skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with your point that it may be valuable to the reader to also mention common libraries or built-ins that solve the same problem that was discussed in the article somewhere near the end. More generally, linking to sources, docs, related work, or next steps can be very nice for readers to further their education. Framing your original comments with "the author should also mention... a standard solver like CHOLMOD" or "a standard solver like CHOLMOD ... as a sanity check that your implementation is working" as you described would have had a good chance of preventing our communication misfire and avoiding my (perhaps unnecessarily strong) snark.
Their proposal is for console apps, and gives the example "export DO_NOT_TRACK=1". They are talking about your first bullet, and not any of the others.
> We believe in the same vision.

Certainly. I was struck by it a few years back, around the same time as Luna was in early alpha stage. In fact I found it while doing research for my thesis, based on this vision. I was naive enough to think I had an original idea when I started.

> Visual languages are amazing for some applications, however, text-based development is superior in many cases, like low-level algorithm development, API connections, compatibility with version control systems (GIT),

And the only sensible way around these problems is to integrate both. Just this idea addresses most of the relevant criticisms of visual programming languages. A list of these I compiled at the time was:

• There is a barrier of entry for programmers used to text-based languages.
• Essential programming tools are unavailable or cannot be applied: version control, side-by-side (or diff) comparison, change tracking, testing frameworks, build systems.
• Visual primitives take up significantly more space than text.
• Existing tools are of low quality.
• Performance is overall slow.
• There are no extensibility mechanisms.
• The target group seems to be novice users.
• There is no universal visual representation.
• VPLs create closed ecosystems.

You might be about to tackle these pretty well. ;)

> I am really happy that we were able to overcome all design problems and make these two representations 100% compatible. TBH, when we were starting Enso, we were not aware how many corner cases and tricky technical details we would need to solve in order to bring it to the world!

I bet. Especially at the level of integration that you're aiming for. My own humble prototype was as simple as I could come up with and already revealed some major issues that a real-world implementation would have to grapple with.

Would you say performance was one of the tricky bits? What was the most tricky?
> I think the hard limit CF imposes is of wall-clock time, not CPU time specifically.

No, it's the other way around. The enforced limit is strictly on CPU time, not wall time. We use Linux's timer_create() with CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID to set a timer that delivers a signal when a CPU time threshold is reached. The signal handler immediately terminates execution of JavaScript using V8's TerminateExecution() (which only terminates the specific isolate).

It sounds like your experience is from a system where each guest runs in their own process. Cloudflare Workers runs many guest isolates in a single process, therefore we cannot simply kill the process when one guest misbehaves. So, we have to do everything very differently from what a container host would do.

The line you quoted from the docs is about billing. The enforcement of limits, and the calculation of billing, are completely unrelated.

Here are some reference links if you want to understand more about how our platform is implemented:

https://www.infoq.com/presentations/cloudflare-v8/

https://blog.cloudflare.com/mitigating-spectre-and-other-sec...
You have clearly never ridden a motorcycle. I'd advise watching some crash videos before talking about this subject.
The forces involved are incredible, even at fairly low speeds.

Asking for data for something so well supported is simply lazy.
Go google "Snell tests" to get an idea of what properly designed helmets should protect against.
Scala doesn't care about efficiency or cost of what it's doing, all the fun fancy features allocate like crazy.
No. Most of the kernel is in C. Some parts have been in very light c++ since the 2000s.
That's not enough either; the humans overseeing the redesign will also make human errs.
But another jvm language (kotlin) seems mixed with java just fine.(did it designed to do so?) Two way calls just work as is. Interfaces just maps to interface in each other. The only problem is probably the gradle config, but it is a one time thing.
You might not have heard of it but it does significant volume. For example, if you look at the USDC markets and sort by 24-hour volume, you'll see that Uniswap is at the top.

https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/usd-coin#markets
Quadzig – AWS Infrastructure Visualization
Oh for fucks sake. This is what, Amazon’s third chance at the trough? At what point is it cheating?

Disclosure: long MSFT.
Pentagon Cancels $10B Jedi Cloud-Computing Contract
sure, smart contracts are interesting but the entire field of blockchains has been poisoned by grifters, criminals and the social and environmental disaster that is proof of work cryptocurrencies.

fundamentally in such an environment there's just very little practical use for "decentralised finance" - we have spent millenia creating regulation and trusted (of varying degrees) parties to manage all this stuff and it works well enough compared to any of the "defi" stuff, where almost the entire ecosystem is fraud and pump and dump. and normal people fundamentally seem to like the system where they can't just be frauded without recourse.

if you can provide a way to do the smart contract bit without the toxic hangers-on then I'm sure there's niche uses for it all, but no one ever proposes any compelling argument other than, fundamentally, the proposer will make more money out of it that way.
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27750298.

Sorry- normally we privilege the earlier submission and you beat Kyle's post by a hair (27750294 vs. 27750298!) but that one was written specifically for HN, so I think it makes sense to keep it.
Macs used to have crappy webcams and most people did not care though. Webcam is hardly a differenciating factor and recent laptops already include them anyway.
That's the problem that free market prefers companies that have 100 bigger budgets for marketing than security teams. Unless this changes, nothing will change.
Banks aren't costly. They earn money on their deposits by using them as the reserve store for creating new money, and generally pay their users, not the other way around.

Granted, they're costly if you're poor, but I've yet to see a blockchain application that seems likely to be useful for poor people who may not even have consistent network access.

Payment processors, on other hand, certainly charge vendors and result in some level of markup to the sale price of goods and services. But blockchains as payment processors add cost as well. This just happens to be hidden right now by the fact miners can earn so much profit from the value of their holdings skyrocketing that they don't charge anything. Crypto values have to stabilize at some point to ever be usable for transactions, so this cannot continue forever, and users will eventually need to pay the cost of the transaction processing directly, just as they do with non-blockchain payment processors.

Decentralizing something doesn't make it costless. Some work is being done somewhere by some machine or person.
Your 30 years of experience is why the article makes so much sense. If you saw this in college you wouldn't have also learned everything else about div and grad.

> these concepts are learned as succinctly

?
Succinctness is *why" you didn't learn multiple interpretations of everything.
It's still the case that two thirds of critical CVEs are due to memory safety errors. That ratio has held constant for several decades. Those CVEs aren't in hardware drivers, but in mundane things like JPEG decoders and mail processing programs. That is directly due to them being implemented in unsafe languages.

> Security isn't boolean, and the closer to "security = 1" you get the more non-functional the system.

Security isn't one-dimensional. Security can be phrased in functional requirements like "does not allow remote code execution attacks", which is of course a boolean requirement. You can slice that finer and finer such as "does not allow remote execution attacks through X, Y, or Z mechanisms" and start adding other, higher-level requirements such as "does not leak user data through APIs", etc. Security isn't boolean, but it is absolutely chock-full of boolean requirements one can pose.

> I believe we need to be better at: Detection, mitigation, response -- all things traditionally sysadmins dealt with.

I don't disagree with that, but this is the last-line-of-defense, the-horse-has-left-the-barn stage, which is basically admitting defeat because of how absolutely riddled with vulnerabilities existing software is.
Yes.. and they weren't requiring a network interface in order to collect telemetry. They were requiring a network interface in order for Windows laptop purchasers to know that they'd be able to connect to the internet.
> I don't see it backfiring much to be honest. I see a lot of people keeping Windows 10 as long as possible... until Microsoft pushes an update to their machines with increasingly annoying messages until they accept - a strategy they have already deployed successfully.

At least they can't trick people into accepting upgrades this time.
Not a big fan of this whole situation, but this just sounds like a 5-yo's lie. Unless you provide anything that proves the whole doxing and calling situation, I doubt anyone would believe you.

Edit: Sorry, posted the previous message from a wrong account and used harsh language.
When I went to college decades ago, we always studied case studies on what not to do. This company did this and almost went out of business. Don't do this. When bailouts happen, the end result of an action is obscured, literally subsidized and I'm afraid people don't take it as seriously.

Funny though, having gone through the Y2K fix, I'm aggravated that systems are now again storing dates in the 2 digit format.
You're way ahead of me so there's nothing I can teach you. I dipped my toe into AWS a couple of times but decided it was less stress for me and my client to go with a VPS on Hetznder, Linode or Digital Ocean. Most of my work has been typical MVC web apps with Rails, PHP & Perl.
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27750770
For those interested, Chia has a really awesome functional on-chain language called Chialisp. It's secure, auditable (meaning large organizations would be more interested), and the recursive nature allows colored coins released on the chain to have the same functionality as Chia.

They have a $500k hackathon coming up this month:

https://cointelegraph.com/press-releases/sirius-labs-launche...
Borat 2.0 is basically an anti-Trump agitation based on rerun of Borat 1.0 (at a bit of The Dictator), that's all, they didn't even bother to elaborate «wear mask» from the cover.

Lynch is severely overrated, watching his works is much more about flatulence than enjoying the fine art.
> On top of this, the plant is under strict scrutiny by the regulators, and they appear to be operating withing the limits outlined by said regulators. So if there is anyone to get mad at here it's not the plant operators, it's the Department of Environmental Conservation.

Actually, the correct answer is: both.

There's a difference between what's legal and what's moral or ethical.

It is clear, at least to me, that emitting large quantities of CO2 into the air, and heated waste water into a lake, for the sole purpose of enriching oneself mining cryptocurrencies, is simply immoral. It is a classic example of the tragedy of the commons.

The regulations clearly do not adequately limit this kind of activity.

So we should be angry that the laws don't reflect our values.

And we should be angry that these folks are taking advantage of that fact to enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
that's not an answer.

what specifically about that building? in what way do you disagree with the "official" narrative and what is your proof of your counter-narrative and what is your evidence that was suppressed?
The pandemic forced them to do the "scaling up" everybody was asking them to do.

Trouble finding conspirators is a definite bottleneck to scaling!
Now merged into mesa: GBM discovery and loading for Nvidia proprietary driver
>It wasn't uniquely adapted to humans in the beginning.

Seems wrong.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5#Abs1

>Conspicuously, we found that the binding of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein was higher for human ACE2 than any other species we tested, with the ACE2 binding energy order, from highest to lowest, being human > pangolin > dog > monkey > hamster > ferret > cat > tiger > bat > civet > horse > cow > snake > mouse.

>>These findings show that the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 isolates were surprisingly well adapted to bind strongly to human ACE2, helping explain its efficient human to human respiratory transmission.
Strange question, but no, I'm not surprised. Why do you ask? I don't usually read the news in order to be surprised.
What Is the Difference Between QA Testing and UAT
> Just imagine coding without access to StackOverflow.

That was the beginning of my career in the PC industry!

C compilers for PCs were in their infancy, so all of the code I was writing was x86 assembly using MASM 6 on MS-DOS 5.2 (hello TSRs and config.sys).

I forget the company, but some tech house published a giant 500 page PC encyclopedia every year that listed all of the x86 CPU instructions, IO ports, interrupts, DOS interrupts, etc. The last issue I had was white with pink lines on it and weighed about 3 kilos! Then the internet showed up and that all went away.

Well, except the mentors. Mentors will always be a step-function way to learn new material.
Apple’s New Announcements: The Good and Bad for Privacy
I believe this and other such initiatives are inevitable as in-person working and meeting, such as meetups, have taken a back seat due to Covid and it has become harder to find cofounders in-person. I believe this is a reaction to some trends that YC must have started seeing lately.

It’d be interesting to see the long term effect of Covid on startup culture, in particular founding of startups and subsequently success rate of startups founded by remote-only cofounders which may have never met in person.
The biggest pushback was with C++. Why? Because when these discussions still started, C++ codebases tended to be a mess. It didn't help that C++11 was coming up and support was wildly inconsistent among compilers. Ultimately it was still possible to write unsafe code though.

The landscape has now changed and Rust has now positioned itself as a language that actually does have very key advantages (in correctness and safety). While C++ has made large strides, its advantages now lie elsewhere (eg; drawing on a wealth of performant libraries-- something that the kernel has less of a sue of).
Maybe this is just sticking out for me because I'm currently working on my visual art skills, but -- making an illustration or piece of visual art involves a lot of separate skills. It's like if someone did a million algorithms problems in Python, then went back to Java and touted the headline "I got better at Java without writing Java". You got better at executing on the whole thing you're trying to do in Java, sure, but your Java-specific skills didn't get better, so -- what are we impressed by?

For any given person those algorithms problems might or might not have been the most helpful thing to sink effort into. I know a lot of artists struggle with issues that are best addressed by scrimmage-type practice, not drilling. "It’s the most effective way to build your skills" is totally defensible for specific skills, not overall success. A lot of artists misidentify what the skills are they need to improve. Executing on whole pieces forces you to reckon with your weak points, not just iterate endlessly on the skill you think would be cool to be super good at.

> Constantly performing without ever practising is how amateurs approach things in other fields. Amateur golfers never drill, they just play. And being an amateur is fine. Painting for a hobby is fine.

This is honestly not true IME. Maybe realist oil painting draws a different sort than the more illustrative creators I know of -- but I know so many people who sketch constantly but never step beyond into more polished works because they're terrified of their weak points.

Finally, "repeated mistakes" as a distinction between performance and practice is just straw man nonsense. Wanting to improve efficiently involves continuous iteration on what you're doing, no matter what methods you're going about. Find me someone who agrees with the idea that it's better to execute on whole works and that this constitutes accepting repeating your mistakes, or defend with some data the idea that drilling necessarily involves more reevaluation of your progress (hint: I've known pianists ruin their tendons with technical exercises done wrong).
Well, they went with a simpler approach earlier, with AMP. AMP couldn’t make any literal guarantees about UX or performance, but in comparison to the mobile experiences reading articles before it, it did seem to often be an improvement.

And of course, people hated it, for numerous reasons. You could just make pages faster and less annoying by using plain HTML, obviously. The problem isn’t that anyone knew this, it’s that most of the big publications DGAF, and they were the entire point of AMP as far as I can see.

There are many reasons to dislike the way AMP was executed, even if they did eventually rectify many of the serious issues... but the AMP cache concept in combination with the soured reputation probably spelled the end of it no matter what would happen next. AMP for E-mail doesn’t really have any of those problems, so I suspect AMP will probably live on in e-mail.

But Google does definitely want to push sites towards better performance and users towards better performing sites; they simply have a mutual interest in this, I don’t think most people would dispute that. Even just in general, but especially when new Android phones are not packing the same punch as new iPhones are... so that scroll jank is going to hit a lot harder.

Lighthouse is generally good. It actually discourages a lot of things that people already thought were bad ideas, even ideas from Google. It tends to score plain HTML pages very well, and if it does catch a snag on something you can usually at least work around it. It provides decent diagnostics for how to optimize a web page. It does have some issues, and that will contort people into doing otherwise silly things. But if the website in question chooses a metric in something like Lighthouse in a way that is detrimental to their UX, chances are they just never gave a shit about UX to begin with.

While I don’t want to come off as a shill, and I also don’t want to come off as accepting Lighthouse just because it’s “less bad” than AMP, I just think that the “abuse” here is less substantiated. Although there are edge cases where Lighthouse can be silly, it does generally force you to make leaner pages. I think it makes a decent measure of performance. As long as a few points on Lighthouse is not make-or-break for SEO scores, and I doubt it’s that sensitive given the variability per-run, I think this is actually a good thing.

Search engine metrics are always imperfect. Anyone familiar with Wikia/Fandom can understand how its subpar content can overshadow much better community-driven websites due to its SEO position, and that is even in spite of what an awful, slow, ad-ridden pile of shit it is. I’d be delighted to see it Page 2’d over Lighthouse scores. But that’s just my feelings on the matter. I’m sure there’s more to it than that.
Sounds like it's high time to abolish intellectual property, or at least software licensing and patents.
Look at most planned utopian societies. They crash and burn because everyone wants to be a leader / thinker, not a doer, at least not of non-interesting stuff.

The title is bad. You can be brainy and do menial work. Really, too many people who think they are above non-fulfilling work is bad. You need people who are used to selling their minds and bodies for money- in the “I work here because I have a family to support” sense of the word.
raesene9:5 says >"Having classic ASP pages hosted on a production system in 2021 seems like a pretty strong indication of a lack of codebase maintenance and auditing."<

AFAIK classic ASP pages can be as secure as those in any other framework. The vulnerabilities (most commonly SQL injection) are known and are addressable.

I know it chafes at some (Microsoft marketers esp.?) that ASP pages are still around. But classic ASP is yet another example of that old adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

I watched one organization assign an entire division of programmers to develop a moderately-sized ASP.NET application: they went through orientation and training in ASP.NET and then planned, designed, coded and rolled out ...nothing! After two years there was literally nothing!

A perceptive manager in another division approached his sole ASP developer and asked if she could write some ASP code to "demo" that same project. She looked at the specifications and then quietly wrote an entire system!

Weeks later, when the department heads saw her "demo", they thought the ASP.NET developers had completed it. Imagine their surprise to find that what they were looking at was done, not by the ASP.NET group funded millions of dollars but by someone in another division: a single focused classic ASP developer quietly working downstairs.

Nonetheless IIRC ASP pages reach end-of-life support by Microsoft in 2025 so it might make sense to migrate. But b/c classic ASP was written in a manner consistent with early web standards (CGI/APACHE) migration of classic ASP to one of the various classic ASP-like frameworks in PHP, Perl, Ruby et al would likely be easier, faster and cheaper. Migration would be mostly translation and much, if not all, could be automated.

In contrast, moving classic ASP to ASP.NET would be more fraught with problems. The underlying models of the WWW are inconsistent.
The vast majority of software is more like hipster react web dev garbage than serious engineering.
Lumin Digital (www.lumindigital.com) | Site Reliability Engineer | [ONSITE/REMOTE] | San Ramon, CA | Full Time | Must live and be authorized to Work in US

I work for Lumin Digital as an SRE and we are building a vibrant and sustaining environment where creative people can do meaningful work. We are building online banking software that allows credit unions to connect with their members and compete with the big banks. Our core values are Trust, Respect, and Boldness. We want to foster an environment where people feel like they are doing meaningful work, are productive, and have the ability to take risks and learn from failure. We have offices located in San Ramon, however, the majority of our employees work remotely.

We are looking for several senior people to help us continue to improve our ability to configure, deploy, and monitor our product in the cloud. These additional positions have come about due to growth at Lumin, and not turnover of existing employees. Our stack includes some of the following technologies: Kubernetes, AWS, Prometheus, ELK, and Node.js. We offer a very competitive salary, unlimited vacation, yearly performance bonuses, and a 401k match.

If you are interested in learning more send an email to careers@lumindigital.com and mention Hacker News in the subject line.
It has been done before: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/publicsector/announcing-the-new...