skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have been listening to the podcast on Spotify[1].

[1] https://open.spotify.com/show/6xbzk3HMnP0pRohjm6hBvz?si=9lZi...
96% of iOS users turn off tracking after update
In that case there is a human being who is legally responsible for the decision that is made. I have no problem with that. If the person is "just nodding", with possibly illegal consequences, that person can be sued.
I remember reading about a year ago how thieves have been seen using BLE scanner apps walking through parking garages looking for computers and phones to steal. Even in "sleep state" many of them are discoverable through bluetooth.
I've worked on teams historically that did pairing (even pairing all day), and mobbing all day, and I don't get the hate.

If the main issue is burnout, then what's up? Even working solo you can burn out, so I don't think that's a valid argument unless someone can convince me that specifically pairing is causing the burn out.

The biggest thing is you need a team that can trust and support each other.
Probably for the same reason why Apple added additional measures that Tile and co. didn't - Apple is placed on a higher pedestal and has a lot more attention focused on it.

Put bluntly, people don't care about Tile as much as they care about Apple (in both a positive and negative way).
As with almost everything, the truth is somewhere in the middle – pairing isn't universally good, nor univerally bad. It shouldn't be done all the time, neither should it never be used.

"There is no silver bullet." Fred Brooks wrote this over 30 years ago, and it still applies.
Show HN: Echoes – Voice first messaging for fast and collaborative remote teams
Making great products needs collaboration, but losing face-to-face spontaneous conversations slows down the decision-making everyday. After I starting work remotely since the pandemic, I have been looking for fast communication tools that can make team closer yet not fatigued. Unfortunately I didn’t find it, so I created Echoes.

Echoes makes communication in remote as seamless as in the office:

Voice-first messaging: Using voice messages can ensure seamless communication while reducing zoom fatigue.

Global shortcut keys: No matter what app you are working on, you can always speak directly to your teammates, not breaking workflow.

Autoplay: Voice messages will be played automatically. If you don’t want to be disturbed, messages will not be auto-played for you.

Smart status: Status will change automatically when people are not available.

No missed messages: You can catch up on conversations after you come back, just like an old-fashioned answering machine.

Echoes is great for small remote teams communicating and collaborating. It has completely changed the way we communicate, and we can’t wait to share it with everyone. We are currently in the beta version and looking forward to your free trial and feedback. My team and I will be around all day and would love to hear your feedback!
>Similarly, trying to rent out one beach condo sucks. You have to market, and the marketing cost isn't spread over multiple units.

Why does he care about trying to rent it? That's why he gives a % to his property managers.
PNAS has garnered itself a nickname among my peers, for these exact reasons. The worst is the sponsored paper section. I have encountered some real garbage in PNAS papers.

However, I've also encountered real garbage in other respected journals, like Nucleic Acid Research. Journals are a business, and most of them go after what's catchy.
Wealth, crypto, high salary of FAANG engineers, data structures and algorithm interviews, diversities are the pet peeves of average HN commenters.

Guaranteed to hit front page when the articles revolved around these areas.
I've always wondered about that theory.

Is the point to move liquid shipments to trucks/ships because it's safer somehow? or simply to make it so difficult to transport liquid fuels that people quit using them?

I suspect that pipeline activism mostly results in the former.
Laws that influence prices by altering incentives are not price manipulation. Laws that say "Hey, those prices you've set? Yeah, you can't do that, change them." Is price manipulation. I've called the thing you've suggested price manipulation, because the price of X to one tier necessarily influences the price of X to another tier (smaller companies get a better deal, which was your goal).

Changing a price in one spot necessarily impacts price in another. It limits the ability for a company to set its own prices arbitrarily, in fact, that's the whole point. I'm using the term "price manipulation" in its literal sense.

A sales tax doesn't quite fall under this because if a company wants to sell at $Y, but sales tax is assessed, the can choose to reduce the item price to hit a customer facing price of $Y. The point of your idea is to limit the price that can be offered in specific circumstances.

In my original post, I didn't use the phrase "price manipulation", I said that a potential negative view taken by a conservative could be "Manipulating an independent company's pricing by legal mandate in some new way is regulatory overreach.". And I stand by the idea that that could still be a negative view taken by a conservative to argue against your proposal. I'm not personally saying that it's a bad idea, I'm providing a balancing thought against your suggestion that it was unlikely to be viewed negatively from a conservative viewpoint.
I remember trying out and writing about Alpine vs Debian in the context of Docker images a few years ago and I remember someone commented saying with Alpine they got substantially worse performance when using Python to connect to a PostgreSQL database using the official Python pg package (it requires C dependencies) in an isolated benchmark that performed a bunch of reads.

I don't base any decisions around micro benchmarks but that example struck me as interesting because this was a case where the performance difference between using Alpine and Debian was real and affected user level applications.

For the last few years I also run Debian Slim for my base Docker images and don't worry about it.

Yes my images might be a little larger than Alpine but it's non-issue in the real world. For smaller scale deploys once the base image is pulled down initially it's there in both cases, so now it comes down to pulling app level changes (code or package deps) which is comparable in size with both distros.

And for huge scale deployments it doesn't matter because typically you'd use custom ISOs with as much pre-loaded static content as possible, so you could easily bake in a specific Debian Slim image into the ISO so when you pull down your application image at deploy time it skips having to pull the base image entirely negating any wins that Alpine might have had for pull speeds and network usage.

Sure Alpine has less attack surface since it's a smaller code base but we're comparing it to Debian here. They have a 28 year track record of being unbelievably dependable and well supported.
Your experience is not unique. Even when data is returned, it's sometimes incomplete or (purposefully?) made near impossible to read. I’m working with a privacy lawyer and a couple other engineers on some tools that would allow users to exert their rights (under GDPR, CCPA, and similar laws) more effectively. If anyone is interested in learning more or being a test subject, feel free to reach out.
I was about to comment that it's somewhat similar to The Three Body Problem that's often discussed on hn's comments sections from time to time but decided to search for that last phrase and apparently it's from a /r/nosleep story:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nosleep/comments/2j3nxz/radio_silen...
There is a network of people all using the Whistle Finder online and they work together to find items around the world on Discord.
This is stopping me from installing me on my laptop:

> OpenRC is not as good, but thankfully it's slated to be replaced in the foreseeable future.

I am really curious and couldn't find information on the web. Change to what?
Ideal scenarios rarely exist IRL. You may be in a rush. Inexperienced. Tired. On a problem you don't completely understand yet. With incomplete information. Exploring data or the problem space. Experimenting with an API. Trying to debug the code your colleague wrote, or a bug in the underlying lib.

That's why practicality beats purity in the vast majority of situations.

There is a place for purity, but you need a hell of a setup.
Also true - but you might call that a separate problem, and one for which the solution is very unlikely to be "no government at all". Bitcoin takes currency permanently out of the purview of all forms of organized governance, barring unreasonable invasion of privacy. All of us now have to live in that world, and none of us were consulted - Satoshi didn't take a vote. That is far less democratic. Deliberately and unilaterally undermining our organized institutions - flawed as they are - is, if not illegal, then certainly antisocial.

Of course, you could say all the same things about e2e encryption, which society seems to have decided - grudgingly, and with much pushback - is ultimately a good thing. But perhaps free speech and financial exchange are different animals, McCutcheon vs. the Federal Election Commission notwithstanding.
>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.

I've had the opposite reaction - I'd watch something I've seen before in 4k remastered or something and it would be a worse experience because the extra details reveal the low quality tricks you can get away with on lower reproduction quality. I've even noticed poor acting a lot more on higher def. It took away from immersion IMO.
Skyward is a great light read by him, but note that it’s sci-fi, not fantasy.
That is the only thing what it does.

Except it does "only" local wireless transmission with _every_ iPhone, not just yours. It's exactly what Tile does, except just built into the OS.
Except this is a boring article that adds nothing. Just like most like it.
They’re really nice until everything on the node is completely broken. Then they are a massive obstruction to access and understanding what went wrong due to the opaqueness. It’s best to do some drills on a purposely broken system to gain some deep insight into recovery scenarios.
> unless someone can convince me that specifically pairing is causing the burn out

If someone tells you something is causing them anxiety and stress can't you just accept that rather than requiring to be 'convinced'?

You say you want a team that supports and trusts... yet you don't believe people when they say something's causing them pain.
Getting super-high levels of press attention is both a blessing and a curse for Apple.

A blessing because they get loads of hype and attention when they release a new laptop or cell phone - far more than Dell or HTC product releases do.

A curse because it's been possible to buy generic GPS tracker modules on ebay for years, and yet the moment Apple starts selling trackers they get far more attention than ebay sellers ever did. And stories about chinese factory worker suicides, right-to-repair and environmental damage from raw material mining all like to mention Apple by name.
Starting from the basis that there are less-than-honorable people in every domain it is perfectly reasonable to assume that a certain percentage of businesses might be (or are) willing to cut corners or behave badly in pursuit of whatever drives them. This could be profits, survival, competitive advantage, all of the above, etc.

I tend to react badly to broad-brush painting of business and those who run them as greedy and evil. There is a cultural undertone that seems to think this way. I can't understand how this happens other than to think that people who think this way (broad characterization) simply don't engage in any critical thinking at all and don't understand business.

The vast majority of businesses, large and small, are comprised of honest hard-working people who have no ill intent of any kind. The percentage has to be in the high 9's, like 99.999%. If this were not the case it would be very evident.

Large corporations can behave badly due to the power they can wield. A simple example of this are companies that have entire floors full of attorneys and can muscle little guys into submission by simply being able to outspend them in legal jousting. I have been at the receiving end of this and it is nasty. You are entirely powerless and can't do a thing about you. The asymmetry is beyond evident and, yes, very much unfair.

This, in my opinion, is a structural failure of our legal system. I am not a lawyer, so I can't really dissect this down to details. I just think that "equal under the law" depend on how much money you have to tilt that equality. I don't know what could be changed in order to achieve balance.

A simple example of this could be patents. A good utility patent can cost in the order of $25K to $50K to secure and take years. A large company has the resources to write hundreds of patents per year. Small to medium businesses are generally more innovative and creative than large organizations with lots of inertia. However, they are often starved for cash, which means they have to choose between innovating, paying the bills, keeping people employed and existing or dumping cash into patent after patent. This creates a situation where small to medium businesses end-up living in a very real legal mine field of patents that could, at any time, take them out. Beyond that, patent litigation --any litigation-- is so expensive that almost anyone has to cave immediately.

Yes, we could do a lot better in ensuring fairness and socially responsible behavior across the board. Not sure how we get there when our political system's fitness function is completely disconnected from delivering anything of true value to society. As long as politicians are evaluated through a fitness function with that consists of votes and not much else, we are not going to have leadership who cares about doing anything other than lying and pandering for votes. How do we fix anything when these are the kinds of people running the nation?
> unless someone can convince me that specifically pairing is causing the burn out.

For many people, socialising is energy-draining. Thus pair programming is extra tiring. While I do enjoy pair programming in some circumstances - for particularly tricky problems, or for mentoring - I would struggle (to the point that I would no longer like or be effective at my job) if I had to do it all-day every day. I can believe that some people can be productive with the distraction of someone else constantly there, but I'm nowhere near as productive as I am working on my own.
I agree that in an ideal world we should just write load code using byte loads and shifts. But in the world we live in, compilers only got the ability to recognize that and emit a bswap instead in relatively recent [0] versions (compared to the age of C). And the recognition can still depend on the exact pattern used. Also, debug builds will still emit the whole shift mess, which in some cases can be annoying.

[0] https://godbolt.org/z/jMbqT86jo
> I open a draft PR the moment I make my first commit on a branch, for visibility.

If the people responsible for reviewing your work don't want to see your work in progress, just wait to open the PR. Consider that they may be inundated with all kinds of notifications and trying to silence things that are not immediate action items. Don't take it personally. If your director prefers it, just wait to open the PRs.

> I commit a lot.

There is nothing wrong with this. But consider that your commits ought to be easy for others on your team to use. They should be discreet units of work. This is useful for debugging if someone needs to use `git blame` or `git bisect` to figure out why a piece of code does what it does or when and why it was introduced. You can rewrite your commit history into discreet units of work by using `git rebase -i` and squashing some (or all) of the commits in your branch together before you open your PR.

> The director expects senior engineers to have very little chatter on their PRs. They should be ready to merge with little discussion.

In general, communication about your work as an engineer is important. It's one of my pet peeves when team leads complain about too much communication. That being said, there are at least two legitimate reasons for the director's position: first, as I mentioned before, they may have too many messages coming in and be trying to cut back on some unnecessary noise. Help them out with this by avoiding unactionable comments and things that you can take care of yourself.

> Rather than linting before pushing, I enjoy waiting for Hound's comments and fixing them afterward.

I suggest installing local linting tools in your IDE. There's no reason to burden your team with extra messages that you could have taken care of on your own machine.

> The director went through my commits and saw some commit messages like "uncomment code", "remove commented block"

While it's not a good practice to commit commented code, sometimes mistakes happen. You can squash these commits into the previous ones so they don't pollute your git history. Remember, half the point of git commits is to understand how and why your code got to it's current state. If you have to pass a bunch of accidental, cleanup, or whitespace commits to get to the information you are looking for, it can make it really hard to work with the code base in the future.

In general, I don't really see anything wrong with this feedback, though I understand that it can be annoying to have to change your preferred working style. My advice, never escalate something like this. If you can't come to an agreement about it with your director, you have two options, either suck it up and deal with it, or start looking for a new job.
5k more a month just for switching jobs is pretty sweet. Even less responsibility too.
Monitoring Machine Learning Models for Silent Failures
"Luck" tends to happen to people that work really really hard though. So it's a question as to whether buying into that lottery is worth it to you, or not.
I might be completely missing something here, but I don't seem to spot any relation to the OpenBMC software payload that is currently available for certain existing BMCs. Perhaps they are not looking to integrate the two, but it would seem like a lot of duplicate work if you create new hardware but then not use existing open software to power it (aside from the FPGA bitstream of course).
>We all know why, companies are chasing profits at any cost,

I wonder if that's even true 100% of the time.

It could simply be programmers + feature creep, bolting great wads of software to systems with small value on the margin.

It would be interesting to talk to software people in the gambling business, you'd think that would be Ground Zero for nefarious attacks.
This is oddly important. From the conclusion:

> While this vulnerability has no real-world implications, we discuss whether it indicates an intrinsic propensityfor arbitrary code execution vulnerabilities in computers ingeneral.

As a joke in the 90's I looked into writing malware for Napoleonic semaphore signalling networks (Chappe semaphore), with the idea that if it were possible, then nothing could be secure. We have some general ideas that nothing is secure, and that security is a relative quality and perception, but I don't know that we've been able to formalize it into a conjecture. (Other than Hofstadter's music to break phonographs by.)

Maybe I'm missing a big obvious one, but there's something about programmable systems that they are necessarily unable to infer or deduce the output of a program beyond a certain complexity without first running it. Or maybe that there is a set of convolutions in a set of instructions whereafter the information it contains spirals off into chaos like the logistic equation and you can't formally predict how a program behaves based on its initial state. There's something about security problems that exist on the edge of computability and it seems like a perspective we could draw generalities from anyway.
That $250/month happens regardless of your employment. If you retire/get laid off/fired/startup fails, that promotion doesn't get you income anymore, but that $250/month still happens.

Granted, you likely have the privilege of working in an in-demand field so you won't be out of a job for long, but not everyone is like that.
I know it's sacrilege, but you could build it in Electron. It is an HTML engine, but it is certainly not a pile of shoehorned libs.
You are not wrong. Browsers could standardize the information exchange and approval that happens for cookies and then implement a sane UI for that similar to how e.g. browser location tracking requires opting in. That should be a perfectly valid alternative for home grown UX that website developers add themselves and offer a better UX.

To do this you would need to provide the legalese for that in some standardized way so the browser can pop up some UI that allows users to review that and approve/reject that. It should simply refuse any kind of cookie until the user has approved. That approval should be removable as well. Part of that should also cover having a sane API around that so sites can decide if they need to fall back to displaying their popups for this. Browsers that support this could even start defaulting to block all forms of cookies until explicit permission is in place for a website, regardless of existing UI. Many users have extensions that do this.

Wouldn't be the worst idea. Of course the flip side is that it also makes it easier for users to say "no" a lot (I would). And there is the notion that this may be a grey area under the current legal text. And of course some browser vendors have vested interest in the whole cookie & tracking business (Google).
I'm surprised to hear this, maybe trying to salvage the old binary might have had some sense, but the client already went for a complete re-engineering, recognising the low availability of this rare chip as a great threat.
Apple's surveillance network is a lot bigger.
How do you deal with TVs increasing in size or dropping in price for the last 40 years?

How do you deal with computers dropping in price for the last 40 years?

Have these industries had issues with deflation?
If you have a million stick it in a boring old index fund. Above market returns require above market amounts of work.
Sure, specializing is fine, but why not use it on the desktop? I've run it on a laptop and then desktop and it's been perfectly fine.
Linus says:

"If the GNU kernel had been ready last spring, I'd not have bothered to even start my project: the fact is that it wasn't and still isn't. Linux wins heavily on points of being available now."

Is he referring to GNU Hurd that is still unfinished?