skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The establishment of protocols is a sort of before-the-fact hedge against the "prisoner's dilemma"; that is, it creates an obvious way for two people who are not directly communicating to structure independently developed code so that it works in a manner that remains coherent when such code is later combined.

Sounds very cool, and the article seems to edify wrt functionality and abstract benefit, but how does it really help? See: the more-or-less complete abandonment of resumable conditions in other languages.

The practical differences between conditions and c++-style exceptions seem to be:

1. The stack is followed back, looking for a handler, rather than being destructively unwound- 'restarts' don't necessarily 'try again', they can continue from where the condition was thrown.

2. While unhandled (ERROR) 'fatal conditions' land in the debugger, nonfatal (SIGNAL)s imply that a sensible default has already been provided, and, relying on point 1, continue otherwise unfettered.

I remain curious about the kinds of practical architectural impact this functionality provides- how often does everyday lisp code signal nonfatal conditions? The hyperspec mentions that *break-on-signals* can be used for visibility there...
There's free good DNS hosting out there. Dns.he.net for example.
> Actually, on the HN post back then, Steve complained more about how Amazon didn't give her the job, than anything else.

Where did Steve mention Ashley not getting a job at Amazon? I remember reading through that thread but I don't remember Steve mentioning that. Today is the first I'm hearing of it.
Why do you need to know the firm name at that phase?
`apt-get source` and `apt-get build-dep` is a wonderful thing! It's a shame there isn't more around that (like how to navigate the code to a large software package once you have it, eg Firefox).
Developer of rcmd here.

I like Contexts too! I've used it heavily for about a year.

But it still felt it needed too many key presses.

And it also required me to visually assess if the selected app is what I want.

rcmd is a better approach for me because I don't have to context switch to another app switching UI. I just focus the app I want with a single hotkey and I get to work uninterrupted.
"Please understand this is a digital product and not a tangible item. "

Lovely, a site that lets you buy a custom JPG of your favourite car. I love it.
I partially judge the novelty of the problem I'm solving by the level of access to information about it I have. You realize you're on the edge of knowledge when you're deep down in the research papers and there's only a couple papers on the subject and you implement from there. The solutions you come up with from that tend to be the most rewarding and unfortunately relative to all the mundane work few and far between. I think I run into that type of problem a few times a year, if even.
I would argue that it's governance, not government.
True, but your phone calls, letters and packages were very easy to silently tap and interdict and were all controlled by central monopolies. Nobody encrypted anything, so raids on offices gave a lot juicy information in plain paper.
zig is not safe. it's more "ergonomic" so theoretically it's harder to write bugs than in c, but out-of-bounds accesses, use-after-frees and such can still happen because of programmer error in well-formed zig programs.

see also: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/2301
The GPL issue doesnt matter for your buying decision. In fact, becoming a client expand your voice: you can now say you're even paying support already to listen to you whine about why they didnt publish the 5 patches they made to some broadcom drivers.
But the mod team who resigned were precisely the ones behind moderating those Reddit/Discourse threads though. So I don't think there was animosity between the two teams from the start, but rather that tensions grew over the years until it became unmanageable.

My interpretation is that the drama happening around the core team (like the things you've mentioned) gets increasingly overwhelming for the mod team to handle, leading to complaints against the core team for causing such drama (which they do not have the sufficient resources nor actual power to handle). This further escalates and devolves into a worse relationship between the two, leading to the resignation.

From the thread on /r/rust one of the mods (different from the Rust's mods) talked about the relationship between the Core and the Mod team:

Bans. We do not directly enforce bans, instead we ask Core to enforce them for us, and Core will double-check our work (though without access to the case, unless complainants are OK with that) -- essentially ensuring that we've done our due diligence, given a fair chance to the person, and that we're following the "escalation" procedure.
Bans (bis). Core may enforce bans by themselves, then let us know.
Involvement. When a Core Team Member is involved in a complaint, or a difficult relationship, we play our mediator/arbitrator role, stepping in and attempting to figure out the bottom of the issue and resolve it peacefully -- much like we do with any other Rust Team Member, really.

This is maybe a workable agreement if the Core and the Mod team went along well, but currently it seems like that's not the case. The last clause (Involvement) basically tells that "we really don't want the two teams to fight, and things should be resolved with common sense". Now that this is way out of the window, perhaps it would be a good time for the Rust contributors to reevaluate their team structure.
What's missing, in my opinion, is share dilution - do initial investors get a say, since they too hope for growth to compensate for the lost proportional ownership?
The author is a known quack, please stop spreading misinformation.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29298178
Infosec seems to have its share of angry people in general. One notable blog you’ll see on here from time to time generally has informative or moderate content, but the comments always seem to be a bunch of pointless shouting at things not really related to the post.
>It's becoming more and more clear to me that the underlying issue driving much of our current crises is that people think binary - it's either "climate apocalypse" or "let's burn all the fossil fuel". Same for the COVID mess, gun laws, critical race theory, take your pick. People are uncomfortable with nuance and since we basically have to pick the experts we trust we fall victim to the loudest and most exciting voice.

It's a new religion. Due to religion being outlawed in places like China this new religion hides itself. I suppose there's no rule saying religions must be public. Which given the societal hatred of recent new religions it makes sense. In addition, their fundamental structure has been tried and failed across the world many times. So going public isn't going to work.

They are prominent in Covid. Like many religions, they wish to dictate what you eat and do in health matters.

They are certainly anti firearm.

Critical race theory comes out of this new religion. Obviously they are very pro-civil rights. Feminism, gay rights, abortion rights, gender roles, and similarity. Social justice in a way to be sure. Intersectionality is obviously a big deal. Ending the drug war is very important to them.

Their goal is a classless society and equal outcome. This puts them at odds with capitalism and the business society. Climate change is a way for their agenda to be pushed against the business class.

I don't know exact numbers of how many adherents but it's about 3 million in north america. They are really struggling in north america but they are certainly easy to identify once you identify their 'heresy and apostasy' type things. Sam Harris is a racist right? He's calling this new religion the 'religion of anti-racism' as what do you name it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXPMsrQ44b4

The irony is that they are seeing it from the atheist point of view, which misses the whole thing. When you have to step back and see it from the economic or political point of view. The irony being those 2 guys are on the record being on this new religion's side. That's beyond irony to me.
Palo Alto Networks Rolls Out Prisma Cloud 3.0
People buy shopping carts worth of stuff at malls. That's not exactly easy to schlep on a bike or a bus for most people especially if you are in poor shape. A lot of people in the U.S. today live in walkable areas, but opt to just take a climate controlled car with a spacious trunk 5 mins to the grocery store vs walk 15 minutes one way and back with 25 pounds of groceries in poor weather.
> This fight is over. You knew it was over the second time you were talking to someone you didn't know well, were about to use the term "crypto", and paused to check in your head how they'd interpret the word. "Crypto" means "cryptocurrency", not "cryptography".

Cryptocurrency implementers understand just fine what I mean. I'm speaking about the actual cryptographers and not the people doing get-rich-quick schemes.

For the rest, I consider continuing to use the term crypto and having them get confused means just maybe that will lead to a test of their faith.
Portions of it are available on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnJCOof2HJk&t=449s
>okay but what what counts as "enough profit to recover your R&D, risks and all the other costs", and who decides? currently it's decided by the market. you guess what the costs are, and decide whether or not to develop the drug accordingly.

The correct price would be IMO the price you would have is there would be competition, so if there would be 10 others creating similar medicine(or CPUs,phones) and what price you would use to be competitive but still profitable ? That would be the correct price.

What happens is if there is not enough competition you max it up 10 times
I did some digging, because every time I have heard of ChatControl I have seen all this talk about what the EU plans to do and no evidence.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE... is the strategy document.

So far, there is a temporary derogation from the ePrivacy Directive (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_instituti...). The ePrivacy directive as part of the EECC forbids (for the sake of discussion) email providers from scanning Maildirs, even if those maildirs are cleartext (as is the case for the majority of providers, s/Maildir/backend storage). The temporary derogation lets them scan for CSE in these sources.

I don't see any proposed regulation explicitly targeting end-to-end encryption, but their strategy document does seem to label end-to-end as a problem, citing the NCMEC (US). The project is here: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa... .
The flying saucer HQ was built for the previous era. Ironically, it is Apple equipment which has helped to bring the coming of the new era. Now it is somewhat more decentralized, with Apple locating where the talent wants to live.
> I felt the urge to react when I read them and bravely restrained myself.

You feel an urge to react at bizarro twilight zone non-sequitur text posts?

I'm sitting here trying to fathom why millions of people would even react to something like that. Like… what was "thumbs up" worthy in any of those?
Aha, so a relatively recent article!
Which part(s) were showing hostility towards job seekers and employees?

If an employer has a need for a level 3 software engineer (whatever that is for them), should they post in Colorado the salary range for that role in Colorado? Or the range for that role in Elbonia on the low end and Palo Alto on the high end? Would the latter pass muster with CO?

If someone aspirationally applies for that role and the interview process places them as a promising level 2 software engineer, what should the company’s answer be? “We regret to inform you that we will not be making a level 3 offer.” Or is the candidate better off if they then continue to say “we invite you to apply for consideration for a level 2 role by clicking this link: xxxx”?
Hibernate Goes Reactive – What Does That Mean?
I don't follow at all closely, but my impression of SpaceX's track record vs. Musk promises is that they're usually late but usually get there in the end, in functional terms if not in exact approach. Is that wrong?
Some interesting context from one of the resigning mod team members:
https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_tea...
Based on common sense - how many people want to waste 1 or 2 hours each day on commute when they could spend it better in so many ways? Or maybe I'm out of touch and people don't value their free time as much as I thought..
We have a system of law and justice that is designed to prevent people actually visiting harm on eachother. We should draw the (very clear and very sharp) line at doing harmful things, and allow people to say whatever they want.

The alternative we're seeing is an ever-expanding, ever-blurring definition of what is policed as "offensive", stifling innovation and fostering division.
Just because I put a brick through your window with template EULA language stating you accept and hereby authorize me to have hurled the brick through your window and that you, the recipient, now indemnify me, the thrower from any damages caused in the process of the message on said brick making it's way to you for recipient, does not mean you can go around chucking bricks through folks' windows. Despite what the tech sector really, really, REALLY hopes people never become irritated enough to actually bother to read up and hold them accountable to.

Meeting of the minds, people. It means something damnit. Just because a bunch of you shoved some boilerplate in the repo doesn't make it binding, and the fact you did, like it or not, alienates a bunch of people who would otherwise be more than happy to extend a helping hand if the extent of the relationship was only the proposed contribution.

t. someone very selective and wary of contractual language when they can afford to be
You see this on Youtube as well. Comments acknowledge "The Algorithm", mentioning that the algorithm suddenly chose this video from 2013 to be popular, or that people who were picked by the algorithm to like this video must be cool. This has happened with music too, Plastic Love and Ryo Fukui's Scenery being some examples I noticed. Maybe it really is "the algorithm" right now but it seems like this could be easily manipulated.
As a rust user I really don't care at all about this stuff. Rust is bigger than any of these teams now, and it has been for a few years. I have a lot of confidence that the language will continue forward in a healthy way, and that governance issues will ultimately smooth out.

I only care insofar as I have been a part of the rust community for 6 years or so, and I care about others in the community.
She's not?
Wealth and privilege allowed Elizabeth Holmes to start Theranos
Guilty as charged!
No, I'm not that young, but I've read enough history knowing that countries had a passing knowledge about the state of the population under their control. You don't need Stasi or NSA level of access to know the state of your citizens.

Intelligence is an old craft. Insiders are old as well. However, speed of life and increase in population coupled with new communication methods invalidate these old methods.

To protect their status quo, governments want their so-called vision back, and then some...
We are globally quickly slipping down the slope into some disgusting hybrid of Huxley's Brave New World information inundation, and Orwell's 1984. Throw in there that humans are now able to own less and less each passing year. Who can say with certainty what the end goal is, but these things should not be playbooks!
If you make a cross-platform app, you get the same benefits with Windows users included.
Chewy isn't profitable yet, is it? All of the new and successful example businesses (save Amazon) only exist because of money being thrown around, and can't sustain that forever.
Your brain is not Leibniz’s machine nor the algorithm sought upon in the Entscheidungsproblem.

Your brain also doesn’t infinitely recurse as it doesn’t have infinite time or space.

A machine that given a logical statement outputs whether the statement is universally valid is impossible, ergo all mechanisms that don’t output true or false given a logical statement are impossible??
Sino-Russian collusion over Taiwan, Ukraine seems improbable but isn’t
I do this too, just so I can refer back to it when I inevitably forget what exactly I did.
For me, in case it’s Oracle. For others, they have other companies they’d rather not work for. Some here don’t want to work at Amazon; others not at Facebook; others not at Google…

It also ends the BS of recruiters who don’t have any listings at all and just want to have engineers they can blindly pitch to companies, hoping they can score a low-effort placement.
Googler here. I can speak to my experience, but others have their own.

> The campus felt designed to suck more work hours out of you.

Another way to describe it is that the campus is designed to suck more employees away from the competition. If you assume the existence of an employee as a given, then the only reason for a perk must be to extract more labor from that employee.

But that's not how Google is looking at it. They're trying to convince good employees to work for them instead of other tech companies. Those perks exist to keep the grass greener on Google's side of the fence instead of Facebook/Apple/Amazon/etc.

This provides an entirely rational/economic answer for nice perks without needing overtime to justify them. (There are, of course, also plenty of non-financial justifications for the perks.)

In the Google offices I've worked in, they tend to be almost completely empty by 6:00.

> If I go play ping pong for an hour, do I now owe that hour to the company later?

My experience is that different employees have different feelings about that. Some do, some don't. Personally, I don't feel I owe the company another 30 minutes if I go outside for a walk because the walk tends to reinvigorate me and increase my productivity. But I would probably feel weird if I was playing a game for a significant period of time more than once a week or so.

> If I'm working past 5, will I be inclined to keep working because I can just go grab a free bite to eat later?

Some do, but dinner is extremely low-key compared to lunch. On the rare times I've been around at dinner time, the cafes are mostly empty with just a few partaking.
It's definitely true in certain cases, induced demand is not some law of physics. Take a one lane road and a two lane road. It's pretty common for one lane roads to end up clogged up due to left turning traffic that's unable to clear intersections fast enough. On a two lane road, traffic that goes straight or right will have room two maneuver around the left turning traffic. And on top of that, planners for highways are really planning for throughput rather than commuting times. When you widen a freeway, speeds don't change or might even go down, but total throughput goes up accordingly and that's whats important when you have a mile of trucks backed up at your port.
In C++, any "const" data can only have "const" operations operate upon them.

const int x = 20;
x = 30 ; // Compile Error, not a const operation.
int y = x + 20; // Allowed

If you have a class:

class Foo{
public:
const int x;
int y;

Foo(int initial): x(initial), y(initial){
}

void setY(int value){
y = value;
}

int getXPlusY() const{
return x + y;
}
};

Foo f(20); // Allowed
f.x = 30; // Compile Error, not a const-operation
int y = f.x + 30; // Allowed

const Foo f2(20); // The f2 object is now const. Non-const routines are no longer allowed
f2.setY(30); // Not a const-routine.
int bar = f2.getXPlusY(); // Allowed, getXPlusY is a const-function

-----------------

So yes. Every single line of code you write will be double-checked by the compiler to see if it is "const-correct". That's the advantage of multi-paradigm languages like C++. Its not "pure", but it implements ideas like immutability from other languages.
It was a metaphor, for the citizen analogy. There is ultimately very little difference in terms of the shape of these problems.
That's interesting, I also came to the conclusion that lisp communities skewed unpleasant. I think it's because they tend to be people (men as it happens) who are older and were around at the time of the original IRC culture, which was quite aggressive / countercultural / unprofessional compared to modern professional standards in tech.
I don't think it was the type of transplant Face/Off was depicting, hers was very natural-looking but also visibly not a normal face.

I'd like to see Mission: Impossible type transplants, or even masks like the ones they use, for that matter.
How the World’s Foremost Maze-Maker Leads People Astray
Yes, you can run Debian/Ubuntu software. It's mostly Debian: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308071.
It might be something to consider, but there are definitely some negative consequences to silently starting on another port, particularly when using automation and tests. It's not fun to have flask silently start on another port and then an integration test hits a completely unrelated service that happens to occupy that port.
IMO the only reason why people run into trouble is because they code as if everything completes instantly. For example, they’ll write to disk assuming the operation is quick, because that’s what they’re used to. You see this all the time in all sorts of software when it freezes up and errors cascade.

People just code like everything works all the time.
Then when they want to integrate an external service, they have to rewrite everything.

If you understand that network calls have to made and electrical signals have to pass down a bus when you write either a monolith or a microservice, going back and swapping services is super easy.
We have Amber Rudd - brexit won't change that I'm afraid.
I was talking about [1960, ...}, but older "kingdoms" also had a passing knowledge about their population's state.

This knowledge was much leaner when compared to today, but there were less population to begin with, so that knowledge was enough.

Crowded countries like China had its social norms evolved accordingly and differently due to this population density.
It's actually quite a good design idea because it is often the case that lower level code knows everything that can go wrong but has no idea what to do about it. Higher level code has this knowledge. For an example, I remember reading a C library for handling some common encoding. It simply swallowed format errors because it didn't want to fail the whole function for them and didn't have a way to communicate anything was wrong. In a conditional system this could have been a condition and the default function could be set up to ignore it, for example.