skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But it also feels like there was a similar discussion on his other articles just a year ago on /r/reactjs, which I’m going to generalize and say might be less jaded than HNers:

https://reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/fcvqnl/stop_using_islo...

Many people picked on the distributed nature of the app, along with auth, but I was personally taken aback at the pushing of a pretty obscure, heavy handed state machine library in ‘modern frontend in 2021’, especially just as we are exiting the Redux era into more ergonomic solutions to state management.

There’s a lot of reasonable feedback here, and it all kind of falls under the theme that this guy is pushing a misguided curriculum. I’m not even a fan of Redux, but modest usage of the useSelector hook is far more sensible than xState (or even better, the myriad of newer alternatives that boil Redux down even more to something even simpler). This an important discussion to me personally because I always wonder how newer developers get these concepts fed to them, and voila, here it is.

It’s not hurting anyone and if anything is helping people with their careers.

Unfortunately, I think a good deal of working professionals on HN can agree that it is hurting our codebases, and the overall Frontend community has achieved consensus for some time now that we’ve been feeding bad guidance to everyone.

All I actually saw on his Twitter, and probably the Discord too (if I were to look), was a fanbase providing support. Objectively, all one can take away from that is that his paying customers like the product. That has no bearing on if the product is actually good, just that some people were either accurately or inaccurately assessing the value of it. HN can certainly be full of haters, but it does have a pretty solid group of shrewd experienced developers that won’t appease and ordain things indiscriminately. In this case, as tough as the feedback was, I think HN got it right.
With violins - or other fretless instruments - isn't it also that they're a bit more forgiving if they're slightly out of tune? I did gather that violinists do the vibrato / wiggling on purpose because, it being fretless, they can't hit the exact note.
Certificate Transparency is also interesting from technical standpoint: it's a decentralized ledger. It's based on a Merkle tree, so you could even call it a blockchain.
Coal isn't cost effective if you price in the full costs of using it. As long as someone else will pay them for you, yes, it's very cost effective.
"credibly expressed an intention"

'Credible' is a key word though, a random joe who doesn't own a gun is not credible to assasinate a President.
Ideally the unsafe parts are restricted to modules which have been proven safe to an appropriate degree of confidence. ('Unsafe' in Rust really means 'not guaranteed by the type system to be safe', so it's not a contradiction in terms to show that 'unsafe' code is safe.)

One might respond that you can do the same kind of modularization in C++. However, I think a Rust advocate would argue that it's much more difficult in practice to modularize unsafe code in C++ to the same degree, since unsafe idioms are deeply embedded in the language and library ecosystem.
It seems a bit disingenuous to claim Obama overthrew Saleh. The Obama administration originally supported Saleh, until massive protests made that support untenable — at which point they withdrew support. That's not exactly an Obama-initiated coup.
According to the linked chart, that mine should be making on or about $(240-100)=$140/t in profit - since they were breaking even at $100 and now the price is $240.

That $600k/day fine is therefore about 4,000 tonnes of coal (ie, nothing). The mine produces ~ 76,000 tonnes a day. That is what the free market thinks of the EU's fine.

The situation isn't that simple since the export price is for black coal and the Polish mine would be producing lignite, but ski jump prices are no joke.
unsafe code blocks are required to uphold the invariants of the safe Rust code surrounding it. So yes, if you fail to uphold those invariants (and that's proven to be pretty tricky), your program is not safe.

My experience is that you hardly ever need unsafe Rust code. If your ownership model doesn't the borrow checker, there are of course also other avenues like ref counts or even an actual garbage collecter (which you can chose to apply only to values whose ownership situation is not aligned with the stack). Only when those options are unable to give you the performance you want you'll need to reach for unsafe code.

Other scenarios where you'll need unsafe might include things like SIMD (although safe wrappers exist) or FFI, but hopefully we'll evolve the Rust ecosystem over time to concentrate the unsafe code in a few places by building abstractions, where they are thoroughly reviewed and well tested.
I assume the author isn't asking "What if there was a 30 minute outage of us-east-1" (just wait for it to come back) or "What if there was an outage of a single AZ in us-east-1" (just spin things up in a different AZ)

Rather, they're asking "What if there was a 30 day outage of us-east-1" - so anyone who isn't multi-region or multi-cloud loses everything, including backups, AMIs, and control plane access.

(FWIW I agree with people disagreeing with the worry levels in the article - a solar storm last seen in 1859 is more likely than a software bug? Ha!)
Code using unsafe might be safe, it just can't be proved to be safe by the compiler.

Just as code written in C might be safe, it just can't be proved to be safe by the compiler! Rust's advantage over C is that the machine-unprovability is confined to small, defined zones, where hopefully human programmers can, formally or informally, prove the code safe.
Guitars have a neck tension rod with an adjustment screw that changes the neck bow. They also have intonation adjustment screws that adjust the location of the tail bridge for each string individually. Then there's still tail bridge string height adjustment.

Neck adjustment needs to be done because seasonal moisture changes can change the bow of the neck. Depends on guitar. This is mostly for proper playing action, so strings don't buzz but aren't too high from the fret board either.

Intonation needs to be changed when you change some other things, like the things mentioned above or string gauge for example. There a tuner is very handy, you can compare the string fretted on the twelvth fret to its harmonic there. The differences are small and hard to hear.

Same things apply for electric basses.

Don't know how things are dealt with on a violin or cello, but the lack of frets certainly makes some of the adjustments unneeded.

With guitar, you only adjust these things when doing maintenance, not in the back room and certainly not on stage.
What about people who can't get medical care like cancer treatments, because hospitals are full of people unnecessarily ill from COVID?
Unsafe in rust means "you have to enforce the use contract manually as opposed to compiler doing it for you"
So yes, if contract is violated there the entire program is contaminated
Your mistake is that you're looking for a place with low barrier to entry that allows people to broadcast their opinions on a country whose language they don't understand. Of course it's going to be filled with low-effort memes.

You could start a r/sino alternative with a higher barrier to entry by allowing only effortposts, but that won't solve the language problem of English speakers primarily relying on English-language coverage written by English speakers recycling other English-language coverage ... ad infinitum, while most original sources are in Chinese and very little gets translated.

Your best bet for a level-headed discussion might be social science journals focusing on Chinese policy issues, which should ensure that every participant has some idea of what they're talking about. (Of course that also means they won't easily allow you to post your own opinion.) You shouldn't expect them to have a simple pro-Sino worldview, rather they'll have a differentiated opinion on their subject of study. A quick search turned up https://www.chinapolicyjournal.org/ which looks quite solid at first glance, but maybe a bit too deep in the weeds for you.
Nah, not really.

The problem with colonial forces installing democracy in 3rd world countries is that eventually they leave, and then all the old problems come back, AND the native liberal and progressive movements are completely compromised as traitors.

ISIS exists because of USA (and other countries - including my own) involvement in the middle east.
The "3rd world countries" resources were plundered and utilized for the development of the colonizers. The "3rd world countries" if left with their resources would have traded what they had and become "developed"

Seriously, people are in colonialism denial now?
Also the source of electricity to power the refineries. I found some figure on how much electricity is required for every litre of petrol and it wasn't insignificant - not as much as an electric car but uses but certainly not an order of magnitude less.

Unfortunately I can't remember where I found that information.
I never understand this point of view.

We decide what happens, collectively. We vote in governments, and we choose what products to buy. It needs to start with citizens because we're democratic.

The problem is that people's public speech doesn't match their behaviour. Carbon offsets for flights have been available for years. Despite ~75% of people saying "Climate Change is the biggest threat we face" [0] only 1-3% of passengers actually choose the carbon offset [1].

In startups, we know that people lie in surveys, and we need to measure their actual behaviour in order to correctly assess their actual feelings/intentions. From this, we can conclude that most people profess a public belief in climate change, but privately don't care and aren't willing to do anything about it. Companies are taking their cue from this: virtue-signal about changing the world, but don't actually do anything. Governments are likewise taking their cue from it: lots of conferences, lots of talk, no action.

We need citizens to stop driving in petrol-driven cars to marches where they protest about carbon emissions. To stop heating their homes with coal. To stop eating fish completely. To buy the carbon offsets, even if they're crap and not very effective. The mismatch between our public speech and our private behaviour is what's causing everyone else to do the same. It has to start with us, because if it doesn't it'll be ignored.

This attitude of "someone else has to take the first step" is what's causing our inaction. Stop blaming others for your footprint, and do something about it yourself.

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/09/1...

[1] https://aviationbenefits.org/media/167226/fact-sheet_11_volu...
> in ~1 billion years the Earth will be uninhabitable by us in its current form

In ~1 billion years, "we" won't be inhabiting anything in our current form. If humanity/primates haven't gone extinct by then, they will have evolved completely beyond our current form.
And Eiffel, which uses a JIT based VM for development and then compilation to native code via the platform C or C++ compilers.
This is a global issue, and Americans make up < 5% of the worlds population. Who are "both parties"?
It's all in good faith, and you can't trust criminals because, well, criminals lol.

That said, on the other hand, if someone wants repeat business they will do what you pay them for. It's why ransomware works - if a ransomware guy doesn't unlock things after being paid, nobody will pay ransomware guys.

TL;DR like most business, it's based on trust.

Anyway, anyone want to buy some secret documents? Just send me 50K worth of bitcoin, you can trust me.
"If you had a bunch of documents showing you were actually not intending to do it and just scamming, and they were all solidly timestamped maybe."

I think the most solid proof thats its not a geuine conspiracy would be

A) if you lied to the person giving you the money, about owning a gun or something else relevant, showing your intentions weren't genuine

B) showing the conspiracy is not credible, i.e. you are conspiring ro use a sniper rifle but you don't k ow how to shoot.
Yes. The idea is to isolate the use of unsafe and prove that it is safe.

Because compiler cannot prove that what you're doing is safe it is your responsibility to do so.
Once you've _proven_ that your unsafe code is safe, then it cannot have propagating effects in the rest of the code.

A lot of people get this confused. They think unsafe means you can do whatever you want. In reality it means you'll play by the rules even if the compiler cannot verify them all. In truth it is not as hard as it sounds, we do it in C all the time.
How is getting a vaccine shot a "medical procedure"? Very technically it is I guess, but come on.

So you are happy to accept bodily harm to innocent "others" (from your comment) to protect the power to refuse to get a vaccine shot?
I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to adopt a bunker mentality on this. iPhones, Pixels, Samsung flagships, etc are fantastic devices that offer incredibly useful and powerful features. For most people giving that up for improved privacy in't a worthwhile tradeoff.

That does not in any way mean any of this tracking is ok or acceptable. It means we need to keep up the public pressure and technical vigilance to publicise this issue, and try and get the industry and legislators/regulators moving in the right direction.
The way I view it is that the unsafe keyword acts as a flag for auditors that they would need to thoroughly check the following block for memory errors.
Moreover, for many critically important pieces of hardware, such as ARM Mali GPUs, the drivers are only available for Linux and Android.
Assumptions are the mother of all fuck-ups..
The same principle of hormesis applies to organic arsenic and many others natural to our diet toxins. Some of the phytochemicals are toxins and anti-nutrients the plans use to fend off herbivores, but could be beneficial to us in the right amounts during the rate state. Our retina has receptors for blue light, which get triggered even when your eyelids are shut. So, do you think blue light is not interesting to our body? Don't you think without bright light your eyesight can develop properly? This is not much different than the hygiene hypothesis - something could be beneficial in the way that we're programmed to expect it, and when we don't get it, our primed defenses actually hurt us. With time, we will adapt to be fine without blue light during the day, without UV, but so far, it seems that we need it for proper development!
Yes, but one of the awesome properties of oil, that have made it such a great fuel, is that you can't normally get all that energy out of it in one huge burst. One of the reasons is that the majority of that energy is not stored in the oil itself in some sense, it is stored in Oxygen in the air. There was recently a chemistry paper on this subject that contained exact numbers, but I haven't been able to find it again.

Basically oil alone is not a great source of energy, oil+oxygen is; and it's very hard to get a mix of oxygen and thick crude oil.
A third player would have to create an ecosystem as well, and companies barely want to write apps for two platforms, let alone one with zero users/money.

It either has to be able to run one platform’s apps, or have some alternative support. The latter can be the open source world, but than why depart from Android, when its core is FOSS?
This is exactly the problem with modern software.

They don't stick to their tasks anymore, but implement all kinds of "utility"-things.

The complexity and quality suffers big time, because instead of being a good piece of software highly optimized to do a few things really well, they all become massive assortments of useless utility crap.
Having exactly two children per family isn't a pyramid scheme though.

The pyramid scheme is that automation makes us more productive and therefore lets us work less. When we have more children we get to work more. So full time employment basically requires us to grow our consumption exponentially. Either we consume ourselves or we let our children consume.
Depends on how it is compiled. There’s no reason in principle the two can’t have the same performance, it’s just a difference in ergonomics.
It kinda makes sense, because MAD has kept people from nuking freely. But there were a few close calls.

That said, if e.g. only the US had nukes after WW2, they would be the world's dictator. I mean they already are very influential everywhere, but they don't have absolute power at least. Still wouldn't want to be at war with them though.
> 1. Zero trust is highly optimal for business. When it is systemically impossible to cheat your vendor/customer, nobody even tries. Happy path only.

I don't understand what point you tried to make, and frankly it sounds incoherent.

Moreover, the weasel word "highly optimal" means nothing. You failed to present any value proposition, specially when discussing a solved problem.

This is perhaps the main problem plaguing web3 proponents: they always fail to present any value proposition at all, and instead resort to all sorts of handwaving to try to distract away from that void

> 2. Good luck suing someone in a foreign jurisdiction with incompatible legal systems.

This statement fails to take into consideration the very notion of a jurisdiction, and somehow presumes that a shop in a country which chose to do trans-national business shouldn't have to deal with the legal implications of operating in another country.

> 3. You miss the great innovation of SN: Preventing Double Spends.

That is not innovation in commerce: it was already a solved problem before the inception of blockchain-based technologies.
Starry Dream Effect
Not really. Sainsbury's also do a £4 lasagne and Tesco also have a premium version which I expect is about the same price.

I wasn't implying the versions are the same, merely highlighting that comparing the cost of random items is somewhat nuanced.
> However, sometimes your program’s ownership model does not fit with what the Rust borrow-checker can verify.

This tends to be a beginner issue for c/c++ programmers. 99% of the time you just need to rethink your design into something better.
Anti/vaccine and aborted fetuses in one comment, that's enough to trigger at least 2/3 of the people online lol

The downvote button should be removed. Either upvote or don't.
unsafe rust code is not safe, but the rest of the program is, and the unsafe blocks provides very nice benefits:

- limit the size and scope of the unsafe code

- make the unsafe part stand out, "here be dragons", so you know when to be particularly alert

- act as a safe way to encapsulate unsafe code so that it can be used by safe code, and used without the lack of safety propagating outside of the unsafe zone
I haven't tried F-Droid tuners, but F-Droid's metronomes were an utter disappointment. Though I haven't tried developing and uploading a better one myself, so...
They might hate their job. They might be disenfranchised. They might feel like no one is listening to little ole me.

It's hard to keep a secret.

I have never met anyone who could keep a secret, especially people in their 20's to early 30's. High school secrets usually don't hurt criminally, or financially.

Almost every crime I hear about the crime that was solved someone retelling a secret. (Those Brazilian bank robbers were brilliant. The guys whom dug into the safe deposit room. They made one mistake. One of the guys wives knew to much.)

So many times the secret was told to a girlfriend, or boyfriend. That secret will eventually get out.

There's a terrible book called How do You Keep a Secret Between Three People-----You kill the other Two.

If I ever had the nerve to pull off a caper; I would do alone.
At least he didn't end up producing meth to pay for his medical bills, lol
I'm ok with ads. I just don't want to see them everywhere I look.

And no, "just" move to another place is not a proper argument:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergo_decedo
It seems most of the concerns in this thread are related to devops which is not something Remix influences.

Remix is about making the front-end “use the platform”, progressive enhancement, SSR etc. They really strip things back to basics and it’s taking me back 20 years. I love it, and I can still write React.

Keep an eye because they have some interesting news to announce these coming weeks. I don’t work for them, just an early adopter.
Up to 600 watts of power for graphics cards with the new PCIe 5.0 powerconnector
Is there any app segment or niche safe from being killed by Google?
Yes, people really need to read history. The statement upthread, "Why can't they build vaccines of their own?" sounds akin to "Whey can't they eat cake, if they can't have bread".

Even if they build vaccines, it is not held to the same standard, for ex: India's covaxin was not being accepted for travel to western countries. The dominant players set all the rules.

Unless we understand why/how we are in this situation, we will keep on making the same mistakes again and again
Yes, we can claim so because there are other ways of proving your program to be safe. See: https://plv.mpi-sws.org/rustbelt/

By the way, several parts of the std (Mutex and Arc for example) are written in unsafe Rust. They have to be, by necessity, because they allow for aliasing and mutation.
Excluding the IR that info would not be in the operators manual. Also, capabilities such as type of missile systems on the tank are in practice not secret and present in 3rd party catalogues.

The only real downside I can see of public manuals are the risk for adhoc use of captured equipement. However I believe the upside of having the operators being able to use the equipment properly easier is greater.
Microsoft 365 Gender Pronoun Kit
I'm almost certain at this point, Linus will eventually kill the idea of Rust in the kernel. The toxic culture of Rust developers will eventually ruin what was once good about Linux.
If you stick to apps from F-Droid you can avoid this in my experience. I don't think any apps I have contain ads. Not sure if F-Droid actually bans them, or if it's the quality that comes with being free (as in freedom) software.
Let’s leave it at “there are android phones”. Unfortunately it is not at all supported for the majority of phones, and for the ones where it is possible, it will result in eg. the purging of camera firmware.
unsafe {} does not disable type checks or ownership rules. It (basically) only allows dereferencing a raw pointer. It's a way of telling the compiler "in this specific place, for this specific variable I manually verified correctness of dereferencing that pointer".

C/C++ is not just "everything is unsafe", it's also lacking many powerful features that exist even inside unsafe{} blocks: ergonomic enums with associated data, type-checked generics, ergonomic moves etc.
That's exactly the point of creating a CO2e tax : making cleaner energies more cost effective by subsidizing them.

Renewable energies are cheap (they are basically "free"). Deploying them is expensive. But you only have to subsidize the cost of deployment and after that it's cheaper for everyone.

It's the same thing with insulation : it's expensive, but once it's done correctly, you can basically heat your entire house with only the sun (if it's there) or really low energy consumption.

We're just missing the political will. The transition is possible and would create jobs for the decades to come.
Another point for using nuclear power to replace fossil fuels as soon as possible and after that replacing nuclear with renewables.

Now we're replacing nuclear with renewables, which is just ass-backwards.
There's previous discussion on reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/pzo1v9/so_you_want_to... with important points
Intel Core i7-12700K: up to 45% faster than Ryzen 7 5800X