been an engineer on a team where the dev manager thought they were contributing but were actually taking all the interesting architectural problems for themselves and making all the decisions, which quickly becomes extremely demotivating since the opportunities to advance your own skills quickly dry up and you’re left just mindlessly cranking out code. The worst is when an abstraction is imposed on the team that doesn’t adequately cover the problem, so you have to spend twice as much time bending the code to make the dev manager happy instead of doing it the way you think is best.

Granted this is just one way that situation can go, I’m sure there’s plenty of effective dev managers who still write code regularly, just hasn’t been my experience.
I have the same categorical feeling of revulsion seeing this kind of pseudoscience today as I did when I first saw it a year ago. This is basically corporate astrology. It's unfalsifiable, patronizing, reductionist and amounts to unwarranted adversarial psychological aggression. If you ever used this in the corporate setting at any place I've ever worked at, you'd be laughed out of the room so fast it would make your head spin.

Stereotyping people into these jungian archetypes makes the error of presuming personality flaws and individual agency rather than load bearing organizational sociopolitical vectors, historical decisions and cruft that needs to be unwound, high level executive directives, and market conditions. That is to say, context, history, and structure; goals and incentives -- all this rather than theory which sounds good but is unfalsifiable (much like modern astrology).

It's borderline irresponsible and unethical to give these ideas the time of day, because they are intrinsically unfalsifiable and based on stereotypes. Constructively approaching any of the issues seen here requires concretely addressing reality -- how can you find evidence of previous challenges, how can you bring said person to understand those challenges, what are they interested in from their perspective (rather than what your stereotype presumes), and is there materially enough to work with to move forward with the working relationship in a constructive manner?

This kind of management consultant voodoo is a pox upon the industry. We should leave it in the past, where it belongs. You've got to ask yourself, what's your goal with these situations? Is it to be /right/? Or is it to /fix problems/? If you want to do the latter, you've got to connect with the other person, and get the solution to come from within /their head/. And frankly, drawing facile, degrading comparisons between them and barnyard animal stereotypes rooted in some blogger's desire to pathologically taxonomize isn't going to get you anywhere.

To end on a constructive note, I'm a fan of Camille Fournier's writing on management. I have found it to be very practically focused with a good blend of strategy as it pertains to the people side of things. If you're interested, read her blog [1] and her book [2]. There are also other classics like Moral Mazes [3] that I've seen come highly recommended from my network but haven't had the time to fully complete (and yet have liked so far). Start there rather than with this stuff.

[1] https://www.elidedbranches.com/

[2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369254-the-manager-s-p...

[3] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/279812.Moral_Mazes
This is almost 150 years of data. There were regimes with very different macroeconomic conditions (great depression, wars). However I do agree with you that there is a chance that we will see something even more exotic.
Google Chrome's Incognito Mode Isn't What You Think
My under $100 router didn’t work because it had too little ram and flash storage to work. It was a few years ago though so maybe the situation has changed. I’d be interested in seeing which routers under $100 are working well with OpenWRT.
this is actually the most useful thing to put in your prompt (much more than your username, the current directory and other redundant stuff), as in PS1='$?\$ '
Wait a second. In Germany we had work related immigrants (dominantly Turkish) in the 60s. The descendants (2/3/4 generation) of these immigrants are still classified as such (and share attributes about the black community in the US). I do not remember a proper title ... but that is just my brain right now.
I'm very interested in a compare between the two!! I'd known of Foam & was planning to at around with it's forming new extension api[1].

I like that foam stores history in git, & can write static html output, which the project uses to self-document.

It'd be sweet to hear from folks who've tried both how they found the experience. I'll try to become one of those folks myself, at some point.

[1] https://jevakallio.github.io/notes/foam-six-months-later
I imagine so for monorepos with plenty of developers working on it. But wouldn't that be solved easily with "git rebase -i <the_branch_that_change_the_name>" and maybe some other CI/CD pipeline.
9,999 in 10k Mobile Apps Will Fail
You prove you own the NFT the same way you prove to your bank that you have money: by letting the bank hold it for you. You deposit or lock the NFT into the service (essentially making it a staking contract). This associates the NFT with an account within the service's smart-contract (of the depositor's choice), which can then be mirrored by an oracle-process observing on the service's backend to become "a record in Valve's database." You then log into Steam as normal.

The difference from "just using Steam" is that, at any time, you can tell the Steam NFT-staking-contract to unlock your NFT and give it back to you. Their oracle will observe this and erase the equivalent "record in Valve's database." (Note how the order of operations flows smart-contract → database in both cases. This isn't an arcade machine, where you have to convince the machine you put your token into to spit it out before you can exchange it back for cash. Effectively, you're asking for your money back at the exchange counter, and it's the arcade's responsibility to then — asynchronously — extract your token from the machine.)

It's easier to make analogies if you don't think about non-fungible tokens (which don't have many real-world analogies besides deeds, and people aren't very familiar with the mechanics of deeds), but rather just with tokens generally.

Say you're at a grocery store. How do you reserve a shopping cart? You insert a token that you own into a slot on the cart, which unlocks the cart from the cart next to it in line. The cart then acts as a staking contract for that token. While it's holding the token, it unlocks permissions for you to do something with the cart itself — wheel it around the store. The cart doesn't need to exist within the same abstract financial system that the token exists in, but merely needs to have some mechanism sticking up into that system — a coin slot — which can observe a token being locked in, and then report that event to a physical backend.

Where the analogy breaks down, is that you have to take your cart back to the chained-up carts in order to get your token out. In equivalent staking-contract scenario, you'd instead withdraw the token, and that would cause the cart to return to being chained up to the rest of the carts. A→B lock, A→B unlock; rather than A→B lock, B→A unlock.

Also, with a physical shopping cart, it's merely social norms and a common-sense observation of the mechanism that suggest that a shopping cart won't "eat" your locked token (i.e. not give it back when you fulfill the unlock condition.) Smart-contracts, meanwhile, can constrain themselves by the interfaces they implement; and can be static-analyzed for their theoretically-possible range of behavior, with the results published by reliable third-parties. So you can actually guarantee whether Steam's smart-contract has any internal capability to "eat" your deposited token or not, without anyone ever having to learn that the hard way.
Physics can explain the fastball’s unexpected twist, new study finds (2018)
Is this the Israel study you're referring to?

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765

Just curious, as I've received the Pfizer/Biontech vaccine.
So if I promise to isolate myself if I get symptoms, and am not concerned about Covid, why should I get vaccinated?
Fighting for people's rights does not put an unnecessary burden on other people. Rosa Parks wanted to allow black people to ride anywhere on the bus, not make white people stand up and give them their places instead.
Teenage me and crew had a "stunt" car with hideously complicated controls. We had valves for the brakes on each wheel, multiple fluid tanks and pumps to spray them out front and rear nozzles, as well as into the exhaust systems.. oh yeah there were 3 (usually) ways for the exhaust to go, with a big clunky valve to control that sticking out of the floorboard too hot to touch. The electonics were even worse. We ran 2 or 3 batteries and 2 alternators. Many lights, radios, etc etc.

Fun project; and a great lesson in the value of simplicity in interfaces. No one could pilot that vehicle alone, really. Just driving it as a car without using any of the stunts was so fraught that only two of us would attempt it. It really did require two people for any safety. Someone had be available to deal with the inevitable leaks and such.

I got into a rented new car a few months ago, and had to take several minutes to figure out just the minimal "drive safely" set of controls... They were more complicated and there was more totally irrelevant crap than my savage teenage abandon had dreamed up. We have more buttons to punch, controls to frob, and state to manage now than the Ford Model T; and almost none of it has anything to do with the operation of the car.

If we're going to go nuts with controls, lets at least make them control real things, and design them to be useful. Chokes and trottle levers and spark gap timing adjustments FTW.
Isn't this exactly why your investment portfolio needs to change with age?

STONKS can only go up if you're 30 and don't plan to touch the money for 35 years, this is basically a fact(I'm just a SWE not a financial advisor).

If you're 55 and looking to retire in the next decade you normally shift a larger portion of your assets into more stable investments.
Coming from Mercurial which calls its default branch.. well "default" to Git which calls its default branch "master" was very jarring for me. So yeah, I definitly noticed
“but I wonder if erasing negative words might make us forget their meaning and repeat the history behind them.”

In response to an article about removing the word master
this is a good point. There's a lot of attempts at fixing issues through optics and performative acts to show understanding but these gestures can be sort of awkward or totally unnecessary while potentially hypocritical if it isn't coupled with material changes.
If you can't tell which of these labels applies to you, try asking your coworkers :)
I remember Gentoo linux being quite the rage in the early 2000's (at least in my office). Compiling everything and getting your system up and running was a badge of honor, I guess.
I'm also French (but living in the US).
How is that not selection bias if you only ask your friends which I presume you met through school or work?
These friends have already overcome the hurdles that minorities have to go through.
In my opinion, it's not about knowing all the core areas of CS — it's about being OK with the unfamiliar. It's about being confident that if someone hands you a problem outside your comfort zone, you'll be able to search for and find the answers necessary to solve the problem.

I'm a senior engineer, but have never taken a CS class, and have never been able to get past page 1 of any programming book. Possessing knowledge isn't what makes me successful at my job. There is simply far too much knowledge required in this job, and my memory is too sketchy, for me to learn and retain all of it. What makes me successful is that (a) I have a good grasp of how to break projects down into little manageable tasks, and (b) I'm really good at Googling.

For this reason, I do believe that anyone can do it, where the "it" that is being "done" is thinking things through and looking up information, not understanding the ins-and-outs of algorithms and data structures and electronics.

What you're describing is the reason impostor syndrome is so prevalent in the tech industry. Because programming is such a tremendously deep area of study, there will always be people who know things you don't, and this can make one feel inadequate. We're raised to think that being an expert is the same thing as knowing lots of things. In the development world, being an expert is more about being comfortable with what you don't know.
This is a great observation. At Amazon it's quite possible to become an L5 manager after being an SDE II for a while, but most of the people who do find it very challenging. They don't have the organizational clout to get things done because nobody respects a manager at that level and because more senior technical folks will steamroll over your technical opinion. To be a successful EM there you pretty much have to have made it to SDE III before switching over.
Instead of being rude and snarky, maybe you could highlight some IDE-only features that you find compelling?
was going to mine but you say not to.
Heritage Foundation: starting with Reagan and encouraging the right's obsession with smaller government, was a large advocate for us going into and staying in Iraq, and was a major influence on Trump - at least 66 foundation employees worked in the administration and advised Trump who should be in his administration, including advocating for Mick Mulvaney when other Republicans were pushing against him. After his loss, they hired three of Trump's immigration team. They have also promoted the voter fraud claims about 2016 and 2020 elections, saying that it was "rampant", and also are heavy deniers of climate change, the Clean Energy act and Kyoto Agreement.

AEI has been a little less controversial, although they've also leaned heavily on politicians about climate change, and their biggest funders are/were the Koch brothers. Notably, they were one of the earliest predictors of the 2008 housing crisis, though their focus (while not entirely incorrect) was about the causing effects of government banking, rather than private sector greed.

The Cato Institute is another organization founded and funded by one of the Kochs. The Cato Institute has lobbied hard for the deconstruction, outsourcing and privatization of the USPS (to recent great success), NASA, TSA. They have lobbied for the abolishment of minimum wage and in the absence thereof have fervently pushed for not increasing it (which hasn't happened since 2007 - legislation-wise, though the last increase went into effect in early 2009). It opposes overtime regulation and of all things, child labor prohibition (thankfully this hasn't gained much traction). It is one of the biggest opponents of universal health care, and of campaign finance reform.

In 2006 it helped Republicans propose a Balanced Budget Veto Amendment. It also strongly criticized the tobacco settlements.

Interestingly enough, the Cato Institute also supported striking down state laws against homosexuality, and the Federal Marriage Act (which would have prohibited same-sex marriage).
I suspect it is more that they think they figured out how to set the different paid tiers for this. I don't remember the details, but there seem to be more differentiating features for the tiers now than when they started it.
Feature request: A restart button.

If I change the configuration, I have to press one of the numbers or refresh the whole page to see the new scenario.

Also, it would be nice to have some comments in the code, for example before the spheres definition, say that it defines the initial state of the world.

Are they really spheres or just circles?
This is my sense as well. Much of change comes down to daily "inconvenience." In that way, Guggenheim's "An Inconvenient Truth" nailed this.

Attacks on "main" as being ineffectual or indications that "the real problem to solve is this over here so don't do this" doesn't diminish the value of iterative changes.

SCRUM focuses on learning by doing, and we may look back on main vs master as an experiment that had no effect. Or we may look back on branches with a master branch and feel differently about them. It is far too early to tell.
1 million or more Europeans were enslaved in Africa: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade
I almost thought I heard myself talking