skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Specifically Facebook comes to mind. They claim they need to use algorithms for maximum engagement, which is probably true.

I still think they would be fine if they just made the news feed chronological (I remember when it more or less worked that way) and let users make their own choices about what to see. I use Twitter that way, where at least they give the option. Next door also has that option, but they automatically turn it off after (iirc) 60 days.

Of course if they weren’t just promoting things that made people upset, engagement would drop and they would be less fantastically profitable. But their users would be healthier and probably happier. I think it is valid for companies to choose to make $5 billion in profit a year over $10 billion, if that’s the cost of respecting human dignity and promoting human thriving. I get that that’s a controversial opinion.
One of the photos literally shows an actual 1st-gen iPod on top of it.
They're so sedate. It's wonderful. From what I've seen with my own kids, they're entirely OK with and plenty entertained by that pace—until they become accustomed to super-fast modern kids' media. Even most of the stuff on PBS seems hyper-caffeinated by comparison. And don't get me started on the damn auto-tune. "Let's teach 3 year olds this is what a normal human singing voice sounds like". Bleh. Friggin' Daniel Tiger.
Facebook groups push people to 'extreme interests', says whistleblower
> Sometimes they are a sign of a person who is really smart but did not have sufficient formal education.

Doubtful
The problem of government budgets is that you either spend it or you lose it
The H-100 was really very nice, but it was already too late for anything not PC compatible.
A big concurrent sharded DB system is not a harder problem, it is a different problem. Knowing how to solve problems at one scale doesn't transfer very well to other scales.
Perhaps obelos is referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_voting
The death from a thousand papercuts.

I'm not terribly convinced with memoization though. You're using extra memory, so it's not free optimization. We have Redux memoized selectors everywhere. I can't help but wonder how much of that is actually a memory leak (i.e. it's never used more than once). Granted, components are a bit different.

I always do cringe when I see a lint rule forcing you to use a spread operator in an array reduce(). It's such a stupid self-inflicted way to turn an O(N) into an O(N^2) while adding GC memory pressure. All to serve some misguided dogma of immutability. I feel there is a need for a corollary to the "premature optimization is the root of all evil" rule.
Can't insurance rates already take into account vehicle safety features? All that I can see this doing is reducing customer choice when it comes to insurance for their autonomous vehicles.
I wonder what is the minimal set of English words covering all search engine users...
Tesla withdraws self-driving beta over software issues
A Cubic Mile of Oil
$ for i in {1..16};do echo -n "ISO-8559-$i: ";echo trÃ¨s intÃ©ressant | iconv -f utf-8 -t "iso-8859-$i" 2>&1;done | grep -Pv "illegal input|failed"

ISO-8559-1: très intéressant

ISO-8559-9: très intéressant

;)
Except they will actually deal with all of it. First question I get is usually "what is var" followed by "when do I use arrow functions and when do I use normal functions" shortly followed by "why does this code work with a normal function but not with an arrow function" or "why does my code using classes and arrow functions not work on [ancient browser some family member has for some reason]?". I'll also get numerous questions about whether it is a good practice to do things like `x++` where `x` is a string because they noticed that it happens to work and legitimately want to know if this is good practice / by design (oof). Don't even get me started on the "equality in js" discussion.

The key problem with js is the relationship between objects and functions is extremely confusing. You end up having to explain associative arrays, and spend 30+ minutes doing some hand-waving to even begin to describe what an object actually is in JavaScript. Then they get it. Contrast that with something like Java or even Rust where, despite the other complexities, it's pretty clear what the data is and how it is stored.
It is silly to focus on number of engineers rather than on total cost. Any company should keep hiring more engineers until the additional salary expense exceeds the decreased operating cost/increased revenue that engineer generates
The profitability slide with the cute animal pictures is a pretty good summary of everything that's disgusting about startup culture. Allred is clearly a huge piece of shit & YC should be ashamed of having funded this scam that preys on some of the most desperate, credulous, and vulnerable populations. Not that other bootcamps are better - and definitely not that most universities are better, either. Most are as bad or worse
indeed. All is wrapped into one huge <strong> tag which causes browsers to apply the bold font style.
I'm more pessimistic about BO+Boeing than I am about SpaceX simply because of massive cultural differences between them all.

While Elon is...eccentric...he managed to assemble the team led by Gwynne Shotwell at SpaceX which can accomplish massive amounts in very short periods of time. Their success rate is extremely high so I would hesitate to ever bet against them.

Blue Origin has for a long time been a side-thing for Jeff. As a result, it apparently suffers from a serious lack of focus, commitment and sheer f'ing will. This is not a judgement of the front-line employees, but of the leadership which has let them all down.

Boeing is...well, Boeing.

I want to go into space as well. And I'm actually much more optimistic than you about the price and accessibility. At our current rate of change, it'll not just be possible within our lifetimes - it'll be commonplace.

Why? Take the example of landing first stage boosters. This was something that had never been successfully done. SpaceX started working on landing in 2013 and successfully did it in 2016. Since then it has become commonplace - sticking the landing isn't even newsworthy. Each tipping point, such as reusability, is happening faster and faster.
Show HN: Record, Capture and Transcribe Audio/Video in Chrome
The personification of companies is the problem. Microsoft is not a person making decisions for good or evil -- it's a collection of thousands of people all with different ideas and different abilities to execute on them.

What's on display right now is how this group of people are collectively making decisions. I'm not sure, given the swift turn around, that this is bad news for OSS at Microsoft.
> this news is very cool

800 nanokelvins down to 100 nK! Brrr! [https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.12238 "Atomic sample preparation", pdf p. 16, and top of p. 3]

Maybe it's soon time to plan updates to PARCS/ACES/SAGAS.
> Passports are, and always have been, tools for travelling internationally. Depending on a passport for general identity is arguably as much of a mistake as using social security numbers for identification.

In the U.S., every state-issued ID card or drivers license requires, among other things, a document proving identity; a current, valid U.S. passport is considered to meet that requirement. Here, a passport is a federally-issued identity document.
The Developer's Guide to Building Notification Systems: User Requirements
I think it can be a solution to readability problem
I agree with what you're saying. Traditional education is ripe for disruption, but this is clearly not the model that will do that. I imagine that there are high quality students that come out of this bootcamps but how consistently can they produce a good outcome for both the students and the prospective employers?

I think the tech industry needs to realize that their talent needs can't be solved this way. We need a more proactive and consistent system to identify potential and educate students. I think VC money creates incentives that impact quality, so for starters we should be thinking of these businesses as real non-profit organizations. Not wannabe mega tech corps.
> "real micro kernel based OS based on a message passing core", and they too, by almost any metric, have been a failure.

BeOS wasn't half bad. The failure was probably mostly commercial. It is true that they moved their networking stack into the kernel, but it's not entirely clear to me that they had to do that, it was just the most expedient way to get acceptable performance and stability given the (programmer-time) resourcing constraints of the project.
Look at photos of the US from before the introduction of the automobile. It looks very similar to today because of the similar form factor horse and carriage has to a car or truck. Minus the interstate highway system, things would look nearly the same.
What this is grasping at is that everyone works at a different level of abstraction, and they are all important.

We need those that oversee the huge complex tasks (that are simplified by abstractions) just as we need those in the trenches.
Thanks for your response! A lot of the issues and solutions you mentioned remind me of my time in past roles. More companies deal with authz related issues than we think, yet there aren't many products available that solve these long-term operational problems (UI, managing existing/new permissions over time, etc). Most solutions are just basic DIY libraries, although services like Warrant (https://warrant.dev/) are now becoming popular as engineering teams realize the complexity of solving/maintaining authz for the life of a software product.

To your point, authz is rarely a business's core product, so many in-house solutions don't get enough attention, and tend to become a big source of friction for engineering and product teams as they age. In my experience, this can slow down teams considerably or reduce code quality over time, which is why I'm excited to help devs find & build better solutions.

I'm glad you enjoyed my post, and I look forward to sharing more about building robust authz!
They say it is to protect us, but I suspect it is actually to protect themselves.
Even on high spec machines, visual studio feels so clunky and slow. Haven't used Rider but Intellij for Java development is a dream compared to visual studio for .NET development
No, that's why having x86 emulation performance be this good is a minor miracle.

Native performance would be expected to be inline with what the benchmarks are showing.

The MacBook Pro Max would beat the 100 watt mobile variant of the 3080, especially if you unplug both laptops from the wall where the 3080 has to throttle down and the MacBook does not.
I miss people being decent to each other. I'd be good with experimenting with removing anonymity in certain contexts to see how different online spaces can be. I genuinely think it would lead to some interesting (and unexpected) results.
Very rarely. And they shouldn't trust any answers that they receive.

It's difficult to give an honest answer to this question even if you want to be honest.

There are often so many little reasons that go into a rejection -- different reasons for different interviewers all feeding into an activation function that leads to a rejection or an acceptance (default state depends on team culture and how well you filter out candidates at the top of the funnel).

For most candidates, it's very hard to distill this into actionable criticism.

Edit: For anyone fundraising, this is also why you shouldn't listen too carefully to the reasons that investors give you when they reject your business as an investment.
Yeah. Or they veer off and discuss setting up Redshift and designs a whole ETL pipeline and data warehousing solution and a Hadoop cluster when a local file and sqlite is much more appropriate.
I agree with you about voting.

But if I'm speaking, reputation usually matters. People want to know whether to assign credibility to what I say, and knowing who I am plays a large part in that.

Now, HN is an interesting example of that. Anyone can read my comment history (unless I create a throwaway for one post), but nobody knows who I am (unless I make my name and/or email address public). Still, I can build up a reputation here, either good or bad. And I do the same for others. "Oh, user X usually has interesting things to say. I was maybe going to skip this comment, but because of who wrote it, I'll read it." Some users get that extra benefit of the doubt, because with me they have built up credibility over time.

This happens in politics, too. Consider the Federalist Papers. At the time, the writers were not known, but they built up a consistent, solid argument. We respect them now, not because of who the writers were, but because of the quality of the material. (If anything, we respect the writers more because of what they wrote, not the other way around.) So this can work in politics - people with a reputation, and still anonymous.

But then there's Q. Q has built up a reputation (both good and bad) while remaining anonymous. But my personal conspiracy theory is that Q was a Russian disinformation campaign. ("Was" is perhaps too optimistic - I would expect Q to re-emerge as we get to the 2022 or 2024 elections.) I would really like to know who Q was, in order that people would have a better basis for judging what Q says.
Did you read my entire comment?
The laptop ones are already 20mm. That likely isn't very good for yield. Going even larger would likely be ruinous in the cost department. Wouldn't putting multiple M1 Max be a better idea?
I am not a native English speaker so I may not have conveyed this perfectly but when writing that comment, I specifically chose to wrote "art doesn't _need_ to be practical" as opposed "art should be impractical" :P
Some of his points are spot on . Namely, framework magic (eg. Django's full of them, as are other Frameworks), as opposed to explicit calls.
It's clear the game is to prolong the lifespan of Visual Studio for as long as is feasible.

I wouldn't have any problems with this if Microsoft actually bothered to make it a good experience. Visual studio should start up in <1 second and not do ridiculous bullshit like change layout every time you start/stop the debugger. Also, woe be unto any developer who decides to build a large, complex Blazor app. Razor component editing in VS2022 is a stoichiometrically-ideal dumpster fire. Select that text in a way the IDE didn't prefer? Prepare for 30s of locked-up circus. It's a Faustian bargain to be sure - Will it come back quicker than if I had just killed the VS process and reopened all my windows? Who knows. I guess I'll wait a few more seconds...

I am really tired of the shitty engineering and lack of focus on the developer ergonomics. It is clear more time & energy went into adding Azure trash into VS than making it smoother to work with. I appreciate all the survey prompts in VS - It makes it look like you are giving a shit, but it is pretty clear that those surveymonkies effectively wind up in the zoo.

My proposal to Microsoft is this: Rewrite the whole thing from zero. Call it "Visual Studio Lite" or whatever. I'll actually pay you for this - if you spend real engineering hours on it and make it the smoothest experience available on desktop. There is no reason Overwatch should be able to run better than my IDE, especially when a trillion-dollar company is involved and is also responsible for the entire operating system upon which these things are happening. The % of features in VS2022 that I need for .NET development today is something like 5-10%. Get rid of the rest for those of us not supporting VB6, et. al.

If the latest language features, libraries & frameworks weren't so amazing, I would have moved to a different ecosystem a long time ago. I'm seriously considering dropping Blazor because the tooling is so trash. I love the concept of how it works, but if it's a nightmare to develop on I'll build a different path.

</rant>
I'd say part of the BE-4 failure to deliver is around culture, they're using the old playbook and not an agile process. Plus they've had a lot of staff leave, although that's been fairly recently after the shennanigans the management were playing. The consultancy that B.O. secretly asked to do around SpaceX was pretty eye opening.
Although, granted, even with waterfall style it should have been delivered already.
How did you change volume or brightness?
Sierra Nevada Corporation and Boeing have been making miscellaneous space systems for decades. Maybe neither SNC nor Blue Origin will be able to deliver on their launch system promises, but it seems plausible that they could make a space station, eventually, with enough money and luck -- and there are other manned launch options.
It's both, for example parsing an import string, or what makes a valid module name, are part of the language. These have restrictions that prevent Unicode glyph attacks.

The fact that imports require a domain name prefix prevents dependency confusion.
I'm on the checkout page of the base starlite (8GB ram, 240GB SSD), and all in to the USA by DHL... it's saying no tax (suck it USgov?), And free DHL worldwide shipping at £318 or $438. I don't NEED a chuckable backup/emergency laptop, but for the Linux-first property, and the price I'm having a hard time resisting. The only downside is that they say the order will be filled mid January of next year, so a long wait.
This comment flies in the face of actual history. While your point about Microsoft may be right (who knows with how they’ve ruined their messaging platforms?) it certainly doesn’t hold true for iMessage which came out in roughly the same timeframe as WhatsApp (2011 vs 2009).
> Process is nearly everything in performance/watt.

> TSMC 5nm is quite a bit better than Samsung 5nm.

These two statements conflict.
It's immaterial because the result of using the data is the same, the advertiser doesn't actually want my name and email, they just want to use information about me to target me better. Imagine instead of web advertising, it were phone calls. A random bicycle company calls you up one day and says, Hey Buddy, we know you were in a bicycle accident recently, we have a deal on new bicycles right now! You ask them where they got your number and how they know you were in an accident, and they say they don't actually know your number, they just bought the phonecall. It's immaterial that they don't know your phone number, because they're using it and information about you in order to influence you anyway.

That's the web advertising apparatus right now. Users are unaware of how much information about themselves they give up, and advertisers are happy to use that information to sell you stuff when you're most willing to buy it.

I personally find that manipulative and unethical, and I believe if it were outlined to the general public then they would also be pretty disgusted with the behavior.

I won't dispute that an actual privacy violation would be much worse, since a malicious actor can do more than advertise with real user data, but that doesn't make this scenario good either. For this particular purpose I don't think it matters if they have the real data or not.
A House Is a Machine to Live In – Believer Magazine
If a Tesla couldn't go 80 miles, there was something wrong with it (like, someone forgot to charge it), just like there would be something wrong with an ICE that couldn't make that same trip (like, someone forgot to put fuel in it). Hell, my ten year old Nissan Leaf could almost make that trip with ten years of battery degradation. So the Tesla either wasn't charged, or we're missing a key piece of the story.
You say that now, but Twitter also began as a way to send a quick message to your friends.
news.eternal-september.org – free access to text-only Usenet News
Opinions are my own.

If you rely on a "not-leaked" interview to filter out bad candidates, it's likely that you may not be conducting an effective interview.

Good interview is about figuring out "what the candidate is good at" not about "gotcha I proved that you're a bad one to filter out". I don't have a set of questions I ask all the candidates. Instead, I based the questions on their experience and projects. It's common that I found out "the candidate is not as good as they claim for this subject", and that's fine. The interviewer can switch the topic and see if the candidate is good at another subject.

Everyone is good at something. The job of the interviewer is to find out that, and whether that fits the business needs. The job of the hiring committee is to decide whether it's worth paying for that compared to other candidates. The only "filtering candidates" job is the recruiter, not the interviewer.
Well, it can, it's just not the default:

>>> from datetime import datetime, timezone
>>> datetime.now(tz=timezone.utc).astimezone()
datetime.datetime(2021, 10, 25, 19, 58, 34, 51668, tzinfo=datetime.timezone(datetime.timedelta(seconds=7200), 'CEST'))

Or if you want to use a specific timezone:

>>> from datetime import datetime
>>> from zoneinfo import ZoneInfo
>>> datetime.now(tz=ZoneInfo("Europe/Berlin"))
datetime.datetime(2021, 10, 25, 19, 58, 34, 51668, tzinfo=zoneinfo.ZoneInfo(key='Europe/Berlin'))
Ah! I've been informed that the console host and renderer that support Nano Server (10.0.14393 or so) are quite unlike the version I'm familiar with.

Nano Server uses bgfxcon exclusively, as well as some magic in a "console keyboard driver" that I didn't know we had.
So the hardware guys can't leak the software, and the software guys can't leak the hardware.
I use Rider in a Windows VM and it is night and day compared to VS 2019 in regard to speed.
Those are poor/obscure references.
It's high time we as a society rejected this nonsensical idea that you can teach anyone anything. Not everyone is suited to learn programming at a professional level; certainly not by cramming in x weeks at some bootcamp. For most students I suspect these are effectively scams. Not unlike college these days...
Disclosure: I work for a GM. What follows is my opinion and solely my own opinion.

If cars were introduced as a new product today, they would be rejected as unsafe. But cars are not being introduced today, they were introduced in the horse and buggy era. Cars should be safer. People work on making them safer over time. Public infrastructure should be built for humans. We are not good at this.

If you use miles travelled as a metric, cars are in the top 5 safest ways to travel [0]. People were killed by horses, being thrown, trampled, etc. Horses were expensive, in maintenance terms. Horses caused pollution - poop. Horse poop in small amounts is very manageable and useful as fertilizer etc. In large amounts it is a real pain.

I ride a bicycle, walk, and drive a car. I've had more injuries on the bike (on paved paths, not due to cars) than I have had in a car. I've had more injuries walking than I have had in the car.

Anyway my big point here is that you have to consider things and solve things in human terms.

0. You have to be careful and deliberate with how you measure this. Depending on what you exclude and how you group things you can many anything the safest or the most dangerous. If someone says something like top 5, or most dangerous, or safest, they have made choices to include or exclude or to bucket or to add weight. In human terms, people want to get to an end destination (Last Mile). Airplanes don't take you to an end destination. Trains don't generally get you to the last mile. Cars do. Bikes do. Motorcycles do. Buses do. Some light rail/subway systems do (depends on the city), but you have to get people to agree to pay for these.