skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I had GitHub claim my private git repos were not personal data. Because it was code, forgetting that my name and email are attached to every commit.

This brings to mind a few questions.

1. If a site stores multiple copies of a particular piece of personal data, let's say an email address, do they have to give you every instance when you ask for your data, or just tell you that they have your email address?

For example, if I use email address as an account identifier, so it is used as the primary key in the Users table in my database, and as a foreign key in my Purchased table, do I have to say send something that says your email address is in 1 row of one table and 13 rows of another table?

2. If I have to give back copies of your personal data that is in content you uploaded, what if that content contains personal information of other people, too?

If you had let others commit to your private GitHub repo, for example, their personal data would be in there. If GitHub has to give your commits to that repo in response to your GDPR request, do they have to filter them so that they only return the commits you committed?

What if I submitted an issue, you committed a fix, and in the commit message you thank me by email address for diagnosing the issue? Does GitHub have to remove my email address from the copy of the commit message when they respond to your GDPR request?

3. What about services that provide storage but don't process the content of that storage except to keep redundant copies or backups to protect you from hardware failure, such as Dropbox or Amazon S3? If I ask Amazon for personal information on me, do they have to figure out that you uploaded your contact list to S3 and my name, email, and phone number are there and tell me about it?
you never had to worry about ransomware back when we used clay tablets for accounting.
Ah, I see. Not segmented pipeline, segmented pipeline control. That makes a little more sense. However it might make it significantly more difficult to make coordination between segments possible: The self organizing behavior at work with car driving may be significantly different than what is required for a pipeline.

People driving cars are essentially doing what is best for themselves individually (within the bounds of the law), and that ends up translating to something that works for the whole. With a pipeline, that might not work: If pressure gets too high in one area, it might take highly coordinated control across thousands of miles to bleed off contents into buffer tanks & ease pressure a dozen segments away.

I'm not saying that couldn't be done, I'm sure the SCADA systems could be isolated from each other in this way, it just seems like it would require a lot more difficulty with explicit coordination between technicians, not a self-organizing system such with driving on a highway.
Yes, the people who sold the software to the university made a ton of money.
Several additional possibilities for why we might be alone:

* alone because there was no need to simulate a second intelligent species

* alone because there was no desire to simulate a second intelligent species

* alone because there were not enough resources to simulate a second intelligent species
In the 80s I had a keychain whistle finder. I.e. whistle twice and the device responds by beeping. It seems the AirTag is similar technology but 10x as expensive, with only little more real value. Am I missing something?
the ideal scenario with functional programming like this is to reason about the code, and may be algebraically model it mentally so that you "know" it works.

But i find a lot of programmers don't do that - but instead write a first version which they don't truly understand (or understand completely), and then use stepped debugging to tweak the program until they get to a verison that works to their desired outcome.
I closed down my simple account months ago.

If only they would stop texting me daily about my account no longer being connected.
> ...businesses already wary of China’s capital controls, Communist Party-dominated legal system and state surveillance apparatus. Those are just some of the concerns that have capped the yuan’s share of global payments at around 3%, well below levels commensurate with China’s contribution to world trade and economic output.

Currently the main issue is capital controls, IMO. If these were removed the Yuan's global use would no doubt explode.
An architectural adapter.

I can't tell you why Swift would "not be suitable" for it as I never claimed that it wasn't.

What I did claim is that it is less suitable for writing these kinds of adapters between its native architectural style and non-native architectural styles, because it is more restrictive. And being more restrictive is entirely intentional.

And being more restrictive is probably a Good Thing™, overall, in order to prevent silly mistakes, f it weren't for the fact that large parts of the programs we write require, well "strongly request", different architectural styles.

Now if you were actually able to express different architectural styles naturally within the language, you wouldn't need to do so many unsafe metaprogramm-y hackish things.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> The animal separation part is confusing to me.

Have you read her fiction, particularly the Farseer and Tawny Man trilogies? Her fantasy universe, and the main characters, involve bonding with an animal so completely that you are essentially one combined being that inhabits both bodies. An emotional peak of the series involve the slow process of aging, and eventual passing of one of the main characters, who happens to be a wolf that is bonded.

Her phrasing here isn't just whimsical musings, but a bit of creative writing that combines her reflections on aging with an homage to her fictional work and style. Her words and message here will connect deeply with those familiar with her work, or at least it did with me.
Also: The Age of Napoleon. https://ageofnapoleon.com
Writing books is not really a good idea
> but rest assured that there are those who aren't built that way

Yeah, the title suggests an anti-pair-programming rant, but the author seems to have stockholm-syndrome'd himself into accepting it. I tried pair programming once, a long time ago, when it first "came out". We immediately ran into all sorts of practical issues like, how do you check your e-mail? (Back then, you had to read e-mail in a dedicated e-mail client like Outlook). What if there's documentation that needs to be read? Take turns reading a page? I can't even conjure up a world where pair programming is effective in my imagination.
For the moment managed RonDB will provide the availability of the cloud, but remember that the managed version is still in development. The steps to go 6 9s requires 1) Integrate cloud APIs such that we know when the cloud provider will freeze the instances 2) Provide global replication between cloud regions and failover handling of this. As mentioned reaching 6 9s requires both RonDB SW that is capable of reaching 6 9s as well as operational competence to actually deliver it. This is what we're aiming at, to make this availability reachable for normal users without this operational competence to deliver 6 9s.
By default, there are ads in Firefox on the new tab page: sponsored top sites tiles and sponsored content from Pocket.
It's true we're all working in the margins of efficiency, but that's like saying there's no difference between a Falcon 1 and Starship. Saturn V isn't close to the limits of how big you can make a rocket, nor how efficiently you can make a rocket, nor how cheaply you can fly a rocket for. There have been plenty of proposals along the way for bigger, cheaper, more modular, and more reusable spacecraft, plenty of which are totally compatible with historic methods. Even literally “keep flying Saturn V” would have been better than what we did.
Last time I checked the amount of sleep I need doesn't go down when an oil pipeline stops flowing.

It's offloading the risk to drivers to benefit these companies first and foremost, which is ridiculous. The cherry on top is the article pointing out even with the extra hours they won't be anywhere near meeting demand...
I like Sanderson, I really do, but I wish he would aim for a bit more brevity. He has a really interesting story to tell, and built an incredibly creative world, but it's like he gets distracted by all the other stories he would like to tell. Just like Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time, Way of Kings seems to get slower with each book as more subplots are developed and explored.

But I think my biggest complaint about Way of Kings is that the characters often make such frustrating decisions. The fate of the world is at stake and people are petty, self-absorbed, secretive, and sullen. Maybe that's reality, but it's so frustrating to read sub-plots that drag out for hundreds of pages simply because people won't communicate.

I miss, to some degree, books like King's Gunslinger and Moorcock's Elric, that could tell a story in ~200 pages. Or even the TSR pulp fantasy books of the 80's which all seemed to be 300-400 pages. Now everything is super-sized, but I don't feel like I'm getting more "story", I'm getting in-depth descriptions of clothing and internal monologues on what to cook for dinner.

Despite that critique, I still recommend Way of Kings (and Wheel of Time!). Just flip through the filler.
nothing will ever be found. the experiment was flawed/doomed to begin with due to the huge galactic distances involved. satellite data has ruled out any habitable planets in a close enough radius to ever be detectable by seti even if they did have intelligent life
[Edit: Article is spot on]

In my experience, pairing works really well to deal with ambiguity, as in problem solving.

In my experience, management often mistakes ambiguity with uncertainty when allocating resources to a project or engagement. This results in terrible pairing experiences where you've been allocated to a project where your normal tech. stack simply doesn't apply. You're suddenly in the weeds learning a new language / framework / deployment-environment playing catch-up with your pair, while your pair is trying to burn-down the actual task/story at hand.

Yes, Software engineers should be willing to learn new things. But, No, I'm not willing to sacrifice the primary psychological safety of knowing "I'm qualified to do my job" just to keep a cadence.
Are you American? Or somewhere where 40 hours plus is normal or time off is 2 weeks or less.
I ask because it also seems prevalent in this thread to imagine that free time is a waste, and we ignore places where more free time does exist already.

People do more than just TV.

It’s more time spent in with your community. Gardening and spending time outdoors. Time spent exercising or taking a long walk. Spending more time with my child in their formative years. Making music or painting to stimulate my mind differently than the usual work. Reading many books.

What is production, without free time is. What is production, without a life to enjoy.

An active community, body, or brain is not recreation, it’s oxygen.
The question is not just whether what was built (Amazon) is valuable, but also how valuable what would have been built had Amazon not existed. At best that will be a fraction of Amazon's market value. At worst it could actually be negative.

> How much would be appropriate... 1%? 5%? 25%?

I would argue that a flat percentage isn't the appropriate way to apportion. It should be something like 100% (spread amongst shareholders) of the first $1 million, then progressively less as you jump up in orders of magnitude such that by the time you're looking at 100's of billions it's less than 1%.

This models two things:

- The greater the value of the company, the more likely it is that this is attributable to a market flaw rather the providing of genuine societal value.

- There is a societal cost to wealth disparity (aside from political issues, it actually undermines the market mechanism). Thus as your wealth level becomes more extreme, you should have to provide more to society in order to earn the same marginal wealth gain to compensate for this cost.
yes and this is why a lot of us have started runnning CI on PR's and failing PR's if they don't pass basic quality gateways like linting.
6-day weeks are still the norm in Thailand. A lot of businesses seem hellbent on not letting employees work remote if they can prevent it.
Is Serbia having its own MeToo moment?
Actually just yesterday I was thinking maybe I could get 32bit Firefox to run on Linux instead of 64bit, so that there's a hard-cap to how much memory it uses (per process)... would be a less invasive option than disabling swapping like I'm currently doing.
So, um, was that a typo? Am I parsing your sentence wrong? Been waiting for an edit but it doesn't seem one is coming. :-)
Rendering performance demo: 20.000 delta updates per second
I haven't heard the podcast. Did they make the distinction between "lab created" and "accidental release?"

Some of Wade's ideas are interesting, but I don't like his guilty-until-proven-innocent tone regarding lab creation.

On the other hand, accidental release is a different matter with clear precedent. It is generally accepted that SARS-CoV originated in animals, yet it also generally accepted that SARS-CoV was accidentally released from multiple laboratories in the early 2000s, resulting in pocket outbreaks:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3323155/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC416634/
Mercury: A modern Visual Basic, with a future and support for more platforms
Version 7.6 for Ida Freeware
That tells me you have a team of people who have not done their jobs, or let too many decisions be made by committee.

We have a large piece of software at our institution that communicates automatically with students, staff, and faculty based on various triggers (grades, dates, etc). The hardest part of that process was writing the messages. It took 1 semester to get the system operational, and two years to dial in the messaging.

The worst thing you can do is create a "specific" message for an individual with generic language targeted at groups. Which, subsequently, it seems is what most institutions do. No idea why. It's easier, I suppose?
If you don't purely do piano and do synthesizers, and write music with DAWs, there's even more crossover. You "program" drums/synths. That's literally what they call it, even though it's conceptually somewhat different. I got into it only to realize it's very similar to "work".
Simple doesn't mean "everything you throw at it works ootb."

Simple means "not complex."

Busybox shell and musl are both less complex than bash and glibc.
I have a bunch of full frame lenses.

Recently I looked at some very old ones I haven't used in a long time. I thought they are faulty (soft).

After some diagnosing I found that it is not the fault of lenses but rather in the meantime I have started looking at images at 1:1 in Lightroom and gotten used to ridiculously sharp images from new cameras.

Have you ever watched an old TV show and despaired how unwatchable it is because of low quality of image? Yes, that's the same thing -- our tastes change.
Is the simple passive NFC functionality even handled the same way as the much more complex AirTag functionality? With this NFC URL modification, does the regular AirTag functionality even still work?

I love seeing things hacked like this, but for all we know this same thing could have been accomplished by swapping out the guts of the device. (Note: I'm not saying the demo is a fraud, I know stacksmashing is legit) There aren't many details in the article, and the demo doesn't really show much.
The company builds its own speech-to-text engine and has better accuracy than Google in German and Turkish languages. Independent review: https://www.abtipper.de/transkription/sprache-zu-text/
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe HTML tags can still be lexed with a regular expression. The syntax of the script element is cryptic, but it does not contain any recursive productions, so it should still be possible to lex correctly with a regular expression.
I still use a 32-bit Atom netbook from a decade ago daily.
Recursion in Python: An Introduction
I would expect that the drug production and export business is a more apt analogy.
I'm not just talking about Java - I've also seen this in mobile projects in Swift for example.

> And with most people being more familiar with imperative style, it makes the functional style harder to maintain for them.

It has nothing to do with functional style. It's perfectly feasible to write functional code with minimal abstraction which is easy to trace and understand. The problem is in handing over your flow of control to an overly complex black box of an abstraction layer.
“Excellence is never an accident. It is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, and intelligent execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives - choice, not chance, determines your destiny.”

― Aristotle
Regardless of the source, the arguments seem pretty convincing. The politics are thick, but the facts still seem to speak for themselves. Does anyone have a solid point-by-point refutation? Preferably NOT in the form of a podcast?
No, the government will not demand to get paid in crypto. It will demand to get paid on the market equivalent of the crypto in Euros and Dollars. Then they can convert it back if they so choose.

Armies in this case are a stand-in for state power.

The entities that collect money and who decides how much money is printed are in reality the same persons.
Only one episode is listed and it goes to a dead link. Is this online somewhere else?
Plus: you can put your formatting rules into your `.editorconfig` and put it under source control.
Is the keychain going to hear your whistle on the other side of town?
Networking Layer with Swift Combine
I have yet to listen to The Napoleon Bonaparte Podcast mentioned by the OP, but The Age of Napoleon is probably the best podcast I have ever listened to. I would strongly recommend it to anyone even remotely interested in Napoleon.
I don’t think any laws need to change. Individual action is sufficient.

I’m unhappy with how BBVA handled this so I’ll be moving my money elsewhere.
Well this cost me some brain cells. Here is the summary:

A retrotransposon/RT (not sure the distinction), that may or may not be active in humans (mostly isn't active), when overexpressed, in the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, will integrate it into the human genome in a preferred orientation.

That is the very definition of a laboratory artifact, and there is no biological significance. If the authors want to waste their time trying to prove some biological significance, be my guest, but short of finding it integrated into "wild-type" human cells, good luck.

Also, from the article:

>Both Young and Jaenisch say they received more intense criticism for their preprint than any studies in their careers, in part because some researchers worried it played into the hands of vaccine skeptics spreading false claims about the newly authorized mRNA vaccines. “If there ever was a preprint that should be deleted, it is this one! It was irresponsible to even put it up as a preprint, considering the complete lack of relevant evidence. This is now being used by some to spread doubts about the new vaccines,” Marie-Louise Hammarskjöld, a microbiologist at the University of Virginia, posted in a comment on bioRxiv at the time.

Shame on you, Marie-Louise Hammarskjöld for even suggesting that. If the experiment was legitimate (which it appears to be), you have no business calling yourself a scientist and then advocating for the suppression of real data. For any reason, whatsoever. It is completely antithetical to the scientific process, and I am now immediately skeptical of any published work you've ever created, and what data you omitted.
Agree with many sentiments described here. I was one of the early pioneers in this area, starting with XP in 1998. At the time, it was cool because it was counter culture, rather than cargo culture. I remember having to get approval from the president of our 500 person company to come in on our own time on a Saturday to take down a cubicle wall, so that we could have a larger collective space.

Some pairings were a delight to participate in; others more strained. But when it worked, it was super cool. It was like that dribble attack on the goal where you just read each other's minds.

One thing we learned early on though, was that any real debugging didn't work well this way. We even codified it as "debugging break" where we would split apart and sort of mumble aloud the different things we were seeing as we pursued our various intuitions and hunches.

Now days, I rarely pair anymore. The skill gap in my current team is pretty varied. The sense of self is strong, which generally goes against the "us before I" gestalt of pair programming. I do find when I need to answer questions or demonstrate, I tend to put myself in the passenger chair and turn it into a pairing experience for the other.
Mozilla Foundation donations do not go toward Firefox development.
Portugal here :) Thanks for that!
> I was also an adult, and the fervor over WMD was unreal

Sure, the fervor was, as were lots of emotional aspects of the post-9/11 wave of Islamophobic hysteria. And certainly the opinion and commentary programs of the major TV news networks were often engaged in that (Fox, of course, but also MSNBC and CNN, both of whom reacted to Fox in the early 00’s even before 9/11 by chasing the bias in Fox opinion/commentary — not so much actual news — which definitely contributed to their slant and the reinforced the national post-9/11 mood well pay the beginning of the Iraq War.) This effect was smaller in the print media (but even greater in blogs, which were taking off as the new distinctly online media and didn’t tend to segregate fact and commentary or otherwise act like traditional media.)

That’s why the widely disseminated debunkings of the WMD propaganda in news coverage were also widely disregarded, but there has since become a revisionist narrative which pretends that the WMD propaganda was generally presented as unquestioned fact and contrary information suppressed by the news media.
> Choice is usually portrayed as empowerment

I read this and thought maybe we as a culture are too hung up on empowerment, power, power-seeking, etc. You say true power is not needing to choose, I say why is it important to seek power at all?
> Am I missing something?

The part where this works globally and is not constraint by how loud you are able to whistle.
>If a civilization has sufficiently advanced technology, then I would imagine they would be scouring the cosmos for more resources.

Stable elements are not scare, life is scarce. I would hope that any civilization advanced enough to travel the verse would be able to strip mine the elements it needs from lifeless rocks and leave planets with life alone.

Bezos is right that we should ultimately move resource extraction to space.
The parent was asking why public funding implied public ownership. That is the default. Multibillion dollar negotiations are a series of complicated compromises, so that the public would be willing to finance a fab they will neither own nor hold power over to satisfy global demand is well beyond the 'burden of proof' line.
No, the company is based in Germany.
Particle physics is younger than psychology and yet far more effective; why? There is a qualitative difference between the sciences which generate predictive models and those which cannot.
It still works on relatively modern drives. If the spindle or actuator arm is stuck, hitting the drive on its side (for instance by hitting a table with it) can free stuck movable parts. Worked well well into the 500GB era.
No, but I buy more ribeye steaks and restaurant meals than I need.

I'm of course way beyond fearing starvation, but there is still no real upper limit to my food expenses.
Five questions investors need to ask deeptech startups