skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think this is a good observation of the breadth of knowledge required to actually boot up a site. You're right: twiddling .htaccess while complaining about WordPress complexity seems absurd since the former is such a lower level of abstraction. I wonder if this is just due to poor documentation of wordpress, but I googled how to create personal website and there are tens of thousands of personal website explaining how to set up a personal website. I'll go one step further and criticize: this write-up is too lightly researched IMHO: if it were a research paper I'd give it a D.
Whatever your stance is on Apple's control over apps on iOS, it's a little bit beyond the pale to claim that Apple does nothing other than connect parties and facilitate the transaction.

Apple literally made the town in which their marketplace resides. They attracted residents to their town from the goodwill of their brand name, through the creation of a desirable product, and through substantial investments of marketing. People are continually attracted to this town because the crime rate is low and the city council's ordinances are suitable for the vast majority.

Apple literally built all of the existing buildings, provided anyone who wanted to participate in the economy with a garage full of tools, provided free and near-free training to anyone who wants it, and supplied people (again, for free) many of the basic raw materials which people used to build products.

Apple literally built the marketplace itself. They did an imperfect but not terrible job at minimising the number of outright hucksters. They made it so financial transactions were perceived as secure transactions[0], and that merchants' customers felt confident opening their wallets more often than in the adjacent town.

[0] This is more important than you remember. Ten years ago the concept of trusting your credit card through an app on your phone was new. By making the system highly trustworthy from the get-go, people's trust was rapidly won and rarely shaken.
Fewer travellers in and out of Sweden.
Sleep is a basic human need, too. But we all understand it’s usually inappropriate to attempt to fulfill that need at work. Same goes for sex.
"but I'm equally certain that Apple's desire to keep people using their payment system is just as much about maintaining a great user experience for users"

It's absolutely and fundamentally first about the platform-monopoly and control.

Apple has a considerable number of other 'bad users experiences' to point at to suggest that this issue, while might be a part of their legit product strategy, is way second tier to their control of the distribution.

Finally, there's also a fairly heavy 'bad user experience' in blocking from doing the things the want to do.

The answer to your question is actually in the economics:

Apple should be able to charge a premium to using their 'great experience' commensurate with the likelihood that vendors will use it, given that premium.

With a 15%/30% cut, vendors will not use the service.

With an 8% cut (assuming they'd have to pay Stripe 4% or whatever), then it may very well be worth it for vendors.

i.e. if the 'Apple Checkout' were forced to compete as an actual produced (even with it's entrenched position in the platform), the profits would be a measure of the value at least on some level.
That's perfectly understandable, I think relatively few people looked at proof-of-work in detail. I can give you a quick overview of how proof-of-work works (I understand it well enough to actually be able to do it by hand on paper), but nevertheless doing your own research always helps:

To "mine" a block, a miner attaches a random number to the content of the block (the content mostly being the actual transactions), performs a difficult calculation on the entirety (i.e. block and random number), and checks whether the result of that calculation matches a prescribed goal. The goal is to have at least a certain amount of leading zeroes in the resulting number, and it is (to everyone's best knowledge) impossible to know how many leading zeroes there will be without performing the calculation. That is the literal goal, not an analogy.

In the massively overwhelming majority of tries, this goal is not reached. The calculation was useless, and the miner tries again with a different random number attached to the block. There is no other value to the calculation than to reach the arbitrary goal. If the goal is reached, the miner has won the lottery: All participating nodes in the network accept the result (the calculation is easy to verify) and the miner may claim the rewards for themselves.

The amount of leading zeroes to achieve is directly tied to the mutually agreed upon "difficulty". If mining becomes easier and the lottery is won too quickly (say because new faster ASICs flood the market, or more miners participate), the network adjusts the difficulty up, meaning more leading zeroes, so that the overall chances of winning the lottery within a given time frame stays stable.
> This is often claimed to be an advantage of PoS: you can't get an extra increase in rate of profits by being richer (beyond the linear increase you'd expect). With PoW on the other hand, the richest have the best access to the most innovative technology and so you get superlinear profits the richer you are.

And yet, anyone who buys these proof-of-stake coins now, years after they were launched, suffers from having a cost basis orders of magnitude higher than that of the early investors. Yeah, they’re all superficially earning “the same staking ROI”. But in relative terms, the earliest investors are mopping the floor with the later investors, because the earliest investors can stake orders of magnitude more coins.

The earliest stakers become by far the biggest miners. They’re given an outsized influence over the network, and it’s sadly telling — and a bit unsurprising — that early PoS investors astroturf their coin by focusing on irrelevant minutia, e.g. “open access to staking ROI”, or whataboutism, e.g. “but what about ASIC miner distribution”. That is a classic Red Herring.

“Rate of profits” doesn’t matter more to fairness than, say, premining half or more of the outstanding supply of a given coin to give early investors absurd ROI advantages. “Fair access to yield” doesn’t matter more to fairness than exclusive pre-ICOs rounds which only prestigious investors have access to.
Two obscure features of the Lisa that weren't retained on the Mac (IIRC):

Pixels on the Lisa were not square. Tall rectangular pixels made for better font rendering.

The Lisa had virtual memory? Not sure about that, but there was a neat feature that trapped stack overflows. The OS could expand the stack with the overflow trap was triggered.
You could have said similar about the internet in 1990. It was an easily hackable network used only by geeks to share research papers and chat. Technologies start to help small niches and grow over time.

The DeFi space could eventually grow to replace any firm that acts as a middleman for digital trades: Robinhood, Wealth front etc.
Assessing mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closure effects on the spread of COVID‐19
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484
But if you assume the main thing special about this year was the virus and strategies aimed at mitigating it, you can still compare overall outcomes between jurisdictions. If tight lockdowns decrease COVID deaths but increase other deaths enough to compensate then they didn’t achieve anything. It would be valuable to know the exact breakdown but you don’t have to.
I don't have many Facebook friends, but they include people on at least 3 other continents. I'm sure a lot of folks have at least some friends in other countries.
Jobs wanted a lower price for the original Mac but lost to others who wanted to take profits. After his departure he complained about the high Mac prices and their effect on Mac market share. Conversely there’s a reason that Gassée the father of the Macintosh II was smirking about the high prices of the current Mac Pro line: https://mondaynote.com/mac-pro-fooled-you-90d560fcca99
I mean, the obvious answer here is that Apple needs to offer companies a reasonable revenue split (like, 5% or something) for these recurring subscription scenarios where it’s obvious Apple did nothing to drum up the business and is purely functioning as a (very convenient, admittedly) credit card processor.
I really wish more design docs / project reports looked like this article - talking about the whys, goals / non-goals, options considered, prototypes built, challenges, and solutions, learnings and next steps. Kudos!
Yeah, they hold the mobile app economy back so bad, that:

(a) they single-handedly created the modern mobile app platform from scratch with the first SDK (including defining the form-factor for mobile phones that all follow after 2007's iPhone) - for a decade before we had to do with Palm crap and Java Mobile, on phones with half the screen size than the first iPhone had (and usually less).

(b) they have had mobile app sales grow year-on-year since 2007, to revenue numbers that drarf the PC software sales of 1990-2005.

(c) the "unrestricted" Android environment, which doesn't hold the "creator economy" back, somehow has worse absolute app revenue despite having double the userbase (and in many countries 3x or 4x the userbase).
I guess I'm advocating for better enforcement then. If we have a walled garden, I want the garden well tended.
Could they be talking about his relationship with Melinda? She was his subordinate at Microsoft when he started their workplace romance.
Investors take risk, perform price discovery which helps allocate capital. Stakers comparatively do very little.
Remember, the 24% number is "deaths per miles driven", so it has 2 (potentially related) trends driving it: much fewer miles driven and more accidents overall.
For those who haven't heard the Bob Dylan song and would like to (probably my favorite by him, the lyrics are something else and it's worth looking those up by themselves):

It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CJHbfkROow
Do they provide the latitude and longitude in the article?
Dont give out your personal number use a virtual number
I think the comments towards the bottom of this thread is what is being referred to: https://web.archive.org/web/20140928104327if_/https://plus.g...
I remember seeing these photo sets long before that. Probably 2000 or 2001, or maybe earlier. But I couldn't tell you for sure.

EDIT: "The initial version of this site was written in the fall of 2003, running on a single server in my basement". I guess my memory is faulty.
This is a minor quibble as I largely agree, but

> In German you can combine more freely, and people will more ofen than not, get it immediately too.

It could be true but I'm sceptical, I reckon tht in most languages you can change things on the fly and people will get it. For example, the next comment down from yours has this:

> I suppose in English it's an updowngrade?

All you'd need is the context and pretty much everyone would get it. You may say that context is the difference but doesn't everything in English need a bit of context?[1] (I'm also a bit sceptical of the context thing too though!:)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_context_culture
People would immediately stop locking their phones to the Apple store though because there would be much better chat applications available outside of it.
Why are you re-linking the OP?
Total noob, but I'm wondering since generating the blockchain (at least with bitcoin) is about finding match (or should I say) partial match of a specific hash.

Could that information be somehow used to cracking encryption that relies on cryptographic hashes?
Infix notation with all the parens is the primary reason I never got comfortable with the lisps. My mind never worked like that. So I really believe there are valid personal preferences that keep people from liking languages right from the start. (I loved forth though. My mind took to it immediately.)
From my perspective (population genetics), I'd recommend anything by Adam Rutherford (Humanimal, The Book of Humans) . He hits similar topics, but with the citations to back his assertions and a minimum of editorialization.
No. A Microsoft spokesman said it happened in 2000.
Code written this way is often smaller and tighter. But that doesn’t make it unmaintainable. Is Haskell unmaintainable because of its dense, clever use of the type system? No way. But I’d personally struggle to maintain something like that because I don’t have enough familiarity with Haskell to do so. Likewise I wouldn’t trust most programmers to maintain the rust code I’ve been writing lately - not because it’s bad rust, but because I’m making heavy use of the language’s features. That raises the skill floor. In comparison, if you gave me some crashing Go code I could probably debug it even though I don’t know much go.

I find most Java code bases awful to maintain because there’s always so much code. Simple changes take a long time to make because there’s so much code to understand and modify. Give me the tight rust any day.
1. First consider the possibility that this is a "life" thing and not just a "work" thing. Your username signals "I'm so depressed and fed up with it all", but what "it" really is can be harder to grasp than a current source of pain like your job.

2. You're also trying to sabotage change within yourself by saying "oh, but it'll take so long/be so expensive". You were not done the moment you left school. That's a common belief that is imposed upon young people, but carried to its conclusion, it's rather ugly and implies that you're either a huge success or eternally damned at age 30, and all events after that point are handwaved away in a Logan's Run fashion. 30 is more commonly a point where people in our society start to get a sense of their actual career path and shift from "consumers" of the current culture to "architects" of the next culture; what preceded that was mostly performative in the average case, a demonstrative adulting to "make the grade", and employment as a footsoldier for this or that ideology. You are cynical about this behavior already(hence your low opinion of the FAANG stereotype). It is therefore time to let go of youthful impulses and seek reflection.

3. This is the point where you should go study the extracurriculars you bypassed the first time because they weren't "practical". You can limit it to one a semester, night classes, online classes. You don't have to rush into a new degree. Through works of art, studied or improvised performance, sporting achievements, philosophising and general appreciation of the human condition, you can loosen the grip on things you have come to hate and start taking some new ones. The arts never have to become your profession, but they will let you see yourself better.
Wait really?

I thought French mostly just had être (and occasionally avoir) for “to be”, and you’d need context to determine if “Elle est heureuse” means she is happy now or generally.
Same boat as you. It's been progressively worse over the years, I think it's a result of political polarisation happening in society.

I kind of solved it by building my own tech business and consulting if I need cash.

Building your own business can be draining if you're in startup mode - but if you're chill and not trying to risk half a million pursuing millions, you can do a nice small business that earn some money you can live on.

I needed to consult a few times because my side projects got destroyed by google (change in ad revenue) or stopped working for whatever reason. It's not ideal but you'd appreciate the shorter stints, compared to full time jobs.
I can't stand most people in tech for more than 6 months, anyway.

I dipped my feet in in full time employment, but that was mainly to collect paternity benefits and because with small kids it's harder to do all the things you need to run a business.

I have more than a few friends who are equally tired of the environment.
Maybe we should start a company for developers who hate the tech scene?

Best of luck!
Yes, my dad had a Model 80 and even older one and they were worthless when we tried to sell in 2019. We got $50 for both together. Think I should've kept the keyboard it had the best keyboard ever made (in my opinion).

But we kids never had a Nintendo or XBox but we always had the latest computer hardware at home. I can still remember that my dad showed us the cd-rom drive in the 80s it was massive.
I wrote 5000 lines of java for a simple multi-user chat room server. I had a separate Java client. I replaced the server with half a page (~200 lines of Erlang) as my first attempt at using Erlang with the exact same functionality.

I still write copious amounts of Java for work and Java is still horrid.
"A spokeswoman for Mr. Gates said, 'There was an affair almost 20 years ago which ended amicably.'"
Big pink riding elephant would be the more natural sequence to me if there are any non-native speakers who are curious. I know there's an established order of types of adjectives. However in this example, it's more of a part of speech order issue to my ear. With riding being both an adjective and a verb, it feels like someone named "pink" is riding a big elephant when the words are in this order. This may be due to the fact that we don't have much for case indicators. So the adjective "pink" is indistinguishable from a guy whose nickname is "Pink". "Riding" as in a riding animal vs a pack animal is identical to "riding" the verb. All you're missing is the artical "a" before big elephant and it could very well be a sentence fragment.

"Fred, riding a big elephant, burst into the arena" substitutes "pink" for a more common name and adds the article and a prepositional phrase and... some grammar that I can't put into words right now and makes it a full sentence.

I guess what I'm trying to get across is that without the adjective order being in line, it's hard to work out the sentence structure which is extremely reliant on word order in lieu of inflection.
As an anti-free-speech progressive, I'll give you an answer: it's not the dark side of that proposition. It's the dark side of assuming that it's possible to trust corporations to be fair about free speech at all.

The only reason there was a hue and cry about corporate censorship of, say, Donald Trump was that Donald Trump's ideas were extremely popular and a lot of people had already heard it, and the people who wanted to hear it have significant (though not absolute) political power.

There are people with nowhere near as much political power who get censored, and the same folks cheer it on. A few years before the recent debate, the corporations all stopped hosting the free speech of sex workers, and nobody from any party cared, and nobody even thought of mentioning it during the more recent debate. The problem is that "free speech" got redefined. The words of the president of the US were within the pale; the words of sex workers were not. Which of those was actually at risk in the marketplace of ideas?

It's abundantly clear that saying that corporations are required to host speech they want to will simply require them to host certain politically-correct types of speech that the government recognizes as "free speech".

We're deeply familiar with censorship on the left. We experienced the House Un-American Activities Committee. To this day, you cannot become a naturalized American citizen if you have been publishing or circulating "written or printed matter advocating communism." Why should we believe that supporters of "free speech" are advocating for anything other than the legal right to force people to publish their own speech?

Show me a free speech advocate who is arguing for the repeal of FOSTA/SESTA, the repeal of the anti-Communist provisions in US naturalization law, the repeal of gag rules preventing pediatricians giving their honest medical opinion or obligations for gynecologists to say things they don't believe, or relevant to this thread, the various anti-BDS legislation that's been passed recently, and then we'll talk.
At least here hiking maps are much better than Google maps. (trails are marked and there are smaller paths visible)
go is far too verbose to be readable. I think its one of the least expressive languages out there.
Given that they stated "Do you basically have to declare and implement types/methods for each different contained type?" in the comment, I don't think they were wondering if you end up using void*/interface{}.

I really don't understand how the python comparison makes sense. Since those particular containers are special cased, the ergonomics are also the same as java (and I'd argue more like java than python). Other than ownership, I don't think go's maps are any more python like than C++s or Rusts either.

> reasonable interfaces in a language without generics

and with static typing. Python doesn't fall into that category. It either doesn't have static types, or does have generics. The answer (as others have mentioned) is that go does support generics for a few particular container types.
At Netsil (microservice observability startup), API analytics and stream-processor was built using a dialect of Datalog. Netsil was acquired by Nutanix in 2018 and the technology was incorporated into a couple of product lines.
The Datalog engine at Netsil is pretty sophisticated, capable of fine-grained parallelism (built on task-stealing architecture) - Datalog programs are chained together in a pipeline, such that the output of one program is an input to another. These programs (stages in the pipeline) can be run in serial, parallel or context_ordered modes. In context_ordered mode the tuples are sent to the execution engine ordered by their context_keys -- e.g. captured packets from the same flow are processed serially and in parallel across flows.

In addition, it incorporates SQLite embedded DB for materialized tables and state. The raw events are aggregated using Datalog rules & tables and SQL queries are auto-generated from high-level Datalog rules.
We also extended Datalog with the concept of "Accumulators", stateful objects in rule head that emit a tuple when certain conditions are met - e.g. we build Windowed Counters, TCP re-assembly from network packets etc. using Accumulators.

In addition to all this, one could distribute Datalog programs across machines -- Tuples serialize to protobuf and sent across machines over ZeroMQ etc. We used distributed features by sending raw metrics from the Host based Agents on customer's machines to the cloud service where the Datalog based stream processor joins the incoming metrics/events tuples with metadata collected from external sources (e.g. K8S tags).

The Datalog engine also synchronized some tables with Zookeeper for distributing config updates in real-time such as metadata tables that were used in stream-joins. E.g. each time a new K8S pod was detected in customer environment, an update tuple was sent to cloud, which updated the Zookeeper backed materialized table thereby synchronizing with all other stream-processor pods in near-realtime.
To me the most annoying thing about Japanese counters is not so much that there are so many, but that you also have to remember when the numbers that go with them will need on-yomi or kun-yomi (ichi, ni... vs. hito, futa...) (well, okay, that essentially depends on the counter itself being on or kun. Makes me wonder if there are jūbako-yomi or yutō-yomi cases, never looked it up). And if that wasn't enough you also need to remember when e.g. いち becomes いっ and when a h becomes a b or a p (ippon, nihon, sanbon...)

Edit: and there are the fun cases where it's not always on or kun: ichinichi, futsuka... or other fun exceptions.