skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Back in university I had an experience that was really instructive.

For a project we had to write a program that differentiates mathematical equations.

I dove in and just started writing code. Eventually, I realized that I had made a design error and that my code was much more complicated and cumbersome than it needed to be and I was getting stuck due to the complexity of the monstrosity I created.

Unfortunately I figured this fundamental design flaw the night before we had to hand the assignment in and there was no way I could rewrite everything from scratch. I had to push through and put lipstick on this pig as best I could.

In the end, I had spent way more time working on this project than my friends who had spent time upfront designing their programs instead of just jumping in.

This has taught me the lesson to always first try and think things through and come up with some kind of initial design, instead of just jumping in and writing code blindly. Yes you can always refactor, but some early design mistakes can cost you a lot of time, and perhaps make refactoring unfeasible compared to a complete rewrite.

As they say "measure twice, cut once".
Have skin tone variants (which is somethine Unicode chose to add rather than added because of existing use) is consistent with not have distinct variants for glyphs from different languages?
What would happen if the site was hit by a meteroid 2km in diameter?
>The more code I've written, the less I care about code quality.

Yea I understand 100% where you coming from ! I also these days try to focus more on "just getting it done/shipped". Lol I even went so far as to have my own little PHP-MicroFramework called "JGID" which means "Just-Get-It-Done" to remind me at EVERY LEVEL even code that is PERFECT but not shipped is not as good as medicore-core that is shipped ! YMMV

>I think the things I could point to in my coding practice which would make the code I write now better than the code I wrote 10 years ago would be:

I like this approach - instead of asking what is "Good Code" You asking, "How has my code improve in 10 years" a subtle change but I there is a lot of value in there.

This type of introspection-question reminds me of the very very common life-purpose question:

a) What will you do if you have a million dollars ?
Sure good question... But I always found the better version of this is:

b)What will you do if you KNOW you won't fail ?

To be honest I think it might have originated from Tim Ferris. You like or dislike him, but what I love about him is his great ability to ask interesting questions.

>- I go for abstractions later, only when I need them, rather than trying to think of the perfect abstraction/design pattern which will solve the problem in the most elegant or clever way

Yup I've noticed this as well. I remember my very first paid coding job. Writing a roulette-wheel-number-reader. And I was so proud to have like a OOP-Hierachy of 3 levels and implementing AbstractFactories for multiple reader-types etc :D Only the "other cases/readers" never happen :)

>..After that it's all about continuous improvement..

Yes - I think I've also seen a similar effect, which is "better code" is a function of repeated-iteration of some process. It's like how woman like men that have a plan. Doesn't even have to be a good plan, just have a damn plan :D
In the 90s, they tried a lot of things in order to control hyperinflation. One of their ideas was to freeze of everyone's bank accounts. They just took away people's money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plano_Collor

If your money is in the bank, it's not really your money.
Build enough apartments and you have your shoppers! Just make sure its really hard to get an Amazon package delivered!
> We prefer not to talk about that kind of total collapse of the rule of law, because it gives people ideas.

And because you do not talk about that kind of collapse, you get people like Joe Arpaio who (after years!) finally got convicted for contempt of court - which however did not stop Trump from pardoning him of course.
Would Olympic athletes need Chinese (Mandarin, etc) words translated to their native language or vice versa?

Because it seems the company involved makes translation software/devices, but do go on.
As someone who is writing a cross platform app, I'd love to, but I can't.

There are too many different stacks with their own languages (which means different library ecosystems), no good FFI/IPC options that work across stacks, massive test matrix for every little piece of the code etc. All of this, when the native differences that supposedly should make each platform unique are so few, and virtually all UI and application logic is identical. Our platform lords have basically not standardized a single thing.
>Really disappointing and pathetic behavior of our spineless leaders.

Yeah it's like 1936 and still no one has learned anything from the past.

IOC and FIFA are some of the most corrupt organizations, and even worse...supported by most country's, because it's for sport and "world-freedom"
Writing style and thoroughness etc. of the comments could still be a give-away.
You are absolutely right, I tested in on myself over several years. I want to share my story so far.
Since I got a prescription of -4 I was so mad that I didn't want to wear those glasses. Furthermore I really felt like they were too "strong" for me. So I kept wearing the previous one that was at -3. Since then my myopia never got worse.
But I wanted to go further and try to reverse it in some way. I have read many studies, like the one you mentioned about the animals with glasses/contact lenses that after some time develops myopia. That is the real proof that "too strong" glasses causes myopia. But what does "too strong" mean? It actually means 2 cases: the glasses that are actually stronger that the one you need (like -4 if you have -3.75), or the glasses that are used when you don't need them (short distance). In both cases you are slowly increasing your myopia (like the animal study). So to stop the myopia you just need to use the "right" correction for the "right" time. For example at PC you don't need full correction (for low myopia you don't even need glasses at all), because full correction is only for driving and looking at infinite distance. So the first thing to do, if you work at PC, is to buy less strong glasses (even super cheap one you can find on Amazon). What less strong means? It depends on your myopia and your distance from the screen. But you can calculate it using a ruler that has the diopters written on it (just print it: https://endmyopia.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/myopia-rule...). For example I've -3.5 but at PC I wear -1.5 because my screen is 70cm far.
As other mentioned already, the best correction you need to use is the one that blurs the text a little bit, where you are still able to read but is not crystal clear.
You may notice that this gets even harder if you have different myopia per eye, because one eye may blur, but not the other or viceversa (I still don't know what happens here, if it's better to cover 1 eye or not, etc).
Btw, if you combine: less strong glasses at PC, regular intervals looking way far, no glasses for reading/phone, you will surely stop the myopia, and maybe you even improve. After years I just improved from -4 to -3.25, but it's better than nothing (and I was not so constant)...
I'd love to hear some other experiences here.
Facebook.. Yes...
Amazon... Yes
Apple... Not so much.
Netflix.. A little
Google... Yes...
I have very dry eyes. Does that mean I can never get lasik?
But as I understand if you break the non locality assumption for the state, then you could make it kind of work. So lets just say by introducing a global variable for the shared state you could explain it (hidden dimension or whatever). Ok maybe it breaks a classical assumptions. I have no doubt that QM works, just wondering if it is really the final resolution we can get.
These companies decided to go fully remote -- permanently
Lather rinse repeat (as directed on many shampoo bottles) is like an infinite “for” loop of (lather, rinse), meaning you spend forever in the shower.
Going for an excessively above-market-price model is waste of taxpayer money. If there have been specific requirements why the standard model would not be sufficient, these exceptions should have been documented.
Partially correct. But we only have an ounce of privacy because states are not able to intrude all systems that we have. If it would be possible, surveillance would be even more extensive.

Sure, if there is enough incentive they might compromise your communication. At that point the wrench argument becomes very true.

So yes, technology did prevent the worst. It is true that it doesn't solve the problem of politcal ambitions of course, that was never the intend.
Has Godwin’s Law, the Rule of Nazi Comparisons, Been Disproved?
A charging port right on the pack is a good idea, you can actually get AA li-ion batteries with usb-c charging (and power step down to 1.5V).[1]

Also nice for these large batteries that you can use them to charge stuff as well. I’ve got a bunch of Hitachi li-ion power tools, almost 10 years old and the charger for that doubles as a usb power source when a battery is installed[2], but it’s nicer to have the output on the battery itself.

V-mount camera batteries often have USB ports for power out as well. These batteries are really nice for robotics projects as they come in a variety of sizes and an extra 5V power supply always comes in handy[3]

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Deleepow-Rechargeable-Batteries-Lithi...

[2] https://www.amazon.co.jp/-/en/UC18YSL3-Hitachi-Charger-Slidi...

[3] https://tomantosfilms.com/13999/maxoak-v-mount-batteries/
Yeah, it's unfortunate. No money in a small minority.
I was one of the Kickstarter backers to investigate this further. I got a nice t-shirt and some stickers, but I was just interested in what we would find out. We certainly managed to fund further observations, and rule out some of the theories.

Hasn't been any updates for quite a while now though.
> And what, is it your position that all the actions of hn founders are instrinsically above reproach?

That's got to be the mother of all strawmen. No, obviously, I do not.

But in this particular case it is about something that is very much the sort of thing that your average hacker would do given the opportunity. Hacker used in the 'old school' sense of: technically inclined person who likes to tinker with stuff and use it in ways unforeseen by the original creators.

It's what we live for.

> To be clear, i object to the notion that its wrong to criticize/debate the behaviour and ethics of others.

I'm fine with debate. I'm not ok with off the cuff judgments. Essentially the OP simply knew more about the device than the trade show staff (which, unfortunately isn't all that rare), they used the exposed user interface to do the sort of thing that it was supposed to be able to do because that capability was purposefully built in to it.

That they put it to a novel use is what makes it interesting.
Make the loop operation something that's passed into the method. Or maybe replace the flag with polymorphism if there's some logical value that it really belongs on.
I think he’s getting all he wants which is attention. The others probably are just your regular incompetent low effort skimmers from the top, but this guy is a douche with an axe to grind and completely unprepared for the job he’s signed up for.
Cool. Looks like a fancier version of Dear ImGui.
For this the hydrogen likely comes from natural gas, but it will eventually come from renewable electricity via electrolysis ("green hydrogen") when CO2 fees are high enough.
It’s a fine distinction. I didn’t say people shouldn’t know. I said we shouldn’t talk about it so casually in a public forum. The information is available to anyone who wants to know.
That is a bad exuse since it would preclude adding any new characters for existing languages. Would you have made the same objection for U+1E9E "ẞ", which was added in 2008?

Also, equality comparison already requires special support, e.g. normalization before comparison.

Sure, there would be an period where software support is incomplete but that is a bad reason to keep things broken forever.
The sell of the time to jQuery webmasters was:

XHTML's complexity is too much to deal with and the WHATWG is going to keep all this unnecessary stuff out so you won't lose control to generalized tools like an IDE and systems that favors formally educated language/tool writers, i.e. schema validators and, as we see now, transpilers.

The end result is still everyone using an IDE perhaps due to more irregular features after WHATWG encouraging a framework, but at any rate demonstrating XHTML was not the real source of webmaster stress and future angst.

So now you have more complexity, a still pointlessly irregular format that needs to identify it's magical elements, and, (to get back on topic,) features that must be implemented first in 2 browsers to become standard.

All of this is brought to you by employees of Apple and the other vendors. If WebKit isn't one of the 2 implementations most people choose to work with when pushing a standard then Safari is the dead implementation due to a constellation of choices all made with Apple's support and approval.
Which, for that era were works of art.
Do you see the gap between "all will be dandy" and "we will be ai-pets or civilisation will collapse"?

Everything will not be dandy, human progress is a messy thing, not solving inequality or climate concerns will cause a lot of issues, agreed. Being a defeatist about it and extrapolating missed climate goals to total defeat is neither constructive or true.
That really is a sad farce. I cannot imagine what my life would be like if there were only three books. You might try reading some more -- humanity is really quite fascinating, and your list only covers an extremely narrow slice.
There is a purist version of clean code. One not written. Anyone witness seeing code for the sake of writing code? Playing also on the word "clean" here. I also feel it is just as important to take out the trash and clean out undesired code.
Not necessarily, most applications already supported multiple encodings, having the OS implement one of the unicode encodings was often all that was needed.
Which areas would you recommend to avoid there and which areas are good to be a SWE in?
I could see this the other way, where the reason this path happens is because of a problem with how the team operates so others are not in the loop on the problem or , even worse, the entire system. I think what the parent is proposing is trying to combat that entire issue
Fun idea. But with such a short shower time, will you struggle to come up with new ideas?
> Unfortunately Android restricts fully automatic updates to preinstalled stores.

Android 12 has improved this a bit by allowing automatic updates from user-installed third-party app stores in some situations:

https://www.xda-developers.com/android-12-alternative-app-st...

Imagine an F-Droid for iOS, with or without automatic updates. Not having to pay the $99 fee per year to keep apps in the App Store would encourage many developers to publish free and open source apps, expanding the selection of ad-free apps for iOS users. Not being beholden to App Store rules means that useful apps like NewPipe, apps banned by certain governments, and apps with GPL licensing conflicts would finally be made available to iOS users again.
> Many of my older extended family members have a single email account shared by a husband and wife. Or in one case the way to email my aunt is to send an email to an account operated by a daughter in a different town. Aunt and daughter are both signed in so the daughter can help with attachments or “emails that go missing”, etc.

As usual with the "personas" scenarios, people creates their unrealistic scenario (just like when talking about UX or design). These personas you are describing will probably fall back to low-tech methods in most of the cases, they won't fail to take a plane because GMail locked them out due to unusual activity when they are trying to show the ticket QR in the airport. They will just print it (or have someone print it for them) beforehand.

> The seaman in this scenario has a smartphone with the email signed in. It’s also signed in on the family computer at home. Both the wife and him send email from it. Maybe a kid does to from a tablet. This isn’t that difficult.

You just missed to add that they use their shared email to communicate between them by using the "Sent" folder.
To be more realistic, the seaman right after buying his Android phone will create without realizing a new Google account because he doesn't probably know that he could use the email account he is already using at home.
But, enough with made-up examples to prove our own points.
New Bill Would Let Government Quietly Ban Crypto Transactions, Advocates Worry
> Is that really a problem? In practice wouldn't it just mean you can only use employer-provided and certified devices?

Depends what you think big corporations' centrally managed IT equipment is like.

Theoretically, it could mean you get precisely the right tools to do your job, with the ideal maintenance and configuration provided effortlessly.

But for some organisations, it means mandatory Internet Explorer and Flash for compatibility with some decrepit intranet, crapware like McAfee that slow the system to a crawl, baffling policies like not letting you use an adblocker, and regular slow-to-install but unavoidable updates that always happen just as you're giving that big presentation.
Try a cold shower. If I do that it is 30 seconds. Tops.
If I was in the position of having to review that PR, I would probably flat-out reject it and ask for just the minimal changes required.

I don't see how adding an additional capture framework backend would require meaningful changes to the build system.

With some likelihood, in this case, Apple probably won't have the resources to rework their PR and thus the PR will stay un-merged until somebody of the project has time to merge/reimplement the relevant parts.

Which of course is a total shame and I wonder why Apple didn't have "mergeability" in mind when they decided to create their PR. They must have known that "rework the build system" can't be part of a PR adding a capture backend if they wanted any chance of this being merged.
Sadly, Sciter's author failed to raise enough donations to make it open source.
I think the 'desktop' naming convention is older than most OSS WM's/desktop environments, it was even used for games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_His_Desktop_...

(now that would be a great name for a WM ;) )
Yeah this just hasn't been my experience. If you're working on a house you measure twice and cut once because the cost of reworking physical materials is a lot more expensive than the cost of doing a second measurement.

If you could delete half your house and re-build it at zero cost, it might be more valuable to just go for the first attempt and learn from it rather than trying to do everything in theory up front.

If you find yourself working on a "monstrosity" maybe you haven't seen the signs soon enough that you need to take a step back and refactor. But in my experience, at least starting on the problem with a POC gives you so much more high quality information that even if you have to scrap and re-write part way in, you're going to reach such a better result than if you try to map the whole thing out first without actually having tried to solve the problem.
I think situations where literally all parties involved are better off than they were before should be celebrated, even if the intentions behind it aren't just philanthropic.
I am disappointed that that diagram omits ꙮ [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiocular_O
Sort of, but not quite. It's actually published by the DfT and the DVLA. But it's just a pamphlet. It's not a law.

Separately the DVLA make standards you need to meet to pass a driving test. Those are not laws, you can break at least some legally.

This isn't being added to the test criteria either.

So the government recommend you do this. But if you literally never do it in your whole life you wont be punished or sanctioned or inconvenienced in even the smallest of ways.

So it doesn't matter any more than the government recommendation to have white wine with fish...
> 4. To keep the discussion focused, in this post I’d like to exclude answers along the lines of “but what if QM is merely an approximation to something else?,” [...] imagine that, as fantastical as it sounds, QM were not only exactly true, [...]

Seems like an absurd, conceptually-crippling stipulation, analogous to asking why [the fine-structure-constant is exactly 1/137](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Numero... ).

I mean, while one might reasonably wonder why alpha~=1/137, wondering why alpha=1/137 exactly doesn't seem like a simplification but rather a different question that'd invite a different sort of reasoning.
Also, if your commit message has parts that say "also, this", "also, that", don't be lazy and break those alsos into separate commits!
This is not accurate. Uruguay has not abandoned its Peso.

You can use dollars and expensive things (cars, houses) usually are priced in dollars, but salaries are in pesos and so are everyday goods.

Inflation in Uruguay is less than 10% yearly.
I won't try to do a TL;DR, but from reading the full article, it seems like he is doing kind of fine right now. He is still sick but he is currently writing a thesis. The article has a really positive vibe to it even though it is a really rare disease.
TLS doesn't have a fixed port number. Ergo, TLS-ALPN doesn't either.

It is the intention of the ALPN spec that you can do tls-alpn-01 on whatever TCP port the two parties (issuer and recipient) care to use.
Assuming this money was in fact spent on a sprayer and roughly at market value, "why so fancy?" is a question for the supervisors.
>mandatory luxuries

That is such a brilliant phrase!
You can easily tag imgui update/render times in profiling sessions. Then they are isolated from the rest of the work that's happening.
Come on, as if Real Bill Gates has anything better to do these days than prowl around on HN
>upfront designing their programs instead of just jumping in.
>This has taught me the lesson to always first try and think things through and come up with some kind of initial design, instead of just jumping in and writing code blindly.

100% One of my favorite techniques is "Super Pseudo Code" ! Why SUPER ?

Lol cause the "pseudo code" I write can barley be called "code at all" - It is usually just a text-file with a bunch of loosey-goosey-function-calls and parameters.

You know just to get a "feel" for how different entities(classes,struct,tables or libs - pick your poison) will interact and what might be needed. We not talking any UML-Diagrams here - really just text-files and functions/entities

This also works super-well for any multi-step-processes.
It is a sales persons' duty to know more about the device they are trying to sell than random passers by. If using the front part of a console you really could brick the device in a couple of seconds using nothing but allowed operations that would qualify as a defect.

As far as I'm concerned this was (1) a harmless prank and (2) a significant impulse to the sales person to up their knowledge of the device.
The SRE book authors cited the post specifically (https://sre.google/sre-book/bibliography/#All12), and Googlers I’ve spoken to mentioned its influence there.