skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree CF kinda blows compared to real programming lang, and is probably legitimately better as an intermediate generated template than hand crafted code.

Even AWS has come up with a CDK to avoid building CF and use real prog langs.

I've never used it though.

I just personally think that if youre going to be a part of an ecosystem, things go much more smoothly when you stay in that ecosystem as much as possible.

Also Amazon is a massive company compared to hashicorp so I feel more comfortable about my infrastructures longevity with AWS tools.

Not saying hashicorp is going anywhere anytime soon and if it did the open-source community would probably take over, but it eliminates that tiny tiny risk.

I would probably use the AWS-CDK now instead of CF.
On the other hand there are things like this:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/upperstory/spintronics-...

Now it will be up-to parents to decide whether they want to bring up an iPhone consumer kid or more of a PC creative kid.
Does that page display anything to you? It did not on my mobile device. It might not be the best choice over images/text for a general audience.
Except not a framework, it's just a library. You can use it to do any of the stuff you would do with CUDA, about as fast, but portably. #include it to accelerate your game's physics engine, or whatever.

It doesn't say so at kompute.cc, but I found that it depends on Vulkan 1.1.
Why the status quo is so hard to change in engineering teams
I'm not sure a lot of people are willing to sacrifice "eating healthy" for "saving a few bucks on carnival food" particularly when there's only a single location that will serve you.

The article presents this as if this is some move of financial genius, when all I see him doing is trading health care costs tomorrow for a tiny bit of extra cash today.
For a deeper dive, James Suzman the anthropologist wrote 'Work: A Deep History, from the Stone Age to the Age of Robots'. Published in 2021. It's worth a read if anyone wants understand how the industrial revolution changed work patterns and (perhaps more importantly) how the agricultural revolution changed how people spend their time and how much leisure time people have had throughout human history
You're right, I think I need to be more specific, assembly line work in some factory might count as physical labor, and that might not be any better, I can't say as I've never had that job.

I'm thinking more in terms of the article, construction work, farming, and the more pre-industrial kind of physical labor.

For me specifically, it was construction work, bus boy, landscaping, janitorial work and military training. All these just involved constantly moving my body in various ways but also I'd say not in a repetitive at risk of RSI kind of way. So it really just felt like exercise.
Flutter UML in 15 Minutes
> example Śmigus Dyngus where young boys run around the villages pouring water on girls they like as a pagan fertility custom

Lupercalia always sounded like a good time to me. Who doesn’t want to strip naked and run through the streets whipping willing young women hoping to have their fertility increased?
> I get the ugliest stares from people when they ask if they can pet her and I say that she has anxiety problems, and that she's never bitten somebody, but I can't guarantee that she never would, because people she doesn't know stress her out quite badly.

A dog who doesn't like to be touched by random strangers is not a bad dog, and strangers are not entitled to touch her! I'm 100% with you on this one. Many people seem to think that all dogs should actively enjoy all kinds of invasions to their personal space (that they themselves would never tolerate), and it's ridiculous.

You're also not, in my opinion based on this description, ‘making allowances’ for any unacceptable behavior. You're just keeping your dog (and people around her) safe and comfortable, despite the misplaced sense of entitlement of some strangers.
It probably started out as a character trait among early programmers, but these days I'm convinced it's mostly a cultural thing. It's not actually about the software as much as these folks want to say it is by saying things like "RTFM"; it's selecting for people with similar emotional reactions to themselves. Consequently, you're also going to see more abrasiveness in very online programmers. Devs that don't want to deal with the abrasive gatekeeping and bikeshedding online and just want to get shit done either work on projects and share them in private circles or quietly write cool software for industry. I know folks working on microkernel stuff and capability-security that just don't want to get into online language flamewars or complexity flamewars, so they just don't publish their stuff on the big link aggregators.

Entire online software communities (suckless, PL enthusiasts, etc) have been created around cultures of rewarding gatekeepers; things like "our software sucks because we're forced to write it for _normies_" (suckless) or "oh those capitalist, Fordian idiots causing us to use sad programming languages that aren't Haskell/Ocaml/Lisp/etc" (PL enthusiasts). It's sad because it holds these developers back from understanding why people don't buy into their philosophies. But for a lot of these folks, I don't think writing and sharing software is the end goal. They want to form a community and a culture with other people where they can shit on the normies or Fordians because it offers them pleasure in some form.
Literally this article is about how on several important metrics, we don't overall have a higher standard of living.

People didn't move into the factories from the fields for the higher standard, they moved there because they never owned the fields, and the industrial revolution pushed them out with increased automation, so they moved to the only place that would employ them even though it was a step backwards in standard of living.
At first I thought this was confusing because it would seemingly be in competition with the stock market, but most of the world doesn't have or only recently gained reliable access to international markets and thus RE has been the primary investment vehicle.
Same reason why people pay to get cancer screenings instead of just waiting until they potentially get cancer and then get chemo.

Once you detect there's a problem it can be very difficult to stop the spread.

Let's say Google did stop paying Apple. Initially there would likely be no change. If and when there's an issue, whether that's from Bing or Apple launching their own service, presumably it has too much mindshare for people to go back to Google, and that point a crack in Google's search dominance has be made.

Then it's just a matter of money to carve out a significant niche.

Better to just pay up front and ensure that doesn't even happen.
The title seems to draw a weird conclusion. The summary is that GenZ has different preferences and attitudes, not that millennials are afraid of them. Here are some other things I noted from this article: GenZ don’t like to work as much and are willing to speak up and ask for what they want. But that can also be a bad thing, for example when they take paid time off for dubious reasons like “not being in a good place mentally”. They have different fashion and humor from millennials. They look down on hustle culture. They insist on injecting their progressive/left politics into institutions (like companies) through vehicles like Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion teams.
On gcp terraform works very well. But we try to keep everything in k8s.

So terraform is critical for our bootstrap procedure, for documenting our configuration.
That's just sickening. I'm disgusted to my core.
On the plus side, at least right now as I write this (the post has been up for 5 hours, with 96 comments), there is, in this HN post:

* No mention of the Twitter thread being better as a blog post, and someone has already posted a Thread Reader App link with the thread unrolled.

* A single instance of someone getting corrected for misgendering, but with no follow-ups or toxic discussion around it.

So maybe things are getting better?

But really, though, I just kinda find foone's annoyance about being posted on HN to be annoying in and of itself. The bot @-mentions I agree are annoying (and I don't know of a good solution; playing ban whack-a-mole every time a new one pops up is lame to have to do), but the other bits have a simple solution: don't read the HN comments. I know sometimes it's hard to resist the temptation, but I personally appreciate these foone threads getting posted here (as I don't really use Twitter much, so I wouldn't otherwise see them). And it's just a little weird to criticize people for linking to something you posted on the web, since linking is what the web is for.
>I have visited a pre-industrial villages in Eastern Europe and not once did I feel the urge to trade places.

Well, this is beside the point, this was about whether "household chores took the best part of the day". Not whether you would trade to rural living or not.

>The hosts spent two hours preparing a hearth to cook bread for us

So? I've roasted, cooked, etc. for decades, and it was never a big deal, nor you have to be over the wood-stove or grill for the whole time (when you do, the cooking is very fast, like with some meats). And if there are 3-4 persons in the household (as there always were, families lived with several children and grandparents where never far away), it's dead easy to have rounds keeping an eye on it and still be free to do whatever else.

>And you are vastly underestimating the child death rates where small children roam freely. Children in factories might have arguably been safer than on a farm.

You're vastly overestimating.

Kids restrained is modern helicopter parent hysteria. Kids generally roamed free up until the 70s in most places in Europe, and well into the 60s in most neighborhoods, even in cities like New York. It's not some medieval phenomenon, or something associated with "high child death rates". The ocassional kid could stil e.g. drown in a lake, like the ocassional kid today can be hit by a car. But that was not where "high child death rates" came from. Increased child death rates were indeed a thing, but were in birth or small age due to the lack of modern medicine (and most of it basic stuff, like cleaning hands, penicilin, etc, not high test medicine). In any case, not something particular to "kids roaming free".
Income is essentially the medium. I'm having trouble imagining how income is scarce - in the same way money can't really be "scarce" - the value would just adjust.

If there's too much demand for money (because there's not enough) - the value goes up.

Do you mean income is distributed extremely unequally?
8-bit floating point numbers (in two variants, mu-law and A-law, which differed in the treatment of denormals, A-law was like IEEE floats, mu-law requires a longer explication), about the same as in your choice, have been used for the digitally-encoded telephone audio signals (PCM audio at 8 kHz sampling rate).

They are probably still used in various older communication equipments.

Using floating-point had the purpose to reduce the quantization noise in comparison to 8-bit fixed-point numbers to the level corresponding to 12-bit or 13-bit fixed-point numbers.

So this was effectively a method of compressing by 50% the bit rate of voice signals.

Later, much better audio compression algorithms have been developed, allowing e.g. a 10 times compression, and such algorithms are used in the modern mobile phones.

Nevertheless, 8-bit floating-point was used for many decades in telephony.
To be fair, i thought the introduction telegraphed quite well that it would be mushy and without any clear purpose. Not sure why I didn't stop there.
Remeber when developers took pride in their blogs, hosted on a platform of their choosing, occasionally coming across someone who wrote their own blogging software. Whilst it is significantly easier to use and get going with Medium, its all just so fucking boring. No personality at all.

Make the internet unique again.
I don't know, I learned about physics in HS and college, but nothing made me understand it better than actually interacting with materials (and it wasn't at school). Being faced with reality changes your depth of understanding IMO.

All in all I think our model of society is slightly fooling itself about a lot of things. It adds but it subtracts too.
This piece is a good exemplar of the problems with modern journalism.

First, let's take a look at the statistics cited in the piece which support the main thesis (the whole article is built on two facts):

* highest quit rate since .... 2019! 2019, wow, that was like ancient history. That makes this historic!

* 14 million (what a big number!) of 18-34 not in labor force. Isn't that number so big? OMG, look at how big that number is!

Whereas the data says both the total not in labor force number and the "do not want job" number has declined for all groups except those 55 and over![1] where it has slightly increased. Actually the WSJ got this right when it said the labor story of the day is people (primarily small business owners) taking early retirement. But then again, that story was written by an experienced journalist.

That's it. That's all the labor force participation statistics she cites in support of this "Great Resignation". The rest are a series of grievances about how bad people have it and how they're really not gonna take it anymore!
Well, OK, then.

So how could someone write a story with the exact opposite conclusion of what the labor force statistics say?
Why would someone think lying about a "Great Resignation" is responsible, objective journalism?

The problem with these type of activist, grievance-based, emptional pieces is that they are not news (describing how the world is) they are advocacy (describing how the world should be). And when you blur those lines, truth and engagement with reality is the first casualty. Raisa obviously thinks a great resignation is warranted and so just pretends that it's happening. As if her own intuition and circle of friends were more reliable than labor force statistics. So she disengages with the real world and starts pretending that it is actually occurring. She is LARPing the news!

And you often see this on the part of frustrated activists. The clues are phrases like "people are starting to wake up", without any actual data. It's perfectly understandable that this happens - lots of people have been secluded, isolated, and are beginning to lose it - but when it seeps into news reporting, it's very dangerous.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm
> (1) Autonomy in maritime is not to replace seafarers, the navigation crew is less than 30% of the crew.

As someone who works in the autonomous ship space now and a prior merchant mariner, I agree with a lot of what you state, except for point 1...

In the near term, yes, I agree that people are working to use autonomy to augment the bridge crew (and engine crew and ship owners for that matter). However, in the long run (and there are actually several prototype autonomous vessels on the water today), the ultimate goal is absolutely to eliminate the need for a human crew.

Reasons... The biggest driver is that much of the design of ships is driven by the fact that human crews are embarked. There are too many items to list, but human factors include the ship superstructure (living qarters/bridge/galley/sanitation), freshwater generation, HVAC (a large chunk of energy costs, safety provisions, medical, and on and on. Other drivers are 1.) Human safety, 2.) Asset (ship & cargo) safety, 3.) Litigation avoidance/lower crew/cargo insurance/underwriting - which relate to 1 and 2 (e.g. collisions into other ships, piers, or getting your ship wedged in a canal). Many maritime incidents are the result of human error.

To the naiive, it may seem that autonomous operation at sea is easier than driving autonomously on land. However, the lay person may not realize that ships come in a variety of shaps/sizes and maneuvering abilities (for different functions including ferries, tankers, containerships, taxis, navy vessels, barges, cruise ships, etc.), communicate via complex bridge-to-bridge communications, navigate using a variety of floating/light/radio indicators, and are very sensitive from a stability and structural soundness perspective to weather (seastate, wind, currents, etc), among many other complex constraints. Thanks to inertia and the large absence of "traction", large ships don't stop instantaneously, they have a stopping distance which can be over 4 nautical miles [1] !

Driving cars autonomously is very difficult, but driving ships autonomously is just as difficult, if not more so.

1. https://knowledgeofsea.com/stopping-distance-turning-circle-...
It's still celebrated in many Slavic countries, but nowadays it's mostly boys playing war with water pistols and water balloons :)
100% true. Some websites are more than 100 MB to fully load. That’s absolutely insane to me. Tons of JS to process on the client side and very often some Java / .net code on the server side. (I’m not mentioning PHP/Python/Perl because those end up being less resource hungry and could actually run on the Pi ;) )
Fair enough, household income is not the same as wages, but the data that you link to shows wages have kept the pace with inflation, contrary to what you were saying.
I have read a lot of research about racism and I can only conclude that the media is not painting an accurate picture about it.

If you want to challenge your views you could read some of Thomas Sowell’s work or from other black conservative thinkers.
Done! https://offbyone.us/feed.xml
Nobody said anything about not wanting windows. It's the choice between a window and sharing a single room with 4 people. No window is the easy choice.
The plan for Kind itself seems to be to allow possibly unsound expressions (for example that don’t terminate), but to have consistency checkers. See:

https://github.com/kind-lang/Kind/blob/master/CONTRIBUTE.md#...
I didn’t see anything in the post you’re replying to saying categorically “This is the way.”
Satoshi needs no wallet. All the wallets will be his when he activates his backdoor :)
It's not a safety decision to reserve the overwhelming majority of land near population centers for large-lot single family detached housing. Deploying the 100-year-old technologies of the apartment building and the subway, where it is technologically and economically feasible to do so, would have this over with in a heartbeat.
One of my favorite old taglines, probably from the Fidonet era was like "the proof that there is intelligent life in the Universe is that they still didn't contact us".
For years I thought it was just a fun joke, then Covid-19 happened and the following denialism paired with unscientific theories suggested that it could well be the case.

About Colony: I liked it a lot, but it was axed like many other TV series. Why producers don't plan in advance for a guaranteed number of episodes to wrap things up in case of cancellation? The boxed releases also would benefit a lot from this; what could be the value of a story that breaks in the middle of a cliffhanger?
Liability isn't something to take. A liability exists as the nature that there is a cost that someone else is responsible for. E.g. if I start a fire in my kitchen, even unintentially, and it spreads to another's home (or apartment), I'm liable for the damaged of that fire to those affected by the fire.

I can't just say "oh, you can't sue me. I don't take liability". But I can lobby the government to say "you can't sue him" which is what these vaccine companies did and continue to do.
This brought to mind something from Bertrand Russell’s Nobel lecture (all of which is interesting, btw)

"I used, when I was younger, to take my holidays walking. I would cover twenty-five miles a day, and when the evening came I had no need of anything to keep me from boredom, since the delight of sitting amply sufficed. But modern life cannot be conducted on these physically strenuous principles. A great deal of work is sedentary, and most manual work exercises only a few specialized muscles. When crowds assemble in Trafalgar Square to cheer to the echo an announcement that the government has decided to have them killed, they would not do so if they had all walked twenty-five miles that day."
Consider that being "valuable" means contributing to the services that provide for human beings, be it bathroom facilities, medical care or pensions; If being treated as human means being provided these services, why shouldn't there be conditional contribution?

And the people who virtue-signal "Well I think they should be treated humanely!" are rarely the people at low-paid services end, struggling to compete with the status quo.
Compressed-air storage for commercial applications
I have a theory that we can eliminate 90% of the required labor in our economy with the following strategy:

End “consumerism” behavior where every problem is perceived to have a solution in the form of a quick product you can buy - much of that is a psychological trick played by marketers and rarely solves the real problem.

Take note of the goods and services we really need. Things like food, shelter, shoes, etc.

Design machines which can produce those vital things in a fully automated or highly automated way. The point of this part is to reduce the marginal cost of one more item as close to zero as possible. This makes sharing easier as it becomes cheaper to share with one more person.

Make those machines completely open source, designed for repair and long life.

Create a system where people can acquire equal ownership shares in the machines they rely on. For any given machine those users work together to keep the machine operational and producing.

Land must be held in common (the legal device used today would be a public land trust) and housing, farmland, and manufacturing space is allotted to people based on need. (Look at the public housing system in Vienna Austria as an example.)

Develop a culture where getting rich is not the goal but making sure everyone has what they need is. This has worked in other human societies before so this should be possible.

Then everyone shares the output of their machines with their other shareholders. Each person owns shares in many machines.

Under this system, there is no ownership class which can suck up all the surplus value. Instead, every person receives the benefit of automation.

In such a world I believe the average persons necessary working hours would be maybe 5 hours a week. We could spend our lives with friends and family, or reading and writing, painting or programming. Most of the necessary work would be done by volunteers who enjoy what they are doing. Work that people do not enjoy could be shared in rotation.

It’s all a voluntary and market based system but captures the main thrust of Marx’s critique of capitalism - the problem with an ownership class sucking up all the surplus value in society.

We could do this. End consumerism, make everything open source, share land, know when you have enough and work to serve others in your community.

Anyway that’s my theory.
Ya, the slums of Manila and Mexico City are pretty affordable compared to the formal housing market. But I’m not sure that we s a good thing. Most developed countries also don’t allow for such places (anymore?).