skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: I am changing my job from stack Java to rust? Does it worth it?
Hello,

I got a new job as a rust developer. I have been for 8 years in java ecosystem professional.

I will be coding web entreprise applications

Did anyone made the same conversion ?
Do you think this worth it for this use case ?
What resources can be helpful for me ?

Thank you very much
It’s nice to say don’t bail them out — until the ATMs go dark.
>any company, not just B-Corps, can have a purpose other than shareholders value maximization.

It's moving there but I don't think it's there quite yet according to case law. The board motivations at present still have to tie back to maximizing value for shareholders.
It could be that, but it doesn't have to be.

If you're on a team that isn't currently having staffing issues, I don't think it's weird to want your next hire to be better than the median person on the team. "Raise the bar," etc. Asking harder leetcode questions seems like a bad way to achieve it, but I get the impulse. If the bar for member nine of the team is approximately "better than the bottom 4" then that 9th person in is likely to have at least one moment of "wait, how did you pass that interview?" at some point after they come on.
>If 2014 invasion was somehow related to Euromaidan protests, this 2022 invasion has no relation to internal Ukrainian politics nor to it’s foreign policy — nothing has fundamentally changed.

There is no "if", unless you are arguing that invading Crimea the next day was a coincidence. That is fact, not opinion. Just like the post-coup regime in Ukraine then officially voting to drop neutrality, clearing the way to join NATO (which is just the international arm of the US military).

As to what has fundamentally changed, well Biden is back in charge like he was in 2014. Biden and family have huge financial interests in Ukraine, as evidenced by the emails that our totally honest media finally acknowledged were legitimate[1][2][3] (only after the election was over of course). And with that, Ukraine was set back on their path against Russia, to poke the bear some more at our behest.

There is a reason Russia/Ukraine was quiet for 4 years under Trump. And its the same reason we had to listen to that tired "Trump is Putin's puppet" conspiracy theory for most of his presidency. He wouldn't play their game. Hell, he was even impeached over Ukraine. Elements of the US government have been orchestrating this game for years, and innocent Ukrainians are the ones left holding the bag. Well them, and middle class US taxpayers who always end up footing the bill.

[1] https://www.newsweek.com/burying-hunter-biden-laptop-story-w...

[2] https://ijr.com/ny-times-confirms-emails-hunter-laptop-not-r...

[3] https://nypost.com/2022/03/17/the-new-york-times-hates-to-sa...
But in JavaScript, these two awaits will not happen in parallel, you really need to await Promise.all() for that.
Are microbes the future of recycling? It’s complicated
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/16/politics/joe-biden-warnin...

It's spring now. Guess it wasn't last winter. The winter of death never quite showed up eh?

Fully vax in my jurisdiction is 85%. I like many people did the right thing and got the shots before they started coercing and removing human rights. How many went for a booster? 47%. They aren't even providing 4th booster stats because I bet those numbers are really low. In fact, vaccination over the last month is really low for any shots.

I can't wait until they redefine fully vax to be more than 2 shots. It has to happen right?

Imagine another chinese virus lab leaks another experiment and this time it's literally going to kill 1/3rd of the planet unless we get vaccinated, wear masks, and properly sanitize our hands.

1/3rd of the planet will die. Politicians lying to us and removing our human rights means nobody will be lining up to go get a shot this time. I very much doubt the government could bring a mask mandate back without another protest immediately driving over to the government buildings and informing the politicians they will need to use force, again. Despite the hypothetical being an extremely dead virus.

If the politicians would like a different result, perhaps they should find a time machine and not do what they did.
Plumbers and Smart TVs are straw men. A more apt comparison might be: Your mail carrier who was recorded stating they only deliver mail to your address that they feel you should see.

> you're clinging to

That's a pretty grand assumption. I'm not clinging to anything. I'm simply stating "how can you make this assertion when there are recordings of people who make decisions for the userbase, claiming they do so based on the thing you're asserting they don't care about?" On the contrary, it would seem that you desperately want the inverse to be true.

It's a fair question. To say that they're the small minority doesn't discount the fact that they exist. It honestly wouldn't matter the persuasion of these people in the context. "People there don't care about X" -> videos of people saying their actions at said company are based on X -> assertion is false.

If Twitter truly didn't care about activism - regardless of the slant - as part of their core business decision making, then they'd purge these people from their ranks, or make it wildly transparent that decisions weren't being executed by people who have broadcast their slant as influencing their work. I don't know about you; whenever I've stepped outside my bounds of what the company wanted to accomplish, I was put back in place pretty quickly.

> You can choose to believe in that conspiracy theory style stuff

To paint any discussion as tin-foil conspiracy is to attempt to shut down the debate, which speaks to your disingenuous intentions and entering the debate in bad faith. This is a great example of one of the problems with discourse right now.

The argument sounds nice but evidence to the contrary exists, no matter how isolated, and has never been addressed by the company publicly. If the company had taken disciplinary measures in response to the recordings, had published procedures, quite literally a bare minimum of transparency, I would personally be very likely to dismiss them as isolated incidents. As it stands, combined with speech from leadership, it does look very much like the company supports and defends bad actors internally. And the twitter thread doesn't appear to hold much water.
You're saying a nuclear detonation of a single, typical, current warhead will spawn electrical fires with romex insulated wires for thousands of miles from ground zero? Or, if not, what would be the typical radius?

Edit: Sandia Labs paper on Starfish Prime and the streetlights in Hawaii: http://ece-research.unm.edu/summa/notes/SDAN/0031.pdf
Switched power supplies are notorious for causing EMI; why didn't he test for it? Frankly, it sounds like he just copied the circuit from a datasheet and called it a day.
There are a lot of posts here about using "Cheers" as a sign-off, presumably because it's still early in the US so more of the readers are from Oz or the UK. I think it's fine when one of y'all use "cheers", but when an American uses it, it sounds pretentious. It's one of the British informalities I like, but would never use myself. And have you ever heard someone say "cheers mate" in an American accent? That's cringeworthy.
The other reason is that people of Eastern Europe either have a score to settle with Russia, or at least want to see it damaged as much as posdible so it can't hurt anyone ever again.

What Russians are doing - rapes, massacres, destroying children hospitals on purpose and so much more - in Ukraine isn't new for us, it is the same old. Pick a random nation between Germany and Russia and they likely went through this in the last 100 years.

Russians are always going to be dangerous as long as their way of thinking of Imperial Russian superiority lasts, but they are less dangerous with their planes shot down, tanks blown up, ships on the bottom of the sea and soldiers dead.
Pfffft.

Nobody is gonna successfully shoot at a presidential motorcade for the same reason nobody is gonna pull off another 9/11. The loophole could only be used once.
sorry, fair and true. My point was more how a company can create a difference between issued and authorized shares.
Ask HN: Does peer review often take away a professor's academic freedom?
In what sense do professors have academic freedom if they can't publish and/or get grants on research they find interesting but that peer review does not?
> I've heard that "have a nice day" is prescriptive or even rude before and I just don't get it.

For some people, 'have a nice day' is code for 'f you'. Dropping your kid off and they're being a pest, but you don't want to drop an f-bomb? Tell them to 'have a nice day'. Your parent is being a pest while dropping you off? Tell them to 'have a nice day'.

Then it's a little weird when a snack machine says it, and kind of fitting when it's on the front of the Facebook commute busses.

'Have a good day' is totally fine though. I mean it's still gonna upset the people who had other plans, but at least it's not rude.
<< almost any measurement one cares to make (with eyes, even) produces endless ambiguities and coincidences that you have to "be in the world" to resolve; and resolution is a dynamic process which you "have to be here for". >>

Sounds like a magic view of the mind to me.

It's suspicious that this is never said about the function of Liver or Kidneys, only about the function of the Brain.

Maybe the brain is protecting itself, like if you ask a cow about steaks.
So Ukraine and the rest of us who value stability and national sovereignty are required to accept prima facie Putin’s conditions and proposed consequences?
I agree.

For completeness, some people find "regards" a bit blunt, and therefore qualify it with "Kind".

I don't really see the issue, but "Kind regards" is orthodoxy in many Australian workplaces.
> ... one hallmark of a bubble about to collapse is fraud running rampant.

Famous shortseller Jim Chanos says the same.
> Ban racial slurs, "doxxing," calls to genocide, and low effort provocations.

Hey everyone, look here! We have the answer to the thorny issue of what governs free speech in clear black and white. Twitter, facebook, reddit execs, take note!
tldr; free speech is hard because regulating speech is impossible
There’s a decent documentary on YouTube about them - Inconspicuous Ingenuity.

https://youtu.be/w5TkSE_5GsE
In that first example, `await` means exactly the same thing as `then` for the purposes the author is talking about -- realizing that something had been serialized that could have been done in parallel.

I don't see why most engineers would be likely to recognize that opportunity when written as `then` but not as `await`. If is is true (and I'm not convinced it is), it seems like an education problem rather than a reason to use promises rather than await. It doesn't seem fundamentally harder to know that two `awaits` in a row means serialization than to know that two `thens` in a row does.

At least in that simple example where the use of `then` is exactly parallel to the use of `await`. Perhaps it wasn't a good example, and it really would be harder to reason about in a more complicated example.
> 2-3 hours

You pay for that wasted time, yes?
It's the traditional formal signoff where the recipient is not addressed. I understand it is of British origin. My guess as to its meaning is, since it is not addressed, you are faithful to the recipient that it will get to the right place. When I send correspondence externally, it is formal in nature. I have just followed templating conventions.

I think it is out of place for less formal communications.
I don't think it is intended to be understood unless you know the theoretical basics of ML and PL. That said, I don't think the presentation is very good. Way too many slides filled with mathematical notation and way too few examples of why differentiable programming is useful.
Epson PX8 – Laptop with a CP/M OS and a Tape Drive
More ableist I think. Some people have bad handwriting due to physical or neurological conditions
Your bias is showing. Case in point; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSNBC_controversies is about as decorated as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_controversies. We live in an age where network news operates to gather eyeballs for ad sells. To pretend that one caters to their target audience where another does not is simply naive.
There might be some truth in what you say for very large image and language models that use supervised learning.

It is really hard to see how this 'it's just a lot of good data' view applies to deep reinforcement learning where the model learns multi step policies from raw input data (e.g a camera on a robot) with only a rough high level reward function to guide it.

If therefore (as seems to be the case) you can abstract the information humans need to provide to the model/learning system to ever high levels of reward function (and thereby vastly reduce the information provided by humans) then it seems very hard to argue that the model (and the training process) isn't doing to some degree what you describe as:

'incredible amounts of experimental work to carve-the-world along its joints, ie., to have the right concepts; and incredible amounts of work to measure along its joints, ie., to have the right units. And then to eliminate all the coincidences and irrelevances.'

For example, imagine a robot learning from scratch to pick objects up based on raw pixel data with only a scalar reward function - where in this process is the human preparing the data so the model only has to average?
TIL of "Gang of Four". I first thought you meant Goblet of Fire and that there was a harry potter reference in compsci that I had yet to learn :(
We both know why you can't back up your claims with sources, and I can. And so does everybody reading this.
How to run terminal commands from Apple Shortcuts using SSH
Congrats to Brendan and he’s been huge to continuing the advancement of FreeBSD.

I can only hope that he brings FreeBSD to his next employer & is allowed to continue his contributions.
Alas the goal isnt the same, and here "predict" is the culprit. What ML systems do is offer statistical estimates, which is one very narrow meaning of "predict".

When I "predict" what will happen when a glass falls, I'm not giving you any statistical estimates. I'm running a mental simulation of the world in its relevant parts and using this to predict what will happen.

The heart of basically almost all knowledge of the world is actually counterfactual (ie., requiring simulation), it's always "if this happens (in the simulation), this will happen (in the simulation)".

To acquire this ability to predict one has to understand, ie., to have the right concepts, reason with them and so on. When a person "has the concept `7`" they can reason thus: "6 eggs would be fewer", "7 is an odd number", "7 is a whole quantity", "with 7 less of 10, i'd have 3" etc.

Ie., `7` is available to play a fundamental role in simulating scenarios and reasoning with them.

When a NN produces a mapping from {Images} -> {Labels} such that the squiggle `7` produces the label `"7"` it doesnt do so via prediction in the meaningful sense of the world. Rather it has found a means of averaging sqiggles, and compares one squiggle to its averages and reports what the historical similar squiggles were labelled.

This is a game which is only useful because we, who can reason with `7` profoundly about the world (etc.), have produced datasets which express our knowldge of the world in ways that dont require it. Ie., we present to the machine something whose average is useful.

The machine is not trying to, nor does it, nor can it, predict. It has no knoweldge at all. It is just a correspondance table we have provided.
I'm personally a fan of small, clean commits, rebasing without squashing before merge, always making a merge commit, and writing a clear, through merge commit explaining what the branch does.

That way, I can treat the series of merge commits to trunk as the simple, linear overview of history, but when I'm bug-hunting I get small, clear commits to search through with git bisect.

It also means I get more useful blame output, as instead of huge hunks of a file being all from one giant bomb commit, I can see the process and evolution that the whole change went through as the original author pieced it together. That can be really helpful when dealing with obscure bugs or understanding systems with little documentation, by helping you get back more of the original author's thought process and seeing how their mental model evolved as they built the feature.
‘What a brutal business’: pop stars on life after the spotlight moves on
The fact that California has no problem with pumping out innovation and globally important companies even with a total non compete ban shows that there is zero reason for any employer to have that additional power over an employee. I would even say the non compete ban contributes to CA’s success.

To really drive home how much of an advantage employers have, even with a non compete ban, employers in California were found to be colluding to suppress employees’ wages.

https://www.latimes.com/80014970-132.html
Yes it doesn't fall for the false centre ground.
Some Bookmarklets, I use (2020)
What outcome? In innovation, thanks to public research for military reasons yes, most common modern tech was born from nazi research in WWII but I doubt some consider even initial phase of nazism a good thing.

We do not live to be efficient, to innovate, to produce goods etc: we live to live, we work because it's needed to live well and in various cases is also a pleasure to a certain extent, but definitively not the contrary. Quality of life on any individual is the outcome IMVHO not the rest.

Even if nazi research pushed infrared, new way to survive in cold waters, rockets, many various maritime, aviation and generic mechanical innovation who now and not only from now have produced good things for us those who have build them do not have any pleasure from them, so the outcome is still negative. Working to left something good behind is good, but not at the price of ruining or dedicate a life for that purpose.
You've really missed the point spectacularly of that example.

Both those promises start, and both are waited for after both have started..

That is the same as promise.all...
There's just an explicit order for the wait, rather than as they resolve, but the result is the same.

Now, promise.any.... You'd have a point...
Got my hands on a 80286 the other week, and have been tinkering and having lots of fun, but forgot how painful and cumbersome things used to be; BIOS doesn't have a built-in menu but has to have setup run from disk, the 5 1/2 inch floppy drive doesn't read disks anymore because it's been bumped or something, thank god there's a 3 1/2 drive that works, but hold on it's not 1.44mb but 1.2mb so that causes its own issues trying to transfer things from PC, the hard drive is so small (20mb) that it can barely hold anything and so you have to make a decision if you want to sacrifice performance and install DoubleSpace/Stacker to compress the whole drive to gain more space etc etc :) another fun thing I learned is that you can use Hydrogen Peroxide, UV lights (and/or sunlight) and cling wrap and restore old discoloured computer plastic parts (keyboards, cases, drives etc) to new looking!
Seems easy to me. 30 days, delete backup keys. What’s the problem? You still have 29 day old backups?
If we are paraphrasing for the general public I think nuance was thrown out long ago with the bath water. Yelling fire in a crowded movie theater is a paraphrase itself, obviously context matters and always has.
Many reasons, for example:

1. do notation works and is used for any monadic type (e.g. lists, parsers, promises, resources like database-connection-contexts, ...) while async/await works for promises only

2. async works on the function-level and only there while do-notation can be used in any place where a normal expression can be used, including being abitrarily nested.

There are more differences, but that should be enough food for the mind to think about it.

You could summarize it as: async/await makes it easier to work with promises on the syntax level and trying to make async code look like sync code, while the do-notation does not try to make async code to look like sync code, but rather embrace that sometimes two different semantical flows are interwined (one inside a monadic context, one pure) and makes it easier to work with them on the syntax level while at the same time making the two look _different_ explicitly.
> There’s no inalienable right to live in a popular place you cannot afford.

I agree, that's why single family households should have a higher property tax and high density a lower one. Currently single family households are subsidized.[1]

[1]: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/4/16/when-apartment...
I've been following Brendan since the Sun Microsystems days with his Dtrace book which opened my eyes to the world of system call tracing from user-space to kernel. Linux at the time had a hodgepodge of tracing utilities (SystemTap, Ktap etc..) that usually required kernel modules to work properly. Strace was my goto in Linux back then but slowed down the target binary a lot. Thank the universe for eBPF and Brendan's current books that today we have powerful tracing capabilities in Linux that rivals Dtrace in FreeBSD/Illumos. If you want to understand the internals of an operating system and how things work, without being a kernel developer, systems performance engineering is a way to go.
I thought as much. Maybe it is CircleCI then.
It makes perfect sense not to trust everything Putin says. That doesn't answer the questions though - where did our media get the idea that Russia ever intended on annexing all of Ukraine? They tell us this was a goal, but what is the source of that claim? Russia never made that claim. Only some in the media have, shouldn't we expect sources for claims like that?
Oxide, maybe?
Aren't both unsupported? By MS.
Just try. You'll learn interesting things by trying. Don't worry about how hard it is. Start with what seems most interesting.
California startup sends tiny robots on voyage into brains
My point in using the extreme example is not to suggest that people are insisting on their use. I chose a fringe example, for which it is socially acceptable to express skepticism, in order to illustrate the point that there are gray areas in how society validates some identities and is less inclusive of others.

In the link you provided, one Redditor "struggles to stay progressive about" neo-pronouns. Another Redditor considers such skepticism to be "extremely gatekeepy and transphobic."

I don't have any reason to believe that someone preferring kitten-folk pronouns is being dishonest or disingenuous, even in this more extreme example.

But what is the principle under which some identity claims are accepted more than others? I have my own thoughts, but I'm curious to get yours. Do you think there is room in society for people on occasion to feel uncomfortable with someone's proposed identity?
This is what I think often when I see news about anxiety and other mental disorder. I have a lot of respect for researchers working on these topics, but I'd like to hear more from researchers who e.g. try to find more accurate picture of the risk factors of these things.