skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm surprised its so hard to find cheap low powered laptops with big screens and a good keyboard. Usually big screens means GPU and high end components. Esp in this era of cloud computing I only need a browser and a terminal on a 16+ in screen. I'd love a MacBook air with a big screen, why is it so hard?
It's fine to trade when you know something that the general public doesn't. Indeed that's really the only time you should trade: you presumably want to make a profit, and society wants relevant information to be incorporated into prices. The thing that's not fine is trading on secret information that belongs to someone else. Insider trading is about theft, not fairness. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-04-01/anothe...
To make that work you have to use `from __future__ import annotations`. see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61544854/from-future-imp...

Not the most ergonomic, but there is a way to do it.
Sounds like an inverse of the homebrew project...
DAO raised $10.4M in 48 hours and it’s planning to buy a golf course
> just a little bit too niche to justify a place in the standard library

parking_lot has actually been considered for inclusion in libstd[0], as a better alternative to the native mutex implementation (parking_lot mutex are smaller, can be const-initialized, can be moved, and tend to perform better - all while not depending on external, non-rust code). The effort is currently on hold, but it's possible that it will resume in the future.

[0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56410
Russia approves Rusian peacekeeping deployment in Kazakhstan
Scientists Race to Make Big Changes to Your Genes
Have been using uni-ball eye for over 10y. As a left handed, this is the best pen I have ever used. Many other pens "scratch" on the paper or result in inconsistent line thicknesses.

Writing with this is a pleasure. Also dries quickly enough on normal paper.
Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Explain Everything About the World - Tim Marshall
this is surprisingly close to the algorithm we used when naming our kids. Another important rule for us was that the name couldn't already be popular, but couldn't be really obscure either, a sweet spot where the name could potentially be popular in 10 or so years.
Yep came here to mention that too. You find it under '/rss', but website owner should really put auto-detect in their header and add a link for it.
> The same reason why geometers needed to be told to start using Arabic numerals by algebraists. Mathematics is changing and the old tools aren't good enough to answer current questions.

At least those were other mathematicians who could understand the domain and the importance of notations for the work.

Hah, no, "-> -> a b c" is not easy to parse, except for a computer. going are people not to read easily. It's a silly argument that prefix is fundamentally easier for humans when it disrupts the flow even in your example.

Even using the words, "implies implies a b c", does not parse well as a reader, even if it can only be parsed one way. If you go to a higher arity operation, switch to function (which is prefix, like polish) notation if it makes sense. But even then, we have things like the integral which uses physical placement to take (typically) up to 3 arguments:

b
∫ f(x) dx
a

With other similar operations. And if order of operations is not clear from an expression, then yes, use parentheses. That's what they have been used for for quite a while.
Has also been published to NPM as v6.6.6 (https://www.npmjs.com/package/faker)
I'm biased because I'm the founder of the company, but you should check out the certificate management toolchain (CA[1] and CLI[2]) we've built at smallstep. A big focus of the project is human-friendliness. It's not perfect (yet) but I think we've made some good progress.

We also have a hosted option[3] with a free tier that should work for individuals, homelabs, pre-production, and even small production environments. We've started building out a management UI there, and it does map to the CLI as you've described :).

[1] https://github.com/smallstep/certificates

[2] https://github.com/smallstep/cli

[3] https://smallstep.com/certificate-manager/
Take three months off. Pack a backpack. Go on the road. Sleep ALOT.
I've deployed similar stacks at scale multiple times and it is amazing how well it all works given how little it costs.
I don't think the issue is "too easy" here, but the lack of downstream verification tools.

If you had a clear metric for all the parts that go into a library you wouldn't worry about how many there were. And if the library author likewise cared about their libraries metric, they wouldn't arbitrarily choose low-quality libraries.

Friction isn't useful here imo. Trust is just as bad with high friction, just maybe less moving pieces. Not having verified metrics seem to me the real problem. Some sort of safety rating that bubbles up from all the dependencies. Changes to software owners would also have to cause issues in this system too.
The sibling comment mentioned that there's probably no contribution from Guido regarding the meteoric rise of Python in data science but the truth it's really the opposite [1]. Guido was really instrumental in suitability of Python for data science [2].

To quote from the magazine article on Python for Scientists and Engineers:

"During these early years, there was considerable interaction between the standard and scientific Python communities. In fact, Guido van Rossum, Python's Benevolent Dictator For Life (BDFL), was an active member of the matrix-sig. This close interaction resulted in Python gaining new features and syntax specifically needed by the scientific Python community. While there were miscellaneous changes, such as the addition of complex numbers, many changes focused on providing a more succinct and easier to read syntax for array manipulation. For instance, the parenthesis around tuples were made optional so that array elements could be accessed through, for example, a[0,1] instead of a[(0,1)]. The slice syntax gained a step argument— a[::2] instead of just a[:], for example—and an ellipsis operator, which is useful when dealing with multidimensional data structures."

Personally I'd much prefer D language to replace python for data science due to its Python like programming vibes but with more powerful real-time programming constructs, and its suitability for beginners or type A data scientists [3]. Python is already showing its limitations especially for the B type of data scientists [4]. There's recent discussions on Dlang forum for the potential improvements of D for data science and there's also recommendation for Walter to join such SIG as was Guido [5].

[1]Numpy History:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NumPy#History

There's even recomendation from Dlang forum for Walter to join such SIG [3].

[2]Python for Scientists and Engineers:

https://www.computer.org/csdl/magazine/cs/2011/02/mcs2011020...

[3]Teaching D from Scratch: Is it a viable first language?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29711800

[4]Type A Data Scientist vs. Type B Data Scientist:

https://www.projectpro.io/article/type-a-data-scientist-vs-t...

[5]Dlang forum: Pandas like features:

https://forum.dlang.org/thread/zuebxhkycgxsoipsgnbk@forum.dl...
Or even people currently in programming jobs doing real world code all day instead of hand jamming some contrived leet code algorithm fiction that will never be allowed to enter production.

More realistic is to talk through a process that can be sporadically described in various 1-3 line code samples that will eventually be put together to form a program for something boring. A good boring example is something like transmit a file from a file system across a network and perform an integrity check. Boring but enough steps to talk through and demonstrate with a couple instructions. Nobody does this. I would hear a discussion on proper use of APIs and step by step walk towards success than see somebody lost writing for loops and conditions.
How do 5M page views consume 80TB of traffic? That sounded like a lot, but calculates out to 1,600KB per page view. That's a lot of JS and images on every page :)

A few years ago when I hosted what felt to me like a popular site, I was serving serving > 150K page views a month from a 1.5Mbps adsl uplink. With that said, back then you could gzip everything and there was no letsencrypt or CloudFlare walls across the board (didn't exist yet).

Good thing bandwidth is easier to come by these days.
Yeah! I think the difficult part of this idea though is maintaining/moving the necessary dependencies, or at least keeping track of them to warn that they're no longer satisfied.

In many cases it probably requires awareness of packaging in a way that normal AST manipulation does not, at least to be particularly useful it would.
I'm with Inoreader and have never been happier. They integrate what they can, which means public Twitter and Facebook feeds, Telegram channels and also plain web pages with either text or image-based tracking in addition to all the "normal" RSS goodies. RSS never died, but a lot of people gave up on "their" web which has been both premature and unnecessary.
Her, and yeah, never said sonic team, just one of the original devs.
> That would depend on if you knew more about how the code is intended to work than the original author of the code. Do you presume to know more about how this code is intended to work than the original author?

I am not sure if you are suggesting that only the author can know how code is supposed to work, that finding bugs require understanding of the code strictly superior to the author, or that the author is infallible and intended every behavior of the current operation.

Either way, this attitude would not have made for a healthy open source contribution environment.
Then we are in agreement, a list of mostly clothes is not a "brittle" set of items. They are all trivially replaceable.
How the Nikon F Revolutionized Photography 60 Years Ago
> Sure, you can be preempted by another thread (or even process) even within an async function

That really depends on the platform. Async rust is also being leveraged to build RTOS on embedded platform for instance. If async rust was preemptive by default, that would be impossible. It's not a matter of performance there, but of correctness.
Curious what the actual structure of the "permit" looks like. E.g. that article says

> On Tuesday, the Australian Open announced that it had given the player a medical exemption,

which to me reads like the tournament approved it. Which I guess it has to do if it enforces the rule otherwise for participants, but why does that matter for the visa (except that he needs to play the tournament to get a visa for the tournament of course)? Was there some explicit agreement along the lines of "we approve your decision process, and then will allow everybody you accept in", was it just an expectation that immigration would accept the same standard, ...?

EDIT: a slightly older article about the decision also frames it as purely the tournaments decision: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-05/authorities-respond-t...

EDIT2: https://www.theage.com.au/national/visa-bungle-delays-novak-... also reads similar. So unless there's something missing in that reporting (quite possible), it doesn't really sound like "he got permission and then they changed their mind" quite fits what's going on? But rather "it was approved tournament-side and assumed whatever he provided there would also be enough for the visa, turns out it isn't/he asked for the wrong visa/..."? Especially for comparison with other people with exemptions it sounds like details that aren't public matter, i.e. the specific documentation provided.
>Well, sure. But that's not what this is actually about. The titular anarchists are not inventing new drugs, they're finding alternative ways to get drugs that have already been invented.

... yes and they're doing so because in part regulatory capture, lobbying, and corruption have lead to unaffordable drugs. So that is, partially, what this is actually about. But sure there are other reasons for people to manufacture their own drugs outside of formal channels.

>I am not convinced that accurately reflects the reality of running a pharmaceutical business, even if incentives/competition is somewhat warped in healthcare. There are a lot of penny-stock pharma companies whose only mission is to generate valuable IP. They're notorious for being volatile (since their outcome is basically binary on the results of research), but not for being great investments. If what you are asserting was actually true, those sorts of firms would generate ~5x higher returns, on average.

That's actually my point. Generating the IP looks to be low value compared to wading through all the insane regulatory barriers, developing sales channels in-bred with medical board licensed doctors and FDA regulators that examine sales materials, lobbying for regulatory capture and all the other expensive pursuits that arguably may not add much value to the ill person consuming the drug. Another words, I'm not sure removing IP from the equation really changes the cost of drugs that much.
Depends on what your website is built on. But in any case, you can write a feed.xml yourself and update it manually on each new blogpost.
Cloudflare subsidizes the small guys in hopes they'll turn into big guys. Bandwidth isn't that expensive in the first place though, that's just a myth perpetuated by AWS/Azure/Google.
Usrbinbash makes a good point regarding the meaning of “relational”. Many people have come to think that “relational” refers to the relationships between entities in the database, when it really means that the database manages data in tabular form. I think this misunderstanding has become more ingrained because people typically normalize their data in RDBMSs, which necessitates greater use of joins. So, when folks talk about a “relational” workload, they often mean executing ACID-compliant joins over a normalized dataset. Because early NoSQL databases had traded transactional consistency for performance and scalability, there’s been an expectation that NoSQL databases can’t support what some think of as a relational workload.

To be fair, in the early days of NoSQL, it was necessary to use denormalization in one’s schema to achieve transactional integrity in the absence of joins. However, distributed databases have since overcome the major challenges of achieving consistency at scale. For example, http://Fauna.com is a serverless, document database which supports ACID transactions via the Calvin protocol. This means that you can execute transactionally consistent joins across collections (“tables”), and either normalize or denormalize your data model for all the same design reasons you might in a traditional RDBMS. The principle difference is that records in Fauna are JSON documents rather than rows in a table.

This is not to say that denormalization in modern schema design isn’t beneficial. However, support for ACID joins in a modern document database gives you more latitude in your schema design choices.

Full disclosure, I am a Product Manager at Fauna.
I think you must have skimmed some parts. He isn’t burring steel into the ground. It’s only to be used inside the buildings shell and above the foundation. Thus it’s generally going to stay dry and mostly avoid significant corrosion issues, especially considering the generous safety factor suggested.

The foundation is concrete piles to bedrock supporting a floating concrete foundation. Clearly that limits building locations, but plenty of places have bedrock reasonably close to the surface.
Those numbers don't contain enough information to calculate a price elasticity. Even sales numbers don't contain enough information to calculate a price elasticity, because you don't just need to know the change in sales after a price change, you need to know what percentage of that change was due to the price change instead of other changing factors - slowing of the pandemic, changing menu, advertising, growth in customer base that was happening anyway, etc.

Those numbers are hard to get. But people who have done studies have estimated that in the restaurant industry, the number is close to 1.

I mean think about what you are saying if you are claiming that the price elasticity is 0. You are saying that even before the wage increases, they could have raised prices by 4% and returned that money to their investors as pure profit, in an industry where profit margins are single digit and not usually high single digit. Not a chance.
Depending on the size and culture of the company I feel like that's a pretty risky proposition unless you've got senior leadership really chomping at the bit right after a major incident. It's quite likely someone pretty high up in the company will fall for the fake phishing and then you've got a bunch of politics in your lap.
In the comment you responded to, I am not taking up the subject of how to achieve testing, replication, QC, and transparency. I am merely pointing out that, to reason clearly about the issue, it is essential to distinguish these goods—genuinely valuable benefits to drug users which should be maximized—from any potential means for achieving them, such as regulatory compliance, which is a deadweight loss to be minimized, even if it is an unavoidable one, as you claim it is.

To do otherwise is similar to measuring the progress of a software project in lines of code, measuring the quality of an airframe design by its weight, or measuring the security provided by the TSA in the number of fingernail trimmers confiscated. It's counting regulatory compliance activities on the wrong side of the ledger.
Why are you assuming that a determined attacker doesn't control your L4 stack? MITMs are a threat, your network could be compromised, routers (especially consumer routers) are rife with vulnerabilities. This is the entire reason "zero trust" is pushed.
Glad to see my favorite everyday pen on here, the jetstream.
I believe that there was an agenda to kill RSS, very much like how the auto makers in the United States conspired to kill public transit.

I don't buy any of the arguments not to implement it. I don't think it is too expensive or confusing. I think it is too empowering to users and inconvenient to marketers.
Jetpens is truly a treasure of a website. I've gotten interested in plotter art in the last year and there's a whole lot to learn about how pens work and perform. Jetpens is the essential source for a lot of that information. Some good articles they've written:

https://www.jetpens.com/blog/Types-of-Pens-How-to-Pick-a-Pen...

https://www.jetpens.com/blog/The-Best-Technical-Drawing-Pens...
Cloudflare is currently operating at a close to break-even loss.
You are trying to directly compare software with traditional engineering which doesn't really make sense. Traditional engineering has a lot of constraints which software doesn't.

> Only software has this culture of releasing something than issuing patches later

This has nothing to do with the rigour of software engineering. The process for releasing the initial software can be very rigorous, with a conscious decision to follow up with a patch or second release.

The nature of software allows this behaviour, whereas traditional engineering doesn't. The fact you can't release a day 1 patch for a building doesn't mean that the process for designing and creating a building is more rigorous.

> Flexibility is an indicator of easiness

How so? Flexibility means more ways to shoot yourself in the foot. It means you can easily implement something that works for now, and fucks you over later on. It's harder to do that with a physical construction because there are a lot of constraints. Physical construction has physics as guardrails, whereas software has unbounded complexity.

> Are either of these industries over loaded with a barrage of random ass startups or is software the only industry with this stuff?

How is this indicative of rigour? Yes, software has a lower barrier to entry. That doesn't mean that software engineering in general has less rigour.

A lot of software is written haphazardly without process, but I wouldn't classify that as software engineering because there is no engineering process there.
> If you work for the public sector your collective bargaining is against.. the “union” of voters who pay you.

I'd first note that politicians and government bureaucracy is a very large layer of indirection between the public and the government employees.

Second, how does that justify unsafe working conditions for employees that have not been granted any special powers? I know teachers who are afraid that these policies will kill them or someone they love. This danger is not part of the job description, there was no warning that "if you or your loved ones are immunocompromised you may be asked to put them in harms way for the good of society".

> “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.” - George meany

This doesn't seem to match the empirical evidence. Public sector unions across the world have done it fairly successfully for over a century. In countries that didn't gut private sector unions it's not like public employees have a much sweeter deal than everyone else, just a decent standard of living.
> Sales of the Bolt EV have been paused since September 2021 as the company focuses on repairing recalled vehicles.

At least include the reason if you're going to point that out.
Are you trying to save money by hiring an undergraduate? Or giving them an opportunity to break into tech?
Tmate – Instant Terminal Sharing (ssh across firewalls)
It is -- and it isn't -- fiction, but "The Crow Road" by Iain Banks has been useful to me to reflect on what inter-generational relationships and communities mean and how they develop over time. Enjoy your literary journey.
> Block AWS CIDR ranges ?

I do, actually. There is zero reason for anyone to use EC2 instances to contact my personal public machines.

> With IPv4 exhaustion increasing numbers of people will be using IPv4 allocations across geographic boundaries.

And there will continue to be tracking of who is using which blocks, so there should be no reason for error rates to creep up too much.

You need to think about the specifics of your situation, not just blindly follow "best practices". For my personal public machines, I do know, with a high degree of specificity, who should be doing what, and from where. I exploit that to place limits on who can talk to them, and it provides a lot of benefit.

If you're running a large public service, you're in starting from a very different stance. For my $dayjob, there are good reasons why customers might contact us from a country where we don't yet offer service, so we can't wall them off. But we do occasionally use geoblocking more selectively when we're under attack.
Meh. When rust was designed it didn't make a distinction between blocking and non-blocking functions (here, I mean having a syscall which may yield to the OS scheduler, such as `read`). Together with threads, this let users enjoy the traditional kernel-space concurrency model seamlessly.

When async got added, this simplification stood in conflict with the new explicit user-space scheduler (reactor-executor in Rust terms). Today, std is a minefield within an async app — your program may deadlock non-deterministically — without as much as a compiler warning. Every project member needs to worry about intricate details of different types of mutices and which std::fs APIs are kosher, and so on.

I would have preferred a plug-in system where you could use the same application code with different scheduling backends - threaded by default, the M:N model or even the M:1 model if you're feeling web scale. This way, code reuse would have been a breeze.

What we got was a mess of application code where the compatibility matrix (what code is compatible with what runtime) is not clear, enforced or even well documented. Even the proponents of the current model acknowledge that the current ecosystem is fragmented.