skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Go is type and memory safe if you avoid explicitly unsafe things, except for data races on those structures

Note that this isn't actually a real exception. maps are implemented in the go stdlib using "unsafe", in addition to compiler magic for the generics part.

I believe that it holds that if you don't use "unsafe" then your program is memory and type safe, it just happens that the go stdlib and runtime use "unsafe", so you can't safely use them either.

I get that this is a distinction without a difference.
Just crate a new account from a new computer and new ip. Read guides (using tor browser on a separate computer) about how to beat the system. Thats how you win against the big guys.
They were all suspended/deleted, but were verified suspiciously quickly.

Twitter indicates that their process is Human-controlled:

https://twitter.com/iamb/status/1414645372731883520
Right, there will be Google and Apple. Totally competition.
https://fullstackopen.com/en/

>Learn React, Redux, Node.js, MongoDB, GraphQL and TypeScript in one go! This course will introduce you to modern JavaScript-based web development. The main focus is on building single page applications with ReactJS that use REST APIs built with Node.js.

It may fast forward a bit on the fundamentals, but they are still there. Along with MDN (to supplement) I think it is a great option.
> designed the emission schedule to give majority of holdings to very early adopters

And nearly every single one of the thousands of altcoins tilt the rewards to early adopters to a greater or same degree as bitcoin. Sadly, there is very little interest in minimizing the concentration of wealth...
I think we should first start with a fundamental breakthrough in our willingness as engineers to admit defeat in the face of underestimated complexity.

Once we take proper inventory of where we are at, we may find that we are still so far off the mark that we would be inclined to throw away all of our current designs and start over again from (new) first principles.

The notion that you can iteratively solve the full-self-driving problem on the current generation of cars is potentially one of the bigger scams in tech today (at least as marketed). I think a lot of people are deluding themselves about the nature of this local minima. It is going to cost us a lot of human capital over the long haul.

Being wrong and having to start over certainly sucks really badly, but it is still better than the direction we are currently headed in.
To be fair there were fairly compact/light* laptops at the time from a variety of manufacturers. But the period between, say, 2000 and maybe the late 2000s in particular laptops were becoming common but you had to make serious tradeoffs between price, size/weight, performance, and other features.

* By the standards of the time
Physical Minimalism
I believe that less is more, especially regarding owning stuff. In my opinion, owing less means less stress, less debt, fewer distractions, and fewer liabilities. Consequently, it leads to having more time, more money, more freedom, and, overall, more happiness. I happily describe myself as a minimalist. People are my priority, not material possession. In my opinion, the quest of life is about purpose, meaning, adventure, not accumulating goods. It doesn't mean I own nothing; it implies that I'm surrounded by things that bring me joy and utility.

For me, being a minimalist means removing excess possessions to focus on things that matter the most. It means living more intentionally and exercising temperance. In my opinion, it's not even about owning less; it's about desiring less, about having enough. By living for yourself, you avoid playing an endless status game filled with greed, envy, and jealousy. You preserve your time and embrace the simplicity required to be truly happy!
> do not use the “get out of debt” header, because you look like a “get rich quick” scheme. It reminded me of the times when Apple nagged me about the translations in my app that was never supposed to target an english-speaking audience.

Opinions are my own.

Tbh, any ads with the phrase "get out of debt" sounds very shady to me. I wouldn't give it the benefits of doubt personally.

> Microsoft never answered at all. After two weeks of silence I reached out to them myself, and the agent tried to be nice, but the phrase “I understand your feelings, but, I’m afraid you’re banned for life and this cannot be changed” just broke me.

If two companies with 100% different spam & abuse systems detected something wrong with this ads, I have the feeling we're not hearing the full story here. Microsoft even went to the extreme of "ban-for-life".
I'm a bit tired of reading motivated blog posts like this that bring up enough related work that you know they know solutions exist to the problems they're bringing up, but for some reason felt it was not necessary to bring up those solutions. This line in particular is plain false:

> None of the languages have found a way to formally disallow paradoxes like out-of-thin-air values, but all informally disallow them.

The post neglects to mention the Promising Semantics paper of 2017 that resolves the out of thin air problem to (as far as I know) everyone's satisfaction, despite pointing out the previous work that brought up the problem. Similar things are true for ARM's memory model, etc.--this is all stuff that's been mostly resolved within the last few years as proof techniques have caught up with compilers and the hardware. Ironically, the thing that's been hardest to formalize by far in a useful way (outside of C++ consume) is--surprise, surprise--sequentially consistent fences!

It also handwaves away as some unimportant point the reason why compilers provide things like relaxed accesses--it's not just (or even primarily) about the hardware, but about enabling useful compiler optimizations. Even if all hardware switched to sequentially consistent semantics, don't expect languages that aim for top performance to abandon weak memory. And personally, I think it's ironic that at a time when even Intel is struggling to maintain coherent caches and TSO, and modern GPU APIs don't provide sequential consistency at all, people are trying to act like hardware vendors will realize "the error of their ways" and go back to seqcst.
This is misleading as it only counts gains in publicly traded stock (not profit overall etc).
It is important and people should be willing to pay for that if they desire it. It is also important to offer products that don't offer the same degree of support if they do not want it.

Ten years ago, I happily paid for an Arduino. I was interested in microcontrollers for about a decade at that point. Even though microcontrollers were inexpensive, I didn't get into them previously since I needed that extra support. Yet the Arduino development board and IDE provided that support in a form I found palatable at a price I could bear. (There were certainly alternatives that provided something similar, but they were expensive. There were certainly alternatives that were inexpensive, but they lacked support.)

Ten years later, the situation is different. More experience means that I don't need as much support. For the most part, I just want a development board that I can solder a header onto. It's something that I may be willing to pay $10 for, but it is much harder to justify at twice the price. It looks like this is something that the Raspberry Pi Foundation realized with the Pico. The development tools are better compared to those provided by a microcontroller vendor than with those provided by Arduino. The board's price is better compared to those of eastern companies than western ones.

The reality is that we need both. The reality is that western boards will probably be more expensive than eastern ones, but the price differential need not be so large when similar products are offered.

EDIT: clarification.
> Same thing, surely?

No, not the same thing at all. Forcibly stopping your citizens from leaving your country altogether is not the same thing as another country stopping them from entering theirs.

Communist countries have historically implemented strict emigration policies [0]. For example, East Germany famously had a policy of mass-murdering citizens who tried to escape to the West [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigration_from_the_Eastern_Bl...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schießbefehl
> I'm not really washing my hair

Can you explain this one?
What about the spot are you looking for in terms of similarity and what kind of info are you looking for?
The latent value of irreverence has been a pillar of the project I've been working on full time since last October.

Like, I just added printer support.. https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1413803026062745600

But for the sake of the trees I'm making it grueling https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1414411610844803072
https://twitter.com/LeapJosh/status/1414678420177440769

Does anyone even own a printer these days? Who knows? Don't care! The feature's true purpose is to try and draw out a smile, and from there maybe a look. The fact it actually works is a nice side effect.
The bytes[0] crate is a popular library in the Rust ecosystem for taking reference-counted slices of a shared byte buffer.

[0]: https://docs.rs/bytes/1.0.1/bytes/struct.Bytes.html
Please read the book if you want to really argue this and the other points: I am not the author, I have to titles pertaining to psychology (or ethology/animal behaviour) so I might misrepresent the topic.

You, on the other hand, may very well be a workd-renowned expert on canine/feline communication but in this specific case are barking up the wrong tree: the cat example is not the main topic but more of an example/metaphor.
Not that you should have to, but words like "Home Budget and Finance Tracking" would make it more clear what it is. Lead with that generic terminology. Then sprinkle in the "encryption" stuff.

Leading with "Encryption" and "Finance" is probably what caused the ban. It got put in the bucket of "shady crypto currency stuff" or "internet money laundering".

Though, yes, it's a shame the system doesn't first issue a warning, and let you reply with a message to a real human with context before a ban happens.
Exactly. I have a lot of the same feelings, so 6 weeks ago I wrote a similar blog post, "Why I prefer making making useless stuff". I haven't quite figured out how to convert my "useless stuff" into a company yet though...

Blog post: https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~azh/blog/makinguselessstuff.html

HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27256867

Reddit discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/njcpxt/why_i_p...
Sounds like this is an asked-and-answered situation. Larger companies have lawyers on retainer who will look over each ad before it hits the market and determine whether it's deceptive or in-line with the TOS. Google disallows you from mentioning cryptocurrency outright (except in very specific, express situations). Furthermore, the "get out of debt" line would have definitely set off a red flag in my mind, and if I was in charge of ad verification I'd probably reject yours too.

That being said, Google and Microsoft (or any of the FAANG squad, for that matter) are certainly not your friends in this situation. But are they culpable? I doubt it. This boils down to a human reading your ad and disliking the tone/contents wholesale. It ultimately doesn't matter how your project is licensed, how transparent your company is or who you're working for: the goal of ad-checkers are to mitigate the risk associated with advertising such a diverse range of products. Since you posted an ad for a relatively high-risk product (handles money, integrates with crypto, is a subscription service), it makes perfect sense to me that you got denied access.
More accurately, Cuba traded with the Soviet Union and received food in exchange for its exports. I don't think Cuba was ever fully self-sufficient in food before, either.

Other than that you are correct about land reform in Cuba.
I agree, but you also distort things by excluding infants, but if that group are included in a separate statistic it would seem ok.
That seems like the problem with your idea to me. The winner of the debate will be the stronger debater.

I can't think of a time when a public debate actually ended up convincing anybody. Presidential debates are, at best, a chance for one candidate to screw up. I don't think anybody came out of the Bill Nye debate against Ken Ham believing anything different than they came in with.

Debate is a poor format for teaching. Material goes past you at the debater's pace, not yours. If you actually wanted to know the answer, you'd read written material. Or interview the experts yourself, so that your questions can be answered, not the ones that the other debater finds most pertinent to convincing people.

I have little faith in the ability of the vast majority of people to form sound opinions on anything. Even the ones who come to the right answer will mostly be responding to the consensus that happens to coincide with their ideology, rather than sound ground-up reasoning.

In this case, any rational basis for this is going to depend on knowing a ton about virus evolution AND about common laboratory practices. It's going to take more than an hour's worth of lecture to teach you what you need to know just to judge a sound argument.

Practically all people would come out of that judging the one using the best tactics, not the soundest arguments. With a heavy thumb on the side of whoever they were predisposed to agree with in the first place.

If you want to hear a real discussion of the subject, you'll have to go to a virology conference. And you probably won't understand a word of it. Nor would I.
I agree with your comment.

But I'd like to point out that the Conservatives in the UK are nothing like Libertarians. There are a few perhaps, like the MP in the article, who would like to think of themselves that way. But the Conservatives as a whole are Authoritarian bordering on Totalitarian, and they are the most Authoritarian of all the big parties (more than the left).

You just have to look at their "hostile environment" policies to see the difference: It is the law that all landlords (even for someone staying in a spare bedroom of someone's home), banks and health services must verify a person's documented right to rent, open a bank account or have healthcare.

Every major party is against those policies except the Conservatives.

As many people in the UK lack or can't obtain documentation even when they do in fact have legal rights (the Home Office in charge of such things routinely breaks the law and is ruled against by the courts), and many don't find out about their restricted status until they turn 18 years old then find out they aren't allowed to go to university after all, and some lose status without knowing because we have a rather opaque system which does that to people for capricious and secretive reasons, we have rather a lot of people affected by those laws, who were either born in the UK or entered legally at the time they entered. This is why the Windrush abuse by government was so damaging, as many elderly people who had been in the country for some 50 years were suddenly affected by the hostile environment policy and had their lives ruined.

No true libertarian would condone those policies, as they are directly opposed to personal freedom between individuals to make small, private transactions. Renting is a private transaction between one individual and another, yet it is illegal under these policies. And preventing the doctor from providing services so that people die when the doctor is perfectly willing to help is also rather unlibertarian.
Cuba is not stopping anyone from leaving for a while, but yes this was a policy during the Castro era.
I wouldn't assume farmers automatically vote red. In ND for example, which is typically red for the presidential race, we often have democrat representatives in congress. Farmers will vote on what policies affect their bottom line, and it isn't always one way or the other.
Data Visualisation for Kids
> 1. Massively increases server strain and bandwidth usage

A short-lived JWT that fits into an HTTP Header is not going to _massively_ increase your bandwidth usage. At most, you will end up with a single refresh request every few minutes as each short-lived JWT expires.

> 2. Has problems with users less reliable connections (they'll be randomly logged out all the time)

Usually if your request failed due to a bad connection, the client wouldn't be designed to automatically log out the user. That would be just terrible UX.

> 3. Makes "Remember Me" style features impossible (unless you use a server-side store for that, which brings us back to it not being stateless)

Incorrect. A short-lived JWT tied to a refresh token allows for a remember-me style feature by checking account access when issuing a new JWT token.
Flaming lips. Their music has gotten a bit too ridiculous lately, but songs like "she don't use jelly" and "yoshimi battles the pink robots", and many others from earlier in their catalog are both silly and heartfelt.
I don't know the number but I suspect some material % of corn production could go away if we stopped subsidizing that industry for insane things like making gasoline for electoral reasons. :-)
> Combined with all the sugar they get from eating fruit, they end up eating about the same amount of sugar as Americans do. ... These are all unrefined sugars, of course

Isn't it important to distinguish the type of sugar?

I thought the 5-10% increase in proportion of sucrose to fructose was sufficient enough to result in significant difference between how types of sugar impact insulin response. E.g., the shift to more easily-metabolized fructose results in even more available calories to convert to fat than the 50/50 sucrose/fructose found in fruits.

> even when statistically adjusting for variables like age, BMI, and physical activity.

I find this hard to believe, that the statistics were adjusted correctly for physical activity. You can talk about !Kung, Maasi, and Inuits all day long, but these tribes are wildly active compared to the typical desk-jockey westerner. That can't be shrugged off so easily.
They didn't use the phrase "get out of debt".
My city hall closed for Covid.

I yanked at the door until it opened. Walked in and found employees to deal with…

Even if doors are closed and locked, showing up can still get the job done.
That doesn't answer the question, which is about emigration illegality being "not uncommon".
>At GitHub, we have 30 databases configured in our Rails monolith—15 primaries and 15 replicas.

For some reason, ( possibly because of Planetscale ) I was under the impression Github was using Vitess.
Or they exchange info. The article even says that MS banned them before they even knew what the business was.
Runs fine without JS to pull these hostile shenanigans.
ah, darn... thanks :)
some people ran away with million$

failure is relative

plus Negroponte got to learnt that communism doesn't work (or maybe he didn't)
I don't want to have dozens of different accounts with dozens of different subscriptions on dozens different terms that are changing dozens time per year.

Ideally I'd prefer to have a single legit service aggregating dozens of good content sites of my choice and pay monthly flat fee to access.

But because each of them are fighting with each other and each of them have their version of infestation with ads, paywalls, popups, content restrictions, accounts requirements - I don't envision any legit service to make peace with all that nonsense.

Pirate who will equalize all this into clean subscription based content is going to make a killing and I'll totally pay for it.

I am willing to invest into clear message that I don't like their current business model. I also want ads-based sponsorship of anything to die. I'm willing to put money where my mouth is. Let them sort it out.

I'd be willing to pay more for legit service to do all above - i just don't envision it happening any time soon.
Parent didn't mean violation of the law, they meant personal violation.
The Millennium Bug
My previous comment didn’t get saved apparently. I can hardly imagine that it was swapping. The machine has 32g ram. Perhaps compiling on macOS is slower. Most of the time was spent on compiling dependencies though. I can imagine that would be faster if you already have those builds lying around.
You're missing the cost of the uSD card.

esp8266 and esp32 boot almost instantly and don't really have a file system. My issue with Pi setups is that they eventually fail due to SD card corruption.
I personally think the way the ad was written it seems to suggest anonymous transactions (not the case of course), but I also would look at this statement:

"we do not impersonate other brands"

The domain is safeapps.io. Not only does this name seem very similar to other applications, some of which are on the Google Play (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hopehealin...), a service provider (https://safemoney.com/) and even a US military domain (https://safe.apps.mil/). Additionally, on the page the word "safe" doesn't even show up, suggesting the domain name is a squat. I don't believe that it's a squat, but the author is jumping to some big conclusions without looking at some potential causes.
Actually, there might not be a good way to model or describe the difference between causal inference, correlation and causality.

Causality involves a deep understanding of a phenomenon in science.

For example, the standard model of physics is pretty good at describing the real world in a good enough manner because we understand a lot of it. The difference with correlation and causality, in my view, is human, scientific understanding of what things are. Formulas, data or drawing are not enough.

For example there might never be a way to prove natural selection, even if there is a lot of data available, but a lot of scientific consensus is enough to describe causality.
So you get to leech off the greatest minds in the present while they are living and again after they are dead?

So when people build off humanity's past knowledge and they pay for the privilege I assume the new knowledge that is created does not belong to humanity any longer and belongs to individuals?
Bitcoin is functional in the modern sense. It's post modern compared to credit cards or cash. It current doesn't scale currently to replace the existing system for everyone.

You could say the lack of oversight around cash makes it appeal to criminals. The truth is most criminals have bank accounts. The majority of thief happens with credit cards not bitcoin.
In my 27 years of software development, almost every time I've heard someone say "best practices" it's because they are simply appealing to authority--a famous blogger, Gartner, etc.--rather than knowing anything about the underlying abstractions or reasoning.

Software development, especially nowadays, is far more art than science. Do "best practices" apply to art? Should they?

For me, the phrase is pure corporate jargon nonsense.
Yes - people dramatically underestimate the value of ruminants that can process plants that we can't.
Would taxing poor practices be a better approach? Eg Excess water usage, runoff, water pollution, pesticide use, fuel use or some other metric?

That way the cost of food would rise, but the cost of regenerative practices presumably wouldn’t rise as much and would earn more.
I'm 100% behind you on this. Worth noting that while the app does appear to be open-source, there appears to be no way for you to self-host the service at the moment. Regardless of how scammy it actually is, funneling every user into a $60/year subscription service is one of the biggest scamming tactics I've seen on the web.