skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No results for "falafel".

I really want this to work, I love the filter options that I see (assuming they work) and I'd love to use something like this instead of Google/Bing (where the top-recommendations are all ads or super bloggy).
& Rust is surely a highly imperative language that has absorbed functional idioms (where appropriate), rather than something that falls under the banner of "functional language"?
> Software subscriptions are different though, as the variable costs are negligible

Depends on the service. Many boast about their large or unlimited storage for user's data, but this part of their marketing relies on the assumption that almost nobody will actually use a noticeable amount of the offer.

It's similar to the dishonest, but sadly normalized practice of ISPs, where the bandwidth offered would be impossible to provide if a significant number of customers tried to use it at once.
I'm sorry, what is the exact benefit of running multiple nodes on one piece of hardware? Just software failure resilience?
Or traditional media? Are we pretending that fashion magazines have never pushed toxic body image messages onto young people? lol
Demographic statistics where men are behind are a perfect neutral laboratory environment to study demographics because there's no menminism movement to put their fingers on the scale, and also no matriarchy to put their finger on the scale. At most you get a few tweets making fun of the situation or using it to indirectly make fun of feminists or something, and that's fairly encouraging by normal environmental standards.
Tesla rolls out Safety Score-based insurance product in Texas
Note that I said “admitting” — I personally do prefer becoming more correct over time but it's hardly a novel suggestion that most people do not enjoy having to retract a previous public position. This is everywhere in society from casual use of terms like “saving face” to work by psychologists, economists, etc. on how to support people making better choices rather than being ruled by the sunk cost of past decisions. This is why public retractions have such weight: even people who like being right don't enjoy that part of the process.

This isn't about treating communication as a contest with only one winner but rather about the subjective feeling of the person making these decisions. Having built it up into a big deal increased the costs of reversal but the mandate changes the dynamic and gives them the option of saying the choice was no longer theirs — if they get vaccinated, that's a better outcome for everyone even if they never admit the bad call.
what's the distinction between framework and library?
"We did not set out to praise Apple’s proposal, but we ended up concluding that it was probably about the best that could be done. Even so, it did not come close to providing a system that a rational person might consider trustworthy."

The best that could be done would be to not do it at all.
> Before there was Helm, I wrote my own tool and framework in Ruby (called Matsuri) to generate and manage manifests.

I've built these kinds of things too in Python (or Starlark). It's an improvement over YAML, but I often feel the pain of dynamic typing.

> The Ruby code can access anything Ruby to generate the manifests, so I have a Turing-complete language and I can use class inheritance, mixins, method overrides.

I actually don't want any of these things in a dynamic configuration language. I kind of just want something that can evaluate expressions (including functions, objects, arrays, scalars, and pattern matching). If it's Turing complete that's fine but unnecessary. I explicitly don't want I/O (not in your list) or inheritance, mixins, method overrides, etc--unnecessary complexity.

Dhall probably comes the closest, but it has a tragic syntax and I'm not a good enough salesman to persuade real software teams to learn it. I've also heard good things about Cue, but my experiences playing with it have only been painful (steep learning curve, don't really see the upsides).
The simplest approach I've read so far was Warren's proposal to split those that manage markets from those that compete in said market.

Specifically, Amazon can run a giant online marketplace, but it shouldn't be able to put it's own products in that marketplace. Being able to both control the market and provide goods and services within the market is a recipe for disaster for everyone that isn't in control.
> The platform does not have a user-engagement incentive.

Then you lose to a platform that does. There does need to be a level of incentive for user-engagement. Either that or users will invent one.

> Personal network sizes are restricted. You can't be "friends" with everyone. Adding friends perhaps comes at some cost or is just strictly capped.

Facebook is capped at 5000 connections where a connection is defined as a friend or page like. You can argue whether or not this should be a smaller number, but technically Facebook does have this.

> Sharing outside your friends network from the platform is not possible. This platform is for sharing with your friends, not the world.

What about Friend-of-a-friends? How do two people find out they're both on the platform? Some information has to be publicly available. I think if you stop making "public" an option, users will just find some way to make things more public. Like sharing images via avatar image. Or taking screenshots and passing those among their friends (and their friends share with their friends, etc).

> Trust in the platform and how it shares your data. The easiest way to trust the server is if everything is E2EE, but we all know that's not trivial. Perhaps the limits in scaling E2EE can work synergistically with (2) and (3)

Eh. End to end encryption only matters for information you want to be kept private. And the information isn't being shared between you and me, it's being shared between Facebook and me, then Facebook and you. The problem is that Facebook is the one selling the data. It's the fact that they're the hub.

It's a hard problem all over because in a lot of places, you're fighting human nature.

Maybe a P2P/torrent style system, where all the information is encrypted and your data exists as a hash. To contribute to that hash, you need the private key, to read that hash, you need the public key. Connections are made by swapping public keys with people. You'd need a way to get your own private key from some source if you want to use multiple platforms. But if the private key was stored in some central hub, but encrypted, you could request the encrypted private key and then use your password/phrase to decrypt it on your device.

Just spitballing.
I'm going to give HN the benefit of the doubt of being able to speak sensibly on topics like this since the "Netflix for Black People" thread[0] was filled with nonsense once you got past the few sensible top-level comments. That said...

As a Black ADOS male whose therapist is of Northern Indian descent, my experience is that cultural nuance is important to grasp since culture = behavior, and therefore necessarily informs one's narrative response to various traumas of varying sorts. On the other hand, culture can also be an invisible prison actively preventing your individual self-manifestation as well as how you deal with others' difference. Both of these components vary in proportion to the specific problem at hand of course. However in my case, after demonstrating some discomfort in broaching certain culturally idiosyncratic topics that play part in how I narrativized my particular trauma, I've discovered that it helps to "have to explain things" because it has the effect at times of "hearing yourself speak"; e.g. displacing specific value statements from their monotonous, protective context, allowing you as an individual to more thoroughly hold them up in the light and assess their benefit or constraint for the solution space of the problem at hand. I wager that no one see a therapist who is the same background as themself. This of course necessarily demands a level of training and receptiveness on the part of therapists.

And if I can be allowed to bloviate philosophically, a decent amount of mental issues is our own opaque self-sameness standing in the way, but our selves are built out of responses to multiple, mutually exclusive demands from without, just one of which is the culture we're born into.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28087309
Some nasal sprays do seem to be effective as prophylaxis for COVID infection. I'm not sure about Xlear, but povidone-iodine nasal sprays seem effective and are already used as prophylaxis by dentists.

See:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=pov... https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaotolaryngology/fullarti...

They're not FDA-approved for this but as long as you're taking other precautions, they can't hurt right?
Just fyi that favorites are public.
Honest question - why? Is it because you see these animals as pests, or that it's fun to go hunting?
also amazing are gibbons. they literally fly through 3d tree-space using branches that flex generously, making the split-second routing calculations they’re making seem unbelievable.
I think it would be one thing if they were just aggregators. It's the community aspect that's harmful - it's clearly addicting and gives people the feeling of being social with fewer of the benefits.
why were SSNs in code to begin with? Did someone point this out to them?
I don't think the elitism here is necessary or even the root of the issue of code contributions. The apps currently present in these PinePhone operating systems were developed and are supported by knowledgeable and hardworking PinePhone users, but the fewer developers there are, the more limited the support is.
Ask HN: Why does HN seem so slow recently?
oh.. changing my elections now! thanks.
I have also been writing software for a while, and I agree with most of Martin's claims that qntm sites in that article. But I also agree that the example code is utter crap. It violates most of the rules that Martin just gave in the chapter.

Now, having written technical documentation myself, and even "Welcome interns" docs, I understand that writing good examples of good code is quite hard. But on the other hand, if one is writing a book about good programming then take the time to write examples that actually demonstrate what was claimed in the preceding pages! Like, it would be better to have a comment saying "Imports elided for brevity and printing costs" rather than writing wildcard imports.
Wow, you're right, USDT is much more prevalent in the largest markets than I would have suspected. Is this a first mover effect? As far as I can tell USDT is the shakiest and least compelling stable.
Yeah, I think we're imagining different people when we read the article. I'm thinking of people who are just quietly going about their lives. It seems like you may be thinking more of people who are vocal about this kind of thing, the crazy uncles on fb, who I tend to think are the minority (just based on what I've seen around me).
Is that a lot? It appears Yale's endowment grew by 40% [1] and MIT's grew by 55% [2].

Over the same period S&P500 grew by 39%.

[1] https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/10/14/yales-endowment-re...

[2] https://news.mit.edu/2021/mit-put-unexpected-gains-work-imme...
That's more than a 17% difference. Seems significant to me.
I like following your work and you are a big inspiration for me!
> If you want to keep up with them at all you need to at least have the bearest presence on the platform.

So, if you texted "Hey cousin, it's been awhile, how's it going?" you wouldn't get a reply?
https://www.facebook.com/help/224562897555674

> How do I permanently delete my Facebook account?
A thread on a grid-based flowchart editor
I am a little dubious about the "war makes technological progress faster" meme. I think technology has a pace determined mostly by physics and what is possible. War perhaps only stops us getting in our own way( see torpedoes).

Just to (cherry) pick a few examples

- WW2 was not even going to start unless progress had already passed the point that doctrine could see a way past the stalemate of the previous war. Germany had proven this (to itself) in Spain in 1936 - that tanks with close air support was now a viable thing at the divisional level. Progress from
the say Panzer II to IV was not "quantum leaps" but solid well tested progress as was similar Russian tanks who were going up against them. Adding bigger engines and more armour, or sloping armour. This was progress by "failing fast". That is an organisational decision less than a technical one. for example :

- Torpedoes : In the battle of midway US torpedoes frankly did not work (it's a terrible thing to ask a pilot to fly low and slow into AA fire and not give them a torpedo that actually will shoot straight or explode on contact). That was fixed in the latter part of the Pacific war but not because of technological progress but organisational change. ie firing everyone who thought there was no need to test torpedoes by, you know, live firing even one.

- Manhattan Project. Yes and no
I mean in early 1939 science did not think it was actually possible to make a nuclear bomb. After Piles' memo that changed and so there was a race on. But the goal was so tempting / threatening that even without a war it would still have been a major strategic goal. just like Rockets

- Rockets. Frankly these are like VR glasses. Basically the technology was just possible in the late 30s. And we would have worked on it anyway - war or not. But despite going from toy demo to actual bombs on London, they were ... well the V2 was the biplane compared to the Apollo 20 years later. It was not war that made rockets go up, it was funding.

War perhaps gives a focus to develop at a pace that would not be seen otherwise, but the space race showed you can do it without an actual live war-

Technology cannot be forced -the materials science or energy equations either make it possible or not. No amount of investment in 1917 would have made a Panzer tank by 1920. You also could not turn a V2 into Apollo by 1950.

Ultimately my view is that war strips away the self-serving excuses that organisations build up around why their progress is slow. It makes things faster because it gives clear unmistakable feedback (see torpedoes) and focuses funding, prioritisation and talent.

It seems it would be nice if we could find ways to improve our organisations without the deaths of millions.

Thank you had not thought about that before.
Hey! That's the goal. I will admit the database is small because I'm adding them manually but I'm working on finding a way to scrape recipes automatically. In the meantime, the tradeoff for the better user experience is less recipes
No more than people think making it to the Olympics is "black magic".
in my org we have basically three levels of architect:

enterprise architect (me)
domain architect (something like "communications domain")
solution architect (like Azure architect)

My job isn't to sit down and write code, most of the time. What I do is take a business requirement, go back and forth with a ton of business people to nail down exactly what they need or want to do, and then go on a series of requirements gathering sessions after figuring out the impacted or required systems. So let's say someone wants to digitize a specific set of communications. It makes more sense to build internal and scalable capabilities to be able to digitize any communication - so working out the technologies required to do that, the integration points, the patterns for how to do it. It involves learning a lot and then evaluating what you learned, and eventually diagraming it all out into an architecture that the domain and solution architects use.

The domain architects then would add in more detail and requirements within the systems that are affected and finally the designs get to the solution architects.

The solution architects go through the whole sketch and make sure it makes sense, that the data or whatever required will get to them and that their platform(s) are empowered and capable of performing the work thats being asked. They then design the solution for those technologies and when programming needs to get done then that is sent to the engineering teams to actually build it.

In terms of hierarchy the programmers/engineers tend to be the recipients of requirements rather than really being involved conversationally. I don't necessarily agree with this approach and I try to work directly with programmers where I can. And more often than not I'll work with them doing PoC coding in whatever technology - usually java, of course.
> there is no incentive to defend its provincial interests (in comparison to say a Quebec company like Bombardier).

It's interesting you are bringing up the aerospace sector (so mostly Bombardier) because of the CSeries saga.

Trudeau immediately bowed down to Trump when tariffs were imposed on these planes, despite later being thrown out in courts. All he did was to basically threaten to not buy Boeing fighter jets and instead get f35 from Lockheed (which he was contractually obligated to anyways).

No support for the industry, nothing. And that was for a flagship prestige technological project.

I still don't understand why he reacted so submissively to Trump. Having the CSeries sold to Airbus at a huge discount was foolish: The plane already had a profitable amount of orders. Now Europeans are reaping the benefits.
A great example I see towards this is Jira's strict hierarchy. My middle-management creates Epics and some Tasks for me (and subtasks are forbidden because apparently they are buggy). But if those are big enough to need their own work I can't divide further to keep myself organized. It assumes that whoever created the ticket knows roughly how much work it is or you need to go back and negotiate the structure, and ruin a bunch of links.

For me personally I want to track things that need to be done, not "week sized" bits of work or whatever your team is calling "agile".
I agree with this. My point is merely that the current problems are a round peg that it is unwise to try to fit into the square hole of existing anti-trust regulation.
This is BS. I know how the interview process works. All these big corporations optimize their recruitment processes around pedigree (matched to the curriculum of top universities). They don't look at track record at all; when track record is a far better indication of future performance. That's why their engineers are so incompetent and it costs so much money for them to produce anything.

They have become so incompetent that they don't even have the talent necessary to know what talent looks like when recruiting.

Corporate engineers will never hire other engineers who are better than them (for political reasons), so the engineering talent in these companies has been degrading for years as the bureaucracy and internal politics has increased.
Twitter bots are easiest, though they come and go. But you can see the issuing wallet here:

http://omniexplorer.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=3MbYQMMmSkC3...

Or visit Tether's site:

https://wallet.tether.to/transparency
That's the amount that Bitfinex took from Tether to remain solvent after the $850M was seized from Crypto Capital Corp in the money laundering sting. Bitfinex wrote them an IOU for it. But of course that money didn't exist anymore, it was taken by various world governments, and BFX and Tether have the same owners.

Bitfinex and Tether are the same company, roughly speaking, and I do believe they co-mingled their funds at times.

This is covered in section III of the NYAG settlement [3].

Depends how you slice it I guess.
I was going to reply to the parent that we used to have a word for this, and that word is "monopoly", but apparently we now no longer have that shared definition, probably an intentional confusion bought at great expense by monopolists.
Awesome questions! Honestly I started this just for fun and as a way to clarify my thinking about startup related topics.

I think that after 10-20 posts I'll be in a good position to define this.

I agree with your point tho, until I answer these questions myself I can't expect to be adding value by sheer luck.
hunt and peck is probably an exaggeration but typing speed is not the bottleneck for programming https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/1302651878065475584
> If I was 10x faster yet it would have been 10 hours. That's a long plane ride. Even with a full-time job I would still be able to squeeze in a couple of text editor sized projects every month. I would be able to learn so many new things.

I see a dilemma here. Nobody, not even 10x faster than the author, writes a full-fledged text editor in 10 hours. You can create something interesting that does text editing in 10 hours (or 100), but it's mostly going to be a learning exercise. You won't have created a piece of software that is of any value to anyone but yourself.

So the dilemma involves the tension between rapidly speeding through many interesting "efforts" that result in nothing of any use to anyone, but lots of learning value to the programmer; or spending much, much more time creating software that is genuinely useful to people who are not programmers, but risking getting stuck in a given language, problem domain or project and not learning as much.

I made my bed - I opted for 21+ years focused on a single project, but I was lucky in that it spanned everything from kernel-side stuff to hard-realtime to UX and I felt I'm still learning new stuff even today.
The longer you keep a scam running the more you can make out of it.
5 & 6 just means multiple accounts per person.

7 means some sort of paywall. You either collect from the users themselves, or collect from people who want access to those users.
Anyone wanna break down the vulnerability, now that we've got source?

Edit: that massive string on line 203 is awfully suspicious...

Double edit: there's another massive string a few lines above that, and the script on line 1188 is pretty interesting too
Still there, just different frameworks. Think of AI 2012 = Web 1995, TensorFlow = Netscape, PyTorch = IE, and Jax = Firefox. We're at about 2004 and Chrome hasn't been invented yet. There's probably another "pole" of the ecosystem (analogous to server frameworks like Rails & Django) that also hasn't been invented yet.

Or in the crypto world, Bitcoin 2009 = WWW 1989. Ethereum 2015 = Netscape 1995. Facebook Libra/Diem 2019 = IE5 1999, except less successful. Actually useful cryptocurrencies haven't been invented yet, although they probably exist in nascent form. Think of how the web came to be primarily used for social media, communications, discussions, information - all of which existed in the form of Fark, SomethingAwful, Xanga, etc. in 1999, but MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, YouTube, Yelp, AirBnB etc. were all in the far-off future.
If scams and money laundering are inevitable and a big enough risk to create real liability, how is that a "good opportunity" for any legitimate company?
So this archive page doesn't seem to contain any SSNs directly, right? you'd have to query for a teacher to actually see it.
I see toxicity not as twitter’s problem, but as its feature. I go to twitter to find out people’s gut reactions to current events, and in that role it is a uniquely capable and succinct resource.

What you will not find there is rational and reasonable debate, but imho that’s not what twitter is for.
So the excuse is everybody else jumped from the bridge too?
> if you're caught making a joke about ISIS, the Whatsapp police can unencrypt your messages

Would you please clarify this? I know that messages flagged by the recipient can be read by moderators [1], but I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at here.

I'm not defending WhatsApp (I've advocated for Signal since the days of TextSecure), but AFAIK the messages are encrypted using the Signal protocol, so I'm not sure how the "WhatsApp police" would be able to determine if you said something specific without the recipient reporting it.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/09/whatsapp-end-to-end-...