skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I come from an aerospace engineering background (did structural engineering on commercial aircraft that were in the design and approval stages) and am in software now (games). I've had two different takes on this. Neither is perfect. Would appreciate comments on them.

(a) If it's regularly expected that you ship bugs, you might be in a discipline that is distinct from engineering.[0]

(b) If you can usually reach for an abstraction to save you, you might be working in something that isn't engineering.[1]

[0] If software is engineering, then it's the only engineering discipline I'm aware of in which the participants are regularly expected to produce deliverables they don't fully understand. What do I mean by that? Well, if we software peeps fully understood our deliverables, we wouldn't have bugs, or at least, we'd always know what bugs are there. If as a structural engineer I had delivered a final draft of an analysis document which showed that I didn't fully understand the part and how it would perform, my boss would not have been pleased. Most software bugs are treated more casually than that, so we clearly have a tolerance for delivering work that we don't fully understand.

You might take issue with the idea that I "fully understood" a structural part. Fair. When I calculated the strength of a beam in a thrust reverser I didn't understand the individual molecular interactions, I didn't need to know if the metal was of a body-centered cubic crystal structure, etc. But this is because I was able to apply well-understood and rigorously accepted simplifying assumptions that were conservative (from the point of view of a factor of safety), and fully encapsulated all the understanding I needed to produce a part fit for use.

[1] This feels like the more flawed of the two proposals, because I expect EEs can do this. Control systems folks can definitely do this, and I would absolutely call them engineers.
because they'd rather block the EU than figure out if the GDPR has any implications for them, it's pure laziness
When correctness matters less than business results, then your role has passed from engineering into business. Software is somewhere in the middle. Software engineers are often informally expected to own the results without owning the profits.
I really wanted to like this the last time I gave it a try, but it just did not do it for me. I though I would like it being a VS Code plugin since "why reinvent a .md editor", but the end result felt pretty janky. Plenty of power features, but they were not particularly intuitive to use....

I ended up finding https://logseq.com/ and have been very happy using that as a local application! I really like its balance of control/abstraction and its markdown based editor is beautiful!
Because then the NSA can't access that data.
Which would fail. You got the directional formatting characters in the wrong order.

It is 2022. If your code doesn't treat all strings as Unicode it is broken.
NASA Advisory Council Wrap-Up
Understanding the control-flow constructs of an imperative programming language is not equivalent to understanding the discrete maths of imperative programming (Hoare logic, Z notation, B-method, etc).

As I said, the average developer is incapable of doing serious discrete mathematics such as formally proving the correctness of an algorithm. For that matter, I doubt the average developer would know what it means for a language to have a formal semantics.

To anticipate the path of a frisbee is to, in mathematical terms, solve a differential equation. Dogs can catch frisbees. We still don't say that dogs understand the mathematics of differential equations. [0][1]

In the software world, formal methods are a niche, as are the associated mathematics. Being costly, they are not used in mainstream software work.

[0] (PDF) http://www.math.pitt.edu/~bard/bardware/classes/0220/dkc.pdf

[1] https://www.wired.com/1993/05/dogs/
If a country wants to do this why don’t they just block connections to all foreign IP ranges and be done with it; don’t make it the rest of the worlds problem.
I admire you diligence with cutting down features to hit the self imposed deadline.

I've been ferociously learning game dev and have allowed myself unlimited time to jump down rabbit holes. Now that I'm actually building a game I need to remind myself to just build it with what I know.

It's an interesting switch in mind set. Still learning obviously, only now I'm pulling together knowledge buried deep within rather than from tutorials.

I'll keep in mind scope and remember your inspiring diligence next time I'm tempted to peek in a rabbit hole.
When GDPR came out, we had a serious discussion about whether Europe having access to our site was important enough to implement GDPR, or if we should just block Europe all together. In the end we decided to bite the bullet and implement it, but it could easily have gone either way.
I'm planning a similar setup. Cloudflare now as email forwarding in beta and then use my personal Gmail account to send mail as by custom domain. Here's a tutorial on setting up Gmail's "Send Mail As": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEheS8gM4Xs
A book review Blogspot blog was taken down due to false DMCA claims
probably not relevant but one time my mid-trip flight landed late. I ran to the connecting flight and made it on board but my luggage did not. I did get it the next day so the system worked but it just points out a complication I hadn't personally considered before.
off-topic: if you want to read something interesting about the effects of abstraction, take a look at this https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07NS35S76/ref=dbs_a_def_r...
> TVs and furbies with electronics in them could give you an electric shock or start a fire

In no universe will a small low-voltage chip cause a fire except in exceptional circumstances. This is a non-dangerous product. But you can only design one if you are a certified engineer.

Most engineering tasks are harmless. They require certification and licensing largely as a gateway mechanism, like being a beautician. No one says that people who design harmless products aren't "electrical engineers" or "computer engineers". Danger certainly isn't the defining feature of engineering -- gateway certification might be, but shouldn't be.

And on the flip side, it is absolutely the case that for designing software which is potentially dangerous should require certification and liability considerations. Do these guys get to be called engineers then? What if all they do with their certification is make video games?
Touched this in a reason HN thread.

"Is this accurate?

We have the Schrems II ruling that made some countries think they could not use services like Cloudflare and Azure. Still Cloudflare and Azure are widely used within EU. (Germany is an outcast). One should as always be transparent about what data is collected. From the GA projects I been involved in (in EU) GDPR has never been a concern."

Is GA really illegal in AU?
How long did it take you to build this? Do you do any advertising?
Dupe.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29918496

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29992741

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29994183
> But I do the same mud stacking (that is plugging bricks to do CRUDs) as my fellow "real engineers" coworkers.

That's the problem with the current state of the Software Development field: Most of the work (90% I'd pull out of my ass) can be done by "qualified technicians", what in Germany is called Berufsschule, in Mexico "Técnico Superior" [2] and in the US I think it may be the result of studying in a Community College.

The work of Software Engineers themselves, that should be doing real Engineering work. To prepare the ground and the "map" for the Technicians to build. It's the difference between an Architect (in an architecture firm) and their armies of interns or technicians (don't know the name in English). Or a Lawyer and also all the people that work for them (interns).

The thing is, that the Software/Computer/IT Engineer degree has been watered down since its inception for 40 years. I think mainly due to the huge demand that the Computing field has had for developers during this time.

[1] https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/conten...

[2] https://www.sectei.cdmx.gob.mx/oferta-educativa/tecnico-supe...
Can I ask why the move from Obsidian?
Exactly.

Wright claims to own around $50 billion dollars worth of cryptocurrency which he cannot access.

Let's say he manages to convince you that he has 1% chance of success at obtaining these funds-- something you could believe even if you know he's a fraud, you just have to have a low opinion of the courts and misunderstand how Bitcoin works (which many people do, see this discussion!).

If offers you a 10% stake in his victory, what would you pay for that? Well under the 1% assumption you might be willing to pay $25 million dollars (half the expected value).

The buyers error is just in flawed reasoning about the odds of success, but people are notoriously bad at reasoning about fringe events and a lot of people don't understand Bitcoin.

For Wright, the fact that his effort cannot be successful is actually a very good property: It means that he can safely sell more than 100% of his fictional fortune: He doesn't have to worry that he'll win and then have to pay out >100%. Instead, he'll lose and tell his investors "Sorry, gave it our best shot but you always knew this was a risky deal!". In that case his income from the scheme is only limited by how many suckers he can bring in... 100 people paying 25m for a '10%' stake would yield a 2.5 billion dollar windfall.

And if you don't think there are at least 100 suckers out there with 25 million to blow you haven't been paying attention to all the defi/ico/nft noise the last couple years.

Right now we know of one major self-claimed billionaire that Wright is exploiting, but there may be many others-- particularly in Asia where language barriers make it much easier for Wright to isolate victims from discrediting information.
I agree with the conclusion that we shouldn't shut the door.

It would be stupid to not try and take into account the experience of other engineering disciplines, just because "we don't fit the mold perfectly".

Sometimes it'll help, and sometimes it won't. What's interesting is to engage with other people.

I am lucky in that regard to have been trained in a French "engineering school", where I was trained in electrical engineering, electronical engineering, signal processing engineering, computer science, and logistics. People I was trained with work on the electricity grid, others on the noise that care tires make. There is no question that knowing concepts about electricity or control theory made me a better software engineer.
I wish mine had 1tb - I was already considering paying as I'm forever bumping up against a ~20gb limit with Google photos contributing most.

To be fair I think that was per user on the domain, so probably could've created additional users to cycle through.

Main thing that was holding me back was losing the grandfathered free plan should I change my mind / find an alternative for photos (I'd quite like to keep Google docs etc), but I guess that's no longer a consideration
Type systems are useful, but not nearly as useful as many people believe they are.
You can remove those messages from the final commit when you squash.

If someone else is doing the merge and you’re unsure if they will you can preemptively squash your whole branch so there’s only one commit in the pr.
+1 for LogSeq! Been using it for awhile now and love it!
It means nothing for you. There is no legal risk whatsoever. Not in the US, and neither in Europe or Austria if you were to travel there.

For GDPR to apply, your website needs some connection to an EU country beyond just being on the internet. What constitutes such a connection isn't an exact science, obviously, which leads and/or allows people to make rather strange claims, the worst of which is probably that such ambiguity makes it entirely impossible to make laws on the subject.

The "official example" is explicitly making accommodations to sell to customers in the EU. The marginal example on the non-GDPR side of the dividing line is a US website, in English, that does sell to EU customers, but only if they sneak their country into the generic second line of the address form.

What gets you to the other side of the line is, for example, a drop-down that lets you chose an EU country for delivery, a switch that allows users to chose to read your website in German (but not Portuguese b/c Brasil), etc.

While there are plenty of cases, as always in life, that straddle the border, one thing is and always was clear: your English-language blog does not fall under GDPR.
This is exactly what's discussed as the misconception 'Engineering is high-consequence' in TFA:

"It does mean that the engineers spent a lot of time on something that’s low-consequence or non-safety critical. In retrospect, this shouldn’t have surprised me. The world is vast and our industry is huge. Someone needs to design the bridges, yes, but someone also needs to design all of the little things we use in our day-to-day life. Much of the engineering there is low-stakes, low-consequence, just like much software is."
I just made sure you do get traffic from Austria – there, you have it. :-)

On the more serious side, I guess, the outcome may be that GA will be not allowed to collect certain data in Austria. (Just a personal opinion, not a legal advice.)

Mind that you can add `ga('set', 'anonymizeIp', true);` to any GA embedding script, which should be more in compliance. (My guess is that GA will have to default to this mode anyway.)

Edit: GDPR is about storing and processing personalized data. Meaning, if no personalized data is involved, there shouldn't be any need for even declaring it, nor should it be subject to explicit opt-in. On the other hand, we can't be sure, if `ga('set', 'anonymizeIp', true);` really does what it says. (Again, not a legal advice.)
Apparently there is 3 separate statements over a long period, one of which is a tweet?

Does anyone know of the 3 and would care to translate them?
> I found in my research that people defending the title “engineer” rarely coherently define what an engineer is, usually boiling it down to “engineers solve problems”. The arguments against the title tend to be a little more developed, as are the arguments about transcending it.

It's a pity the author didn't go into more detail about why problem-solving is not the key defining characteristic of engineers. Since the author claims this is somehow not coherent enough, I'll share my very strong view that this is exactly what separates engineers from programmers:

Engineers apply technology to solve problems. They are rarely interested in technology just for the sake of it (that's what scientists are for), but rather in what it can do for them.

Most people in our industry today are far from being engineers. Engineers don't pick their technologies based on hype (or more charitably, excitement), and then try to find problems to solve. That's how some companies ended up using machine learning for projects where simpler statistical methods would have sufficed. It's how inexperienced developers fell for MongoDB's marketing and jumped straight to using it without considering whether it's better for their use case than the alternatives. It explains how at some point a ton of companies were using blockchain for things that could have been done with centralised databases (although that one's likely more due to company executives trying to impress investors).

If you’re always focused on using the latest thing, you’ll always have a solution in search of a problem. Reach for new tools when you have or anticipate a problem that you think might reasonably be solved by such tools. Do that and you've at least inched a bit closer to being able to reasonably refer to yourself as software engineer... if that's your thing - I'm generally not a fan of the title myself, but the engineering mindset is the most important thing I look for when interviewing candidates.
I think a big part of the problem is worrying about all these edge cases and how people will take advantage of these services. Means testing is a prime example. We should be making more services free and open to everyone. Jeff Bezos, a homeless person, and I all have equal right to use government services. None of us should have to pay for our ID. Just give it to us all for free and if necessary raise the taxes on the people who would have paid for these services out of pocket. That improves buy in as now everyone is receiving the same level of benefit and it allows us to remove a lot of bureaucratic bloat that has built up over all these programs trying to assess an individual's eligibility.
Seems like a prudent move when a certain segment of the population believe the prior definition gives them an excuse to not get vaccinated.
Whatever you do, my advice is don't do it from a place of fear or desperation.

Take the time you need to think about what's best, and delay irreversible decisions until you are in a good place to make them.

Do whatever you need to get into a good mental space so you can think about what's the best course of action for you.
what did you do for those 6 months if i may ask?
If you serve pages to EU citizens then you run the risk of breaking the law in Austria. If the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSB[0]) were to take you to court (in Austria) then you (or your company) may be prosecuted. So the question then is would the DSB attempt prosecution? If they did and you don't offer a defence then you would probably lose by default. The question then would be are you judgement proof?[1]

"The extraterritorial reach of the GDPR is broadly defined. It applies to a controller or processor of data when they are monitoring the behavior of data subjects within the EU, when they are processing data related to the offering of goods or services to data subjects in the EU, or when they have an establishment in the EU and the processing of data is happening in the context of that EU establishment." [2]

This is not legal advice, etc.

[0] https://www.data-protection-authority.gv.at/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_proof
[2] https://www.clarip.com/data-privacy/gdpr-united-states/
Right. It feels like Op uses wrong math but gets a good conclusion in the context of doing daily job: focus on one shit.

However, in general sense, the return of an investment is considered as random variable, so the problem is not just max value, but max value while minimizing risk, and the solution is multitask/portfolio
At uni I had one course in software engineering. It was different to other courses as it was about defining metrics and constraints, measures of success, requirements etc. As well as evaluating what building blocks you had available.

To me the term didn't come from HR it came from trying to get "programmers" to think in terms of constraints, value, risks etc. Seems a pretty clear and simple definition.

The reason I think its not taken off in the same ways as say mechanical engineering is because in general customers cannot actually see the product, only certain elements of its outputs.

If you couldn't see bridges either in use or after a failure. You just saw cars disappear at one end and appear at the other, not even able to measure the gap or time taken to cross in any meaningful way then structural engineers would bullshit and self grandise as much as software engineers.

Maybe one day the average person will know enough to hold us to account, then we will begin engineering properly.
Is there another source?
Seems Dorsey's COPA is going to try to prove that in court shortly

"Bitcoin 'inventor' will face forgery claims over his Satoshi Nakamoto proof, rules High Court" https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/06/craig_wright_satoshi_...
Yeah, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, because the very first time I heard from him (in an interview series in the Waking Up meditation coaching app), he talked about various mistakes and regrets about his book, or things he wished he’d done differently.

Blue light didn’t come up then, but talking about the stark alarming tone he sets in the book, about what the detrimental effect of not sleeping well can be on your body.

He said that he later realized how unhelpful this is for people who have real insomnia problems, and can’t sleep even though they do understand and take it seriously.

So my first impression of him was of a guy that is willing to own up to his own mistakes (partly why i bought his book).
HSTS itself is fine? It just means "please only contact me over TLS for X amount of time". The only complaint I heard about was adtech companies using it for fingerprinting.

Are you sure you're not thinking of HPKP?
Strictly adhering to Hanlon's Razor tells us we should find that poor unfortunate Nigerian Prince who was too stupid to get out of his own way.
I make between $500 and $2000 per month with UXWizz[0], a self-hosted analytics platform that I have been working on for around 9 years.

Hopefully I can grow it more this year as all the Google Analytics related news should make more people consider self-hosting their analytics. I stopped providing any cloud-hosted version and focus purely on self-hosting.

[0]: https://www.uxwizz.com
Thanks for the insight. I like to think that you are right!

Thanks for the hug. It is much appreciated.
I'd add a bit of caution to this. Yes, tell your boss, but have some kind of plan in place first.

If the boss is a good boss, they will work with you and try to help. If your boss is not, things could get a bit more complicated.

In other words, be prepared for a boss that makes this your problem. If they do, that's a sign that you should probably be looking elsewhere anyway. That might also be a clue about where the burnout is coming from.

But bottom line, think through what your next steps look like if

a) Your boss is understanding, and wants to help (what do you want from them? how might they help? etc.)

b) Your boss is dismissive, or doesn't have the ability to help (will you look for another job that is less stressful, or focus on saving enough for a sabbatical, or other?)
> If someone else is doing the merge and you’re unsure if they will you can preemptively squash your whole branch so there’s only one commit in the pr.

I agree! And that's what I do. But OP said that would be "a waste of time and effort", hence my reply.
Those creators were and will continue to make normal Youtube videos.

The only thing with Originals did was provide them with resources to make slightly higher production value content, but it seems like said content didn't perform as well as the creators own content.

The creators are still free to find their own production company and produce similarly polished high production content if they want, but again, I doubt that content is worth it on a platform like Youtube.
Presumably because the fines for getting GDPR wrong are potentially very high, where "less severe infringements could result in a fine of up to €10 million" and more serious infringements "could result in a fine of up to €20 million,". [0]

Personally I'm afraid to make anything I'm working on publicly available, in case the server logging at some level isn't compliant. It's hard to be sure something hasn't been overlooked, and the monetary risk is very high.

[0] https://gdpr.eu/fines/
> There's no doubt that poor people sometimes find it very tough to obtain ID

Perhaps this is the case, and perhaps not, but I'd like to examine this premise closer.

Has anybody provided even a single example of a US Citizen who was trying to figure out how to obtain some ID and couldn't figure out the process?
Wondering that myself. There is no link to any kind of official statement on this page as far as I can tell.
> a series of 70-100 hour weeks

wouldn't you have to go back to that and end up in the same situation again?