skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Apple users are happy that they forced you. They like the AppleID experience and nobody would care to implement it if they didn't force developers.

Are there any statistics on this? Apple never asked me if I wanted or liked the AppleID experience.

When AppleID came out, I thought it only worked on Apple devices so my use was limited to non-cross platform applications. With developers removing AppleID from Android applications, my initial misperception turned out to be justified.
As a user, I don’t trust your “honest answer”.

On the other hand, I absolutely trust Apple - my relationship with them spans over a decade and countless products/experiences.

I’m happy that they’re forcing devs to offer Apple Sign On as an option when other social logins are also offered. As a user, I trust Apple far more than any 3rd party dev.

I pay a premium to Apple because of their platform and the types of things they enforce.

I want you to understand that as a user, this is exactly what I want Apple to do and I pay extra for it.
From June 2021 : Facebook reportedly fired 52 employees who were caught spying on users

https://nypost.com/2021/07/13/facebook-reportedly-fired-52-w...
Similar. My old man went back to his old job as a consultant. It was supposed to be 20 hours a week and quickly turned into 40. Then he gradually reduced over time.
For casual readers unfamiliar, what is happening is typical of what is happening in other corners of university history departments: less factual history and more politicized interpretive dance. Typical young classical historians reject the idea of a "fall" of Rome. That basic long-arc story is now rejected. Rome simply evolved.

Most of us read Gibbon and later popular historians, thus we are familiar with the "fall" story. The clash between academic and popular Roman history makes for a lot of articles about how you, the layman, misunderstand Rome.

In short, you don't misunderstand Rome. For a very good riposte to these arguments, see Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization, Oxford University Press 2005.
Beware of the false prophets.
It’s possible that the code was modified in a way that bypasses the null-check. It isn’t necessarily true that anybody removed code.

Unit tests that test the contract of a method (if you put in this argument, then you’ll get this return or side effect) are a good idea in both dynamic and static languages.
I like MMR, but like many people in that genre these over-simplified calculations only really work for a very narrow set of circumstances.

What happens if you want to buy a condo in a competitive market that requires a 200k downpayment? Or have a medium-sized wedding? Or have two kids in day-care?

I understand that the FIRE response would be that you don't _have_ to buy into all that stuff, but saying that it's just a little algebra and some simple assumptions is fantasy unless you want to live like a single 24 year old your whole life.
I think you are confusing implementation with behavior. That is, I am achieving that same result through different means. I am mostly uninterested in specifically how the configuration string is parsed. It's not really important.

What is important is that we know we will have to deal with the possibility of something not existing. That is where the complexity lies, and where we want to take care to make our program as sensible as possible. Validating your input to throw an exception or return is one way to satisfy the compiler, another way is to use `Maybe` as intended. The author's "solution" is simply a poor illustration of parsing over validation (read that sentence again).

I suspect, and this applies to you as well, that they are just not comfortable working with the `Maybe` construct. Adding extra ceremony to remove a `Maybe` is simply not worth the trouble, and your idea of "continuously propagating" is severely overblown. Again, we can write every single line of the rest of our program as if `Cache` exists. You don't need to "handle" anything extra (other than the holding the concept of a slightly more complex value in your mind).
But they did exactly this before, upgrading unsupported win7 machines to an unusable
win10.
Yeah, I kind of agree with them here, alert is such a massive anti-pattern that it's not worth anyone's time to fix nonsense edge cases
I hate how this quote has been perverted. “Premature optimization” was meant to apply to people making their programs an unreadable/unmaintainable mess to save a couple of CPU instructions. Figuring out how to organize your data is not premature optimization, it’s literally one of the first things you have to tackle when starting a project, because trying to change it down the line is going to be miserable, especially if you can’t afford any downtime.
- something like 75% of lawyers would not recommend their children go in to law

Yes, but it must be like what IT has become to some extent. Many people go into it because it's a (seemingly) high paying job with lots of jobs available, but they aren't passionate about it. Then get disillusioned about it. So you have a high rate of dissatisfaction amongst professionals in the field. Personal experience you can go from 50k/yr to 250k/yr and still be depressed if you're not excited about what you are doing.

Wife's divorce lawyer.. Guy has a small office in small town. Has one paralegal working w him. Charges his $250/hr. Not much stress. If he works around full-time per week, pays his paralegal and small office - he's doing pretty good by most salary standards.
I gave a talk at CU Boulder[1] in 2019 on complexity in cloud infrastructure and the design of rsync.net.

What I wrote, and then said several times was that:

"Simple systems fail in boring ways. Complex systems fail in fascinating ways."

I gave examples from Chernobyl, Air France Flight 447, etc. as examples of such. It's a topic that fascinates me and I had hoped to give several more such talks - but alas, the pandemic.

In my opinion, the best discussion of this topic is the book _Normal Accidents_ by Charles Perrow[2].

[1] https://www.colorado.edu/libraries/2019/11/08/cyberinfrastru...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_Accidents
Makes sense! Thank you. That progression over multiple pregnancies is certainly on our mind and on our OB’s mind. Glad you’re working towards addressing it.
I would imagine that the stray RF at the altitudes at which commercial aircraft fly already poses enough of an interference threat. Given that, those systems are likely already designed with enough RF shielding or other safeguards. Since the RF power emitted by consumer mobile phones is so low, it shouldn’t pose much greater of a threat than the RF the aircraft are already designed to handle.
Of course they have to put that in TOS, this whole discussion is about how CS didn't enforce changes in margin on time, and they ended up bag holding.

What do you want them to do? bag hold a loosing or risky trade and pass the effects to other clients?
It's fairly obvious to me that the CDC never had a chance at public trust in the first place, because public agencies don't get to have trust in the 21st century, period. Honestly - name a public agency that's widely trusted and respected, on a bipartisan basis, and I'll give you a public agency that people don't pay attention to or care about.

The moment the CDC came into the national spotlight in March 2020, that was it for their bipartisan reputation as a trustworthy agency.

Part of public trust is believing in good faith decision making, which implies that mistakes are seen positively or neutrally in hindsight - part of the process of learning, not evidence of corruption or gross ineptitude.

When is the last time a major US policy mistake didn't result in a political field day?

The CDC never stood a chance, if we're being honest.
Does an AI generated image fall under their definition of a photograph?
Title Case Converter: A Smart Title Capitalization Tool
I had a similar situation. I worked hard and went back to school and became a professional artist. I was paid decently, but ended up never drawing or painting for myself. I hated it. It took me close to a decade to start liking the process of creating visual arts again, and even then it was tentative.

I read something not all that long ago that I wished I had read when I was much younger. "Make something you like your career and keep your passions for yourself, if you are able."

Obviously, this doesn't work for everyone. Some people have that all consuming thing where the process of selling your passion doesn't kill the love for it, but it didn't mesh for me =/
Is venture capital bad? [audio]
slice | Backend, Full stack engineers | Full-time | Bangalore

slice is India's best credit card challenger to pay bills, manage expenses, and unlock rewards. Our members love us and swear by us. We're reinventing how traditional credit cards work by offering a simple and transparent app to help our members transact easily. We have about 3 million registered members with an average age of 23, making us a market leader in a niche and growing segment.

* We are looking for Backend SDE 3 engineers who have hands on experience in Node, Express, MongoDB, TypeScript, AWS.

* We are also looking for Engineering Managers who have experience in managing small teams of 5-7 engineers and have experience in Node, Express, MongoDB, TypeScript, AWS.

You can find more openings here: https://careers.sliceit.com/jobs

Note: Please mention that you are applying in reference to this post in HN. :)
Yeah. Depression by its nature is a bit of a special case where when you're in the throes of it, "this is your responsibility, only you can fix it" is the absolute worst thing you can possibly be told. It will definitely just shove you deeper down the hole. But once you've got some upward momentum a shift toward "I can fix this myself" can sometimes be helpful.
Rob Eastaway's excellent How Long is a Piece of String¹ covers the history of month and day names in its first chapter. Thirteen pages from 30000 BCE to now, via abundant and perfect numbers. Day names eventually being explained with the following table:

Planet day English French
---------- ---------- ----------
Saturn *Saturday* *Samedi*
Sun *Sunday* Dimanche
Moon *Monday* *Lundi*
Mars Tuesday *Mardi*
Mercury Wednesday *Mercredi*
Jupiter Thursday *Jeudi*
Venus Friday *Vendredi*

I'll admit I'd somehow never spotted that Lundi comes via diēs Lūnae, even though Dimanche from diēs Dominicus jumped out even to my English tongue.

It also contains a lovely example of how day names would be different if other objects were visible in the night sky with the naked eye.

[I'm pimping the book here because I imagine its mix of math and quirky backstories would be appealing to the HN crowd.]

¹ https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/632979.How_Long_Is_a_Pie...
well, the dumb fucks won't mind.
QUIC is secure-ish UDP. It's about latency for me (online games, video streaming, etc).

Expecting TCP appropriate loads to be much faster isn't the point.
Sure, but you need a path there. How do you get from complex to simple? That's really hard. It's relatively easier to keep things simple over time.

By default Money does not know or care about conscientious design. It wants functionality and it wants it now, future be damned. This is not irrational. Usually there is no future.

The problem start with your unlikely success, and yes now you have money to throw at it, but ironically the people that are best suited to wrestle complexity to the ground are not super motivated by money. They are motivated by a peculiar kind of beauty that is, by hypothesis, missing in the successful, complex system, and so they will not want to contribute, money or no.
Note, though, that in most threads on HN about qualifications for programming or software engineering there are usually quite a few comments from people saying that they never actually use anything from the classes they had to take to earn their STEM degree.

As far as actually teaching them things they would use on the job the STEM degree was no better than any random humanities degree. The only value they say they get out of the STEM degree as opposed to any other degree or no degree is that many employers use a STEM degree as a filter when hiring.

You can also see this whenever any thread about software interviewing comes up. People complain about having to cram memorizing a bunch of algorithms and data structures that companies like to ask about.

Those questions would be right at home on a CS class homework assignment. If the class material was something that working programmers actually had to use they would not need to cram for it when it comes up on interviews.

So yeah, a STEM degree is more valuable for a typical programming job than a humanities degree--but not for any good reason.
>We now consider that to be propaganda.

We always considered it propaganda. Just like modern day advertising and marketing. Its all propaganda. They are trying to convince you to believe something (that is likely not true. ie: we have the best product)
Your timing for this niche is probably spot on. Any missions that scavenge falling systems could be called Jawas. Maybe this will be an entry to the asteroid mining with the knowledge gain of moving stuff around. Sounds fun.
This is where the strangler pattern can turn around and strangle you.

At my last job, we hired a new team to transition our stack to a new architecture. They built it, and SOME components of the legacy stack DID get replaced and deprecated. Some did not. Which is why across our two stacks, we used no less that 4 totally different, separate database implementations. 3 different NoSQL cache implementations. 2 different types of kubernetes clusters, (RKE and EKS). 3 totally separate monitoring and alerting systems. (just a few examples, but the whole problem is way too big to list out here). The worst problem was that staff who designed the legacy systems had either left, or didn't remember how they built it or why they made all the choices they did. So the ONLY effective means of knowing whether a legacy component could be replaced, was to simply shut it down and wait to see if anybody complained. (we called it a "scream test"). In some cases, customers would simply stop paying, and nobody (but finance) would notice for MONTHS. We'd still have people logging in from non-paying customers. Or in other cases, the customers had totally shut down their own operations, so there was nobody to pay, and nobody to call us and say "hey, we're not doing business with you anymore". Engineering never wrote a formal way of validating the whole system, so when features would break, the only way we'd know is if a customer noticed (assuming they're still using the feature), and called Support.

Now, this only happened in the 2 years I had been there. In the previous 15 years, I imagine this had happened several times (aborted modernizations/migrations).

In all that time, nobody had been allowed to sit and plan out how the whole system could be simplified, so that the whole organization could even understand what they were deploying and paying AWS for.
TypeScript has nothing to do with C#, apart from its creator. The structural type system with explicit nulls, sum types and very powerful generics makes it feel much closer to the ML family of languages than C#, despite using the C-like JS syntax. The teams I've used it in have never really used it to build complex OOP hierarchies or even used classes for anything other than React components, though there are probably many who do.
In-tree replacement is coming in v1.22...as in, just a few weeks away. It uses admission controllers, just like OPA/Kyverno et al, hence the current guidance to use one of those.
there is some slight difference but i don't remember what it is. i wrote a blog post about abel-ruffini based on those two videos and i remember there being some things that were clearer in one rather than the other (but i don't remember which!)
I agree, I know of one. But I own it.
Maybe they plan on making the encryption slightly less encrypted so they can tell something about the content? Would that not mean the encryption is basically pointless?
Blockchains Have NFTs Unnecessarily Tied Down
Here, it is shown that blockchains aren't intrinsically required for NFTs, and, in fact, create additional problems for them.
https://fs.blog/2020/03/chestertons-fence/
This is the reality of the situation; until you're eligible for (edit) medicare, health is a significant expense. When paired with the "hedonistic treadmill" of spending, early retirement takes a lot more investment than many suspect. Even at a safe withdrawal rate of 4%, $2M is "only" $80k a year. You're not driving around in Ferrari's and eating caviar on that (parodying a rich lifestyle here). Of course there are levels, and one could live modestly in a LCOL area on that, but that's not what most people have in mind. Particularly for a "millionaire".
Gitly: A light and fast GitHub/GitLab alternative written in V lang (pre-alpha)
Don't forget things like routing, authentication, certificates, logging, deployments, error-tracking, monitoring, error-handling and service-meshing.

Sure, it probably gets easier when you're booting your third or fourth microservice, but there's a lot of overhead.
If you learn SQL, please take the time to learn how to pass parameters without putting them in the query.

Example in python:

query = """Update employee set Salary = %s where id = %s"""
tuple1 = (8000, 5)
cursor.execute(query, tuple1)

It is very important that the parameters of a query never become part of the command string, or a whole class of injection attacks become possible.

At this point, you could still run into problems if your parameters and command string aren't in sync, so watch out for that as well. (Usually this would happen later as the code was modified for new requirements)
I am fucking happy that apple didn't allow you to force the choice between Google/Facebook or annoying account creating down the throats of your users.
That's exactly the reason I pay more for apple hardware: UX consistency.
If I didn't want it, I would be saving money using android and windows for equivalent hardware.
Doing the double slit experiment with ever-larger particles is not related to quantum communication.
Sounds like Racket with Typed Racket.
So far every comment here is talking about safety of flight, which is not the issue.

It's not about safety.

The FAA didn't make this rule. The FCC did, because the cell networks weren't designed for thousands of airborne handsets moving at 500 knots. "Cell phone systems depend on frequency reuse, which allows for a dramatic increase in the number of customers that can be served within a geographic area on a limited amount of radio spectrum, and operating a phone at an altitude may violate the fundamental assumptions that allow channel reuse to work."
doomsday for all the people that got the bio genetic tool "vaccine", not for the naturally recovered folks
I'll bite, what exactly worked much better than Slack without the web?
Yeah I think it's better rephrased as "service reusability". A proper microservice should be able to be redeployed anywhere for anything.

If you have an authenticate() function in an auth helper library, you can move that around to new web apps to help users authenticate with different parts of your site(s).

Your authenticate() function for a microservice is probably going to be part of a broader "microservice api library" that gets reused, but I can't imagine reusing the microservice code itself - you're supposed to just spin up a new one.
> also requires sign-up - even though free - which (I think?) is discouraged for Show HN.

Look at past Show HNs and tell me how many respect this. It's such an obsolete rule that it's irrelevant and almost OT to even comment on.
I'm not sure that's true in times of crisis. Bush's approval ratings and trust levels with the general public went through the roof during 9/11. Obviously he squandered that, just as the CDC has done here.
Kolmogorov complexity is close to what you're getting at, but is about total string length of the program which is more useful than line count when line count can be gamed. That is, a shorter program is "simpler" than a longer program. In quotes because it's not necessarily true (see code golfing, the language itself may become very complex to permit such a short program and the requisite knowledge and competency then increases the total complexity to achieve, or even understand, the simpler result). A similar technique that doesn't discount meaningful variable names might use syntactic token count. That way:

printf("Hello, World!\n");

and:

Put("Hello, World!\n");

Can be treated as the same complexity (the difference is 3 characters, and they are otherwise equivalent).

There are also analysis methods (names escaping me, and Google fu is weak today) that look at loops, procedure calls, dependency graphs, and other things to attempt to discern (should be treated as guidelines and not rules) the complexity of a program using objective metrics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity
That is quite the jump. Here we were talking about the absurdity of putting unvaccinated people on a no-fly list but put it into perspective against the state violently suppressing it's people in the name of disease prevention and you can can definitely see that they are both absurd.
> You don’t pursue a coalition with a tiny vocal minority at the expense of a greater group of people.

No? A coalition is A + B + C + ... ~= 50.1%, you might need that vocal minority to make the math work. And those factions won't agree on everything, so there will be intra-coalition tension, but they know they have to work together to get what they each want. However, there are limits, so if the coalition totally abandons C's issues (or even just severely de-prioritizes them), then C will leave.
Interestingly, this sort of structural typing was already present in C# 1.0 with the foreach statement allowing anything with a GetEnumerator() method that returns something that looks like an IEnumerator.

This was discussed in 2011 in a StackOverflow question [0], including a link to a blog post by one of the language designers [1].

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6368967/duck-typing-in-t...

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20120126033827/http://blogs.msdn...
Apple will fix those for free, you know?
> That’s the root of quite a bit of evil in software. A closely related motive is a desire to show off.

Yes but its also driven by keeping oneself employable.

" I built a simple system to do X" is not a winning conversation in an interview. GP's complex system is what ppl say they built.
Retirement is such a loaded word because to many it means "wealthy enough to do whatever they want", whereas traditionally it meant "no longer useful to employers". In the former case we have stories of 20-somethings "retiring", the word repurposed into just a meaningless boast.

In the no longer useful to employers vein, in the working class town I grew up in there was a common observation that retirement was a harbinger of death. That when someone retired their lifestyle would quickly decline to sedentary decay, boredom medicated with alcohol (or other things). Death would quickly follow.

As an aside, tangentially there's a wonderful passage from Mark Twain in Tom Sawyer -

“Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do. Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.”
You definitely nailed the tone you were going for, you're just not liking the response.
No. There is no mention of marriage at all. The assertion was specific to monogamous relationships.

A monogamous relationship is usually, especially when not arranged, established well before marriage. Divorce rates that hinge on years of marriage and not years of relationship does not provide us with any useful information here.
Proportionality is a thing.
I don’t see that claim anywhere in that article, despite how hard it’s reaching to be a hit piece.