skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you have 7 commits it's very likely that 3 of those commits at least don't build because they were intermediary checkpoints. Then there's the one commit that contains the buggy code and if you revert that it breaks the whole thing and it doesn't work. Now you gotta revert the whole thing anyway, all 7 commits (or the merge).

Why bother with all this time and energy? If each single commit in your straight master history is one self contained thing it's easy to revert that whole thing and done.

We are also talking SaaS here with releases going out multiple times a day. So if something is very broken it's likely to be noticed very quickly and the breaking change is probably the last commit on master and you don't even have to revert it. You just deploy HEAD^ to Prod while you create a PR to fix the problem.
Have you looked into Weaveworks Ignite?

https://github.com/weaveworks/ignite
Everything is depression.

Had major brain fog problems. But was generally happy and good natured.

Spent years seeking help, at every stage was told it was depression.

Turned out it was a horrible disease that was slowing killing me.

I imagine a lot of “depressed” people have an underlying chronic condition that isn’t being addressed.
Or define your interfaces properly, version them, and publish libraries (precompiled, ideally) somewhere outside of your source repo. Your associated projects depend on those rather than random chunks of code that happen to be in the same file structure. It's more work, but it encourages better organization in general and saves an incredible amount of time later on for any complex project.
Actually, "Internet investigator" is the person's job title, not the company name. The person listed the title like he is an employee or contractor representing Pearson. Anyone 'claiming' to represent them could have sent it.
What is an example liberty that pertains in the US and not in Europe?
> "how do I sleep on an airplane". Isn't a neck travel pillow an appropriate result here?

Late to the party, but I want to say here the answer is "maybe". However, the idea that the solution to every problem or need is to buy something is pretty regressive and is kind of at the core of the problem with consumerism and rapacious capitalism.

For a person to buy something, that something has to have been manufactured, shipped, sold, shipped again, etc. All that is extractive and depends on externalities that are too-often finite.

Also, the person buying has to have money, which they made through some kind exchange for labor, possibly fairly, possibly not. For capitalism, incentivizing people to treat a want or need as an opportunity for a financial transaction is essential, even when there are other solutions. Remember, for example, that the Listerine company essentially "invented" bad breath as a problem requiring a product to solve. Not that people didn't legit deal with bad breath before, just that they weren't sold a pre-packaged "cure".

So the question "how do I sleep on an airplane" has many answers other than "buy something".
Civilization VI is, in my experience, buggy to the point of being almost unplayable (in multiplayer, which is all I care about). I'm not sure 3.3 is criminally low, it probably just reflects the fact that reliability is a very important feature.
I get the feeling we might understand the term interface differently. What do you take it to be? To me, the interface is PCI-Express 4.0 4x. The "1950 MB/s write and 4700 MB/s read" are the specifics of the drive's performance.

According to Wikipedia, PCIE 4.0 4x can sustain more than the spec sheet advertises [0].

The spec sheet advertises 4700 MB/s write and 1950 MB/s read. The interface can handle more than 7000 MB/s in each direction. That's more than twice the advertised bandwidth of this drive.

If what you mean is that the MP600 isn't able to handle the claimed 4700 MB/s "most of the time" or something, than that's fair (I have no idea if that's the case or not). But the "interface" doesn't really come into play, here. The drive is advertised as PCIE 4.0 4x because the 3.0 revision couldn't handle the advertised maximum read specs.

Just like it would seem strange for an internet provider to sell a 400 Mbps (advertised) connection over a 100 Mbps line.

---

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#History_and_revisi...
Addendum:

In thinking about it -- It seems to me that there might be a relationship between heat, resistance, and unbalanced capacitance in a circuit...

In other words, you have a wire.

You put amps (at a specific voltage) through this wire.

If the wire diameter can't handle those amps (at that voltage, remembering that the higher the voltage -- the more amps that a wire of a given diameter can carry, case in point, high-tension electric transmission wires -- they usually never melt despite carrying huge amounts of electricity, the reason being that that electricity is at high voltage)

If the wire diameter can't handle those amps at that voltage (the the lower the voltage, the more it will heat at a given amp load), then it gets hot.

It starts to act less like a conductor -- and more like a resistor...

But wait!

Haven't we also seen this effect with capacitors that are fully charged (well, minus the heating)?

No longer does current pass through them at full capacitance -- as full capacitance is approached, they start to act less and less like conductors, and more like resistors!

They also want to "push back"!

Well, maybe wires which are under electrical stress (heating up, gaining resistance) act sort of like "mini-capacitors"!

That is, their capacitance isn't that much -- but they want to "push back" against the circuit, if only for a microsecond -- to release their micro-capacitative electrical load!

But -- in many places in a CPU -- if a bit needs to stay set to '1' for example -- this cannot happen -- because electricity needs to pass through that circuit constantly!

Solution: First, figure out a way to store bits in capacitatively balanced circuits (an LC coil would be an example of this, but there should be other ways to do it), this allows the circuit to "relax" regularly every millisecond/microsecond/picosecond (relative to CPU speed / transistor switching speed).

Net result is that circuit should not get hot, ever...

Rule of thumb (for future CPU engineers): If you're storing bits in a circuit that gets, or can get hot over time -- you're doing it wrong... (even though humanity's CPU engineering history up until this point in time is that every CPU created thus far -- stores and manipulates bits in circuits that generate heat!) <g>
So I tried it. I combined https://stackoverflow.com/a/64084994 for emoji detection with https://stackoverflow.com/a/25578365 to loop through the page and remove them. The result was an emoji removal script I could easily paste into Web Inspector's console tab to remove all the emojis: https://gist.github.com/LouisStAmour/e067d5b7adc0fb7c19f1a56... (click "Raw" for easiest copy-paste)

Right away, the headings and list at the top of the page are much more readable. I find myself anchoring not to the emoji but to the actual headings on the page, like "Meaning".

But then we've the list, with all those circles that used to contain emoji...

If you want to remove the circles, use:

document.querySelectorAll('.rll-bias__icon__wrapper').forEach(x => x.parentElement.removeChild(x))

And then adjust the padding left:

.type-post .post-content .rll-bias__container { padding-left: 30px }

Having done the last CSS tweak above, the first thing I notice is that a lot of the checklists are in a "Coming Soon" state and feel less overwhelmed by the visual icons, but more overwhelmed by the length of the lists.

The lists, on the other hand, immediately feel less visually approachable because my mind is asking for simple visual examples of each, but those aren't present until I click, at best.

It's interesting. To me, the emojis add an artificial sense of "completeness" to the page that make the page visually rich but don't necessarily add to the experience as much as creating new visualizations for each list item would. And they obscure how much of the list isn't finished yet, in terms of having examples and a detailed explanation.

But reading the list with emojis, there is definite value, especially because it has me questioning what each emoji means to the list item. Some of them seem very literal to the point where they're not helpful - some distort the meaning, such as "Framing" or "Contrast" whose emojis represent a different use of the word (a picture frame vs framing an argument; happy/sad extremes vs isolating an element to draw attention to it).

And I can't download the cheat sheet without turning off my adblocker/tracking protections, it seems.

The more I read the page without emojis the more I realize, it's a list of definitions. One could imagine this alphabetically sorted at the back of a book on this topic. Useful? Yes. But easy to apply? Not really.

If these were cards or checklists or if I could swipe through, see a random example, and remind myself of how I could creatively one of these principles to a problem at hand, I think I'd find these very useful. Alternatively, I could see myself looking over an entire site and asking myself, for each of these principles, where it might be useful or violated in a current design, then marking comments for future improvements.

Thinking about it without examples makes it feel too much like a flash card memory quiz. Quick, what's the "Von Restorff Effect"?! It's a bit mentally taxing. :D It's only when you expand and add examples that I feel I've enough context to remember more than just the name of something.
Your hobbies will lose.
I think the big difference is what type of information you're looking for. The code is the final arbiter on what the program does, but gives incredibly little information about why it is designed that way.

* Can be learned from the code: Function A accepts a C-style pointer to a data array.

* Can be inferred from the code: Function A is called in an inner loop, and so it probably accepts that data array to avoid doing any memory allocation.

* Cannot be known from the code: Even though the data array is initialized to 0 in the current code, function A should not assume that will always be the case. That data array is intended to be used as persistent storage in a future version.

The first one is kind of pointless to document beyond what doxygen already gives you. The second is useful, but not necessary. The third is absolutely essential, because nothing in the current code can possibly tell you about the future intents for changes in the code.
One of the major drawbacks to going back to the office is dealing with the dreaded open office plan. If Google popularizes a new office style that discourages the bullpen feel of open offices, it would be a welcome relief.
I've heard this so many times, but making your own is just a strong learning experience you don't get when you purchase them. You get exposure to mistakes!
I’m not, just out of curiosity, I copied Rapé, pasted in google search and the first thing that came up was: Rapé and Sacred Tobacco. Pretty accurate.
I have a mobile app, on Google Play I have a 3.6 rating, and on ios I have a 4.6 rating.

I haven't seen a difference yet, but I read for app store optimization purposes, higher ratings help.

Makes sense.
> when the company asked a diverse group of consultants — including sociologists who study “Generation Z” and how junior high students socialize and learn — to imagine what future workers would want.

Danger Will Robinson Danger!

Why would anyone try and make decisions based on the preference of jr. High students. Making decisions based on youth in the most unstable period of their life when they are incredibly hormonal and still not all that logical seems like a recipe for disaster.

I don't know about you but my jr. High self was an idiot and nothing he said or did was a good idea.

Or is the idea that we don't want to have the next gen adapt to a new way of socializing and interacting in a professional workplace? That too seems like a bad move.
You can't tell the difference between a prototype and product. OK. Lets go to the basics. Do you at least understand the state standardized tests are commonly given to grade 3 to grade 10 students on three subjects (English, Math, Science)? That's 24 tests (a few grades could share the same test, but that's complicate). Most state universities don't even have 12 psychometricians. Lol. Of course the reality is much more complicated than 24. You are just imagining things with no understanding of the scale of the complexity of the reality.
What are the names of some of this software that are a good example of in-use but are clunky/have awful usability? I ask because it sounds like an interesting area, and I would like to see for myself what you're working with.
Impressive I would have quite maybe a month into this debacle.

Did they manage to setup a tribunal and a committee of public safety?
Coloring without seeing (2001) [pdf]
Well, it's nice to see they're rational, indeed.
Money gives you more throws of the dice, and often with 'better' dice.
my thoughts would be:

- while building up your following on google, market your brand to your own site(s) as much as possible

- build brand an alternate streaming site(s)

- have a way to reach your followers in the event you get shut down - email list, etc. to inform your followers to switch to the alternate site
Minimum wages also provide a price floor on labor. If I make 21 an hour managing a Starbucks, then I make 3x the minimum wage.

I’d suspect that the owner values labor in multiples of the minimum, if the minimum wage were cut in half I’d expect the managers rate to similarly fall.
Free books? What kind of socialism is that? /s

Seriously though, "Imagine there was no such thing as a library, and that members of the current neoliberal policy consensus were to sit down today and invent it." https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/citizen-coup...
Videos are super easy to produce. They are also wastful to watch and difficult to find something in.

So, our company creates videos, no one except new people watches them and everybody complains about lack of documentation.
Gotta wonder about all those parents that missed the "make you a better person" memo.
It's funny that there are a lot of stories lately which contain googla and privacy in the same sentence. It is like they realized that they have an image problem and are doing something about it.
Hah, "legal action". The response to that should be "You want to sue me? Go ahead an line up in the queue over there, behind 'The United States of America'.".
> As a content creator, you want the platform to protect your copyright and at YouTube's scale, copyright scanners are the only way to implement this.

Is this really true, though?

Google certainly doesn’t want to pay for people, but automated systems can be used as a first-pass filter, before human are brought-in to make a second-pass judgement.

So what is the rate of false-positives? And how many automated flags are triggered per day?
> gives you the freedom to tinker on your own time - basically gives you the ability to hire other people to do the actual work of serving customers

"just"? Seems like you identified it as a main factor just like the parent. It's like the difference between necessary and sufficient but put in terms of probability instead: it significantly increases the chances that it's even possible to make an attempt. It's clearly not sufficient though, as you both point out though.
And here is the odysee link for those of us who do not like to be FLoCed by Google with the "watches Snowden" tag.

https://odysee.com/@mario:38/edward_snowden_pic:4
They weren’t going to pay for you?
Something I wonder about is whether the inflow of money into all these "assets" is indeed driven by people with buckets of excess capital, or actually from people who could use the cash in hand the most. Anecdotally I know individuals crushed by student loans/HCOL who immediately threw their stimulus checks into crypto and meme stocks with the rationale that if they lose it all, a few thousand dollars would've made no difference on their debt anyways whereas getting on the next rocketship trend early could become a life-changing sum of money. I agree something is fundamentally broken if we've reached the point where we live in a casino economy, I don't know how long it can last and the long-term potential consequences are quite concerning
While I recommend reading DDIA, I think buzzcut_diet may end up disappointed. Reasons:

- it takes a while to read DDIA. Probably around 6 months of focused reading. Perhaps more

- one can learn a really good chunk of theoretical stuff... but probably not applicable to day to day work

- zero practical experience will be gained regarding Kubernetes, Spark, Kafka, EMR, Redis

So, I would recommend a more practical approach:

- start already reading the documentation of K8s, Kafka, Spark, etc. Choose one and go for it. I would recommend Kafka since its documentation is well written

- while reading documentation of the tooling above, one will inevitable stumble upon theoretical stuff that will not be explained in detail: that's exactly when you pick up DDIA (or similar books) and try to find the topic in the index and read it.
I was going to get an axidraw but on a whim I checked locally and scored a HP7475a for $60 and got it working.

So definitely worth looking around a bit before going with new!
Legal minimums :D

My truck is 20 years, though.
Remote Utilities Pro 7.0.1.0 Crack with Serial Number
I guess this makes sense. I have a relative in Boston who pays $900 / month for a PARKING SPOT.
Time is just excuse. I worked on multiple projects that had tons of time and very little or no time pressure.

People still did not liked writing documentation. They still did not knew how to write it.
I must admit I didn't realise that Ferranti did things like digitisers. I used to work at the Western General Hospital in Edinburgh, just down the road from the Ferranti site on Crewe Toll, where a couple of my flatmates were radar engineers. Don't know if that's where they produced the digitisers though.
let's ask this fellow then:
https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/soestwp/about/directory/craig-s...

Is this a case where most people would expect nasty nothingness, and therefore the discovery of "creatures greater than 2cm" megafauna is "surprisingly diverse" ?
I'm definitely a fan of type checkers and formal verification. The problem is that even those tools permit not just specific bugs, but whole classes of bugs through verification; there are inherent limits on what any tool can give you. It's a similar thing with test cases, too.

So, I'd say that when you use a debugger in tandem with a bunch of other good tools then the bad habits that the debugger encourages just matter less. There are fewer classes of bugs that will make it through verification and those other tools force you to understand the code at least well enough that you can pass their checks. However, you still need to read to generalize and fix those remaining bugs properly, and the debugger will push you toward a fast single point resolution rather than a slow but general resolution which is what you'd get from careful reading and thinking.

The big argument against this is I think is if you're working with something where a large number of bugs is acceptable. Like, if you're hacking together a demo/prototype and you just need X to work then a debugger might be the way to go: Just ignore the other bugs because who cares? Or if you're working with some legacy software that's generally known to be buggy and you just need to fix some specific critical use case quickly.

It's also just hard. Like you said, being able to read complex code and then systematically coax the bugs out of it with your brain and eyes definitely takes a lot of practice and the more that that can be supplemented by automation and good habits, the better.
And woe unto junior developers who change into the submodule directory and do a git commit, then made infinitely worse if it's followed by git push because now there's a sha hanging out in the repo which works on one machine but that no one else's submodule update will see without surgery

I'm not at my computer to see if modern git prohibits that behavior, but it is indicative of the "watch out" that comes with advanced git usage: it is a very sharp knife
Shortages are good.

It's the perfect time to set up manufacturing capability, so nationalists can be happy.

It's a good time to push for hire wages, workers should do it.

If there is some alternative industrial process, now's the time to try it.

This is no 70s oil moment, because there's no indication fewer widgets are being produced than prepandemic.
> because not getting a job is existential for those seeking the job

Before jobs offered by others existed, not working in some form would have been existential for those people. This is the de facto state of existence. You'd have to at least do some form of hunter/gathering or subsistence farming.

This increasingly common idea that individuals no longer are obligated to provide for themselves is wild. The only way around it is to obligate others to provide for you instead of providing for yourself. The last time this was a common idea in the United States was in the in the antebellum South.
The areas where people vote for less and less government tend to be the places that have the most minimal services. I have yet to see an area that truly attracts business because of having low regulation and taxes, they all seem to have absolutey no businesses because there is no infrastructure to build upon, nor an existing business community to interact with.
Systems work in funny and unexpected ways. When they started their company Brin and Page may have truly believed they could go in the non-profit direction. But the forces at play in late capitalism worked inexorably to extract value, and little by little, possibly before they realized it, Brin and Page were no longer in control of what they created.
Based on the way the article was written, I can only infer that this ridiculous proposal was actually on the table at one point, and after sufficient pushback, the press narrative had to be that it was always going to be this way all along. People don't make fuss over things in a vacuum.

I had a public school education, and the most advanced mathematics courses my high school offered were underwhelming. I started teaching myself linear algebra and multivariate calculus on my own to quench my boredom.

Yes, get rid of advanced mathematics courses all together in the name of equity and not hurting someone's feelings, see what that does to American STEM competitiveness on the world stage... Do you think Asian countries would ever even consider doing something remotely like this?
> Why is it that even slightly old systems are so buggy that they are trivially hackable for a moderately well funded group?

Slightly old here means 13 years after the latest release in case of Windows XP.

That's a very long time for anyone to upgrade.
hm not sure how/if they will react if this blows up but it wont stop me for now.
libgc.so :D
At the expense of equal losses of employment from people competing for those jobs.
> what is a reasonable alternative for a content creator..?

Insurance? I'm only half kidding. No individual youtuber has the deep pockets to stir the slumbering Googlebeast enough to get it to notice and correct its mistake, but all youtubers certainly do. Conversely, perhaps there's a market for a we-only-get-paid-if-we-win lawyers to spring up here, as they have with workplace injuries and such. Youtube's resolution process may not be friendly to creators, but juries probably will be, if the creator bypasses Google and sues the party making the claim. "Sues for what?" I dunno - emotional damages? Tortious claims? They'll figure something out, I imagine.

Maybe those are silly ideas, but they're certainly less silly than waiting for Google to fix things...