skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
makes it even easier for both the US (via Microsoft) and Russian govs (via JetBrains) to copy, analyze and inject arbitrary code into any codebase (public or "private") used by this combo of tools
I’ve been “burned” many times by using standard off the shelf solutions to problems. Not because they didn’t work or had security issues but because they didn’t do precisely what a stakeholder expected, down to the pixel. No amount of me saying “nobody will notice if our app works the same as everyone else’s” worked.
Before the App Store: the carriers took 70%

After the App Store: Apple takes 30%

But let’s not pretend that most of the App Store revenue comes from poor indie developers. It comes from pay to win games, loot boxes, and other in app purchases with zero marginal costs.
> if SQL were built on YAML

Actually that's pretty nice compared to what we actually got:

https://schemahero.io/learn/tutorial/create-table/
Both my teenagers do. And yeah, I have a monthly subscription for headphone cables.
Lightning is being used right now. In what way does it not work?
How the Rich Are Driving Climate Change
> The site now has more than a million visitors a month and earns a nice side income from a small ad.

So when it says that, what does that mean? It pays for hosting costs I assume. Are we talking enough to pay for a couple of meals out a month? Or enough to retire on?
Turns out we dedicate tons of resources to advanced technology when we are at war (WW2/cold war). Sounds like we need another good war with a power who is actually a threat to rapidly innovate.
Pluggable square still worked with the dongle, but that’s moot since they moved to Bluetooth long before the change (which apple also doesn’t control.)

The change was for acquiring space and enhancing water resistance.
KDE Connect Beta Arrives for iPhone
Yes (with one solid tone for the first second of the minute, IIRC).
The fact that giant companies eventually collapse under the weight of their own greed and complacency doesn’t mean they don’t engage in anticompetitive behavior while they’re at the top.
If a company is doing tons of R&D, and everything suggests that that R&D will give huge dividends in the future, then it seems perfectly normal for such a company to have a high market-cap/revenue ratio.

If having too big of a market cap relative to revenue is wrong, then you're basically saying that companies should not invest too much in their future, just use their money to sell as much as possible right now.

You know who else has extremely high ratios of mktcap/revenue? Pharmaceutical companies trying to cure diseases that have no available cure. Is it wrong to try to cure those diseases?
Arcan looks pretty amazing actually. I'll have a closer look at that over the coming days, thanks!
Evented ("async") concurrency, as found in Node, Python, Rust/Tokio, libuv, and Ocaml is based on building chains of events which are waited on by some fast polling mechanism like epoll or kqueue. Any IO call, say a socket read, tells kqueue/epoll to notify some handler to service the event. The flow of events drives execution.

This is distinct from thread pool models where you still block the entire thread for an IO call. While a sufficiently smart scheduler can probably then context switch out of this thread onto something else as the thread waits for an IO response, this is distinct from having the event directly wake up a handler.

That's usually what I associate as the difference between an event loop model and a threaded model. You can certainly make your threads highly granular and isolate each distinct blocking operation to its own thread pool, but it's different from actually being notified and woken up for events.

> I think you're responding to the wrong person as I didn't "try to talk them into using granular thread pools".

Yeah I think my wires got a bit crossed there. Apologies. That's what I get for being snarky while not paying full attention.
Apple has always had insane margins . Even the Apple //e costs more than competitors.

Apple became the most valuable company in the US before Jobs passed.
It means they were not successful at crushing their competitors.
Because it fails to sate the emotional rationalization that sits behind so much of the rhetoric that has been used to justify such measures. The wealthy are evil, duplicitous, exploitative, and in the best cases, merely lucky... regardless of what a wealthy person actually did or didn't do to come to their wealth... and the not wealthy are blameless, innocent, unlucky victims that are unable to change their lot in life in part because of the oppression of the wealthy and in part because their betters in government aren't yet empowered enough to protect their best interests.... again all without regard to how they came to their unfortunate lot in life.

Now, of course, I'm exaggerating, but only a little I think. And, of course, this happens on both sides of the debate... but the side in power right now is the one making taxation proposals. Personally, I support your idea by and large. An amount that scales to the degree of the transaction ensures that big transactions pay larger amounts and that everyone has a stake.
Yes - and if you've raced before and were successful then with training you can get back to top shape and be competitive. It's going to be a much easier time for you than for someone who's never raced at all.
Human behavior probably has the opposite effect in captive elephants. If a captive elephant is born without tusks then the Mahout is going to kill it rather than invest in rearing an animal that has much reduced utility and will not yield healthy offspring.
The limit on lifetime and annual caps only applies to "essential health benefits" which gives insurance companies the ability to deny first and force the insured to fight to get payment. Grandfathered legacy policies are also allowed to maintain lifetime bans.

https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-aca/benefit-limits/...
TLA+ is a specification language. Its goal is to say exactly what the algorithm is, because an informal description in English or even pseudo-code is usually too ambiguous and not amenable to mechanical proofs. TLA+ by itself does not prove anything. You can write incorrect algorithms in TLA+, in the same way that you can write incorrect C programs.

Once you have a TLA+ specification, lazy people like me run the specification through a tool called TLC that exhaustively explores all possible behaviors of the algorithm in a finite search space. For example, the specification may say that a property is valid for all N, but TLC checks it for N=1, 2, and 3. This step is not a "proof" (it's more like a test suite), but people like me say "good enough" and ship at this point.

Lamport and colleagues have a tool called TLAPS where you can write a proof yourself (e.g., valid for all N), and the tool checks that the proof proves what it claims to prove.

The next step, which is what this paper is all about, is to derive the proof automatically.
> I don't miss MagSafe and I enjoy the interchangeability of chargers.

The new magsafe uses a normal usb-c power brick with a special charging cable. The cable has a usb-c plug at one end and a magsafe plug at the other end. So it should be intercompatible between chargers now, and there shouldn't be any more need to buy a new charger when the cable frays. (And apparently you can also charge with a normal usb-c cable in any of the regular usb-c ports).

I'm quietly hoping they might be able to run data through that magsafe port too. Being able to have a small usb dock which connects over magsafe would be sweet.
Before you fall for the clickbait, this is simply a deranged 'prediction'. Here's why:

If Snap rejected offers from Google and Facebook, why on earth would they accept an offer from Shopify? Even if the shareholders wanted that to happen the co-founders have more than 96% of the voting rights.

Good luck with forcing such a deal to go through against their wishes.

In fact it is the other way round. Snap is the one going 'shopping' and doubling down on commerce. [0]

[0] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/snap-hi...
Oh wow. Thanks for pointing this out. I had no idea this was happening. I've wanted it for forever, but I thought browser vendors had always shut down talk with "just don't style native controls" dogma. Good to see it changing to reflect the reality that everyone does it anyway.
try this while you enjoy the muzak

https://spaceexplored.com/2021/09/27/darpas-hawc-achieves-fl...

enjoy the read.

look closely at the artist rendering, i had something like it fly over my cabin about a week ago, but it looked very X-45 ish [1] as well as moving about 50 mph vs 1mile per second

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-45
I live in Somerset (UK) and have a 15 gen. ancestor from Cornwall.

Your point is?
One system is land based. The others are space based.

The world needs redundancy especially in the presence of solar flares that can knock out satellites.
I have an "atomic clock" that receives WWVB and runs for years on 2 AA batteries. It's 20 years old so what you want is eminently doable.
> how does someone like Steve gain so much respect from so many different types of people?

Simple. Steve is undeniably one of the most influential people in the last 50 years. You don't have to agree with him to recognize this. To dismiss his impact because you don't like him personally is shallow and reductive. No one is saying he was a nice guy.

First, he and Woz brought us the Mac. Sure, Woz was the tech guy but Steve's product influence cannot be overstated. Macs really lost out to the IBM PC and then Steve was forced out of his own company by his own hire (John Sculley from Pepsi).

Apple languished for a decade while Steve started NeXT. On the brink of bankruptcy when Apple had to be rescued by a $150 million injection of funds from Microsoft.

In the next decade, Steve took the NeXT OS that because the foundation for OS X and iOS and released the iPod, iTunes and then the iPhone that ultimately turned Apple into what it is today: a trillion dollar company that literally prints money.

Steve was basically the ultimate product person and really a visionary. It was often stated that he generated a reality distortion field as he literally changed industries around him. The sea change that was the iPhone took control over code distribution on mobile phones from the wireless carriers. The price of this was several years of AT&T iPhone exclusivity in the US. The popularity of the iPhone bent carriers to his will. He unrelentingly refused to ship bloatware on the iPhone (unlike what you get on basically very Android phone other than the Pixel).

Apple developed a track record for taking terrible technologies and making them great. One of my personal favourite examples is connecting to Wifi. Many here probably aren't old enough to remember this but in the early 2000s that involved going to a settings window in Windows and entering the Wifi type (802.11b and then 11g), the encryption type (eg WEP, WPA, WPA-PSK, WPA2 or WPA2-PSK) and an encryption key, which may or may not be a password.

On OSX you simply selected a network and entered a password. Why ask the user for a bunch of stuff they don't care about, probably don't know and you, the computer, can figure out?

To me this is classic Steve influence.

Fun fact: Steve is the reason we don't have DRM on downloaded music. iTunes initially used a DRMed format to launch and all songs were $0.99. DRM was demanded by the RIAA. The RIAA didn't like the pricing model. Steve ultimately made the bargain that gave them pricing tiers but his demand was no DRM. That's how iTunes ended up distributing DRM-less MP3s instead.

Steve was by far the most user-focused of any of the tech titans of the last half-century.

Some people don't like Apple's walled gardens and that's fine but again, to dismiss the impact of the iPhone (for example) because you personally prefer the "freedom" of Android is a shallow judgement.

We stand on the shoulders of giants. And Steve was a giant. That's why he was and continues to be respected.
Elephants are not "evolving" and it's not a "response" to poaching! Poachers killed elephants with tusks, and as a consequence elephants without tusks have a reproductive advantage.

This is more like dog breeding than about nature fighting back.
Right? Mozilla's XUL had the right idea a the time. I wonder if similar things exist for the modern age?
The notch does have a benefit. The area below the notch is the same 16:10 display you would have gotten without the notch. Now the menu bar that has been at the top of Macs since 1984 doesn’t take away from that main area.

The Apple Watch has been much more profitable and will have a longer lifespan than the iPods.
When I lived in Los Angeles, the joke was if someone claimed to be a writer you'd respond, "Oh, you're unemployed then?"
Maintaining code that you wrote rises to a nine out of ten. Debugging your code is a ten out of ten or higher.
So AJ managed to write an entire article on the history of Urdu in India without referring to how the imposition of Urdu by the newly formed Pakistan on its majority Bengali-Muslim population eventually triggered the Bangladesh Liberation War.[1] They have even cutely tagged the article with 'Islamophobia.'

Urdu is the language of northern Muslims. While Hindi-speaking Hindus might understand it, they won't be able to read it because the script used is of Persian origin. If companies don't use Sanskritized vocabulary and Hindu-origin imagery to advertise to Muslims and Christians in India during their festivals, why would they do the reverse to Hindus during their festivals? They deserve all the flak they are getting.

Linguistic conflicts in India have a long history. The states are divided along linguistic lines. There have been massive demonstrations in South India against the imposition of the Hindi language in the past.[2] There is an ongoing linguistic conflict between the Hindu-majority state of Maharashtra and the Hindu-majority state of Karnataka over who gets to control the border district of Belgaum.[3] Urdu is an Indian language and is getting the exact same treatment from people who don't want it imposed on them.

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

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Hindi_agitations_of_Tamil...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgaum_border_dispute
You're right... I'm undermining my own job security here.
> No, the problem is not mainly China and India. China emits just half as much CO2 per capita as the US

Explain that to the air.
It may be possible, but it will not be pleasant to use tracing to answer those kinds of questions. Sounds like something you can do with off the shelf product analytics tools like Amplitude or Mixpanel. Do you already have something like that?
I mean, this would be doable if one happened to own a daisy wheel printer or IBM 2741 terminal (which is basically a Selectric typewriter plus the circuitry to turn it into a terminal), that would actually be pretty easy to set up.
you're only thinking about the 'write a comment get a block of code' feature. it also has autocomplete/predictive functionality that speeds up coding quite a bit when it works
Well, they didn't really solve your problem...
This is such a difficult and interesting question to try and answer. Of course, I can only offer my viewpoint as someone who worked for (with?) him in four different contexts.

He was most definitely not empathetic to me. He could be very empathetic to an abstract construct of a person. He would act as an advocate of the "user" but I felt that the user was always him. How did this align with reality? I guess it did, to a certain cross-section of people who appreciated whatever guise of a user Steve represented. This user construct changed over time and I could see it in early Apple Steve, lost in the wilderness Steve, NeXT Steve and return to Apple Steve.

Steve had charisma. Younger Steve charisma was different to me and it left an imprint. I felt that he was attractive physically and mentally, could engage with you and make you feel like you and he were doing something that could really make a difference. We knew we weren't curing cancer, but that somehow the pursuit was noble in a similar way; enabling human potential that was being lost. I still want to feel this way about technology.

Once you got to know Steve (if one could) he was oddly two-dimensional. His lack of real personal connection or concern about you as an individual was troubling. In some ways, the more abusive he was to you, the more it showed his interest in you. It was dysfunctional. He was never mean to random people (in my observance) although you hear stories of him being abusive to people he didn't know, I never saw it. I saw him open doors for people, let people cut in line in front of him in the salad bar, normal sorts of politeness. The higher his expectation of you, the harsher the abuse you could expect to receive. You could never really become numb to it, but after awhile you just began to adjust your calibration.

As you point out, Steve did win quite a bit. Of course he lost and sometimes he lost big. I really didn't care about winning the way a lot of Silicon Valley people care and I saw some of this in how Steve lived his life. Yes, he drove a nice car and had some property. But he wore well-worn clothes, drove himself to work and generally seemed like one of us. Later in life, odd things like private jets, yachts and Central Park condos showed up.

Everyone that I worked with at Apple who is still there knows it is not the same company. It can't be. The scale, management structure, market, political climate and more is different. And there is no Steve. I left Apple when Steve finally left, but I knew that "my" Apple was gone around 2006.
Related Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/4privacyapp/4privacy-ap...

It seems to be doing pretty well! "$542,379
pledged of $175,000 goal".
I think there are early and mid 2012s that differ quite a bit. I have a mid 2012 and the battery replacement is a nightmare. I'm waiting for my 14" to arrive, I'll switch over, then give it a go so I can hand me down the 2012 with some life in it. And if I blow it so be it.
or poker
I'm confused, isn't the M1 RAM+CPU+GPU on the same component?
Counter anecdote: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29018935

"But the Linux desktop experience has been ... frustrating to say the least. And I say this as someone who has used linux in the terminal at my job every day for 5+ years now. It's ridiculous that the software experience still cannot match my 9 year old laptop running macOS Sierra on a 2.5GHz Core i5 and 8GB of DDR3 RAM!"
“Any application that can be written in JavaScript, will eventually be written in JavaScript.”

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Atwood)
That was a really nice touch and not too bright. I stumbled on a Dell USB-C charger with a white LED. It doesn't change colors and it's bright enough to light a room.
Which one is more likely? There’s your answer.
I agree and I suspect this was less of a problem for people with a 15/16" MBP where the edge of the laptop was likely past their leg.
Facebook's Hiring Crisis: Engineers Are Turning Down Offers
Seems like sound advice. I'll definitely be trying it in the near future. Thanks a lot!
Realistically the moral panic that someone underage might br able to have a drink in a restaurant probably comes from the same place as the irrational terror that someone, somewhere in the restaurant doesn't have the covid vaccine. It's sad that there are people that think either require government policing
> So your complaint is only "battery life"?

No. Way to miss the forest for the trees. Go read the whole thread.
I don't think this is a reasonable assumption for the browser at all. It's 2021; WebRender has proved that a better design is possible.
https://web.archive.org/web/20211027075755/https://www.newyo...
> This is a problem I also deal with working with junior team members who would rather ask a question about how something works rather than read the source. Even if I do try to explain it, I can’t explain it to the fidelity and nuance encapsulated in the actual code. Nor can I explain the context as well as clicking “find references” does.

As a junior, this is a problem for me too. I don't know when it's the right moment to ask something. "When I've been stuck for an hour to half a day" seems to be a good heuristic, but it's not perfect. I don't really know what's the best option for me. If I ask later, I learn more by myself, and improve my skills in figuring out a codebase. I also let senior engineers be more productive. If I ask earlier, I'm more productive. But I take more of the senior engineer's time.

Another heuristic I tend to use is "for code stuff, try asking later, for business stuff, try asking earlier", since business stuff is often harder to figure out. We have code that describes the behavior of our product, that I can read and try to understand, but we don't have code that describes the behavior of the business.

Same dilemma when adding comments. We code in a relatively "plain" style, so "how" comments are mostly useless. "why" comments are more useful, but people tend to not really update them.

I think a way of solving partially that would be to be clear about the meta stuff. For example, I could ask if I'm asking too much or not enough questions, if my productivity seems okay. The senior engineers could also communicate about that. Even sharing how they do themselves stuff would be useful. For example "I tend to look at the code for X minutes before asking someone.". As a junior, I could multiply this time by 2, 3, 4 and do the same. Or ask the seniors about how they did things when they were new to the codebase.

To give a bit of context, we have more than 10 MLOC at work on a 30+ years old codebase, ~200 engineers and half of them are there since 3 years or less.
I routinely refactor without changing tests, and it’s a primary concern when I define interfaces and determine what to test. For what it’s worth:

- This works best if you actually embrace BDD to test for behavior rather than results. The behavior is less likely to change, and along with points below so too are the interfaces under test.

- I find the least test change in statically typed languages where defining types is the first “test”. Behavioral interfaces become much more stable as you define them if you actually know what they are upfront.

- Both of the terms “integration test” and “unit test” discourage this. Validating what your program actually does usually sits somewhere in the middle, and allows you to encapsulate a lot more of what would otherwise likely change in tests.

- Stricter interfaces fare better than looser. That doesn’t mean give up on the Robustness Principle, but it does mean don’t let it become infectious (I now want to blog about the “color” of functions which accept “options” or other miscellany). The sooner you parse/validate/have concrete and reliable types, the less your code under test and the tests themselves will change.

And that, while it’s my last point, is the most important: narrow types early. Get stability inside the seams of your program.
What companies are meeting hiring goals at the current moment? Demand is just so high.

Virtually every acquaintance I have ever met at any conference has hit me up on LinkedIn to ask if I might want to join them. My new boss has repeatedly asked me if I know anyone to join (and I haven't even started there yet). A friend had a terrible internship at a company as they were so short staffed (and this is a big, big corporation, not some podunk startup) that interns were roped into all sorts of work and on-call.