skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
“Revulsion” and “pain and despair” are not the same thing.

“Revulsion” is what you might feel if you feel historic responsibility for slavery.

“Pain and despair” is what you might feel if you feel you are a direct victim of its consequences.

This revulsion is a good thing. It feels good to be revolted by something so obviously revolting, and it can keep you motivated to do something about it.

Indeed, this is why it was made required reading.

Pain and despair are not good things. It feels bad to be in pain you can’t control. And it doesn’t motivate you to do something about it, but instead keeps you down by making you believe nothing can be done about it.

This pain and despair is how slavery still lives on today.

No one should be made to feel pain and despair.

But the point is that the students who read this may be in either group.

And the other point is that the required reading list was created before this second group was discovered. It was literally unknown to the science that these people existed (this is not about responsibility, regardless of that, it just makes one question the quality of the work that was done)

So that’s why it shouldn’t be required reading anymore.
Webkit was made to be embeddable, so it spreads faster. More webkit-based browsers exist.

Firefox as a project seems directionless. New releases anger its users with unwanted feature. Its custodians wasted so much energy on silly projects that people are reluctant to donate.

Oh and of course the competition comes pre-installed on millions of devices. Operating systems even remind you when you're not using their bundled browser.
Open Confidential Computing Conference 2022 is coming up
That’s most likely local cache (it takes file names from your local disk)!!

The file names and content are encrypted.

No decent backup software will leave file names in plaintext.
>"as it is just part of a system no one has any control over"
Define "control". A self-driving car is on some level in control over its driving. Otherwise it would not be self-driving. When discussing free will, ppl tend to use the word "free" and "control" differently than when used in everyday language.

It becomes a similar question as asking: if god or "something" created the universe, what created that something. Its turtles all the way down yes.

>"it is part of the natural system we find our selves in".
Like exactly everything else that surrounds us :)
Why should I as an author of a piece of downloader/extractor software be liable for what others do with my software? As the author, I'm not bound for EULAs I never agreed to.

Alternatively to downloads, I could also make a software that asks the user to supply the NVIDIA installer binary and extracts the firmware out of it.
Universial conscription? No, it's entirely volontary in the book. Completed service is a requirement for full citizenship though. But having done military service is quite rare in the book from what I understand.
They really could prevent it from happening through branding/psychological manipulation - allow sideloading and put it behind many warnings/hide it similarly to android’s dev menu with 7 clicks on God knows what.

Governments no longer have a teeth, pro-users will be happy, and for apple everything will remain the same as even the pro-user will continue to use the AppStore for nigh everything.
Exactly. “Write code for humans first”.
Would this architecture work on their iOS app as well even with Apple's restrictions on downloading executable code?
Zadam/trilium: Build your personal knowledge base with Trilium Notes
Possibly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020–2022_global_chip_shortage, but could be anything, including high demand.
Just over a lb a week is totally healthy. 2lbs a week and he’s fine.

But understand if that’s his choice!
Sabine is great.
From the list at the link, I would argue that the following are mostly orthogonal of, and certainly not requirements from, clean code:

1. Performant

2. Safe

3. Scaleable

4. Easy to delete

---

Performant: I can write you a nice clean bubble sort implementation, which will obviously not be performant.

Safe: You could write a nice clean server which reads input from a network socket and executes it via `system(...)`. This would not be safe.

Scaleable: That's not even properly defined. How would you "scale" my device driver? Or my microcontroller logic? ... does that mean those can never be clean?

Easy to delete: To delete and replace? To delete for building tests for other parts of the code? Didn't even get that.
> That should be good competition for ... Intel Xeon.

Poor Xeons with meager TBs of RAM.
Along which lines? Hardware/Software/Services?
You must be the mayor.
I can't imagine anyone else getting so upset
I'm glad that it worked out for you.

I ordered slightly undercorrected glasses (-2/-2.5 instead of -2.25/-2.75) exactly a year ago to try the same, and it did nothing for my myopia. I use the undercorrected glasses all the time, except when driving at night and when playing sports, and nothing has changed.
I still use them all the time because the cheap frame I chose turned out to be very comfortable, more than the expensive one from my regular glasses.

At first I had some hope because for the first days using the undercorrected glasses I would end up with a strong headache in the evening; when this passed I figured that maybe my eyes had begun adjusting. But every time I try the regular and undercorrected glasses side-by-side, I see noticeably better with the regular ones (I sometimes test this just by eyeballing something afar, or by reading a home-printed Snellen chart 3 meters away).

I figured some people have glass-induced myopia, and some people just have myopia.
(potentially controversial) clinical studies on myopia progression, https://wiki.endmyopia.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies
Sure it's supported, but that's not how majority of websites work today.
> There are a lot of things we can't know exactly but that are still objective

Hmmmmmm not sure about that. AFAIK anything that we either can't measure objectively, or don't yet know how to measure objectively, is a subjective measurement, even if that measurement is subject to an objective apparatus (observer effect experiments; the measurement is subject to the circumstances of measurement)

Totally open to being wrong and you being right tho. Any examples come to mind for you?
To be honest, only around 10-15% of the time.

Often they were small dev teams in a small company that have high standards and given the trust & freedom to do things.

I think it boils down to how much the programmer actually cares and is given the necessary time to do a good job.

P.S: Been programming only for 6-7 years so can't say if my experience is any indicator.
I'm glad he brings up the much-maligned Singleton pattern as an object for debate - or beauty being in the eye of the beholder. "Clean" to me involves a range of classes and singletons (or better, all static code) in as close an approximation to use as they're a actually used in the final code. If something happens once only in your code, it's dumb to make it a class instance. If it happens twice but you know you will never need it again, same. If it happens repeatedly, refactor.

Clean code can be repetitive or concise. Readability is important, but only part of cleanliness. When you look at bad or dirty code you can tell immediately, because the logic is loose; it seems to try to handle edge cases at the end of a logic block, or catch errors that lead you to wonder why should this code ever encounter that error if the other code it's referring to is stable? Clean code displays confidence in knowing that edge cases are managed before they get to user functions.
You'll have to make some really convincing arguments to get me to install your software on my computer. I much prefer an instantly accessible, sandboxed web app.
> The code often tells you a story

It sure does.

Unfortunately, the genre is quite often Lovecraftian Horror.
Sunglasses may have a similar effect — and they can be removed :)
Swift originally had UTF-32 strings (an upgrade from ObjC which uses UTF-16), but they redid String to be UTF-8. It's typically the best choice even for CJK text, because it has ASCII mixed in often enough to still be smallest.

I don't think reversing a string is a meaningful operation though; there's no reason to think of a string as a "list of characters" when it's also a "list of words" and several other things. Swift provides more than one kind of iteration for that reason.
One of the most surprising thing I remember is when I was a student, I met a lot of students in the deaf community (I was an exchange student at RIT which has interpreters in classes) and a few of them felt that the Cochlear implant was a threat to their culture. They were worried that it would signify the extinction of deaf culture.

It's similar to the worries of deaf parents having a hearing child and not being able to connect with them and have less shared experiences.
I'm too tired to find sources right now, but the popular thinking is that each of these retailers sank due to bad service. They had leadership changes that suddenly wanted to cut salespeople (while their competitors didn't), or source cheaper parts (Sears Craftsman and appliances). This was at a time when the businesses had seemingly healthy margins and glowing prospects.
Actually, the opposite - a good dev would simulate two outcomes. Otherwise you may have a serious lag the moment someone opens up the box, because the system would need to simulate the cat’s behaviour for the past.
There's a book called "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" that this guy need to read...
That's the first time I've heard someone express what I feel too! I'm -8.5 and -9.5 in contact lenses and that blurriness feels very relaxing for the brain. Though it's a bit unpractical having to hold my phone 15 cm from my face in the bed...

Also, our super power is the power to see extremely small details, which proves useful sometimes!
Strong disagree. It's defined meaning in the context of code is a subjective experience of the coder of "clean", which carries elements of "satisfying", among other things.

Maybe: It has no intrinsic, defined meaning in the context of the computing machine.
Sure but the point was - sometimes there's no meaningful names, and the best description of a function is its definition.

That's why you write functions like this:

def testXIsYAfterSettingAToBAndCToD():
A = B;
C = D;
assert(X == Y);

So much meaning provided by the name ;)
The repo was moved to here:
- https://github.com/stryngs/802Eleven/tree/master/pmkid2hashc...
@uuddlrlrba FYI, text shows "\frac{x^3}{2}" but rendering shows "\frac{x^3}{3}" in readme
studying too much at close distance, and not spending enough time outside
React and Flutter aren't immediate mode only because they're build on top of the DOM as primitive. Otherwise, conceptually they are evolutions of immediate mode.

And they inspired plenty of GUIs outside the web to go "immediate" mode themselves.
Most corporate codebases I've encountered are, to put it mildly, unpleasant. In most cases, you've got dozens of people with varying skill and style maintaining the stuff over a decade or more. New business requirements are patched on top, without ever considering the whole architecture.

The cleanest codebases are those where the project has a focused goal and is maintained by a few developers with a low churn rate.
The Uncle Bob Martin definition of "clean code" from his book "Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship" is a set of rules that absolutely are not at odds with one another. If you follow them you will end up with code that's really nice to read and easier to maintain, and, most importantly, that you can confidently change.

There's a decent summary here - https://gist.github.com/wojteklu/73c6914cc446146b8b533c0988c...
So many developers say "clean code" when they mean "familiar code" and "familiar coding patterns". One person's clean code is another's heap of spaghetti. Idioms (like Duff's device, assignments in conditionals, function chaining) can be clean code if you apply it appropriately and your developers recognize it. Strict class hierarchies can be dirty code if you need to move gigabits in real time with 10 µs latency.

Kids don't like broccoli because they haven't tasted broccoli.
Well, I don’s see any future in jetpacks, as they don’t have a decent use case. Just imagine, every food delivery or parcel delivery with a man driving a jetpack. It would be crowded in cities over the ground, and if they fell? A person of around 80kg with jetpack fall from the sky, that’s crazy.

That’s why drone parcel delivery never see the day, as it is also very impractical and dangerous. It can be only good for unpopulated areas and long deliveries like islands or remote places.

Maybe, and just maybe, there will be a new kind of sport, in arena, with people racing in jetpacks, like drones.
Absolutely, and I'd say:

> make complexity simple, even when your target market is other engineers

including and especially if the target market is other engineers.

Simplicity though is achieved with additional effort. It almost always requires additional effort to make the implementation simpler while having the same outcome.

It's why my personal motto is "Think more, write less". This, however, is not something that's encouraged in software companies. You are supposed to be sitting there and typing non-stop, that's what they call a "software engineering job".

In fact I never call any code "clean" because the term is vague. All that matters is how simple it is and thus how maintainable and performant, though occasionally the two can contradict each other, but most of the time they don't. Say, a complex caching algorithm can improve performance, so that's an exception. But most of the time simple is a synonym of both maintainable and fast. Can't think of anything else that matters, has real practical consequences and is not just hand waving around "common practices".
> What's the use case there, everyone sharing a Google account?

Yes. Everyone having their own distinct accounts is a property of high computer literacy in the family.

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.

> Which isn't "A seaman and his family".

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.
Everyone is different. It's unclear why some people benefit more from vision therapy than others.
From my experience it isn't a be-all-end-all so much as another point of data for anomaly detection.

In practice, geoip "regions" like used for this _are_ on the larger scale, yes; However that still lets you ask valuable questions like "why is this user who logs in from Vermont, USA suddenly in Hungary?" and potentially do something proactive like limiting that session's resource access until a new MFA challenge has been passed, or ( more aggressively ) destroy the session or otherwise force a full reauth.

The downside is that this almost always relies on some actively maintained geoip database ( ala maxmind ), which... well it isn't exactly cheap, and it isn't exactly perfect, either ( see: maxmind historically putting IPs in a central location when lacking specific data )

Ultimately it's one part of ( what should be ) a suite of checks for anomalous behavior, not something to blindly implement. The latter can cause a great deal of grief if your tolerances are too tight or your proactive actions aren't in line with the activity/abuse they're intended to mitigate.

A pretty direct example of proactive action would be restricting access to using saved payment methods on a platform until the user has completed a new 2fa challenge.

You could require this challenge every time the user wants to buy something, yes, but as that will probably impact checkout rates, you could get many ( if not most ) of the same fraud prevention benefits by only challenging when the session has moved some threshold distance - It won't stop them from buying something at home or a coffee shop in town, but would stop a session hijacker on an opposing coast or another country from doing so.
There's a nice and detailed video about the thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1cUIGHZLGA

ModernVintageGamer knows his stuff well.
Halley Research Station
What ideas?
I agree - "clean" or "good" are the same type of keywords like "professional" or "specialist".

I worked in places where code was 100% conformant to the official style guides, but every single change was painfully slow and quite a lot of people complained about working environment. Code was handbook level beautiful though, even if not exactly bug free.

I also worked in feature factory where management was crazy, code was unimaginably inconsistent (same module, multiple files, one file - tabs, other file - spaces, third one - MIXED), but people were mostly chill and happy about pacing and themselves. No one believed in code so it was quite common to double and triple check most of the changes. Environment was very stable due to this.

Eternal dichotomy - code as an art or form of engineering - shows really good here. For some utility, infinite extensibility and minimal code even in exchange for implicitness is cleaner than expressiveness and strictness.

Thus, no code is clean. I could guess Java code isn't clean for Rubyist and likewise. There's a reason we have so many languages available.
idk man, tar is pretty new, they probably haven't had time to do that yet.
I initially understood the prose in Section 3 like you interpret it (separator not terminator). That was a mistake. The RFC's BNF grammar is quite clearly stating that path segments may be empty, so it may end in "/".

Therefore, in relation to the article, the URI RFC does indeed not offer guidance about what would be the better approach.
The way it is done in Hong Kong (and other Asian cities like Tokyo to an extent) feels way closer to town centers that predate cars, where there is a lot of foot traffic and walkability which imo makes such a better experience.

I just think in America it is too car centric and not dense enough to line the incentives up for it to happen here. Land is cheap enough that malls will just build outwards and create giant moats of parking lots around them to kill walkability, and public transit ridership is too low because everyone is driving cars so service can never reach the standards in Asia. Its a shame because feels so much worse than what has been achieved in Hong Kong.
If you write something that we would love, or sparks an awesome discussion - it is your DUTY to submit it :D.
The goal here is to find interesting stories, not get "white knight points" for refusing to post your own content.

I submitted many of my own articles here and they have trended. Frankly, it constitutes most of my submissions.

Since HN is the way I get information, it is hard for me to pitch anything novel since whenever I come with content that I want to share, I search and somebody already submitted it :/. It is a new years resolution of mine do post more of the "other" stuff

I rounded up my thoughts on what made my previous articles "successful":

https://piszek.com/2021/10/07/hacker-news-tips/
Beautifully written, horrifying story. Had no idea this kind of "illness" even existed.
What you can easily follow though is largely a function of your programming background. An experienced Haskell programmer will have no issue following all kinds of “.” and “$” usages, but one who is not experienced with Haskell, even if they learn what the syntax means, will have trouble following it.
For that, I think you'd have to have a unique and highly in demand specialisation, and become widely known for it. Then you can basically ask whatever you want.
Exhibit: Phantom Access
42. The answer's 42.
Tysons Corner, VA and Reston, VA are good examples of how things should be. Mixed use development with retail, commercial, residential, public transportation, and plenty of parking.
> The WHATWG was founded by individuals of Apple, the Mozilla Foundation, and Opera Software in 2004, after a W3C workshop. Apple, Mozilla and Opera were becoming increasingly concerned about the W3C’s direction with XHTML, lack of interest in HTML, and apparent disregard for the needs of real-world web developers. So, in response, these organisations set out with a mission to address these concerns and the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group was born.

Darn it, XHTML could have been so good if it got mass adoption! It would simplify parsing content and personally, working with XHTML is sane and easy (albeit in a somewhat dated Java stack with JSF/PrimeFaces, which build upon it). It also gets rid of the inconsistent tags in HTML which can remain open, which i think is a good thing.

Then again, i also like XML, maybe to the point of sometimes preferring it over JSON (or at i would if the ecosystem would be there - WSDL was leaps and bounds ahead of OpenAPI/Swagger, but seems like the interest in XML died down), so i don't doubt that many don't feel that way about all of it.
You can get a separate intermediate distance pair specifically for computer use. If you're -2.25 then something like -1.25 would put optical infinity at 31 inches away allowing your eyes to be completely relaxed. I've got close to the same prescription and just prefer to keep my screen at 24" and increase the font size a bit, and I can see that just fine most days. I'm not sure if my brain has learned to deconvolve better, but around -2 is a sweet spot where you can definitely get away with not needing glasses at all for computer work if you try, considering that you're uncorrected plane is at 20 inches.
Brave Engine - Google Chromium

Edge - Google Chromium

Vivaldi - Google Chromium

Opera - Guess what? Yes its Google Chromium

Electron - Google Chromium

The only two other engines are:
Webkit
Firefox

Firefox is barely surviving and is using funds from Google. If Google stop those funds, its gone.
Webkit is from Apple and if you look on my apple it is only alternative till today. If IOS allow other browser then you should know web will be in hands of Google.

Google can do whatever they like. And web being in hands of Google is dangerous.
Similarly, the existence of so many subjective and unarticulated views on "code correctness" has left me in a place where the only certainty is: there is no certainty.

If your best practices are so great, make a sound business case for them. Uncle Bob did no such thing.
Plume: Differential Privacy at Scale
I will give it a shot :)

Q: Because consciousness is all there is.

Q2: Because you need consciousness to observe the universe as classical.

Q3: Way over my head.
This article shows that a legislative body can regulate things for its citizens, and by retracting the law a week later, that a legislative body can learn about its mistakes.
I see, this study does seem to rule out my view. What's the current consensus about why myopia progressed so quickly in some countries?