skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's exactly right Indymike. Business should be vision and mission lead. If people have an understanding of the CHANGE they want to capture in the world (either by creating it or taking advantages of it), a good leadership will know when to pull on the levers inside the company of the business at the right time to complete a mission on a step towards the vision. Sometimes that's leaning into sales, sometimes it's leaning into product, sometimes it's leaning into technology, sometimes it's playing them all together. Business is more art than science, and the startup trope should be "I'm going to capitalize on change" not "I'm going to change the world".
I still get ads about leather wallets from when I was searching for one like 10 years ago.
Dont start with JWT. It’s better to start with a traditional system and move to more complex/novel solution as the system grows.
> It also kind of cemented for me that weird edge cases don't actually matter in practice

Just look at the linux kernel. The tremendous amount of complexity and code need to support all the weird edge cases of hardware that does pretty much the same thing is mind boggling.

If you can ignore the edge cases yeah they don't matter, but as a language implementer these things matter. For the user, they are always present, when by mistake or by choice they are used, then they will matter.

So yeah, weird edge cases matter a lot! In fact trying to minimize them is very important to keep the complexity of systems down.
One of the most cruel things evolution did to us is that we constantly seek meaning, order, correctness, where there are none to speak of.
> The article itself says the experiment was designed to look for evidence of emotional contagion, which is quite different from "it was designed to make people sad".

That was their research goal, yes. Their methodology was this:

> For some, that meant 90% of all "positive" posts were removed from their newsfeed for a week, rendering the social network a pit of despair.

Research can be unethical even if the intention of the research is not.

For the traffic analogy, if part of that traffic experiment would involve a routing change that researchers know will likely cause a traffic jam, then the experiment will be unethical, no matter how warranted the research may be.

That's the reason you cannot use placebos to test life-saving medication (without prior informed consent), even though it would certainly be beneficial for science if you could.

And in Facebook's case, their research goal wasn't even that ethical in the first place. Maye we can have this talk if they try to find a cure for depression through emotional manipulation, but this was literally just about preventing people from leaving Facebook:

> "At the same time, we were concerned that exposure to friends' negativity might lead people to avoid visiting Facebook."
The landing page claims that it doesn't, but their own site has this message:

> Hey! We use cookies to track you through our website and use this data to optimize your experience! Thanks!

So apparently, their own software isn't good enough to optimize their own site. At least, not without cookies.
> This post says Sid Meier didn't take part in Magic: The Gathering (1997) but Wikipedia lists him as the game designer.

That particular claim seems to require a citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic:_The_Gathering_(1997_vid...

Looks like this was the revision that added it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magic:_The_Gather...
Are they high compared to other cars in the same price range and similar cost to repair? Remember: insurance rates aren't just based on how often cars get into accidents; those that cost more to repair after an accident will have higher rates, too.
I mean both really, and to be sure I'm no expert in it's use.

It got me to thinking about all the visual gingerbread on websites and to some extent on applications. From just a cursory look at this world, it would be interesting to design an audio-only interface to a computer rather than one that reads a display to you.

That would be a wonderful hobby project, some sort of displayless Linux with a mic and a speaker that does useful standalone things.

One thing it did occur to me to look into are (for instance) Alexa skills. That would be a natural way to provide access to a number of necessary abilities (like paying the power bill) and in many cases could work simply like traditional voice access via a phone. I see that this exists to some extent already.
It's been tricky. I've worked in a number of software development roles now, and (like many engineers, I expect) I really enjoy solving technical problems, and find it difficult to push back on social pressure.

Recently I've begun time tracking at work. That's not something I've done much in the past - and it's been challenging to adjust to the idea of it.

Two foreseeable positives of that are:

- It'll be possible to look back on time spent, and reflect and learn about projects, activities, and perhaps distractions

- It'll be easier to close the laptop screen at the end of the day (assuming there are no pressing/ongoing issues to deal with) knowing that the day's work hours are done
> Based on the results of this experiment we developed a 3-step model of how names are constructed: (1) selecting the concepts to include in the name, (2) choosing the words to represent each concept, and (3) creating a name from these words.

This seems flawed, when I look to name something, one of the most key things is what other things are named in that context, and patterns and consistency between them.

It appears the study described a problem, instead of putting them in preexisting code?
Context? Explain?
Make it a game about being a guardian angel.

Set objectives for the people, a few non intrusive tools (moving cats around, blowing wind, changing light traffic), and as the angel, the player must influence the world so that objectives are reached.
That is specifically not what the claim is, though it’s phrased so as to encourage that mis-interpretation.
All of your arguments assume that all parties are in good standing of well-functioning governments with well-functioning financial systems that all get along. But, then politics, corruption, bad monetary policy, bureaucracy, etc get involved and sometimes things aren’t as simple for people who aren’t middle class Americans.

Bitcoin is basically a giant IOU distributed throughout the world without the involvement of any country or company. The tiniest bits of that trillion dollar IOU can be transferred and traded between the lowliest individuals around the world without restriction, without involvement from any bank, without interference from any government. A homeless man in LA can perform international trade with a programmer in Russia and an artist in Cuba completely by themselves without requiring the blessings or assistance of Citibank, Western Union, Biden, Putin and Díaz-Canel. And, with smart contracts, this extends out from payments to loans, collateral, corporations and all kinds of financial instruments. All without borders or lawyers. Basically any rules you can imagine based on money, time and signalling consent.

It’s turning out that Bitcoin and Ethereum aren’t great on their own for buying lattes. But, they are turning out great as a foundational layer for a whole new financial system. Rather than basing a macro-scale credit system on the federal reserve or stock/real estate derivatives, we can now use tiny or huge chunks of BTC and ETH as collateral, as a loan basis, as a settlement layer, etc and build up from there.
It doesn’t. Read the tweet, specifically the image. He’s comparing Autopilot enabled to all car crashes.
Selenium uses WebDriver and Playwrite looks to be the unofficial next generation of Puppet. Last I heard there are plans for a WebDriver 2 based on Puppet. So perhaps Playwright will positively influence that effort and someday Selenium too.
It honestly sounds like he was on a meme-making streak, and thought he'd throw one joke in there for people who understand that his statement means nothing
Yes, see https://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/... and https://signalvnoise.com/archives2/beautiful_code_testfirst....

I don't have good memories from the whole thing.
Proper caching makes any problem 10x as hard.
Depends how intense those 3-4 hour workouts are. I think a lot of the difference in peoples estimate of how much they can exercise without steroids is down to differences in how people train.

E.g. you're not going to manage 3-4 hours of heavy compound lifts a day done in quick succession, sure. At least not without lowering the weights so much it becomes more cardio than resistance training.

Even 1 hour a day is overdoing it for powerlifting type training. At my strongest I was doing 45m every other day. I could probably have done more, but I got my best gains when I eased up and let my body recover properly.

But if you're doing bodybuilding, and a lot of that time are not the big lifts but adding in lots of isolated lifts of various small muscle groups, and sufficiently low intensity cardio takes up a good chunk of the time as well, sure you can easily spend 3-4 hours a day without drugs.

That said, a lot of people clearly claim to be natural while they're not.
6 year Tesla owner here (Model S then Model X which is my current primary car). It is extremely rare for me to drive without AutoPilot; parking lots are pretty much my only AP-free zones. I suspect this is true of most Tesla owners; it certainly is true of the ones I talk to (friends and coworkers). From watching Autopilot, it seems to me that FSD is a long way away. HOWEVER, Autopilot is way more attentive than a human. It is not distracted by changing the radio station or AC, kids in the back seat yelling, or eating on the go. The 10x number is not surprising to me and seems plausible simply because Autopilot helps address deficiencies in humans.
I have said decades ago, what goes out there will no longer be human, one way or the other.

Much more opportunities and less risk for robotic AI out there.

Lagrange point stations may be feasable again.

They were a thing in the '70s.

Less hassle with those pesky biological necessities.

Of course still problems with radiation, but much thinner shielding needed.

And thinner Umbilical/Lifeline to Mutha Oith.

Low Life Need Not Apply.

Of course much less romance.
But who cares, it's business anyway.
Brilliant if you are selling the ads.
(but also steroids and growth hormone)
Have you tried running on CBD?
I've been doing similar but with much more advanced bash script since about 2010 :-) I haven't used Google Analytics, after I learned how they use this data. I just never even thought about sharing this, because I thought no one would care. But I find like minded people on HN all the time ^_^ It's much cooler if you use this as a live script to watch for traffic. You can filter out only the pages you want to see for example. If there is any interest, I can share my scripts ;-)
I don't think vscode needs any additional promotion.
The point, whatever it is, seems to result in a considerable improvement, counted as 10× by the report in question.

I didn't read the actual report. Are the changes even across types of accident? Specifically, does it count and report a 90% reduction in the number of pedestrians and bicyclist run over?
Using email to review patches is completely absurd. The following is a contentious statement but there's no avoiding it: it's done nowadays by people who started doing it in the 80s and 90s and are being stubborn.
Here are some reasons email should not be used for review, if any are really needed:

- A "patch" must have a defined parent. Otherwise it is not defined what state of the overall codebase is being reviewed.

- Proposed changes evolve through complex lifecycles of comments/discussions and updates. Some comments are global and some should be attached to specific lines of code as it exists in a specific revision. This complexity is (obviously!) better modeled by a dedicated UI than by shoe-horning it into plain text email.

- It makes sense to attach the dynamic status of test runs to these updates. This can be done in a web UI but cannot be done in an email.

- Commenting on individual lines of code is desirable and (obviously!) better done by attaching a discussion thread to a defined (revision + code coordinates) location in a diff view than by replying inline in an email. The reasons (if they really need stating) include (1) that breaking a diff manually in an email and replying inline makes it hard to assemble the diff in your head, (2) it is not possible to have clearly readable discussion threads involving multiple people with each thread attached to a certain line in the diff, (3) it's certainly not possible to keep that discussion coherent when the underlying patch is evolving.

- Not everyone uses, or wishes to use, plain text emails.

- Not everyone uses or wishes to use a text-based email client that runs on their local machine. Nor do they have, or wish to have, their emails present on their local machine (they want their emails stored online and accessed via a web interface).

(And yes, I am someone who has used mutt, and gnus, and dovecot, and offlineimap.)

- The history/evolution of a codebase can be represented by a graph structure. It makes sense for review discussion to be associated with this graph structure. This is what Bitbucket/Github/Gitlab provide. Email does not provide this. There's a risk with email that it won't even be publicly searchable, but supposing it exists, a web-hosted archive of emails is not an effective way to comprehend the history of a codebase.

As a cultural observation, the people who are still insisting on email are often the sorts of people who insist that email should be plain text and actually look down upon technical people who like web-hosted email clients and HTML emails, and they are sometimes the sorts of people who deride Github as being nonserious -- full of "kids" who carelessly propose ill-thought out change sets and expect them to be incorporated into public projects. Neither of those positions are reasonable or speak highly of the holder.
Deliver bug-free products using slack
That’s not at all what it means. Tesla is comparing scenarios where autopilot actually works (the easy, low crash rate scenarios like highway driving) to driving everywhere (including high crash rate scenarios where autopilot specifically does not work) and saying “look how much safer it is!”. This is what we call bullshit statistics.

Comparing a luxury vehicle with ADAS features to the general NHTSA crash rates for all vehicles is also bullshit.
That article does not make it clear if there was actually no human in the driver's seat. It says two men died, and it says there was a person in the front passenger seat and a person in the back seat. That implies, by omission, that there was no person in the driver's seat. Was there a third person who did not die, a person sitting in the driver's seat?

Obviously if there was no human in the driver's seat, these guys were "looking for trouble". And failing to negotiate a curve at an excessively high speed isn't something the autopilot should be expected to deal with (unless it has precise location data and precise map data which informs the reasonable limits of performance... but I don't think it has these).

It's absurd if people want to blame Tesla for this.
Americans commenting here have their own bias.
What do you mean by "That entity isn't the contract"?

Yes, the enforcer is not (necessarily) part of the contract. But if the right incentive system is in place and there is consensus that physical enforcement should happen - anyone approved could take that job/risk and be the enforcer.

With such a system you may not even need a physical enforcer since the risk of not getting the tenant out could be tradeable (like an insurance) and the owner would get his rent even if the tenant cannot be evicted immediately. In case of the tenant, there would be huge negative financial incentives to stay.
Absolutely, that’s why everyone is chasing the elusive “baby body“
I'd argue that the ability to unite people by assigning meaning onto things, places, and ideas is the single reason why humans have been so successful in advancing civilization to where it is today.

Edit: eschew -> assign
This is oversimplifying probably. The JVM can make your non-optimized code faster than your non-optimized c++ code.
Governments often pay more for multi-sourcing things. It’s just safer from an overall risk mitigation scenario.
These two examples do feel like strawmen, and are somewhat simplified. For example, "product-led" in this example lumps together PMs, designers and developers into a single group, whereas in fact there is conflict inherent in features vs user experience vs technical debt/constraints. Moreover even a sales-driven company is not going to promise a unique feature for every customer, unless they want to run out of money quickly or they are in the enterprise customer market with a small number of clients.
It'd be awesome if github and gitlab started offering these kinds of metrics for their free static hosting.
We are all still living in 2021. This man is living in 3000
"Zero cost abstractions" is just fancy-speak for "exploiting optimization passes" to convert dumb code generated by a template- or macro-system into machine code that would be generated from "less dumb code".

You get the same "zero cost abstraction" effect in lower-level languages like C (but you need to feed it "dumb code" to see a similar effect). Nobody talks about "zero cost abstractions" in the context of C programming because C doesn't encourage to "obfuscate" source code with high level abstractions.

Not sure if optimizer passes are the main reason for Rust being slow though, I'd guess it's more the static code analysis, e.g. a C/C++ compiler with static code analysis enabled is also many times slower than regular compilation (but Rust should have an advantage there, because Rust doesn't allow as much freedom as "less correct" languages, so the static analysis can be more focused).
Data Engineer – The Chef
Despite what Elon would have you think Tesla doesn't have autonomous cars. The article points out Tesla only logged 12 autonomous miles during the reporting period.

"Autopilot" and "Full Self Driving mode" are just dangerous marketing gimmicks that give people a false sense of what they actually do.
It doesn’t mean that - Musk is blatantly doing the incorrect comparison you mention.
The tweet also mentions safety features other than autopilot. Having active safety features like pre-collision breaking or passive ones like 360 degree camera and sensors help a lot.
Lists can be used for things other than terrorists
He explained the point. Just because the system can't drive me to work while I get an extra hour of sleep doesn't mean it can't prevent a car crash while I'm trying to find the right Steve to call in my contacts list.

The car is dumb, but always on. Humans are smart (well, relatively) but easily distracted. Both sides compliment the other.
Blitz - (https://blitzjs.com/)

Blitz is built on top of Next.js and gives you postgres for free, in addition to auto-generating CRUD routes on schema changes. It's trying to be like Rails.

I've used Next.js with firebase for multiple prototypes.
If the world wasn't completely crazy, making statements like this repeatedly would lower Elon's credibility, not raise it.
> have stood in the market for 10 years straight

At which point, Bitcoin proponents will up the requirements again. This is an excuse people use to avoid talking about the fact that Bitcoin has spent the last 2-3 years consistently proving that it doesn't scale and that it is unusable as a currency.

> had what some call an "immaculate conception"

Or, it was a good first try that needs iteration now that we understand that hyper-deflation is a bad thing for a currency, now that we understand that pseudononymous addresses don't provide any real privacy guarantees at all, and now that we understand that transaction speed and cost has to be something that's optimized for early on in a coin's life and that those issues can't be fixed by pasting an ad-hoc, unproven non-blockchain solution on top of the coin 10 years later.

The weird, religious loyalty people have to reinterpreting Bitcoin's flaws as strengths is setting the entire crypto ecosystem back. If you want to appeal to 'stability', then banks have been around for centuries. But if you're trying to build something new, you're going to have occasionally innovate and iterate on the thing you're building.
The beginning of the article is pretty on point. Most PM dream about working in a pure product-led company and spend their time complaining that it is not how things should be done. Which is a big misunderstanding of the PM job, I've written before how to navigate the PM in role in Saas enterprise (very likely sales driven) [1]

Actually if you search the web for PM resources you will mostly find insights on how to run in a product-led environment. Which is funny because most of companies are not operating that way. It is even more funny because it is easier to fail a product-led company than a sales driven one

The rest of the article is bullshit to enroll people for his workshops. There is no better gurus than ones who invent terms who don't exist and then spend their time explaining how genius it is. A market-focused seems to be the kind of companies that someone who has never run a company would imagine. Wins on all markets, but also on the product and the sales. And we all know that this is impossible

[1] https://blog.luap.info/product-management-in-saas-b2b-enterp...
> .. batteries kept reigniting. At one point, Herman said, deputies had to call Tesla to ask them how to put out the fire in the battery

FWIW this was what happened when there was a Tesla accident in my area. But for sure, these are only anecdotes. We have to compare the data with how often non-Tesla cars burn
> However, the older employees warned me that the criteria for such bonuses were often ill-defined. I therefore pushed for clear achievable objectives. These pre-agreed objectives were promised, but never provided.

He asked for clear conditions and management agreed to provide them, but never did. They were playing him. The comments from the older employees suggest this wasn't the first time they used this tactic.
Even better: flush your smartphone down the toilet.

I mean, if you have to try and double-guess your phone to make sure it's not spying on you the game is lost. I don't even know what game that is. But it's lost.
I used to think this, but people who just bought a dishwasher are probably somewhat likely to buy another dishwasher, even the same dishwasher, and there only needs to be a tiny fraction of a single percentage chance for it to be worth showing an ad impression.
From the context, "Sales Development Manager".
five... naming, sorting, of by one concurrency errors and.
Speaking of these devices, software is just virtual hardware, hardware is just statically fixed software. It’s all just patterns of logic gates configured to operate other cartridges of capability.

Conjuring up some arbitrary boundary constrains device maker innovation, reliability, security, and other consumer value.

You are free to pick your own water line, find a device that draws the line there, and vote with your wallet — or make and market your own thesis.
The fact that we have laws preventing assisted suicide is beyond me.

My wife has a condition where she will be wishing to commit suicide someday. Our country (France) law makes it near impossible. Then we have Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands nearby where this will be possible.

Net effect? People like us who have the knowledge and money means will get suicide. Others will not, making their family or community life even more difficult.

This was exactly the case with abortion in France until the 70's (and Mrs Veil who was one of the not do many politicians in the last 100 years who was great). I guess we will be always late with history.