skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The pandemic has definitely accelerated progress in the EV space, many places had clean air for once. Unfortunately there are very few good EVs (dedicated platform and not based on a ICE) but that is changing. Like the Porsche Taycan and Jaguar iPace both good. So this new charger infrastructure is exciting. I don’t understand why you want to diagnose me. All businesses do marketing, i am not caught up on anything. This page is a conversation based on an article about Elon Musk. I do appreciate your responses and i accept diverse views but i think people will be studying what Elon, Tesla and SpaceX have done many years from now and also what Mercedes and Volkswagen did too. I do think we will see more innovation in EV charging and I don’t think the existing business models will last. Thanks for the links. Yes what BP is doing looks good.
yes, Java is adding jextract [1] as a replacement for JNI (Java Native Interface) which directly consumes header files using clang and produces a jar wrapping the native calls.

It's not bolted in the compiler so less nice than Zig but the jar produced by jextract is not ABI dependent so more portable. The ABI dependent code is generated by the JIT using the the Foreign Linker API (the equivalent of C# DllImport) at runtime.

[1] https://inside.java/2020/10/06/jextract/
> my second job had quite a steep learning curve as I had to figure out how to debug and navigate on my own, without talking through it out loud.

Why couldn't you talk through it out loud?
I guess it will always be possible to make critical components by delaying a customer's batch that would have been delayed anyway.
Short answer: don’t encourage it. Support it where requested.

Don’t encourage, don’t applaud, don’t try to improve it.

Let it grow and develop, allow it to change when it does, to be what it is.

If your child needs your help with it, you’ll know - by their unstoppable requests.

Encouraging or rewarding it is a sure way to kill it. See Alfie Kohn’s Punished by Rewards for tons of research showing how rewards / encouragement kill intrinsic interest.
Read hard stuff (in math).

Find first priciples always.
the Ultimate Guide to Inflation
While I think it’s incorrect to assume PDFs cannot be exploited, I’m using computer viruses as a metaphor. What if a legit chemistry paper was tampered with such that the procedure creates and explosively releases a nerve agent and a cheap grad student that didn’t pay for the legal copy unknowingly follows it?
Offloading brain-stuff to external storage is a great stress reliever.

Either a digital todo-list or a physical notebook both work for me.

As long as you can convince your mind that the task is stored in a safe place so it's OK to stop thinking about it - you can get back to it any time you need to.
I haven't worked with SAP for several years, so my info may be out of date.

I learnt about SAP from a massive book, it was about 800 pages. I threw it out moving house a coupe of years ago. You could search Amazon for up to date reference books.

You would have to love working for enterprises and government bodies. That means putting up with politics, career progression challenges, etc.

You would also need a solid software engineering background. SAP systems are extremely complex and massive in scale. In my experience the multinational consulting firms specialise in configuring, installing and maintaining SAP installations. So working for one of those firms might be the best way to break into that field.

Since you have an MBA, another career entry option might be as a business analyst. https://www.iiba.org/ is a good entry point reference.
What about DNS? If DNS is down for myapp.com, it will also be down for status.myapp.com
Is the article not the exact opposite?
I originally wrote this as a response to some comment, but it applied to multiple different threads, so I figured I'd post it top-level instead:

I found a job where I worked remotely and people legitimately cared about what I accomplished over weeks and months without even seeing how long I worked each day. I took full advantage and worked weird but not particularly long hours. Counterintuitively, this helped me do more: I wrote maintainable code with fewer bugs, so, once I had a solid foundation, I could do experiments and add new business logic fast. Based on code I've seen on other projects, it's not hard to imagine a different codebase doing the same thing where a one-day feature in my world would have been a two-week feature instead. Now I'm sure you're thinking to yourself that I'm exaggerating, but I've absolutely seen teams and projects with this kind of productivity delta.

It's always hard to convince people about counterfactuals, but in software "slow is smooth and smooth is fast" is absolutely true. If you take your time and avoid unnecessary deadline pressure up-front, you will average substantially less time on new logic and debugging. The difficulty, of course, is that when you do this right it looks like you're solving easy problems while the team that coded themselves into a corner and constantly have to fight fires look like heroes burning the midnight oil. (There's the cult of overwork again!)

It helped that I ended up contrasted with somebody who took on a lot of responsibility only to strew overcomplicated garbage across multiple parts of our codebase. The rest of the team took a depressingly long time to recognize the problem, but it eventually wasted too much of everyone's time to ignore. I am not sure that anything short of a painfully tangible demonstration in this vein would convince people without direct experience that the dynamic I'm talking about is real and important!

Anyway, working reasonable hours actively helped me do better work and I am convinced this is true for most software work and most people. As a bonus, it worked out pretty well for me, I got promoted. I still have reasonable hours but the work is now far more people-oriented which means my impact, if anything, is even less related to my hours! What I'm realizing is that if you're a manager and you want to build a resilient and productive team, you actively do not want your ≈staff engineers and data scientists working anything that even resembles long hours! But that's a post for another day...

The moral of the story is that it's possible to find teams which legitimately care about output rather than input, which will let you have a solid salary with great hours. Unfortunately I still have no idea how to evaluate teams on this axis as a job candidate; I just got really lucky stumbling into this particular job. I'm not sure how to reproduce that for future roles (always looking for suggestions!), but at least it's nice to know that such teams do exist.
The difference in working hours is not as big as you make it seem.
In the 1950s it was normal to work on Saturdays. Nowadays, it Europe at least, the 40 hour working week is standard.
Also most women used to work until they had kids, and some returned back to work when the kids had grown up.

And then there's the difference of lifestyle:
In the 1950s most people did not own a car or a television. A family home would many times be smaller than a present one, even though families had more kids.
And finally nowadays it's pretty normal to go on holiday abroad twice a year. In the 1950's this was unheard of.
I haven't decided on switching from Gmail yet, but recently I took a step in that direction and started switching over accounts to an address on my personal domain. The address still routes to my Gmail box in the end, but at least my most important accounts are no longer directly tied to it, and in theory I can point it anywhere else whenever I feel like I can ditch Gmail.

I've had this domain for ages, and I always planned on eventually using an email address with it, but changing every account I have seemed like too insurmountable a problem to even get started. Well, to anyone who is feeling the same way--the only way it gets surmountable is one account at a time. Start today!
In The Dark Tower, only first two books are good. Third is decent, the rest I've read only because I'm a very stubborn person.
Blender is pretty successful product. But I agree, all UI toolkits that are available right now suck. Flutter may turn things around, not fan of it needing a new language however. There's reason why react and react-native are popular as well.
So the end of the Latin word for "cut off" was cut off? That's fitting.
1. Sometimes you have no choice but to make one.

2. Analysis paralysis is no joke either.
Everyone I know who uses these also exercises significantly, both weight training and cardiovascular fitness.
Thanks to a pull request, display brightness is now work!
Clubhouse finally launches its Android app
To be honest a lot of the guidance was verbal. The only book we used was called ‘Help Yourself to Sight Reading a Practical Tutor for Pianists’ by Daphne Sandercock. The writing style was quite severe and had phrases like ‘a fault common to weaker pupils at this stage…’
If you're discussing tech jobs you're already looking at the top 10 percent or so though
> the clerk who set up the automatic payments accidentally typed in my account number, which was one off from the car loan holder’s.

Were you just extremely unlucky, or doesn't your bank account number have a proper checksum builtin to prevent this?
My logic is most people would put themselves first at the cost of the greater good. So if it is well established logically that the greater good is for everyone to cooperate and not pay ransoms then it needs to be enforced for everyone.

It’s like pollution or recycling. Why spend the effort and cost to do it if the benefit is only to future generations or society as a whole (ignoring the few who do it for their own sense of self-satisfaction)? That’s why we have things like penalties for pollution and carbon credits.

These people are externalizing the cost of their actions. At the very least we shouldn’t allow ransom payers to externalize the real cost of the ransoms to future generations and society as a whole.
Ha! got it.
I worked for a shop that adopted the Pivotal model and I can say that it was hell on Earth. If you check the research data it is obvious that pairing is only effective in some very special cases like: knowledge transfer for new teammates, onboarding people, getting juniors up to speed, solving __very__ complex problems. For your everyday work it is not only draining, but also a waste of both of your time. What makes it even worse is that your downtime will double because of pee breaks, coffee breaks, lunch breaks. People rarely feel the need to go at the same time. Nowadays if I'm interviewing somewhere one of my first questions if they have adopted this madness or not.
ah, that is where the curvature of spacetime comes in. That field is curved between both observers on each side of the earth, because there is a massive object between them: the earth.

So the field is going radially inwards towards the center of the massive object.
Sounds funny if you talk aloud while no one else is there.
I once hooked a high current 10Hz AC signal to a peltier plate. It made ice 'flicker' on the plate as it melted and froze 10x per second.

It was really cool to rub your fingers over it - it made a kind of haptic feedback device as your fingers froze and unfroze from the plate.

It did require kilowatts of cooling on the backside of said peltier plate...
So how do we objectively measure all 5 dimensions? I.e. would I roughly assess myself similar to how others (on average) would assess me?
How can dogecoin have 10x faster transactions than Etherum and BitCoin ? I know the method used by BitCoin with the miners. What is the method used by dogecoin to be so fast ?
C is a domain-specific language for writing security vulnerabilities :).
To me at least “general purpose” describes almost all programming languages with the exception of “special purpose” or “domain specific” languages like SQL, Prolog or XSLT.
It would work about as well as banning abortion - of course it would still happen, just outside of the view of the law. Like, come on. If the life of your child was on the line, you wouldn't figure out a way to pay the ransom even if there was a potential for prosecution later?

Also I'm not sure how the fine would even be decided to be effective? 3 years in prison? Would absolutely gladly trade it for the life of my child. Probably any amount of time in prison would be spent gladly in order to save your child. And once we start throwing ideas like life imprisonment(because really, can't go much higher than that) it would be struck down as not proportionate to the crime.
Now introducing, TypeLang! A strictly typed spoken language with core emotional concepts built into the standard library and immutablity as default. Easily transpiled into dozens of different languages, such as English, Japanese, JavaScript, and Smooth Jazz.
You mean they are buying assets and thus the money is simply providing liquidity and has tangential value. They aren't just printing it and giving it away, this subtle but significant difference is one of the reasons that money supply and inflation have very little if anything to do with one another.
Why is it more convenient?
Iteratees use a slightly different interface: when you feed one values you get the next iteratee state (which is either "done" or "in-progress", roughly - you can feed an EOF if you want an iteratee to finish, you don't have a "current" value until then) and any unconsumed values (possibly all of them). It's counterintuitive to start with, but it makes for a really nice representation.
> The thing is, your program is only as asynchronous as the lowest I/O level. It doesn't really make much sense to have your business logic take advantage of this, if your program will block on lower levels.

it's called non-blocking sockets, precisely the thing that 'gevent' brings on the table without breaking conventions of other existing interfaces, contrary to what 'asyncio' does - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42448664/async-generator...

And no, it's not only the lowest I/O level, since there are groups, queues, chains, and other primitives [1] that work on higher levels without special keywords too.

[1] https://www.gevent.org/api/index.html
Not worth reading to the end at all. King didn't even think of a proper ending, prefacing it with a suggestion to stop reading before it. The series got weaker and weaker after second book.
What was the answer though?
This had a thread just a few months ago: Setting User-Agent Field? (1996) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25670161 - Jan 2021 (64 comments)

also these- but I'm pretty sure there have been others - maybe someone will find them:

Q: Setting User-Agent Field? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14250473 - May 2017 (1 comment)

Q: Setting User-Agent Field? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1655648 - Sept 2010 (5 comments)
Don't get hung up on the numbers. What's gratifying now also has the power to be very demotivating later.

Fall back to 75% or 50% every now and then and be conscious that it's not bad at all, but still progress.

I don't know where you are in your lifting career, but it pays 5x later on, when numbers don't matter anymore. You'll be amazed how quickly you can build strength back up after a break or injury or how much muscle is still "just there".
Not relevant in meaning, but relevant for the order of the letters in the word:

deicide: The killing of a god
I thought we were having a civilized discussion, not Reddit back and forth.

But to answer your actual question - societies decide it, through trade bodies, through unions, through courts, through commissions , parliaments, senates and so forth. Individualism is nonsense and never makes sense out of internet arguments.
Yes, because the Russian state has nothing better to do then inconvenience the operation of a foreign fuel pipeline for a few days.
I wonder why this was downvoted rather then argued against if someone happens to disagree. The characterization of the feminism movement of that time as being predominantly middle class white women movement is valid. Imo, that is why it ended up being successful. Some people think that career or prestigious professional roles is frivolous demand, but I personally strongly disagree. Just like it is legitimate for men to want them, it is equally legitimate for women to seek good jobs with good pay, good conditions and respect.
Just like middle and upper class guys on HN seek jobs that they like and that challenge them, women wanting these is equally valid.

Yet moreover, issues like domestic violence were really acute for many middle class women too, having good job makes escape so much more easier. Career is not just frivolous thing, it is safety. Yet moreover, middle class men get sick, injured die and career makes you safer.

And second, discrimination on the jobs was as acute. Those women (and their families) needed work, full stop. Them being paid less or having bad working conditions was something that impacted them a lot. It was not just pocket money where the difference does not matter.
I prefer imperative code over collector like APIs for two reasons, both visible in this example:

1. The intention of the code is obscured by more layers of abstraction, increasing complexity.

2. Small changes to what the code is conceptually doing tend to lead to larger changes to the actual code than with imperative code.

For the first point, reading through this post and the previous post linked, the code is doing the following:

Taking the entries of a map of product to count. Turning those entries into a different class, a row of each product and count. Then it collects this list on one hand. On the other hand, it sums the total, based on the per product cost and the count of the product in the cart. Then it combines the row list and the total cost into one object, returning it.

Deconstructed, half of this code is just unnecessary complexity. A map of products to count, and a list of unique product/count tuples are theoretically identical. You can iterate over them, find specific products, etc. There /might/ be a reason to specifically desire a list; However why would that code be coupled with code to sum the cost of the cart?

All in all, why is the code not just:

public BigDecimal sumPrice(Cart cart) {
BigDecimal sum = BigDecimal.ZERO;
for (Map.Entry<Product,Integer> entry : cart.getProducts.entrySet()) {
sum = sum.add(entry.getKey().getPrice().multiply(new BigInteger(entry.getValue())
}
return sum;
}

For the second point, briefly: Consider how code would have to change to calculate a deal, such as Buy One Get One Free. Such code to do this calculation would add another layer to the collector with another function defined somewhere (or hidden in some other existing abstraction, such as OP's CartRow::getRowPrice) instead of just visible in the function that calculates a cart subtotal. If the deal relied upon concepts not limited to one row at a time, eg buy any two flavors of chips for %25 off, the proposed solution would have to be completely rewritten.
If we can agree the act is in self-interest, and we can agree that society has a role to play in disincentivizing certain self-interested actions that harm the greater good, then we can agree that society should apply those disincentives to ransoms.
I'm confident that it is evolution. People don't evolve, populations evolve.
Objectively is the new literally.

Just read “in my opinion”.
Interesting. The german word entscheiden (decide) is also based on scheiden (to part) as in Scheidung (divorce) and dahinscheiden (to die slowly). And even more meanings from the same root-word.
Lo más destacado de la semana (03/05/2021–09/05/2021)
Just in case it's not obvious to everyone, the name is a reference to the tee(1) [1] shell command, part of "coreutils" [2]. The manual page begins:

tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files

It's a proper vintage tool, listing RMS as an author.

Edit: less repetitive repetition, added coreutils link.

[1]: https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/tee.1.html

[2]: https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/
How Data Labeling Contributes to the War Against Covid-19?
> Three very resources rich regions. They are exploiting their natural resources to compensate for their (relative) low productivity.

This can't be the reason, simply because the relative share of GDP is so small. For Denmark, Sweden and Finland natural resources amount to less than 0.5% of GDP. For Norway it's 7%.

For Australia it's 5.4%, and for Canada 1.9%.

For comparison: In Congo, Lybia and Kuweit natural resources explain nearly 50% of GDP.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.TOTL.RT.ZS?most_...
The pension crisis is because people aren't having enough children, because they're working too much. Working less is a solution to that, strangely enough.
> Lets say solar, is the measurement made during the day? Because for most of the clock, they added zero solar.

should I tell you what most people do during the night?
> I don't know how people are able to stare at code, walking through those complex patterns, for 6 hours a day, let alone the entire 9-5 time

I sometimes enter "the zone" in which I lose track of time and work just flows. But not every day.
This is not really hard to explain. In both the USSR and in China you had massive famines in the countryside during the initial periods of rapid industrialization. Why? Well, put yourself in the shoes of the party officials:

1. They wanted to rapidly convert the society from one that was based on subsistence farming with very few factories (read, steel production) to a modern industrial society in which a small group of farmers produced large amounts of surplus food that can support a growing urban population of factory workers (and thus produce lots of steel. Never underestimate the fetish for steel production in early communist economic planning).

But how to reach that point when most people were peasant farmers growing just enough for themselves and there was no surplus for all the planned factories?

2. All communist (and indeed, left-wing) movements in Europe originated among urban intellectuals that viewed the poor serfs/farmers as dangerous political enemies (although sometimes there was a romanticism involved). This was because actual farmers tended to be very conservative, devoutly religious, and not really interested in building utopian societies. The hotbed of "class consciousness" was always the factory (in the city) and sometimes the mine, but never the poor rural farm. This divide between the higher income urban left and the lower income conservative/religious rural areas continues to the present, and from the slaughter of the farmers in the Vendee during the French revolution to the slaughter of farmers by Mao, it's usually the rural population that gets hammered in the wake of a successful left-wing revolution.

So there is an obvious opportunity to kill two birds with one stone: confiscate food from the farmers, take it to the cities to feed the new urban workforce, and in the process you eliminate a lot of people who were never really part of the revolutionary team.

Now in both China and Russia, this was not advertised as a program to kill farmers. It was advertised as bold new agricultural reform program that would unlock massive productivity gains via collectivization, and wouldn't loyal workers in the countryside want to send some of their extra food to the city? The party will be sending someone by to collect.

And this is the good-enough first order explanation of why we had all these famines, rather than specific scientific theories about agriculture.
I am aware of how staged rollouts work, but you cant say that you treat all developers the same if you give some features you don't give others - regardless of their maturity.

Even giving those "preferred" developers advance notice of upcoming features isn't treating them the same as other developers. I really don't see how you can think otherwise.