skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think there's another hidden element: the majority of people in tech love wrangling with complexity on computers.

Why else would people spend hours trying to configure and customize linux distros?

To them it's a puzzle game and they very much enjoy the challenge of solving these puzzles. Having a dynamic system with many moving parts that all need to be configured just the right way so they finally fit together and come to produce the desired outcome.

This is an "epiphany" I got from playing "The Witness". I spent more than 50 hours playing the game, and I'm not even 10% finished. The puzzles in the game are original and require high level complex thinking to solve. But at some point it just got frustrating to me. I wanted to play games to sort of relax or perform low key mental activities. But this game wants you to spend a lot of mental energy to solve puzzles that seem arbitrary and pointless. The feeling I had when I was playing this game was very similar to the feelings I had when I was trying to wrangle with confusing Docker configurations.

That's when it hit me: people who love to play with Docker configurations treat it like puzzle games and they enjoy every bit of the mental effort it takes to get things just right for the system to work. It doesn't bother them that the system is fragile or over complicated, or that the mess they're building is hard to maintain.

Of course, I kind of empathize with that because that's also what got me into computers and programming in the first place. But to me, the complexity I want to deal with is in the code. Once I write code that solves a problem, I don't want to then struggle to get the code running. I want to just compile and run with one command. I want all the complexity to be contained in the code and to keep the environment simple.

But if your jobs is DevOps, you don't get to solve hard problems in the product's code base. So instead you solve hard problems in the environment that the code executes in. So you thrive in the complexity of microservices and dockers and all that buzz.

In other words, people in tech love solving hard problems, and if you don't give them hard problems, they will invent them.
> the load is just a load

You will need a standard communication protocol for storing charge/discharge history with the battery and reporting temperature. Nobody wants to swap in a battery that is exhausted and won't maintain a charge. Vendors maintaining swap pools need to know when to cull old packs.
I think a lot of people underestimate the speed at which DC fast chargers are already being deployed. They are a simple known quantity with few moving parts that are fairly easy to install with existing power infrastructure as long as you can find a few extra parking spaces in a lot somewhere.

Tesla alone is opening stations with 8-20 charging stalls on a daily basis, and other companies are doing similar work:

Tesla: https://supercharge.info/changes

Others: https://fastcharger.info/

We are already at the point where most new EV car batteries are going to last the life of the vehicle, and can get a useful charge on a road trip in under 20 minutes. Battery swaps are an interesting idea but would add extra space and weight and require a level of standardization that just isn't going to happen across manufacturers unless forced by regulation.
District Attorney is the local prosecutor.

Attorney General is the state prosecutor, and the boss of the DA.
"WiFi works, no setup required beyond selecting a network and entering the password.
Calling works, no setup required beyond installing a SIM card and rebooting.
SMS works, no setup required beyond installing a SIM card and rebooting."

Interesting, possibly useful as a daily driver.

Also: link for the best pro comment about linux phones I've read on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26080871
> So, it is OK to take money and other goods from people who have it and bestow it on other people who don't?

Yes
Sony is buying Haven Studios
You should always be aware of the business domain of the code. My general pattern is to actually have an idea of what the software does. Then I locate where the general code is. After I ask what modules I'm interested in - most codebases have clearly delimited modules. Then I work from the entry point on that module and look on what it returns. I sometimes look at other part of the code to assert my assumptions, but generally, I stay in one place until I have a good idea of its behavior. Then after I have a good model, I move on to the next one. The goal is to understand each unit enough that I can write a couple of sentences or paragraphs about it - from functions to whole file.
That's not a tweet, it's a blog post. I will never understand why people do this. Twitter tries to force me to sign up if I scroll down too far. Sorry Sam, I guess I won't be reading your wisdom today.
> Maybe it was just that year you applied there was stiff competition.

Yes, that's possible. It's also possible that all of the other experiences that I have had during my decades-long career, all of which have supported my conclusion, have all been aberrations or part of an elaborate conspiracy.

But I'll give you long odds against.

> All that matters is what you do, the choices you make, the actions you take, the work you do.

OK, I'm not going to try to dissuade you from this. If that approach works for you, then more power to you.
> Why would anyone climb off that gravy train?

If I actually believe I can't deliver the stress alone of feeling like a fraud and waiting for the hammer to fall seems worse than the interim reward for me, but I can certainly see people built different who would tolerate that. I think more likely is that people let themselves be convinced it will work out during the process of convincing investors.
If that was the intended use of !important, I reckon that info would have been an awesome addition to the CSS spec.
Here's an example (not mine). This was likely built via UI, so this is generated XML.

https://github.com/rohanbaraskar/UiPath-11/tree/master/Autom...

There's not much RPA code on GitHub, which seems like a red flag to me. I suspect there's more hype than actual work happening.
I have guessed words like ‘naafiz’ (enforcement) that I suppose didn’t make the Urdle word list cut. I also suspect there is a slight bias towards Arabic and Persian words
Negotiate the other way and see what happens.
I think this comparison is a worthwhile effort, but it also should be kept in mind that any kind of aggression, large or small, personal or political, evokes reactions and emotions from a relatively small pool, and the words to describe these emotions are also from a relatively small pool - which means headline similarities may not be any kind of portent of doom.

The underlying point, however, and the initial quote of the article, remain pertinent: "Those Who Cannot Learn From History Are Doomed To Repeat It"
Mac Studio: Those aren't SSDs. Those are raw storage modules
Innovation is all around you. It's just not the type of innovation that requires elected government officials to participate (and in a way that will frustrate some of their supporters).

You're likely reading this on a device that was invented while plenty of ignorant people were still not enlightened.
Magpies remove tracking harnesses that scientists had placed on them
If people would stop leaving discharged scooters in the sidewalk, I might care less. As is, they're a nuisance building a business off of overusing a communal resource (sidewalks)
It's notable how the situation has changed over the past few years. I am old enough to have had an account on grex and remembering geocities websites: looking back everything looked so exciting and new but also difficult to access and make use of. Online communities such as grex.org allowed me to have a first glimpse into the universe hidden behind a blinking cursor. Now spawning a VM is a matter of a couple of clicks and the net is full of technical documentation and howtos on all the most common used applications and services. I wonder what are the "magical" bits that are keeping kids awake and in awe today.
Yeah, running code on the web was always going to be a thing one way or another (there was a time when it was even considered a good idea) and one language would have won out, because in hindsight having browsers support runtimes for multiple languages was probably not feasible.

Maybe with Webassembly we can revisit the model of a web that supports multiple programming languages. Either way, I'd rather have Javascript than VBScript.
Scooters are dangerous. The upright position with arms low in front close together makes for some really nasty falls.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31130267/
> This site is specifically targeted to software engineers

I thought it was for VCs and founders too. And PMs.
So, then you have been working on a distributed monolith and not a proper microservice architecture. Just saying.
German invasion involved a much larger army. Germans invaded with 1.5M infantry soldiers alone. Russia barely has 15k, 100 times less, right now in Ukraine, most are mechanized. The scale of the war is immensely different.

edit: I know there's a higher estimated Russian count but it's not infantry.
I view it as two separate categories; donations & support contracts.

Donations are a thank-you payment for the code as it exists today. If someone finds it useful or includes it in their commercial product, give me a donation to reflect that thankfulness. It doesn't get you anything in the future, it is a payment for what exists today as-is today.

If someone wants a guarantee of future work, whether features, bugfixes or support, that requires a support contract with a much higher payment and more formal terms. In that case, they can influence the future direction but it'll cost orders of magnitude more.
Sony user here. I just plug into the USB-C on the camera (a7R IV) to download photos from it, it mounts the SD cards as USB drives. No sense faffing about with their crappy wifi program.
While interesting, this ignores the differences between the current situation and WWII. It’s clearly trying to lead the reader to a specific conclusion. For example, when Poland was invaded, Britain and France immediately declared war on Germany. Where is this parallel?
It is part of the spec, and is explicitly noted to avoid confusion starting in Selectors Level 3[0]:

> Note: Repeated occurrences of the same simple selector are allowed and do increase specificity.

[0] https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-3/#specificity
That's what the TMSI is supposed to be - (iirc) older cell protocols would send the IMSI over the air all the time, but since at least LTE, possibly earlier, the IMSI is only involved during initial connection to (some region of) the network. During the initial connection, you're assigned a TMSI, which then changes periodically, and you use this for identification on subsequent transmissions.

This is why this paper also talks about determination of IMSI from TMSI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobility_management#TMSI

But your idea is plausible as an added layer of security - the SIM card could generate a temporary IMSI somehow. I think you'd actually want the next IMSI (or next N IMSIs) to be assigned by the network and communicated to the phone/SIM, rather than deterministically generated. If you deterministically generated the numbers, you'd have to pre-assign each subscriber a pool of numbers that are guaranteed to never overlap with any other subscriber, and this scheme would have to:

1. assign a large enough pool of IMSIs to each subscriber to handle all future communications with the network
2. make it so it isn't trivial to determine whether two fake IMSIs are the same subscriber (so you can't do something like a fixed prefix + HOTP or something).
Ok fair enough.

What I meant to say was that pressure to enforce laws only happen if there is public pressure to see the law implemented, and when the concepts are too abstract/intangible, the public disengages more easily from the issue.

Political will for improvements and funding is more likely to happen with more public support as counter to the influence of industry lobbists.

Public support is easier to rally when people can personally relate, or ideally share a pain point. A good candidate would be the annoying pop-up boxes. Frame them as dangerous because increasing the risk of online data and identity leaks. Solution to this threat to public security is to eliminate them by default answer. Simple law proposal.
EU resolution: end segregation in schools and halt xenophobia in media
If GNOME bundled Kompare or other KDE programs you might have a point. You wouldn't blame Apple for the look of LibreOffice on macOS so why blame GNOME for the non-GNOME programs?
Who is this Amazon company and what kind of magic turbo pixie dust have they spread on their commodity "Basics" MicroSDs?
A compact, functional monolith can be leaked and downloaded under a warez link somewhere, or taken by a former employee to a new company. A sprawling byzantine landscape of poorly documented microservices can’t be pirated (or even reproduced legally) without resources close to the original creator.
The illusion of evidence based medicine
You are right that technically opt-in should always take longer. No cookies should have been set until the user accepts.

But opt-out should not set anything. I don't know what you mean by "local cookie", a cookie is always sent over the wire by HTTP. If you mean saving to LocalStorage, then I don't think that's allowed either.
Oof. Thank you for this feedback. This particular item (the tables vs the set) happened to be human error. We will improve.

It is interesting to note you prefer browsing sites directly. We do have a Chrome extension that is light weight, and can alert you when an item is available elsewhere. This may offer the best of both worlds.
Mind blown. How the hell did I not know this.
OneWeb turns to a competitor–SpaceX–to complete its constellation
You know you can acknowledge a problem and that doesn't mean you have to solve it this very instant, right? It's not a matter of either dropping everything or gaslighting people^W^W dismissing the issue as trivial. There are other choices. Many other choices.

If you don't think the problems people are bringing you have merit, then they won't bring you any problems at all, even when they have merit. Suck it up and realize that you're going to have to allocate a little bit of time on "good problems to have" (if this is our biggest problem right now, things are going very well) or you'll either introduce latency into your early warning system or shut it down entirely.

> if the problem boils down to "this architecture isn't pure enough"

Then the problem is that your coworkers think that purity is a magic shield that will protect them from all ills, which is a bigger problem. You still need to hear it, even if you don't like it.

Honestly though a lot of times when I find myself at odds with someone they try to dismiss my concerns as matters of purity when what I'm really complaining about is the smoke that's coming out of the machine (or the team's ears) because they're riding it too hard. Sharpening the saw isn't aesthetics. Preventing wear and tear isn't some white tower bullshit. It's about keeping something in the tank for the next problem we don't know we have yet. People who don't believe in burnout are doomed to create it, usually in others.
" The underlying assumption that you can change the visuals without major surgery to the HTML is basically never true,"

I would disagree. I think an amazing amount can be done with CSS alone, but developers never take the time to really leverage the power of CSS.

I think perhaps it's worth making a distinction between web app development, and content, (e.g. marketing, articles, weblogs, personal websites). While there is often crossover between the two I think that CSS was originally designed for styling content, which was the primary use of the web at the time. It fits less well at styling complex interactive component based web applications.
My inherent philosophical objection is that "reality is shared consensus", or more accurately "reality is the set of things which forces there to be a shared consensus about them". The more people who corroborate the things I observe to be real, the less likely it is that I am delusional and imagining them all in my head (unless everyone I've ever met has been part of my delusion, but that's an excessively obtuse view). Reality isn't the shared consensus per se, but shared consensus is a multi-meter we use to measure reality. We can never directly observe "this battery has 9 volts", only that our instrument reads "9 volts". At some point we have no choice but to drop the abstraction and accept the measurement of reality as reality itself. The reality of the battery is whatever the multimeter reads. Maybe every single multimeter is wrong and by sheer coincidence and this battery is actually 10 volts. Maybe the multimeter is right but every single persons eyes have a glitch causing them to read 9 volts in this one particular instance. But neither of those "true realities" is distinguishable from the one where its actually 9 volts.

So when we come around to "subjective experience", this thing which by construction no one but you can observe your instance of it, by definition its not real. Your personal "subjective experience" is not and cannot be part of the shared consensus. No one but you can honestly agree that your subjective experience is there. Even if they think they have their own subjective experience, they can't know if you're a p-zombie or not.

Sure many seemingly reasonable people all seem to agree they know what you're talking about when you say "subjective experience", but each and every one of them might have a completely different idea of what that means. I can't possibly agree that I "know what you're talking about" when you mention subjective experience, as any time I ask someone to define subjective experience it eventually circles back to requiring me to acknowledge my own subjective experience first. It's infuriatingly circular! To define subjective experience you have to already know what subjective experience is. If I drink the cool aid and acquiesce that yes I have subjective experience, we could continue the conversation in perpetuity without ever confirming that we are in fact talking about the same thing.

So my objection to the notion of subjective experience, aside from being a popular coat rack for tedious agendas, is that its inherently undefinable and untestable. Therefore the "hard problem of consciousness" isn't hard in the "you just have to work harder" sense. Its literally impossible because at its root the problem is worse than undefined, its undefinable. When you try to present a solution to it you'll find...a lack of consensus about your solution.

Reality is shared consensus.
Also I doubt they’re actually worried. They have enormous cash reserves.

Nearly half the initial money in the Softbank Vision Fund was Saudi Arabian and that gave us Uber and many other new unicorns. If anything we should be worried about the effects of all those cash reserves starting to throw around their weight.
I'm not criticising the idea or the framework, but the react team have had to go to enormous lengths to make that one simple idea work. And the community have had to embrace (and then sometimes, forget) some pretty controversial techniques and concepts in that time, with more big changes coming soon (hello concurrent mode!). It has cost FB tens of millions of dollars to develop. I'm not saying that investment hasn't been worth it, but peek under the hood and the complexity is huge.
The leaf was in front of the face but the algorithm decided to blend it in that way.
Isn’t the erlang ecosystem pretty much this?
This is beyond pathetic! Now there's no doubt that our brains have been shrinking!
The invasion of Poland was much bloodier than is often recalled. The Germans and Soviets invaded with 2 million soldiers and incurred 59 thousand casualties. The Russians are conducting direct combat operations with every major Ukrainian city except for Lviv and Odessa. The center of Ukraine is largely farmland and small villages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland
I assume The Verge will be correcting its article, right?
>Being a UK resident I often have to remind myself that the UK and continental Europe's level of cellular coverage is something of an outlier.

You have it backwards. The U.S. is the outlier. All similarly wealthy countries have better coverage.
A University near me has a Master of Business Administration (MBA) course that includes "Corporate Ethics".

Can you believe it? The audacity! A business charging business people, for a course of knowledge both sides know they will never use...
Socal, we have zoomo which is $20/wk.
It's scaled up to 1.6rem. The problem is user agents that don't support accessible font scaling.
1. We do not want war.

2. The other side is solely responsible for the war.

3. The enemy has the face of the devil.

4. It is a noble cause that we defend and not particular interests.

5. The enemy commits atrocities knowingly; if we make unfortunate mistakes, it is involuntary.

6. The enemy uses unauthorised weapons.

7. We suffer very few losses, while the losses of the enemy are enormous.

8. Artists and intellectuals support our cause.

9. Our cause has a sacred nature.

10. Those who question our statements are traitors.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basic_Principles_of_War_...

Don't kid yourself that is not happening now, as it did in 1914, 1939, 2003 and countless other times. Noticing its existence is not support for anything at all. Whatever our feelings about it all we should be asking "How is this different to our feelings about how we thought the Iraq and Afghanistan wars would play out and how they actually did?" The stakes are really quite high.
I wrote my graduate thesis on something similar. One of my findings was that "hotness" was less important in male choice than female choice. More specifically, I found that men didn't care as much about the hotness of their potential mates than did women care about their own hotness influencing the quality of their potential mates.

In short, hotness's strongest correlation was in women's pickiness; the more attractive the woman, the pickier she is. This remained true regardless of other factors that we would predict to matter (e.g., age, income...).

Men's attractiveness did not influence their pickiness.
> You've got investors who value your company at $10 billion, and they're ready to loan you $1 billion. […] You've got no plan for how to pay back that $1 billion.

This suggests either:

- the investors [think they] know something you don’t know

- the investors are profoundly careless with their investment

- the investors don’t exist, this is completely implausible

- you’re actively misleading the investors about that paragraph, not just keeping your mouth shut
That sounds like a better model than zoomo around me honestly.
> No strong applicant wants to waste time applying for a job that they don't want

This is circular reasoning. You don't know the applicant is strong until they pass the interview, but you have to pay them to find out. It's a fantasy ripe for the the current seller market, enjoy it while it lasts.
Keep in mind that while the popular conception of WWII is as a mechanized war, everyone (especially the fuel-starved Germans) was still incredibly reliant on foot and horse-based movement. I don't believe the German army even had experimental APCs at the start of the war.

The commonly cited number for how fast a traditional army can march is 20 miles per day, unopposed. The BTR-80 is rated for 50 miles per hour. Obviously APCs have to deal with refueling and maintenance and the like, but surely a modern mechanized army shouldn't moving slower than a comparable unmechanized one from 80 years ago.