skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’ve been using Actix-Web for the backend and Seed-rs for the frontend and it’s been a blast. One language to run on the server and in the browser. I admit I still have to write scss and know html but that’s no biggie. Biggest pro for using Rust, no more json! I use message pack with compact representation and my data just zips from my webapp to my server without a hitch. Not having to wonder if a field is potentially null in some deeply nested object is a magical feeling.
Intel in Talks to Buy GlobalFoundries for $30B
For the most part, I’m not trying to be persuasive on here. Just riling up the randos.
Cybersquirell Advanced Persistent Threat
I tried a single query (for cybercafe projects) and got a 404:
https://www.zidisha.org/projects/cybercafe
Yep. Just taking a 50:50 bet on the popular side doesn't mean anything, unless backed up by something substantial. There's no meaning to saying you were right or wrong, unless how you got there can be followed by facts and verification.
800px gaming.
Heat = Flaming, Light = Illumination (in the metaphorical sense)
Is that in a metropolitan area? Wow that's worse than what we have Australia, and internationally we are the laughing stock of internet connections! Here, you can get double than 10MB/s even in some remote areas now.
No way in hell I will ever go back.
> They fail to see what every outsider, and many insiders, clearly see.

The problem is that half of those outsiders clearly see the evil as Facebook censoring too much. And the other half clearly see the evil as Facebook censoring too little.
> … too early to really take advantage of networking…

So how do you explain "HP Distributed Smalltalk" ? :-)

https://www.hpl.hp.com/hpjournal/95apr/apr95a11.pdf

How do you explain "Gemstone/S" ?

https://gemtalksystems.com/products/gs64/
> The cheap adjective was unnecessary.

Huh, no it was. I wanted to distinguish between cheap <$5 plastic toys and brand name $10+ (expensive) ones.
A question for people practising trunk based development: how do you perform code reviews?
I doubt the strength of arguments that go like “people have been saying X forever, but X hasn't happened yet - therefore not X” because it completely ignores evidence for X over time.
It should probably be "evils"
Based on your post history, it seems like you may not be familiar with the expectations for discourse in this community. Per the guidelines[0]

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

It looks like a lot of your grey comments did not follow this guideline. I see you've been here since 2018, but maybe nobody ever brought it up. This community is different from other places like reddit, and its partly because of these practices.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Y'all should really start naming manufacturers and models so I can avoid them.
Sounds like a problem with the software update installer and not Arch Linux.
To be fair, that's Arch Linux ARM, which is technically a separate project. The pinephone arch linux arm repositories aren't even maintained by the official project.
That said, I've had no such issues running Arch on my pinephone.
MAGA World’s ‘Freedom Phone’ Actually Budget Chinese Phone
Stanley Kubrick's Paths of Glory is a good illustration of how this question plays out.
Yeah except it's the size of a TV remote.
Trailers were originally at the end of the movie (hence the name).

They got converted to pre-views pretty early on though because at the end of the movie people didn't stick around to watch them.
That negates one of the major advantages of committing code, which is having a regular backup of your work.
Time to generate I get, but you could always augment the table over time and fall back to standard methods otherwise (and store the result).

Storage I have a harder time wrapping my head around. Aren’t primes quite sparse at cryptographic magnitudes? And are the primes used for (say) 256-bit encryption about the same magnitude, narrowing the dimension of storage required?
This is not really a problem in zig. If you really need a destructor, write a .deinit() function in your struct, and call that. For your case with mocks (note mock as a noun, not a verb, which is a bit of an antipattern anyways, see: http://blog.plataformatec.com.br/2015/10/mocks-and-explicit-...). That aside:

Go doesn't have generics so you can't really do this, but in the case of zig, your function would be parametrized on the type, so you would issue it a struct to be shared by the tests that has the common initialization upfront, make_ functions that return the pre-initialized stuff, followed by running the function, followed by no-op deinits, followed by whatever forensics you'd like to run later.
The Club of Rome is some odious stuff. It seems to be a group of academic doomsayers who like to play around with toy models in order to justify quasi-communism and other goals related to neo-Malthusian beliefs. They may be the primary progenitors of using toy models to cast the bones and make scary predictions about the future, especially with regard to climate alarmism. From The Limits to Growth:

"In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself."
Facebook at least claims to be a leader in scanning for and detecting child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on their platform. As a result of their diligence and size Facebook reports a lot ~90+% of all CSAM reports[1]. That fact suggests that Facebook really is better than most when it comes to detecting CSAM because there is nothing inherent to Facebook that would make it a more appealing platform for CSAM than pornography websites (e.g. MindGeek), 4chan, or snapchat.

When the media get a hold of a fact like 90% of CSAM reports come from Facebook they jump to the conclusion that Facebook is a "hotbed" of child pornography - as in this example[2]. Facebook's efforts and openness about the problem are fuel for click bait criticism of Facebook.

Naturally, this has a result. Facebook, in part, I think, because of negative feedback, wants to move towards end to end encryption in their messenger platforms. This will make it impossible for their automated systems to detect CSAM in messages and so their CSAM report numbers will fall. Everyone wins. Well, except for the children who are now exploited behind the protections of end to end encrypted messages.

This article seems similar, in part, to what I've described above. Facebook is unusually transparent to media companies by providing their CrowdTangle tool to media and academics. This level of transparency is not offered by competitors and so Facebook, with some data available, looks worse than competitors who have no available data to compare to.

I write "in part" because here the content isn't inherently bad the way CSAM is. Instead, it's just political messaging that some media groups do not like. Neither the article here nor in the New York Times even try to address whether Facebook is doing something to cause this, or whether Facebook's audience simply likes Ben Shapiro and Dan Bongino. Is Facebook giving preferential treatment to these people, or do Facebook users just like the "wrong" pundits?

1 - https://www.missingkids.org/content/dam/missingkids/gethelp/...

2- https://www.thedailybeast.com/facebook-a-hotbed-of-child-sex...
Why would they buy them if they've stopped developing 7nm 3 years ago?

How far behind is Intel really?
The @Vector provided is actually a reference to SIMD vectors and there has been discussion to rename it to something that reflects this more clearly.

https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/7305
If you have more people trying to sell your stock than want to buy it, it doesn't matter how much controlling interest there is. The board has to keep the market happy.

The market doesn't care about user privacy or ethics. The market only cares about making more money than was made before. They only care if the source of data (us) get so fed up we stop giving them our data.
There's no duty to obey an unlawful order; UCMJ case history indicates that in order to be lawful an order can't infringe on the statutory rights of the person receiving the order. In other words, you don't have to kill yourself attempting a patently impossible feat, and as there can be no possible military objective being pursued by giving the order, the officer should know better than to issue it.

As for your second scenario, yes, that's about it. Although to be honest it's unlikely to ever go to court martial; an officer demanding impossible things happens all the time and is dealt with at the company level.
Yeah, there's two different aspects in there (though without the full-blown testing making broad atomic commits isn't super attractive to me anyway. ;) )

Amazon's Brazil system doesn't sound like it does the "test the whole company's code" aspect in the same way.

> If you create a package at Amazon, you specify an interface version like "1.1". As long as changes are backwards-compatible, the interface version is not changed. When Brazil builds a package, it appends an additional number to turn it into a build version like "1.1.3847523". You can only specify dependencies on interface versions.

So if I'm working on a non-backwards-compatible version, my users aren't going to pull it down immediately in the build (if I properly call it version 1.2.x), so the build won't show which of them it broke.

Even if you depend on the latest version instead of pinning to a major version, how would I force a company-wide build of everything that depended on me using my not-yet-landed branch? I can run those tests in a monorepo on my branch directly, I don't see how I'd do it in a manyrepo setup without a very specific set of "every project in the company specifies its dependencies as depending on specific, easily-overrideable, commit SHA versions."
> It is a really, really bad idea to put business logic in your database and there are people in this thread downvoting everyone who points it out

Your database is your business logic. From constraints to the queries you write, it's all business logic.

Regardless, you misunderstood the article. This is about moving formatting into the db layer. Letting Postgres return JSON, as opposed to middleware code to translate rows to JSON.

Which is like the opposite of business logic code.
Doesn't Mudrex allow users to build their own rules as well?
How about with multiple repos, across multiple systems? Eg. embedded device with 4-week test cycles, backend server with CI/CD, frontend site with CI/CD, and upstream vendor contribution PR(s), and where the data fees for firmware updates to the set of all customer embedded devices run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars? You can't get them all in one commit then. Even with a monorepo (not contributing back to upstream) it'd be an utterly massive commit.
AMD Link also works.
A complete collapse of the viability of targeted advertising would be totally fine with me.

The business models that would become viable in that reality would be a better equilibrium and the incentives would be better aligned between software companies and their users.
Great article, despite the size of that burger!

Just one question: why he says that clojurescript is a pain in the ass?

I know he used it in multiple projects and wrote datascript library compatible.
Absolutely in most countries you get either a much faster connection for the same price, or a connection of the same speed for less than that. And in this comparison I'm including a few developing countries where I've been recently (SE Asia).
On the bottom it says "Warning: Knowingly filing a false VAERS report with the intent to mislead the Department of Health and Human Services is a violation of Federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1001) punishable by fine and imprisonment.".

I wonder if they check it, I mean, after all, you do have to provide all your details (name, street address, phone, etc.) and they probably filter out obviously bogus ones.

It also says that "[...] has been estimated to account for only 1% (see the Lazarus Report) of vaccine injuries". Of course 99% could be mild, but a higher % could be deaths. Welp.
Intel Exploring to Buy Chip Fabricator GlobalFoundaries for $30B
> When arriving, I discovered branches were living from 5 days to somewhere 30 days. People had to rebase mainline frequently into their branches, causing lots of rework and spending much non-valuable time on fixing what got broken.

This alone doesn't tell me anything about their process. It happens with unbranched workflows as well (unless you use a VCS that prevents more than one person from checking out a file at one time). The fact is, some work takes a few days (or weeks) to get right, and in the meantime other people may have changed those files. This is why `svn update` and `p4 sync` exist.
We are almost certainly plummeting towards the next collapse of the roman empire. This time "western civilization".

But it's not that bad!

Rome's collapse took around 100 years, from 376 - 476[1]. If you consider Byzantine as a continuation of Rome, the final collapse didn't happen until 1453 [2]. So it took a full 1077 years for Rome to fall.

Plenty of time for our lifetimes to pass in relative comfort. We're, what, 10 years, maybe 20 years, into the process of our civilization collapsing?

I think what we're mostly seeing that's giving us the fear of collapse is a slowing of rapid growth after WW2 [3]. We've lived our whole lives in a time of rapid economic growth. Just because that's regressing to the mean doesn't mean the ride's over.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empi...

[2] https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-middle-east/byzantine...

[3] slowing growth after "catching up" from WW2 is the core thesis of Capital in the 21st Century
You said there's never any reason for art. That's not just abusive, it's wrong. Without a reason, it's not art. And the reason here is weak. It's "because we could." That's what makes this objectively bad.
> I am part of this "we", and yet I ask myself, what am I willing to give as indirect payment? What other options are there?

I am perfectly willing to see ads as an indirect payment for free services. Show me some ads with tasteful photography, good art, or a nice pun. I might even click on them and buy something! This is not new, we have been doing this for centuries.

What we currently have are hardly good ads in any way, shape, or form. They rely upon invasive tracking to show you lazy creepy notifications like “Oh you live in 123 Evergreen St. and bought a toaster recently? Here are ads for five other toasters!". Ugh, no thanks.

Advertising is fine. Getting rid of invasive personal tracking will allow the creativity and art to come back into advertising.
Does anyone have a pointer to what bills are being considered where?

It seems like it's Europe and probably the European commission but a bit of web search doesn't turn up anything.
NYC doesn't have the good weather that LA does. NYC also puts pretty strong limits on the people living in the shelters. There are a large portion of homeless that don't want to give up drugs, pets or other freedoms...so they prefer to just live in tents in nice weather.
Historically, "frying themselves" was also meant in a very literal sense, with thermite or explosive charges.

Every so often, something would make it into the post-WWII surplus market with anti-tampering countermeasures still intact. Hilarity seldom ensued.
This is highly unlikely, Firstly military comms equipment and drones use their own proprietary comms equipment The coms equipment is typically a combination of (AM/FM/TacSat) it wouldn't be running through a firewall that handles phone and internet (which is almost always handled by a separate contractor even in 08)

I'm not going to say it didn't happen, because its the military, but that is super uncommon, and against so much info sec, it just doesn't stand to reason.
Google spam filtering is much much less accurate than that, and it’s an easier problem.
Thanks for the heads up. The error is now fixed.
The article did make a start, when it suggested ‘Let me get back to you tomorrow about that,’ or: ‘Ask me again in a week.’

Are you wondering what comes next?

Perhaps you're dreading being hectored or criticised in response? Don't worry. There are ways to overcome that.

Here's one key paradigm that will make you bulletproof against anyone's unreasonable overture, comment or passive aggression:

"Don't let it in."

How?

Watch this.

If what Marisa Peer says resonates with you at all, watch it over and over again. After a few times, you'll learn the words by heart. A few more times and the emotional intelligence of it will be imprinted on your psyche so effectively, your answer will be automatic. Practice and you will be free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeDt9dgFXFk&t=18s
> lack of operator-overloading just seems like a pain to me.

It is a pain, but all things considered, having it would have been a greater pain. Note that the main issue with operator overloading in Zig isn't so much the operator part but the overloading part, because overloading introduces ambiguity that cannot be resolved at the code-unit level. Zig doesn't allow name overloading even for ordinary identifiers (actually, Zig is more strict in its opposition to overloading than Clojure or Erlang, which do allow it when there can be no ambiguity). I think it's more likely that Zig will allow user-defined infix operators (say +' or something) before it allows overloading of any kind.

> Zig in many ways puts faith in the coder to not screw things up

I understand Zig very differently. Zig puts a lot of effort to make it hard for the coder to screw up. Even where it doesn't enforce correctness at compile time or at runtime (and it does both much more than C++, to the point that the goal is to eliminate all or nearly all undefined behaviour in safe mode), its strong emphasis on correctness, including functional correctness, is expressed precisely through a simple and lean language that's easy to understand, so that it's harder for the programmer to screw up (plus fast compilation and easily isolated code units). So to the extent that Zig puts faith in the coder (less than C++, more than Rust), it can do so because the language is so lean and simple.
Maricopa Auditors Seek Envelope Images, Splunk Logs After Finding Discrepancies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermountain_Power_Plant

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-utah-coal-los-angeles...
Yes. I agree with this whole heartedly. It’s usually an issue with not understanding the other side’s perspective. Experienced/good engineers who know the space they are operating in can get a better sense of what the customer wants even when the customer may fail to adequately express their needs. It always helps when there’s people on both sides who have clear visions and a means to communicate those ideas with their counterparts.
You should never risk you personal wealth on startup ventures, ever.

Startups the SV way are hard to do, if you are not part of the bubble. As you said, you don't have an "in" so nobody is going to easily give you money. You have two options:

1. consider a different growth strategy, startups are not the only way to grow a business, focus less on growth and more on stable income, try to acquire at least one recurring client

2. build your reputation, then you will get capital, doing no.1 first will also help you with no.2.
SpaceX's problem was they trusted the manufacturer who had certified the strut. So theoretically it was already being done by the vendor.

SpaceX is also pretty good about eliminating checks that have become redundant or otherwise redundant. For example they no longer do a static fire on the launch stand before every flight.

The big promise of Starship is the quantity of flights they envision. A thousand flights will give huge insight into reliability, insight that space flight has never had because most articles are never recovered and inspectes.
Casual 'almost certainly'...

I don't think so.

Anyone know the name of the longstanding psychological phenomenon where people tend to believe they're living through an inordinately pivotal inflection point in history, when in reality: they're 'almost certainly' incorrect?
If you have some code that if its callers changed, they would stop using that code or use it on a different place, it's a unit and it's a good idea to unit test it.

If you have some code that if its callers changed you would want to change it too, then it's on the same unit as the calling code, and it's bad to divide it away.
So much this!

You could, maybe, make an argument for brand ranking if the brands didn't share DNA and just happen to have the same parent company. That is not the case here.

Using the above example, oppo, realme, and oneplus share key in-house technologies (ex fast charging). Beyond IP sharing, the oppo and oneplus flagships are basically the same phone with an OS remix.

Reminds me of when Ford used to rebadge some key models as Mercury vehicles because (sigh) "The brand tested well with women."
I edited to add more context.
Kind of derailing the discussion looking from the specific context of web-dev stacks, but...

> For me personal hell is a giant stack that I barely understand, a stack that I'm very slow to iterate on, a stack that has 9999 exceptions and custom rules and "quirks" that I need to remember and work around. This is infuriating, and definitely not fun.

...but hopefully putting it in a larger context: This is exactly what I find infuriating and not fun about every ETL/ELT tool I've ever used or seen, and which makes these my personal hell. At a guess, this is probably what infuriates developers in any specific area -- only, in most areas, there are at least some good tools to choose from.

> So then what's fun? For me it's something small, fast, something that's no hassle and that lets me put my ideas into practice. Something that makes sense, something that I can have a complete mental model in my head and modify it in practice as fast as I modify that model in my head.

This is why I'm thinking about building my own. I have some ideas already, but... Sigh.
They say in their partner website that it's a PC, and that you can even wipe out Steam OS and install another OS if you want.

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/faq
I guess if you keep saying the same thing will happen repeatability eventually you'll look like you predicted something.

Even a broken (analogue) clock tells the right time twice a day.
The linked post has nothing to do with replacing rest APIs / is a completely different use case than postgrest.
It means that the conversation isn't producing much of value despite lots of activity, like an inefficient lightbulb that wastes energy by emitting heat instead of light.
You’re confusing reason as in technical requirement with reason as in why they chose to do something. They can choose to do something without it being a requirement.

And you’re changing your comments after they’ve been replied to - please don’t do that.
Are those things new? IRC has been around 25+ years at least

Might as well ask why would any tech entrepreneur ever have moved to SF?

Therein would lie the answer