skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Spotting bugs in code review is already hard when the code you're reviewing has been written by a human. In this case, at least you can rely on your knowledge of the co-worker who wrote it - over time, you learn the kind of experience they have, the kind of mistakes they make.

Spotting bugs in code that has been generated by a GPT-3 derivative, with all the subtle mistakes that implies, is going to be even harder.
Not even a command line ?
Feedback Loop – Remote USA – Senior Full-Stack Engineer Full-Time – $130 – $200k
Feedback Loop (feedbackloop.com) is a growth-stage company whose agile research platform provides rapid consumer feedback to inform and accelerate innovation initiatives. At Feedback Loop, we change the way companies develop products for their customers by providing a platform that lets researchers and non-researchers alike learn faster and innovate smarter. We work with some of the largest B2C companies across industries including finance, insurance, healthcare, and media.
We're looking for engineers who are curious about product development and consumer behavior, want to work on related challenges, and value opportunities to explore new technologies that execute against a robust, collaborative product vision. We use Typescript/NodeJS, Ruby, VueJS, Postgres, Mongo, Redis, Kafka, GraphQL and many other technologies, but we don't think it matters if you've used similar technologies on a different stack. Our engineering teams tackle a diverse and evolving array of challenges; from architecting and scaling our microservices to handling real-time data streams with Kafka and using machine learning and natural language processing to empower real world business solutions. This position is full-time and remote (within the US), though remote engineers may be asked to visit our NYC headquarters occasionally when it is safe to do so.
Sr. Full-Stack: https://grnh.se/643cb2fe2
Engineering Manager: https://grnh.se/76c71e092us
Curiously enough, Google itself only recently introduced local app sharing ("Nearby Share" via Bluetooth/Wifi etc. – of course only for free apps) as an official built-in Play Store feature, while at the same time an increasing prevalence of app bundles will mean a suboptimal experience when sharing between devices with differing screen density, language, etc.
For Many Jobs, Signing Bonuses of $1k – and Up – Are the New Norm
It isn't the alcohol in beer which makes it safe, it's the brewing process. To brew beer, before fermentation you first have to boil the wort (water + malt + hops), and this kills all the pathogens in the water you brewed it from.
https://archive.ph/MJiHQ
There has also been a push by Google and others lately to "dumb down" the url bar to hide the full address from users. Not sure why but I assume the justification would be some misguided attempt at making it look nicer while the real reason is somehow ad related.
Which part is incorrect?
To my mind the difference between copilot and semi-autonomous cars is that split-second decisions are not required in this instance. If it takes you a minute to snap out of it and notice the suggestion was wrong, no problem.

On your other point, it's true that if you're working in an unfamiliar ecosystem, spotting subtle issues will be harder. But I think getting automatic suggestions that are probably idiomatic in that language will be more helpful than hurtful.
It’s so beneficial for pastoral populations, it arose several times in distant populations.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase_persistence
The sense of progression in Duolingo seems to falter after a while. It's nice to brush up on basics, but it doesn't last long before you wonder whether you're using your time efficiently or just making yourself feel good about doing something when using the tool. Which is one irony of the gamification that also happens to annoy the crap out of me.

I actually went back and used it a bit the other day, and the day after, I was getting blasted with push notifications and e-mails. Part of Duolingo doesn't seem to value your time and attention span in a way that gets kind of tiresome.
When you work for a company that forbids copilot and blocks its traffic from the network, you'll find that your dependence on tools to create your code has held you back.
> I, too, was fascinated by a "web without browsers" (or with other kinds of browsers, really) until i stepped into the community and realized that community was a proto-nazi cesspit full of misogynistic attitudes.

Could you expand on that? It seems a bit out of (anti-)left field, so to speak.
It's surprising especially since Tim Cook said:

> "We believe that we need to own and control the primary technologies behind the products we make, and participate only in markets where we can make a significant contribution."

I'm surprised they don't consider the cloud storage for all their services, which they're trying to make a bigger and bigger part of their revenue mix, a primary technology.
Oh no, definitely not. If I don't understand what it is doing then I don't put in in my command line. That's a recipe for disaster.
Carrier injecting ads into SMS '2FA' texts
AMD wins EU antitrust nod for $35B Xilinx acquisition
No. If it is something that has been done plenty of times before, then we would also know how to prove the correctness of it automatically. It would also lead to much better and less code, because you would be aware that it has been done before so many times.
> It's nice to brush up on basics

Absolutely. You can't use it exclusively. Services like Chatterbug are much more complete for actual learning.

Edit: I should also include, though, that I spend like 10x on Chatterbug what I spend on Duolingo.
The difference is that copilot constantly emits code visibly on the screen.
> besides for healthcare

Ignoring people's actual health in exchange for more expensive things seems like a backwards metric.
Proofing correctness (in general) is incomputible (halting problem and stuffs).

Those "prove" you see in academic paper are very specific case.
I remember watching the previous video and feeling like I couldn't completely understand his explanation. In this video I think I get it. The lever analogy and the part with the wooden board and wheels was a nice touch.

I know many here look down upon YouTube for science videos but hey someone has to do the stupid job of trying to make it simple for the masses and some channels like this are really good at doing that.
This whole thread makes me think of this comic (it's more cynical the older you get). "What do you want to be when you give up"?

https://joedator.com/cartoons/what-do-you-want-to-be-when-yo...
IMHO, the reason embedded QA works better is because QA is fundamentally a negative task. In that you are telling people they made a mistake.

That's difficult to hear, repeatedly, from the same person. And I've seen a lot of developers not react well to the underlying discomfort.

When it's an external team, at arm's length, that relationship can get pretty bad.

At least when it's someone on your team, then you have non-QA moments and interactions to help balance out the unfortunate bug truth.

And the end result is faster, more thorough, more productive bidirectional communication between QA and coders.
> - The exact StackOverflow snippet said junior is copying was seen by others and likely already debugged to some extent. There's typically also a lot of relevant information in the text surrounding the snippet.

Empirically, this is false. There is an incredibly high amount of bad, incomplete, or vulnerable code on SO.
Flying car completes test flight
InCommodities is hiring multiple F# Developers
Who do we look for?
We are currently expanding our Software Development team and are looking for strong developer profiles. We are looking for people with experience ranging from junior through mid to senior/lead. For all types of profiles, we are looking for someone who is open to change, a dynamic environment and is comfortable challenging the status quo.
We believe in our people and give them full responsibility for their projects. Your involvement starts with the idea and dialog with users, throughout design, implementation and operations. We are here to help, challenge and review but you get the freedom needed. We expect our future colleagues to be curious at heart, and always want to do better.

What will you work with?
We work mainly with .NET and F# both Windows and Linux (via docker, Kubernetes, Azure). You will work with various systems, some of which include a front-end and some are purely backend available through an API.
Some of our solutions involve JavaScript and Python.

What is the culture like?
You will be part of our young but experienced software development team, where personality and cultural fit is important. The work culture is relaxed as we don’t have a dress code nor strict working hours.
We value a strong social culture with a high frequency of employee events, ranging from casual Friday beer at the desk to going go-carting or our big annual parties!

Main points:
• .NET
• C#/F#
• Functional programming
• Kubernetes/docker/Azure/Kafka
• JavaScript/Node.js
• Python
• Curiosity
• Bachelor+
I don't think he means that there is anything wrong for Stardew Valley, a game, to not be "rewarding" (and thereby rewarding here is defined as something beyond entertaining). But if Duolingo as a learning tool is like that too.. that's a problem.
Which alcohol-free beers appeal to you? I haven't found one, though I've only tried halfheartedly.
AC Feels Great, but It’s Terrible for the Planet. Here’s How to Fix That
Love it. Browser extensions like yours are one of the few things we have that act as “condom”s to protect us from the nefarious features of these websites that aren’t working in our best interests.
You are some steps behind the climate change deniers list of refutations (in more or less general chronical order):

- there are no climate change

- climate change is not because of humane activities

- climate change isn't that bad

- climate change might be good overall

- climate change is business as usual: improvise, adapt, survive

You can find more claims and counter claims https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-cold-weather.htm here. I picked up that one following your question about cold winter.
When production is only motivated by profit, why would any company choose to reduce its profits? That eventually leads to losing to the competition and more consolidation into fewer companies that are ever more ruthless.

You’re just observing how capitalism works. It’s why some of us would prefer rationally and democratically planned production motivated by needs.
Type it out anyway, copy paste security risks or not, it helps you remember how to do it in future
I read the patent claim and ignored the rest, as the pros in these threads have been recommending that we do. I paid careful attention to the colons and semi-colons. There is one claim and it is short and not hard to understand. Take a look for yourself, you should be able to get the gist in well under 5 minutes: https://patents.google.com/patent/US6289434B1/en.

To me, it looks like the patent is for.... "hooking up memory together with several processors in a system, and having that system process 'media' data in parallel" with "processor" defined as "multiplier unit + arithmetic unit + arithmetic logic unit + bit manipulation unit" (quotes mine, not from the patent text). There's also a bit of stuff about how the arithmetic logic unit and the bit manipulation unit should be able to "operate concurrently" with some of the other units. It seems like this patent is basically for the idea of parallel processing on modern computers in general. If so, most of the computing industry infringes this patent today.

I'm not a hardware expert, though, and it's possible I'm missing something and the claim is more narrow. It depends on the exact definition of those processor components and whether this ability of some CPU sub-units to "operate concurrently" with others is common on modern computers.

All that aside, the patent seems to have no intellectual value whatsoever. I have no idea what the history of parallel processing is, but it definitely predates the writing of this patent in 1998. The only thing that seems even possibly new is a tiny bit of text specifying which units should be able to operate concurrently with other units. Is that supposed to be the novelty that we're protecting with the power of the law for 20 years?

The point of patents is that the public benefits from novel invention ideas being published, in exchange for the publisher getting exclusive rights to the idea for a few years. The public can build upon the idea sooner if it's published earlier. In what universe do we imagine that someone reads this patent claim and is enlightened and inspired to build upon it?

How is this patent anything but yet another insane, horrific abuse of the system?
Social security is a separate trust. Medicare is far more efficient than private insurance. It could be even more efficient but is hamstrung by corruption in Congress. Being unable to negotiate drug prices is a good example.
Yep, evaporator + condenser works very well in nature for billions of years.

For example: https://news.mit.edu/2020/passive-solar-powered-water-desali...
Unfortunately no, because StackOverflow is like a „best of“ collection of code snippets, while the entire Github will be a long tail of stuff of random quality.
Thanks for replying. I thought that might be your reasoning.

Without agreeing or disagreeing with your rationale, for me it would be better if you'd make this more clear from the outset.

Something like: individuals can only make very limited positive impact, which in many instances is confounded by psychological factors driving behaviour in the wrong direction.

Your understanding is better than your initial communication.

There are in fact aspects of your argument that I disagree with concerning the Overton Window, but we needn't go there for now.

At least you are no longer infuriating to me.
YAGNI only applies for a "top-level" applications. For libraries used by third parties (e.g. the standard library of a language) you want clients do be able to do things you haven't imagined, so different trade-off are in place. For software which cant easily be updated, like mars rover software, you also have to prepare for all eventualities up front.

I don't agree with the article that you should always select a relational database up front. Should Calculator really use a relational database to persist configurations? This is exactly where YAGNI applies.
I have been beginning myself, what apps/sites/methods would you reccomend?
Tbh UX is an aspect of uBlock that could need serious rework. I still haven't figured out what the patchwork of colored squares means...
Of course, when the correctness of your program does not matter in the first place, but just its output, and you happen to be able to judge the quality of the output without knowing anything about your program, then something like Github Copilot makes sense.

So the problem is that Copilot will only work for 99.99% of all the code that's ever written?
Heard that one before too. I have to work without the IDE for interviews and it's not a big deal. It's just slower and less efficient.
It is silly to view ping as a single number.

The metrics that matter are:
Min, Max, Average, Median, 25th percentile, 75th percentile

The same metrics need to be used to measure jitter.

Only then can you draw some pretty accurate conclusions about link quality.
I’m not sure about the bonus situation, but the US patent office is self funding (their budget is filing fees), so they’re is the perverse incentive to approve more patents.
> It reminds me of Stardew Valley, the game is addictive, but it's not rewarding.

For me, the reward is relaxing.
Danish central bank compromised due to Solarwinds vulnerability
This is a great description of the dysfunction in development work management. I've always said that deadlines are just made up numbers and the work will get done when it's done. However after leading a team I see how that attitude can lead to a ton of bike shedding instead of prioritizing and shipping features.
I've got a 14 month year old. The daily grind is relentless. But it's not miserable. I've watched a tiny helpless creature turn into a curious little person who can walk around and play with things, who gives me big smiles and hugs when he sees me, who takes real joy in such stupid things (current obsession: bike helmets). It's hard to quantify why that's a good thing - much like to many of my friends the idea of voluntarily spending an evening writing software that's different to the stuff I do at work all day also seems completely crazy.

Sure, there's low points, but there's also high points every single day.
why would you not understand it ? it seems unrelated.
FUSE-based file system to inject faults
I think your line about rote excersizing allowing education to scale to millions is an often lost point when talking about the problems with modern education systems.

The Well-Trained Mind: A Guide to Classical Education at Home has an interesting comment on this issue. The author, with a Masters in Education and years working in public schools, says that she often runs into parents who are worried they are not qualified to teach because they do not have formal training in big-E Education. Her response is that our Education training system, with all of its study of psychology and law, is not designed around educating a single child to their maximal potential, but about scaling up education so that a single teacher can teach a room of 40 children to a socially acceptable minimum. From this point of view professional educators have no advantage over the individual parent and may even bring along irrelevant habits from their formal training.
> There has also been a push by Google and others lately to "dumb down" the url bar to hide the full address from users. Not sure why but I assume the justification would be some misguided attempt at making it look nicer while the real reason is somehow ad related.

Suggesting Google might do anything without ad-related motives is probably too generous, but I've always thought that this was an optimisation in the sense that it's built on optimism: when everything's working well, most of what's in the URL bar is irrelevant. So the bar is built towards working well in the best case, at the expense of becoming much less useful in the worse (and probably more common) case.
Or Idris dependent types, which allows you to prove properties of any value, not just numbers.
I agree in principle, but think it's possibly a good opportunity, to utilize this to create a compendium of industry practices, some of which could then be labeled as anti-patterns.
Dunbar-Ortiz has a good take on this, for her the US American identity is basically a European settler/covenant identity, much like the whites in other settler colonies: Australia and South Africa or Rhodesia (as they were). Unlike in Mexico, where the native history and identity formed part of the identity of the identity of the new country "everyone's an Aztec", the real history of the US prior to European invasion and colonisation was marginalised. Even today US American schoolchildren know more about European history than the history of America. Is that settler/covenant identity collapsing? Great, hopefully it will mean that treaties are more likely to be kept and that stolen land can be restored to its original owners.
What if you now understand what it's doing (jogged your memory) and its a long command?
The Cantillonian Oligarchy: Why the Left Should Embrace Bitcoin
>It's interesting to me that the next few steps of this technology evolution might be that we loose the ability to prove our code correctness forever. Every program will just be a certain - measured by tests - percentage of accuracy against some goal and that's it.

Aren't we already there outside of very specific special applications? At the very least you have to assume every library you are using and the framework you are running on is correct. Sure, that works 99.9% of the time. If your testing framework can get the rest of the code to 99.5% of the time, is the .4% that large of a deal in a case where the other .1% is not?

When we look at what the market wants, what individual people want, do they want things proven correct given the increase in cost it brings? They may say they do, but spending behavior doesn't seem to align.
This point might be a bit lost in the current state of the industry as HN is exposed to it, but usually the idea behind keeping a very junior developer around is that gradually it'll stop being a very junior developer and become a slightly less junior developer who will spit out code snippets that aren't usually just plain wrong.
I'm at bit over 800 days of Russian and French.

I didn't really expect to learn Russian, but it did give me a place to start. I now use books and Youtube to keep practising.

The French course is funny because the English is a bit broken sometimes.

My goal was never to become proficient, so Duolingo met my needs very well.
You would do well to enable Wi-Fi calling in that circumstance if your provider offers the service. I had a misconception that that service was somehow inferior to getting a “real” connection to the cell network—not so. The cell network does not care how you access it, and more-or-less treats RATs (Radio Access Technolgies) as interchangeable.
Rumsfeld was capable and intelligent, and showed this in both his public service and private business. (Who brought you digital TV and a small-molecule antiviral?)

Compare him to Robert McNamara who "failed up" repeatedly. (e.g. who made the cars that Ralph Nader warned you about? who convinced everyone that the World Bank's development strategy was disasterous? TBF, MacNamara's bean-counter attitude served us well w/ the Minuteman missile and the transition to missile ships at sea -- it's funny how Chinese action movies show so much pride for modern warships that we try to hide because we think they don't look aggressive enough.)

He wrecked his legacy by going along with the second gulf war which: (1) was based on a lie, and (2) we lost. The full cost of the 2nd gulf war won't even be known until we know how badly prepared we are for the next war.
The future of deep learning, according to its pioneers
In this case it's worse, because a divide by zero will panic instead of throwing an error.

The "standard" Go response is what you suggest. However, it does force the caller to deal with the error condition. For Go devs, this is standard procedure and they won't mind ;)

However, if the routine is relatively trivial, and it doesn't matter too much if an error occurs (but you don't want it to panic), then handling any errors inside the routine and always returning a valid result is OK.

If this was me, I'd take this second path, and keep the single return value, but catch the special case (float64(len(runs) - failedRuns) == 0) and return zero for that.

Or you could use the panic..recover method and trap the panic and return something sensible. I tend to avoid this, though, because it can trap panics further down the call chain (not in this example, obviously) and you end up with weird bugs that are hard to catch because they're not explicit.
>Asking developers to own QA is broken because developers are naturally biased towards the happy path.

I've been arguing the same thing for a while now. There's a clear mismatch in incentives. If you hand off the QA to developers you might initially get less bug reports but that doesn't mean your software isn't garbage.

Some of the best QA engineers I've worked with were developers in a previous life but they've since spent years cultivating a very different way of thinking about software. Believing you can get your engineers to adopt that mindset overnight is pure fantasy.