skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been to arcades all over the the USA in the last decade. The new breed of arcades serve a role more like "video game bar" than the their more kid/family friendlier predecessors.
Get New Utilities is a double edged sword, much like adding layers of abstraction.
>It's just not sustainable anymore for most tech companies.

Translation: Most tech companies are addicted to cheap labor, either through exploiting new graduates or handing out potentially worthless stock options. They won't choose to reduce their profits regardless of what happens.

Very few startups "need" to hire less experienced people, mostly the ones that do just haven't got a viable business model. The ones that can't afford to hire the people they need at a reasonable salary for the work they expect shouldn't exist. They're just machines for turning venture capital into personal wealth for the founders as they exploit their employees then sell out.
Boomers are dying. More at 11.
Spotify making money from Young's music and giving Rogan $100 million means Young's music and many others funded Rogan.

Apple and Amazon have Rogan's comedy specials.
(not parent)

>They're here to flex "ownership" of a national capital

Seeing how the government & media reacted at the start, I highly doubt a change.org petition would have had accomplished much. Having flashy show of support is way more impactful. This is the whole point of protests.

>This is a Facebook conspiracy theory convened to experience itself in person.

As I said in OP, reductionist views like this are very toxic and not how you approach disagreements in a democracy.

Attacking the character of some organizers (be it true or not) adds nothing to the discussion except divisiveness. Not only that, you seem to imply that their demands are invalid because of that, which is just a smear campaign to ignore the issues they (and the other protesters) raise.
I don’t feel that you need to code well, but it would help if you actually understand the very basics of programming. There are so many quick, free to use, and easy to understand resources now; like games, that I feel that there are only poor excuses for actively avoiding not learning to code.
The Promise of Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning (2019)
Assuming vehicle manufacturers even need context switching (apparently they do...) I'd love to see an innovation to use OLED pushbuttons[0]. Some companies make these specifically for automotive applications even though I don't think any brands are using them at the moment.

You can make the physical button/key show any icon you want, and it can change so you can have menu-style systems without losing the physical pushbuttons.

0: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/nkk-switches/ISC1...
I think you haven't understood what I said. I know that envy is not the only form of harmful status anxiety, and that the wealthy can suffer from non-envy status anxiety. I just think that, envy or not, it's a personal problem that those people can and should get over. They're not victims. They do it to themselves.

And struggling to pay bills is a different problem from inequality per se.
I really enjoy using Beancount + Git for managing the accounting book for my own startup company, but I found it a bit tedious to add entries periodically. I wonder why nobody build a service make it like GitHub but for Beancount and automate lots of stuff. I then decided to make a service for it a while back. Shameless self-promoting here, yesterday I just launched the service in very early stage of open beta:

https://beanhub.io/

Basically the idea is, as a software engineer, I believe accounting book can be automated like how we build software. There are many interesting workflow we can bring into the system, such as

- Pull request review
- Commit sign off (pgp signature)
- CI for generating reports

and many other interesting aspects. Also just like software, I believe many of the orgs can benefit from open sourcing their financial data, like no-profits or government. So I am thinking making open source accounting book free repository for the product just like GitHub did previously. Anyway, I just found this thread happen to appear on hacker news so just want to share the stuff I am building. Feedbacks are welcome.
It's not about the other artists. It's about podcasting being the last bastion of free speech that everyday people can consume.

For full control and censorship, podcasts have to be walled off and censored.

The artists are just dummies being manipulated into bringing this world about.

But yes, Spotify is the biggest prize, and once Spotify gives in, so will everyone else. That takes care of most podcasts. Then through podcast apps and aggregators, hosting, sponsors, and banking, the rest of the .RSS world of podcasting can be destroyed.

Going after Joe is a statement of power.
Ask HN: Websites for Professional Advisors in '22?
What websites have convinced you to buy from the advisors behind it?

I'm in a small professional firm (think lawyers, accountants, or consultants). We sell advice, not tangible products.

It's time to redesign our website, and I'm struggling to put my finger on what I want. Shopify and Wix don't quite fit and the standard Bootstrap landing page seems tired.
Holiday 2021 update regressed Tesla UI to Android 1
I'm usually a defender of the single screen on the Model 3/Y, but on this, the author is right: the new UI (v11) is terrible compared to the previous one (v10).

Not only does it hide commonly-used safety-relevant functions behind extra taps in sub-menus (as detailed), it was apparently done to free up space to offer a 'dock' of app buttons - three permanant and three 'recently used'. I struggled to choose three apps I needed enough to fill the permanant spaces - and certainly don't need quick access (when I'm driving!) to Netflix, or games, or whatever is popping up in 'recently used' today. I would like the driver profile menu to be quickly available, but alas that's been hidden too.

It's a total cluster-f*ck that makes no logical sense when considering the need of drivers, and I hope they listen and revert at least this aspect of the UI.
We seriously need an Internet Bill of [Personal] Rights and get it into law and use it against the FAANGs. Europe at least seems to be trying, along with California sometimes.
Show HN: BeanHub – A GitHub for Beancount
My husband just upgraded his P100D to a "Plaid" so I took the P100D as a hand-me-down instead of us trading it in or selling it. I had been driving a "Volt" and was happy with it.

This is the first car, in my 42 years of driving (I'm 59) that I had to read the manual and "study" the UI before I could use it. And I still have trouble adjusting the temperature, etc, while I'm driving. It's way too confusing. I suppose I'll get used to it, but it's too much time with my eyes away from the road.

If I say anything about this to Tesla "true believers" (or even the folks on Hacker News!) it's always my fault.
In Zsh setting '-x' on an interactive shell will also show you what is executed for prompts, completion, and any hooks (probably other things too)
It really depends what your arrangement is. Is everything shared between you? Then you need to track all accounts. You should look into automating ingest of your accounts data. Most banks/credit cards etc. should allow some kind of statement export. If not, consider switching provider.

I would advise not to worry about petty cash. Don't get pedantic. Worry about the big things. Just make a cash account for petty cash.

If you don't share accounts then just track your stuff and set up reimbursement account(s) for your family. You'll only know the net amount you need to transfer between yourselves to square up at the end of the month or whatever you agree to do.
The main cause of that is I was slow to make the compiler open source. It is open source now.

https://github.com/DigitalMars/Compiler
I wonder if there could be some "gradual" approach here where perhaps you'd have levels of maturity that you can evolve a project thorough over time. Perhaps something such as:

0: no separation of concerns whatsoever, just quickly hacking at it.

1: no separation of concerns required, but you have to label each component as having one or more concerns. This would still allow for mixed "business+presentation", but you can add constraints such as "a pure business component is not allowed to depend on a pure presentation component".

2: No mixed-concerns components allowed. So you have to split them somehow, but they can still interact in arbitrary ways.

3: All interaction across concerns has to go through specific interfaces, such that it's easy to replace implementations (e.g. using dependency injection).
That's just long term product planning. The rest of the people here are talking about long term employee development - making your employees more valuable so they produce better products rather than treating them as costs that must be reduced.
If this is specifically referencing that technically you could have served those google fonts without making the user go to Google (a proxy of your own and not a hyperlink) then yeah I'm all for it. Big if though, but to roll with it

1) finally webmasters can feel the absurd amount of data they push on us for goddamned shiny JS that barely runs on my phone. Maybe they'll cut back a little

2) Hopefully this incentivises a bit more clear border segregation. More technical effort? Yes. Better for my privacy? Hopefully.

I don't like the language here though, specifically the lack of anything directly supporting my stance. But I prefer optimism and then realism
Every time I think I ought to test drive a Tesla in order to do my due diligence for an electric car, I read another thing like this. Or it's autopilot crashing again. Or more reliability issues.

I think I will hold out for a more traditional design. My Bolt's touchscreen isn't terribly obnoxious, and it still has physical controls for a lot of things, including the defroster.

If only it could charge faster on road trips, max is 50 kW. Typical is 40.
Let us thank the free market for his miraculous creation, amen.
I can't say I'm too experienced in writing code for WASM, but I have to say I was pleasantly surprised when I experimented with Go.

It has to be said that I have many (mostly subjective) problems with the Go language and the ecosystem, but with the help of GoLand I was productive in minutes. The layer for exchanging arguments between the browser and the "native" code is a bit weird, but once you get passed that, it's easy to get going.

The Rust problem with WASM is more about learning Rust well and picking the right libraries (many of them have dependencies that don't work well in the browser!). Setting up tools like cargo to compile usable WASM files also takes a little practice, but that's at most an afternoon of messing around before you should be reasonably comfortable with it. In my opinion, the main improvements Rust brings to the table are the (memory) security features and the fearless multithreading, but neither of them are of much use within the WASM runtime. The borrow checker will still help you write correct code, but it can be an unnecessary pain in the ass when it doesn't need to be. Rust is a great systems programming language, but I'm not so sure about it becoming the de-facto WASM standard.

Of course, if you already know Rust, or know a library that would be super useful to you, it's great that Rust can Just Work (TM) with the right setup. First-party tooling support is pretty great for a language to have!

If I had to choose, I think I'd pick a language that I'm comfortable with (C#, Kotlin, Java) and has the necessary libraries easily available, and see if the tooling works well for my use cases.

I'm also watching Zig evolve with interest; it's not quite there yet, but it's integration with C libraries and some of its more modern language features are very promising. WASM code doesn't need many of the complexities modern languages bring, but older languages like C can lead to dangerous programming paradigms, so I think a mix between the two can produce clean, performant and fully-featured code. I wouldn't recommend it for production use yet, though, as the language is still in constant development with breaking changes between point releases!
Builtin templates in Nim are awesome but since then, there is the possibility to render pages server-side with karax: https://github.com/karaxnim/karax
Check my project that converts a static web page to ready to use karax DSL code:

https://github.com/nim-lang-cn/html2karax
Indeed, some tech is based on things like physics, math, chemistry, manufacturing, and so forth. We've figured out how to have people managing a tech business, who couldn't grasp all of the disciplines that go into the tech.

The danger with any technology is that it will start extracting rent from your business if you don't understand it. At the very least, I'd advise any manager to read The Mythical Man Month, which I think is still fresh after nearly half a century.
Ye, unless you to electrical engineering/close to hardware embedded or something. However even those probably benefits from mastering some memory managed language, before going back to C.
I worked at Hotelicopter, which was a hotel meta-search engine written in Ruby on Rails. We were bought out by the six major hotel chains in the US and re-branded as Roomkey.com. To get us started, they agreed to push a lot of traffic at us. We knew from load testing that it would be very difficult, with our practically non-existent ops team, to scale Rails to handle 1000x our current load.

We knew we had to rewrite the system in a more scalable language, and we had to be live on a fixed date. This was late 2010, early 2011. Our CTO evaluated a number of languages and chose Clojure. A team of five or so devs was able to write the entire system in a few months and launch without problems. I don't think that would have been possible in a non-lisp language.

The Clojure learning curve was steep, especially since stack traces for anonymous functions in Clojure 1.1 often began with "nil pointer exception, no source file, line 0."

Once our dev team "got" Clojure, we were hooked. The verbosity of other languages started to look appalling. Clojure let us iterate quickly without sacrificing performance, which was suddenly a big issue.

Writing Lisp code permanently changed the way I think, and the way I code in other languages. I strongly prefer composing short, deterministic functions, which are testable and easy to reason about.

Roomkey became a victim of the pandemic, when hotel bookings declined sharply.

I'm just now starting to pick up Common Lisp, and it's a joy: the simplicity and consistency of the language, the REPL, the emacs integration. I also like that it compiles to native code. That's good for performance and for deployment, since it doesn't require the target machine to have a JVM.
Sorry you're taking it as dismissal and denial. It's not meant that way.

I realize there's a problem. I also realize nothing I can say will solve that problem. It's up to tenonyx to solve it. I'm not trying to solve, just trying to help show a perspective on it that one might not immediately see. Because I've been there, too.
My success with outsourcing some work to Latin America has been much, much, much more successful than outsourcing to India and other places in Asia for the following reasons:

1. As the article points out, being in the same/similar timezones is huge. With so many folks working remotely anyway, it's much easier to integrate these developers as part of the team. They join standups, we can have easy back-and-forths in Slack, etc. The timezone difference to India makes this virtually impossible, so that if you ARE outsourcing to India the model is totally different and you have to outsource a very different type of work. Plus, since the time zones are so off, the situation sucks for everyone - someone is either staying up very late or getting up very early. These days I refuse jobs where coordination with India is required, because it's just not worth sacrificing other parts of my life for it, especially when it's easy to get a job where this is not necessary.

2. In general, I have found there to be less of a cultural issue of Latin American developers proactively speaking up and letting us know concerns/potential issues than their Indian counterparts. One of the biggest issues we had many years ago is that, while we hired developers in India that were fantastic technically, they were loath to inform us of problems or schedule slip until it was too late; in general, there was a culture of "over-deference" which proved to be extremely detrimental. If anyone has read Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers, it was very similar to what he discusses about Korean Airlines' cockpit culture.
So why not use WinForms?
> ” If someone is very money-driven, there’s nothing we can do.”

I am very far from “very money-driven”. I worked for a long time in the non-profit sector that would pay much less than mostly any of my other careers options. Then I changed to software development.

I work for an American company from Brazil. I earn 5 times more (after taxes) that what I would likely earn in a local well-paying company for my level of experience. 3 times if I was lucky and good at negotiation.

And think that is 3 times multiplication of already high-paying job. So it is a LOT of money. There is just not much a company can do around here until the demand for tech talent in the US decrease a little.
In the medium term the market may realize the available stock just increased, which would improve stock:flow production numbers which could increase the price.
It’s just horrible , I hate it it made the car worst
This is how startups succeed and take market share very quickly. A small number of highly paid highly competent people build something which is significantly cheaper and better than the incumbent because they aren’t weighed down by very large numbers of unnecessary people doing things poorly in the most expensive way possible.

Then the startup either gets bought by the incumbent who has existed so long they just have piles of money or the startup grows into a similarly inefficient monster.

It is a sign that there is something wrong with the game created by the economic and legal environment which tends towards a large proportion of useless work and barely adequate quality. I.e this is why we can’t have nice things and it’s not exactly clear how to fix it.
Fleet Below Deck, Part I – Architecture Overview
Just because we can!
Or even worse, with the life savings of other people.
I can hardly imagine that situation working out if the company you acquired were in the US.
Oil January Release Notes and Themes
It runs under Windows, cross compiling for DOS. People have told me it runs fine under Wine, though I haven't tried it myself.

It could be made to run on Linux without Wine, there's nothing in particular nailing it to Windows.
I still remember the days when buttons were meant to look like buttons, and that was actually something we specifically aimed for and got [correctly] criticized on when we got it wrong.

Back when Skeuomorphism was in vogue, it was far easier to train users to use computing devices. These days you "just have to know."

And, no, it isn't just Tesla. All the major tech companies have given up on usability (e.g. remember when Microsoft had a usability research lab and improved the products using lessons learned?).
Reminds me of Google's icon redesign. Is it just me, or does it feel inevitable for behemoth organizations to converge towards UX anti-patterns that sacrifice functionality for style?
The redesign is generally fine, but they definitely moved a few features to places that are less convenient. It's not a major issue for me, but I do find the climate controls more annoying now. They haven't done another update yet, so fingers crossed that they incorporate some of this feedback.
This is literally the “AckChyually IT WAsnT ReAL CommUniSM” meme
The interesting question here (to me) is what an actual fix would even be - given the proximate trigger was basically "lying to zsh about the argument parsing of the thing you were completing" (and obviously we all lie to software all the time, being a cursed sand herder be like that) I'm not sure how you could make the completion setup in question avoid triggering that problem without being less robust for the majority of users.

(this said more in a spirit of morbid fascination with these sorts of weird interactions than anything else, I'm genuinely unsure if there's a right answer here, only "pick which sort of wrong will be least intolerable for your userbase as a whole")
Performance, at the level of a single frame, is a complicated multi-system interaction where only a few layers are visible, and small bubbles can cascade into missed frames. None of the IHVs are incentivized to make all layers visible, so I'd argue that how hardware operates is not more or less understood by the application developer unless they have the influence to talk to the IHVs directly.

I'm not saying that the APIs can't be used to get good enough performance, but I am saying that it's a fiendishly hard problem, and even harder if you're not one of the handful to get (more) complete information. Perhaps much more so than the CPU world where microbenchmarking is more mature.
I think step zero for this kinda thing should be writing a test suite using the current code as the reference implementation. Then you spike it out with a first pass and if your clean version can’t get 90%+ without lots of edge case handling or abstraction breaking then you keep what you have.
While simple CRUD apps are not technically challenging; the hard part of doing these is figuring out the specs and communicating with the client. I can see how this can go wrong with offshore clients (time difference, cultural difference, language difference, only remote). There could be a market for local agencies outsourcing tech work (and even that has to be done carefully). But clients directly outsourcing to off-shore agencies, that spell trouble.
This is handy, but the good news is that if you're dealing with anything made in the last 30-40 years, it's all but guaranteed to have the ETRTO measurements marked on it somewhere.

Practically speaking there are two rim diameters you'll likely come across on all but old, "unusual" or high end bikes:

559mm: the ubiquitous "26 inch" mountain bike tire. Has largely fallen out of favor on high end mountain bikes, but there are zillions of bikes with 559mm wheels and frames sized for them out there. On high end mountain bikes, largely displaced by 29" or 27.5" setups.

622mm: "700c" road rims or "29 inch" mountain bike rims. Nearly universal on modern road bikes. If you have something else on a new road bike, you probably already know it.

Other sizes you might find in the wild:

630mm: The largely obsolete "27 inch" road rims. uncommon on new bikes, but you'll still find plenty of them on older bikes. Not even the slightest bit interchangeable with 622mm. Usually, you can't even switch to 622mm rims on frame built for 630mm because the brakes won't reach 4mm closer to the axle. Easily mistaken for 622mm if you aren't paying attention.

584mm is the "27.5 inch" mountain bike standard that splits the difference between 26" and 29". If you have this, you probably know already.

Once you've got the rim diameter right, the tire width is pretty straightforward: if it looks right, it is right. It'll be pretty obvious that a "29 inch" mountain bike tire doesn't go on a road rim, even if the diameter on both is 622mm. If you have needs under which that doesn't apply, you're probably already aware of them.

You can put hooked tires on straight sided rims safely (I have), but likely not the other way even if you could find dedicated straight sided tires.

Tubulars are a while 'nother animal, about which I know nothing :-)

ETRTO made it much, much simpler to get the rim size right when all of the various standards had different names to different people.