skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The difference is the bottleneck in skilled cloud practitioners. There aren't that many people who can deploy these systems at scale, and they are best rewarded at the centre of the system. So the system centralizes. Enterprises would love to duplicate AWS, but they don't have the ability to each hire similar calibre talent and keep them engaged on their pet clouds.
> You don't know what Github is doing privately with this tool running in their backend systems.

What of it? You don't know what they're doing regardless. You're attacking a strawman, because of its name. Please for the love of everything, take a step back and understand what you're even arguing about.

YOU are not the target of said telemetry. Their frickin' servers are.
Not this again, fine I'll choose not fighting climate change. The deniers won (not you). The Bitcoin guys can keep their paperclip maximizer on, people get to keep their ICEs and gas heaters.

>A carbon tax for corporations banks everything on the hope that it will be profitable to move away from fossil fuels in the near future.

It's almost profitable today without even pricing in externalities.

>The cost of failure is a catastrophic global crisis. How do you financially factor that in? How much profit does an activity need to generate for it to be worth causing a global catastrophe? The cost is immeasurable, so you can't put a price on it.

Failed econ 101... It doesn't matter how high the damage is. The same way it doesn't matter how important food and water is. Food and water is still affordable. Why? Because the value provided by water/food isn't what matters, it's the cost of the next cheapest alternative. If someone sells bottled water for $5000 and someone else for $0.25 I don't have to pay the "death penalty" because I cannot afford the expensive water. It's the same thing with CO2 emissions. A single ton of CO2 could do infinite damage and therefore the price would have to be infinite, that is, if it were impossible to reverse CO2 pollution. It's expensive to extract CO2 from the air but the maximum cost is $600 per ton, that alone reduces the minimum price needed to $600 even though the modeled damage caused by CO2 pollution is infinite.

>For individuals, a significant carbon tax means rich people get to emit CO2, and poor people don't. Rich people get to sail on their yachts, and poor people starve because they have to pay more for food.

What the fucking hell? We are literally taxing the polluters in this case. We are making it expensive for rich people to pollute, we are literally shouting in their face and saying, "You must pay dearly for your pollution, rich prick". We are taking money out of their damn pockets so they have less to spend on pollution. Compare that to the alternative which involves no punishment.

>Legislative solutions don't have any of these problem. Ban yachts. Subsidize food. Ban cars.

You run into the incompetent politician problem, also, you are making the mistake that politicians even give a damn about climate change. In Germany the CDU doesn't give a crap, they will take a CO2 tax shoved down their throat by the greens and never touch it but they themselves are never going to ban yachts or cars.

I hope this planet burns down because everyone involved, including myself, deserves it.
> Before RH took over CentOS it was pretty much dying on the vine, releases were getting VERY slow, etc.

Remind me again, how long did it take RedHat to publish CentOS 8 images out to cloud providers or virtualbox? I think it was the very least 6 months behind the RedHat 8 release.

Only started using CentOS at 7, so not sure how much they used to lag behind releases beforehand.

But I've also had a dozen quality issues with RedHat software and services since they've been assimilated by IBM; so there's room for plenty of surprises.
That’s clever, but not what I’m suggesting.

I’m looking for a mechanism which apes existing cloud APIs directly.
It's not purely a technical matter, there are different market dynamics at play as well.

If you go cloud, you get a handful of very large suppliers, that provide a lot of non-standardized services that are probably going to lock you in like hell (as the article wel says).

If you build infra, you're using /mostly/ commoditized supplies and skills.

If the cloud offerings where interchangeable and the industry reasonably fragmented, the margins of cloud providers would be slimmer and the paradox would probably go away (in favor of: always cloud!).

See for example Porter's analysis framework [1] and how your positioning changes in the two cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter%27s_five_forces_analysi...
The insane claims, the failure to provide any proof despite the ease of doing so and the email address at the end tells me this is a scam artist fishing for gullible marks.
This is the money quote for me:

> Frameworks should lure people into the pit of success, where following the normal rules and using normal techniques is the winning approach.

> I don’t think that React, in this context, really is that pit of success. A naïvely implemented React SPA isn’t stable, or efficient, and it doesn’t naturally scale to significant complexity.
This is the smartest comment. Lab leaks happen frequently, it's part of medical research. There's no hard evidence that this virus was engineered or human modified. China didn't create the concept of a virus. Mistakes happen
While that is true, many of the devs also do care greatly about accessibility. As someone who has worked on some a11y stuff, I do it because I think it's the right thing to do, not because of the regulations. The regulations just set a baseline.

People often forget there are humans on the other end developing things, not just faceless corporations.
The problem with that comparison is I don’t have to pay big co to be able to write code in C++
Aren’t the real figures more like $200 vs. $700? Cloud stuff only really makes sense when your resource requirements as super spiky.

100% agree on shifting capex to opex though, capital works teams are super in favour of that, oddly enough.
Good revisionism there. The very first sentence they push the bioweapon theory.

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/man-behind-global-coronavir...
>If I don't know that, if I can't construct that interpretation, then I feel very uncomfortable about the code.

This is probably the biggest difference with myself. If I have a clear concept of how the abstractions operate in the context of the related abstractions and the big picture, I feel perfectly comfortable not knowing the details of how it gets done at a lower level. To me, the details just get in the way of comprehending the big picture.
>This seems like a well known trap that people would know how to avoid with a little planning, but I guess they have no one thinking that far ahead

But you see part of the magic trick was Amazon spent years having companies like Garnter proclaim that cloud was cheaper, and nobody could possibly do on-premises IT cheaper because of economies of scale. As a result you've got CIOs everywhere trying to make a name for themselves by driving their company to the cloud to show immense cost savings. They don't have time to be bothered by the actual financial models or real costs. By the time finance realizes what happened they'll be on to the next gig.

It was honestly brilliant, the number of "cloud first" strategies that originated in board rooms filled with people that don't know the first thing about IT is kind of disgusting.
Well I guess by renting they can get the latest and greatest machine available instead of dealing with an old machine bought say 5 years prior. If the machine breaks, well you just get another one. No maintenance cost for the company.
I mean it depends. Buy it is not always the best thing to do. Renting may be more convenient sometime.
Where have you found an ILP64 system? There aren't any - that's why I said "current C".

The idea that C programs can survive having the size of their most common type changing is not realistic, though luckily people rarely try.
"The Histories" by Herodotus is a wonderful read, but it really matters which translation you use. The is the one I read is translated by Robin Waterfield.

https://www.amazon.com/Histories-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0...

I also have a newer one translated by Tom Holland, and it seems to be a good choice too. This is how Robin Waterford translates the quoted section (Book Four, section 42):

"After all, Libya is demonstrably surrounded by water, except for the bit of it that forms the boundary with Asia. King Nech of Egypt was the first to discover this, as far as we know; after he abandoned the digging of the canal from the Nile to the Arabian Gulf, his next project was to dispatch ships with Phoenecian crews with instructions to return via the Pillars of Hercules into the northern sea and so back to Egypt. So the Phoenicians set out from the Red Sea and sailed into the sea to the south. Every autumn, they would come ashore, cultivate whatever bit of Libya that had reached in their voyage, and wait for harvest time; then, when they had gathered in their crops, they would put to sea again. Consequently it was over two years before they rounded the Pillars of Hercules and arrived back in Egypt. They made a claim which I personally do not believe, although someone else might - that as they were sailing around Libya they had the sun on their right."

Notice that the tone of this translation is informal, which is partly why it is an enjoyable read. But notice also the key difference in the final sentence: the one used in the article (de Selincourt) adds "to the North of them". This is missing from Waterfield and Holland. I suspect that de Selincourt added this as a clarification. I assume he took other liberties in his translation too.
Apparently they did so in consultation with the WHO :)
It’s easy to say that. But be careful what you wish for. Do we need another locked down sandbox?

I think Google would like to take Apple’s curated approach to the Play/Extension Stores. But they don’t have the political capital to do it. As an advertising company, any restrictions they add will appear malicious to many.

All that said... this thread is about Microsoft, where for enterprise clients, telemetry and restrictions are a feature, not a bug. So I would expect some movement by Microsoft to add more security to their store. It could be something as simple as a label “Reviewed by Microsoft” for vetted extensions. But that’s a dangerous game as long as the browser sandbox is widely defined. Malicious apps could sneak through review and then Microsoft would look bad. Whereas Apple has an actual OS level sandbox with restrictions mostly matching their policies.

There isn’t really an easy answer to this problem unless you want to sacrifice control of your browser, in exchange for increased security controls that might not even apply to you. It’s not a new tradeoff by any means.
Those are examples of Firefox having performance benefits for uBO over other browsers instead of examples of the Chrome version being crippled after the fact, e.g killing of the webRequest API.

Killing the webRequest API (without a real replacement) would absolutely cripple uBO on Chrome. The Firefox version having access to WebAssembly without an extra permission isn't preventing the Chrome version from working.
So this is exactly a symptom of unclarity of the roles that xml causes in the first place. It seems like You're trying using the tags as keys instead of as information categories. In json you might encode these sorts of data as something like (pardon my lack of quotes, I'm on mobile):

{a_list:[{text: too, type: b}, {text: bar, type: c}, {text: uh_oh, type: b}]}}

But generally you shouldn't have a mixed type list in json unless it's a deliberate choice, the "limitations" of json are exactly what devs want because it corresponds to a clarity of thought and purpose that simply isn't there in XML.
That's exactly what I meant in this specific context: I was not talking about a synthetic origin.
Microservices, in my experience, are chiefly about scaling teams (more freedom to move faster). In fewer cases, it is about optimizing a hot path. If it is not one of those, I'm having a hard time seeing why you would want the overhead of microservices.
You can thank America once they finally manage to push changes to section 230.. It will be so much better then.
> There's something different about these mobs

I'd say the new thing is just how transient they are. They nucleate around a Tweet or a Citizen-driven manhunt in a matter of minutes or hours, ruin someone's life, and then disband. There's no stopping them, because the whole process happens so quickly that the people in the mob are all running on their initial burst of outrage and excitement. By the time they cool down enough to think things through, the deed is done.
Absolutely, bargaining for cheap service fees from these suppliers, only to be charged greatly for simple hardware and anything outside the standard list.
The US absolutely knew there were risks here. US diplomats knew that the lab had insufficient safety systems for the research that we already know was being done in Wuhan. Those diplomats explicitly warned the US of the dangers several years ago but the US did nothing. [0]

If anything, the Wuhan lab needed more US funding that was primarily focused on safety.

Edit: If you want to prevent certain types of dangerous research, simply cutting funding is a bad way to do it because it can reduce safety. Instead you need to use other diplomatic or legal tools that won't increase risk.

[0] https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin...
So, pretty much everything we've done in XML is now available in JSON. Wasn't the purpose of JSON supposed to be getting rid of XML's complexity?! Same with JavaScript - it was supposed to be a dynamic typing language, now most of the serious code migrated to the type safer TypeScript. We just keep going in circles and wasting so much energy! This is not progress; it literally is chasing our own tail!
No, every bit of cynicism about the media coverage of travel bans seems 100% justified. For context, I'm from the UK where we have a right-wing Brexit-supporting government that's perceived very much as a Trump analogue - except they didn't impose travel bans on places like China early in the pandemic. Which means that over here, people blame our pandemic deaths on the supposed fact that our Government avoided placing restrictions on travel because they're evil right-wingers who were too worried about the damage to the economy that would cause. There was literally a talking point where the Guardian dug up an estimate that imposing travel restrictions on China would've delayed the outbreak here by something like a month, but it had to be a ban on all travellers who'd been in China within 14 days and not just direct travel - that is, it specifically had to be a Trump-style travel ban, an Italy-style one would not have worked. Meanwhile, their US coverage was attacking Trump for his travel ban.

Also, remember that the current US president literally went from using the idea that travel bans were dangerous, counterproductive and made things worse in his electoral campaign to reinstating them with the exact same rules as Trump used as his first act in office, and the mainstream media cheered him on every step of the way...
> Dataclasses! We could cheekily say Python gets better at something Rust does - dataclasses makes Python better at records

It's not clear if you mean python got better at storing records than previous python or if it got better at storing records than rust.

To be clear, dataclasses make python better at storing records than what was previously available in python but still not as good as Rust (serde, immutable defaults, no perf penalty with immutability).
Is the majority of HN really fighting for Zerohedge to be recognized as a legitimate source of information?
For me the clear threshold for when you've gone too far with SSR is if it needs auth. Just do not go there. So this is not an SSR issue per se, it's poor SSR implementation issue IMO.
I haven't said China is the same as USA. I’ve said China is a huge set of different interests.

Can you see the difference between those two propositions?

Apparently not, if you’re quoting one western account of one Chinese guys statement, and imaging that represents all of China monolithically.
Indeed, he mentioned "weaponized virus" on the article, I had forgotten that particular bit.
I wonder if this is why h.265 HEVC video playback on firefox is noticeably darker than in edge/chrome.
The new fonts are just system fonts, which exist because they’re fast and good.
Yes and, it depends.

Last time I was procuring racks of servers, it was about a 6 week lead time, sometimes more. So yeah, you have to do a lot more capacity planning, and probably keep capacity in reserve for things that are unexpected.

I've had to go around to every engineering team and try to get them to tell me how much gear they might need in the next 1-2 quarters. They rarely know, so it's a lot of guess work.

So in a situation with a quickly growing product, that grows in an unpredictable way. Or a really new product where you just have no idea what the adoption is going to look like.

Then yeah, getting those new instances right now is really really important. At Segment we very often needed more instances in a huge hurry due to some customer load spike.

And sometimes AWS ran out of the instances we needed in the region we were in. So we had to get creative to use other instance types.

Also the cloud provider pricing structure heavily incentives you to actually do some capacity planning. On AWS, Savings Plan gives you huge savings.

But if your workload is fairly predictable, then this on demand benefit isn't nearly as compelling and at the right scale, it makes sense to start buying servers to put in your own datacenter.
Unless the company shutdown or sold and suddenly you can't access your data easily or the new company changes the features drastically. I think that many companies can't afford to have their data at the mercy of an outside company with no alternatives.
This copy is hosted in (one of) the old homedir of Karl Ramm, who passed away not so long ago. I believe that he would be tickled and mildly but pleasantly surprised to find the link on HN.

To whomever posted it: thank you for reminding me of an old friend.
> Why is George Soros funding DAs who refuse to prosecute crimes?

Smells like a conspiracy theory to me. And citing the Washington Times (a paper notable for having a Wikipedia section devoted to its documented history of publishing things sympathetic to white nationalism) is not a reasonable source to cite.

Don't bring racist conspiracy theories here; that's not appropriate for conversation.
Ask HN: Payroll or PEO for new startup with foreign employees
Hello Hacker News! I'm CEO of an early but fast growing US-based startup in the aviation industry. We have some unique characteristics--one of which is that we have six co-founders working full time, two of which are in France. Right now no one is salaried, but we expect that will change over the summer.

I'm looking for advice on what other international startups have done in regards to payroll. It seems like Gusto and Rippling support US workers only. Is there a system that can support onboarding, payroll, and benefits in both the US and Europe? What about a PEO option? If we're keen to outsource HR, is there a good PEO that can drive strong benefits for US employees while also supporting the team in Europe? I'm also curious for feedback on Payroll SaaS vs. a full-fledged PEO. What do folks prefer? And if there is a time to switch from one to the other, when is that typically? Am I better off just hiring an accountant?

Any and all help is greatly appreciated!
You are making very very wrong suggestion now. Because some people can link Chinese government to all Asians, so we can't criticize the Chinese government? Because Chinese government = Chinese people = Chinese Americans = Asian Americans?

I think this kind of automatic linking Chinese government to Chinese / Asian Americans is itself racist.

What you are suggesting is implicitly accepting this racist idea.

To stand against this kind of racist idea, what we should do is to explicitly separate the Chinese government from Chinese people, from Chinese Americans. We should directly call out Xi Jingping the dictator and CCP the dictatorial regime, instead of implying Xi Jingping and CCP own Chinese people and somehow also own Chinese / Asian Americans.
Have you tried? Us startuppy mortals can't buy those today, unfortunately. Maybe in a few years, when they trickle down from the people with 8 figure budgets.
> Whenever I talk to people about recent news stories in real life it feels like everyone is just repeating talking points they read online.

Would you mind sharing some examples, as well as the counterpoint arguments you add to the real life conversation?

I've seen claims like this before, and it almost always comes from people who get their news from places like Zerohedge or Infowars.
It is. But this is a) new, and b) more apparent.
Long term it’s good to erode trust in Facebook as it’s a malevolent force in society.
My understanding is that Dr. Seuss & P.D. Eastman books (among others) were primarily intended to be read by kids learning to read, not to be read aloud by parents.

But I have personally found these books with extreme limited vocabulary to be much better read-aloud books for 2-year-olds than books for independent reading by 4–5 year-olds. More generally, many other graded readers are excellent read-aloud books. At age 2–3, my kids particularly enjoyed the Henry and Mudge books https://www.amazon.com/dp/1534427139, and everything by Arnold Lobel.

If you are trying to teach kids to read, let me highly recommend Bloomfield’s workbook Let’s Read from the early 60s, which I heard about from a 2012 comment here on HN by Tokenadult. https://www.amazon.com/dp/0814311156 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4665466

Bloomfield was one of the leading linguists of his era, and his book is very carefully structured to introduce only one new spelling–sound association per lesson, with the first half consisting of only regularly spelled words, so there is no possible confusion, with the full mishmash of irregular words only introduced after the reader is already fluent with regular spellings.

My son & I started working through it together for about 10–15 minutes per day when he was 3.5 years old, and it took about 8 months to get to the end, after which he could fluently read pretty much any material he could comprehend. As a not-quite-5 year-old he now happily independently reads books intended for 3rd–4th graders. (I’m not trying to suggest every kid should start on such a project at that age; every kid is different, and interests and attention span vary.)
Nothing new or surprising. Anyone who regularly uses both systems knows about the Windows performance tax.

Most notable is the performance improvement of the recent Windows update. I wonder what happened.
This. The chances of a nice stable peaceful growing season… nope. Things will become more volatile, which means the chances of the opposite, ruined crops, increase.

Stability and predictability are low energy things.
The product is great but their free tier row limitation is really low (500 rows per database). And then paid plans are expensive.

I was building a Jamstack site for my dad[0] using Airtable-as-a-backend, and we almost ran out for rows for his Soviet camera collection. We had to work the model around this limitation. It's not the kind of thing that made sense to pay for monthly even if the plans were cheap, and they're not.

[0] https://alex.minkovsky.online
There used to be a canal that went from lake erie all the way down to the ohio river
What sources would you recommend instead?
Actually the development of Qucs is ongoing, it's just that they are a little late on making the jump from Qt 4 to Qt 5, so Qucs isn't in available in some distributions that removed Qt 4 at the moment (e.g. Arch).