skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I would say this is more a fundamental problem/feature of human relations than technology. Every transaction, every contract, every treaty and every law has, on its own, little more value than a receipt. Centralization doesn't really solve that issue so much as it pretends to add the weight of government/society/God/{abstract entity of choice} where there is none. What's remained the same since time immemorial is that every act of trade is done voluntarily or under force. What blockchains and bitcoin change is by making the receipts self-provable and consistent without needing more information than a public key and a time of transaction. It doesn't change the need to assert one's property rights. That is still the purview of law and law enforcement short of a breakthrough in jurisprudence.

Your point about the dollar is flawed. The value of the dollar may be a floating currency at its most ideal but its "true" value, outside of forex, is determined by fiat. The Fed just financially engineers it in a very complicated manner with veritable pulleys and levers and, somewhere along the way, a gun to everyone's private bank account in the form of artificial inflation/negative interest rates, punitive taxes, and from time to time, suing institutions that make US financial theater look bad by threat of dubious litigation.

>>If you have to rely on police and courts to enforce your smart contract, why do you need the decentralized smart contract to begin with?

If police departments have to rely on private citizens to be bounty hunters or informants, is there a point to having a police force at all? What's the point of a legal system that depends on executive enforcement when the citizenry is capable of doing so on its own? Why do we have to have a mayor/governor/president? Why not a government of individual people addressing their own affairs as need be and judges/arbitrators as referees?
The answer to both sets of questions is that they are both options to a larger question: "How should one handle interpersonal expectations and violations thereof?"
> and goes against precedent.

On the contrary, this is with the precedent, damages due to breach of contract, theft, destruction of property, etc are cost to replace not the original cost. And specific performance (i.e. requiring someone perform the action to fulfill the contract) is available if monetary damages aren't calculable (i.e. there is no replacement on the market).
Not a huge fan of Kubernetes myself but Deployments solve that problem out of the box with much less code.
That is especially confusing if your native language is German, because recto is Vorderseite and verso is Rückseite.
How can they tell where is the cable damage? If the cable is all underground, surely they didn’t dig up the whole thing? Can they measure that from one end? Do they do a binary search by digging and testing?
I’ve never used Closure, but I’m a couple years into Scala after many years of Java. And I don’t think I’d be happy if I had to go back to Java full time.
The risk-free rate is that yielded by bonds issued by creditworthy governments. It's available to everyone and is the same whether you're Goldman Sachs or a nobody.
Numberphile has a bunch of fun videos starring Neil Sloane, the creator of the OEIS. He gets really excited about graphs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAMgUB51XZA
Most medium-sized industrialized countries have capacity to manufacture something like the Oxford vaccine. We're seeing that with the technologically similar Russian Sputnik vaccine which has been widely licensed. It's being manufactured in China, Russia, India, South Korea (two sites), Italy, Germany, Spain, Brazil, and probably some others I'm forgetting.

And I would disagree. There are of course institutions capable of funding such projects and acquiring the resources. They're called governments. Between funding, compulsory licensing and nationalization powers, if a nation has the theoretical ability to manufacture the vaccine, then that theoretical can become reality with the right policies.

Canada did nothing until August 31st, around the time the federal government realized we were not going to be able to acquire doses from the USA/EU with priority. Then two plants got emergency funding. They will come online this fall and will likely produce 50+ million doses this year, some of the Novavax vaccine, some of another promising candidate vaccine developed domestically. Both have been ready to test since March 2020. If they had been funded then, we may already have had domestically manufactured doses available.
The above post isn't _really_ about Docker, I don't think. Relying on scp to deploy to prod also has nothing to do with Docker inherently. This post is mostly about rejecting any "modern" build and deploy tools in favor of perceived-simplicity. The problem with perceived-simplicity is it's usually not actually that simple, the developer that thought up the idea just inherently understands it. My post above was mostly to highlight that that pereived-simplicity falls apart when you add more devs, or increased code complexity, etc.

Using legitimate tools to handle building and deploying has nothing to do with Docker, but the author of this blog post has combined them.
I have to admit "happy" was not a word I expected to see in this thread.
js doesn't have a glm library?
I sort of assume there's lots of stuff like this that exists and people constantly bringing it up at every opportunity is kind of tiring. The converse where "everyone knows" but doesn't acknowledge it isn't necessarily any better though.

Anyways, the mental image of robot beaver drones with glowing red eyes causing havoc makes up for it.
The difference I was trying to highlight is that UML (at least in my experience) was still very much focused on "big design up front" and production of design artifacts (vast numbers of diagrams) that agile and TDD approaches explicitly rejected.

I don't remember rapid iteration being a part of any UML-based methodology that I ever used. By the time the diagrams were complete enough to capture implementation details, they were too unwieldy. Did any UML tools support common refactorings, or would you have to manually change potentially dozens of affected diagrams?
If you look on the Swift GitHub page you will see tremendous effort going into async/await. It will change the game for server side swift later this year.
Uh just to be clear, I am one of those devops engineers who taught themselves.

I have a friend who works at Saab engineering and knows UML. He studied for 7 years at uni, I dropped out of 10th grade.

There's a huge difference and yet people call me an engineer in certain contexts.
... a photo from the site appeared to show the beavers using Telus materials to build their home ...

LOL surviving beaver's in 2021. At first I thought this was a joke, but no... beaver's are getting smarter.
That's a very cool project of yours I'm going to have to look at when I have the time.
Beavers are extremely cool. Being Canadian, I never gave them very much thought until the youtube algorithm one day had me watching a documentary about them, that lead to me searching out another documentary to watch about them because they're so fascinating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLyBZ1mdg2c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N15sLwRCmnc
This space above the motorcycle shop is my office now. It’s such a trip to read about this story. Thank you for sharing. If you ever want to come by and tell Dan stories, I’d be happy to host you.
On the verbosity point of Java, I'd say the following:

At write time, verbosity is mostly solved by intelliJ. Code gen and tab complete make it at least as fast to write code as any other language in any other editor.

At read time, verbosity is your friend.
Railroads (particularly high speed) need to be long and straight. What happens if people don't want a dozen trains roaring through their neighborhood every day? It's difficult to just go around it.

What happens if people don't want a railroad through their property at all? After all, once a railroad is sitting on your land, it's difficult to repurpose it for much else. The state can try eminent domain, but that takes time and lengthy court cases, and the costs add up quick.
Who speaks for the Empire of Austria-Hungary now? No-one. The forces that unified Italy in the 19th century (fighting against that empire!) tore it apart into its constituent nations. In the USA, Italy was an ally in WW1 (or at least they fought one the same side). Why would anyone use the place names of the enemy?
A few fellow astrophotographers have built and used them successfully (forum link in Polish):

https://astropolis.pl/topic/71039-monta%C5%BC-wirus-2020/
I think that's a fair point. The way I see it, going from requirements (even visual ones) to working system would require strong AI, as any sufficiently powerful visual environment would wind up being Turing complete.

Which means that no code is either use case bounded or claiming something roughly on par with a break through. The first is common enough and where I imagine most low/no code offerings fall when the hype is stripped away. The hype seems to promise something on par with the second and I think that's where the dismissive attitude comes from.
I mean someone at the CEO/product manager level. They don't need to understand the details, and rarely do they. The anecdote that came to mind was a conference where a non-technical CEO gave a high-level explanation of "how Docker transformed my company" (not much substantive content) through all kinds of shipping container analogies.
> It is frightening how fragile the physical security of global networks appears to be.

Is it? I have access pretty much all the time and can’t name an outage (that wasn’t caused by me), ever.

When something gets broken somewhere, presumably my data gets routed around the issue.
Twitch made it to acquisition with amazon with basically this system for both a rails app and about 20 other go apps. I'd know, I helped transition us to ecs later.

For go apps, docker isn't really doing much over golang binaries. The bigger transition was more just moving us away from any unneeded dependence on system level apps. This happened at the same time we were dockerizing.

I think the ECS abstraction is better than the simple daemon scripts we were using and scp for deploys, but we made it work up to around 30k servers before we hit scale limits. We could have pretty easily taken it even further forward but ecs is simpler and better integrated with the rest of AWS and our build tools. It only matters for a few special teams.

The real issue with SCP at some point was the parallelism of deploys: opening 30k ssh connections single threaded or with bash starts bogging down at some point, and we were at the point of writing a massively parallel version when we switched to ECS for much of this (also around the time ECS became stable).
That.
Combined with the fact that so many productive people and healthy business have limited or no access to it.
You can always solve the current problem.

But this is an arms race with uncountable adversaries who profit from finding new ways to spread. Some will always succeed.
> Low Code or even No Code

I look at the code I'm writing (mostly C# thesedays) and I consider the _information-theoretic_ view of the program code I'm writing, and I see a major problem is that even syntactically terse languages (like C# compared to its stablemate VB.NET) still requires excessive, even redundant code in many places (e.g. prior to C# 9.0, defining an immutable class requires you to repeat names 3 times and types twice (constructor parameters, class properties, and assignment in the constructor body) which alone is a huge time-sink.

The most tedious work I do right now is adding "one more" scalar or complex data-member that has to travel from Point A in Method 1 to Point B in Method 2 - I wish I could ctrl+click in my IDE and say "magically write code that expresses the movement of this scalar piece of data from here to here" and that would save me so much time.

At least in modern languages like C# 9.0, Kotlin, and Swift (and C++ with heavy abuse of templates) a lot of the tedium can be eliminated - but not in the granddaddy of OOP languages: Java. Still to this day, I have absolutely no idea how people can write Java for line-of-business applications (its bread-and-butter!) and remain sane from having to manually manage data-flow, implementing Java Beans, and manually writing by-hand getter-and-setter methods...
It makes me think of how anti-human, self-hatred focused (all notions that humans are a virus derive from self-hatred first, without exception), and irrational those memes are, since humans are nature. Anything we do and anything we build, is nature in action.
If you use violence to stop someone from using violence, you either reduced the amount of violence done or kept it the same. There can be some ethical uses there. The concept can be spread to some other areas, but only ones in which the intolerance could hamper the intolerant, which I don't think is the case here.

It's typically known as the "paradox of tolerance" by the way, your mistaken version didn't ring any bells, and I assumed you thought the argument ended in a logical paradox.
After leaving Apple, Chris Lattner (designer of Swift) ended up at Google for a while and there was an attempt to make Swift a first class language for Tensorflow. An interesting podcast on the topic from 2019: https://www.swiftbysundell.com/podcast/58/

Since then he has moved on to SiFive and S4TF has been shutdown. See HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26117453
It's not guaranteed to be unique. Blockchains are.
I don’t know how Swift works, but from my Haskell experience, if your language needs async/await —- it’s already failing. Everything is async in Haskell, so you don’t need to think about it, and cannot accidentally make a mistake by blocking your async thread by calling sync code from it.
Market makers. They have to determine a price, but ETH hasn't yet evolved to a point where it operates in its own world, so they lazily (but understandably) follow the price fluctuations of BTC while allowing people to buy or sell within a certain range. Obviously if a huge buy comes in, or a lot of people are buying, they'll let it go up (or down if its the opposite), but once that dies down they'll again follow BTC price swings. However, I expect this to change as cryptocurrencies mature.
It is about 1000 mountainous kilometers from Portland to Oakland. There are no major metropolitan areas in between. Just places most people have only vaguely heard of surrounded by places only the locals ever go.

And there are very few reasons to travel from Portland to Oakland on a dedicated itinerary. No critical business relationships. No historic ties. No cultural affiliation.

Comparisons of US rail to Europe usually ignore most of Europe. 18 hours reflects a rail speed comparable to what Google returns for a train trip from Zagreb to Tirana. I'm not sure you can even take a train from Berlin to Baku.
Arbitrage isn't the fundamental explanation. There's no pure arb relationship between ETH and BTC.

The real reason they're linked is for macro reasons. Hype for ETH is correlated with hype for BTC. Regulatory environment for ETH is correlated to that for BTC.

Statistical arbitraguers then front run the resulting macro flows, but the core reason they're linked is the macro flows, not the arbitrageurs.
Buying these NFTs is more like buying your name on some dedication plaque no one will read unless directed to do so; people do this, sometimes with millions of dollars, because it is, in fact, a "cool story" vs. merely sending an anonymous envelope of cash to the owners of the building (maybe a University or local government).
>Is Tesla not far ahead of the competitors?

Depends on region. "Renault's Zoe was the best-selling electric car in Europe in 2020, beating the Tesla Model 3 to second place." [1]

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/972845/electric-vehicles...
I've used personal wikis and knowledge bases for myself and they work okay. vimwiki has been useful for me.

I find that I do some pretty cool stuff and then totally forget how I did it a year or 5 years later, mostly with coding. The open source projects I documented and explained are things I myself google to help me set them up in the future, so a way of codifying my knowledge has been to try to write about it and put that in public.

I set up development environments for myself a lot, so I wrote an article about how I do it https://modfoss.com/creating-my-development-environment.html and then put the code on GitHub as well https://github.com/symkat/modfoss_devel So if I don't do it for a while, I'll have a starting point and me-from-the-past explaining what I did and why.
A while loop with a switch also creates no stack frames for each operation interpreted.
The story says that cell service is also down.
> I am as equally as surprised by their surprise about how much R&D is involved in making a "simple" lamp.

I think your surprise is justified, especially since you've been in this world for a while. But I think there is an apparent (but not real) contradiction between offering designs for free so people can go and build something themselves, and then charging money for R&D. This is what is meant by the term trade secret.

re: Woodworkers and co -- sometimes. Room & Board doesn't share their designs. Tartine Manufactory probably has a cookbook.

> You're reading into the comment an emotion that did not exist when the message was sent. If you read hostility, then that's no what I was trying to infer.

I'm genuinely really happy that this is not the intent. Challenging phrases and Socratic questioning can really come off as hostile.
If Intel couldn’t keep up with the latest fabs I can’t believe an automaker could start from 0 and have any remote chance of success. Volume would be too low to make it work financially even if they could.
I am all for keeping complexities at a minimum and it's great that it's working for them.

However, Docker is so simple to work with and so valuable in what it delivers that a headline like this reads to me a bit like "We don't need git". Sure, you might not need it. But it would probably be nice.
The abstract mentions people with 170 average IQ. Hawking had 169 IIRC. Physics PhDs are averagely on the range 130~145. That's much lower than people on the study.

IQ is not taken seriously as a measure of intelligence or success anymore. And people can be trained to score high on IQ tests.

On the debate of Nature vs. Nurture, I do not think that inherent intelligence viz. good genes do not play a role. But I tend to belive that nurture has a larger to play.
From the comments, it looks like they aren't even using a database and storing data client side ("to be stateless" they say). I don't know what kind of application they are serving but that has a whole can of complications. They are trying to make money yet I assume they don't have accounts etc. That's a bit overkill. So, no database, a single web service, yeah you might not need docker or alike. Depending on their use case they might need high availability so a backup server with a failover would be nice of course, ideally kicking in automatically and doing the necessary notifications.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_time-domain_reflecto...
This happens with cars pretty frequently too, though usually with squirrels. They get in and chew up the wiring harness under the hood. It's crazy expensive to fix because it's not always clear where all the damage is, and access often requires disassembling tons of stuff in the engine bay.
Getting VSCode debugger to hook into a process running in a docker container running inside WSL was insanely frustrating. In the end, I stopped using Docker during development and only use it for deploying to staging/production.
Continues to impede, he nor any of his organizations is a signatory on the vaccine patent waiver.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/press-releases/news-senators-...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfRljMcuAe0&t=319s
As usual when talking about supply chains and industrial processes, it seems like Toyota managed to do the right stuff to avoid delivery problems - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-07/how-toyot...

They seemingly learned from a few other supplier disasters over the last decade, and were better-prepared to deal with shortages of critical parts from their vendors.
Yup.

It turns out to be more complicated than one (or than I) would think at first.
I wonder if it coincides with antinatalist attitudes.
Scheme has had tail calls as a basic idiom (some call it Proper Implementation of Tail Calls; others call it Tail Call Optimization) forever, and I keep them in mind any time I'm implementing anything nontrivial in Scheme.

There's no special syntax -- there's just the notion of tail positions, from which tail calls can occur. For example, both arms of an `if` form are tail position, if the `if` itself is. And if you introduce a sequencing block in one of those arms, the last position in the block is tail position. (A specialized IDE like DrRacket can indicate tail positions, and DrRacket will even hover arrows, tracing the tail positions back to the top of the code.)

When implementing a state machine, for example, a state transition is simply a function application (call) to the new state (optionally with arguments), where the the called function represents a state. It's satisfying when you realize how elegant something that used to be messy is, and you can imagine it being very fast (even if your Scheme implementation isn't quite up to getting as fast as a C or Rust compiler that can recognize and special-case tail calls.)

(For the state machine example, compare to more conventional approaches in C ,of "state ID" variables, `switch` statements on those, and record-keeping for additional state. Or doing it in data, with state ID being index into arrays, again with any additional recordkeeping. Or lots of function calls when you didn't really need the time overhead and stack usage of function calls with full returns.)
Yes there must be interfaces with the real world. The classic example is a “tooth fairy” insurance policy where a smart contract yields a coin if the user loses a tooth. How do you verify “proof of tooth”?

This is where the concept of an oracle comes in. Chainlink is attempting to provide a decentralized, tamper-proof oracle network for smart contacts so if you want to know about the cutting edge look at what they’re publishing.
I don’t get the no boilerplate aspect of your comment. For all that Golang has going for it, avoiding boilerplate isn’t one of them. I’m thinking specifically about multiple clauses at the beginning of functions passing up return values and copy pasting the same code (or auto generating it) to work around lack of generics.

Most of the criticism about Java seem to be about old codebases that overused Gang of Four patterns, when that used to be more of a thing. Don’t blame the hammer for the shoddy building, blame the hammerer.
Market makers can't force a correlation to exist. They're neither a sufficient or necessary condition for it. They only front run an already existing correlation.

The correlation exists because of non market makers.
I think partially implemented standards are very useful! You can partially implement in a way that provides escape hatches for users, or you can lock them in to your assumption of the right behaviour.

That said, I think there are very many http clients that implement enough of the standards to me incredibly rich and in line with the spirit of the protocol. The web for humans and machines is based on http. It can improve, but the standard has quite sufficient support to be called practically meaningful
What makes you assume that all people have or even want docker runtime in their machines?
Not to mention all the security headaches it brings with it.