skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I disagree diametrically with both the general sentiment of the article, and every major point that was made in it.

Every point in this blog post strikes me as either (1) unaware of the tooling around python typing other than mypy, or (2) a criticism of static-typing-bolted-on-to-a-dynamically-typed-language, rather than Python's hints. Regarding (1), my advise to OP is to try out Pyright, Pydantic, and Typeguard. Pyright, especailly, is amazing and makes the process of working with type hints 2 or 3 times smoother IMO. And, I don't think points that fall under (2) are fair criticisms of type *hints*. They are called hints for a reason.

Otherwise, here's a point-by-point response, either recommending OP checks out tooling, or showing that the point being made is not specific to Python.

> type hints are not binding.

There are projects [0][1] that allow you to enforce type hints at runtime if you so choose.

It's worth mentioning that this is very analogous to how Typescript does it, in that type info is erased completely at runtime.

> Type checking is your job after all, ...[and that] requires maintenance.

There are LSPs like Pyright[2] (pyright specifically is the absolute best, IMO) that report type errors as you code. Again, this is very very similar to typescript.

> There is an Any type and it renders everything useless

I have never seen a static-typing tool that was bolted on to a dynamically typed language, without an `Any` type, including typescript.

> Duck type compatibility of int and float

The author admits that they cannot state why this behavior is problematic, except for saying that it's "ambiguous".

> Most projects need third-party type hints

Again, this is a criticism of all cases where static types are bolted on dynamically typed languages, not Python's implementation specifically.

> Sadly, dataclasses ignore type hints as well

Pydantic[3] is an amazing data parsing library that takes advantage of type hints, and it's interface is a superset of that of dataclasses. What's more, it underpins FastAPI[4], an amazing API-backend framework (with 44K Github stars).

> Type inference and lazy programmers

The argument of this section boils down to using `Any` as a generic argument not being an error by default. This is configurable to be an error both in Pyright[5], and mypy[6].

> Exceptions are not covered [like Java]

I can't find the interview/presentation, but Guido Van Rossum specifically calls out Java's implementation of "exception annotations" as a demonstration of why that is a bad idea, and that it would never happen in Python. I'm not saying Guido's opinion is the absolute truth, but just letting you know that this is an explicit decision, not an unwanted shortcoming.

[0] https://github.com/RussBaz/enforce

[1] https://github.com/agronholm/typeguard

[2] https://github.com/microsoft/pyright

[3] https://pydantic-docs.helpmanual.io

[4] https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi

[5] https://github.com/microsoft/pyright/blob/main/docs/configur...

[6] https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/config_file.html#confv...
This happens to me all the time. Perhaps the most amusing instance went as follows (quoted verbatim, with identifying information omitted):

This email is regarding: [].

Class: MATH 7 ADVANCED Prd: 2 Teacher: []

-----------------------------------------------

Good evening, please check [] for missing work, complete it and submit it. Let me know if you have questions or need any help or anything opened up or more tries. Remember the Ch. 3 test due today. Thank you, Mrs. []

I replied:

I think you've got the wrong email address.

Thanks,
David

The teacher then replied:

My apologies. You are correct. Your son is crushing it :) and I failed to take him off the group email. Thank you so much for letting me know and keep up the great work! Again, I apologize for the inconvenience. Mrs. []

I then replied:

Thanks! Only one thing: I don't have a son.
The last 12000 years maybe. We had 2.5 million years of hunting gathering before that. Only the very recent history is one of agriculture.
Same observation, similar timeframe. A few that have likely been breaches, one or two failed web game businesses sold for scrap.

My motivation of keeping it up is mostly habit, I wouldn't want shop mails on one of my public addresses anyways. A nice benefit is that phishing mails arriving at the wrong address are even easier to not fall for (but a deeper phishing attempt, with targeting based on a breach or something like that might become easier to fall for)
To me it seems simpler. Up to 50 years ago you could not have a conversation with more than say 10 people maximum. Most people don't have the patience to only speak 1/10 of the time. More than that it would be one or two addressing a group.

The internet has made possible conversations with unlimited participants, and no one has to wait to get their own point across.

The horribleness in people was always there. It just didn't spread like measles.
Unless you reasonably see yourself starting a lawsuit (tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars) or paying to certify a class (hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars), arbitration is almost always better for the consumer.

It’s cheaper, which renders benign the big-company dickhead move of forcing millions of dollars of legal preparation. It’s quieter, which renders benign the big-company dickhead move of airing embarrassing stuff in public filings. It’s faster; if you’re owed money you’ll get it quicker.

There is concern arbitration may be more biased than the courts, but the evidence for anything systematic is scant, and the extra eyes don’t hurt. (There is even, now, precedent for collective antagonistic action [1].) For most users, considering the sorts of squabbles one is likely to get into with the likes of Venmo, releasing Venmo from binding arbitration may be a net negative move. (If you get screwed for anything less than hundreds of thousands, you’ve given up your right to pursue.)

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-19/trump-law...
That's why every website should use HTTPS.
He does not need to sell he could get a loan by using his shares as collateral
What’s the point of reducing everything to the most primitive element and ignoring the reality? You’re one of these “I’ve seen this before, nothing new” while completely missing the value proposition. Why do anything when everything already exists and there’s no nuance?
I think there is a big difference between the perspective of a business and that of a company.

I'm willing to believe that 75% isn't bad business-wise, but 10 h/week are a bit less than a tenth of your waking hours, over one and a half hours per day, several hundreds per year, a few ten thousands over the course of your life.

Imagine what you could do with that time. Imagine you could spend 1½h per day more with your kids, with the people you love, with friends. Or maybe learning new skills, working on personal projects, going hiking, whatever you enjoy.

I believe that it's perfectly understandable to feel (at the very least) a bit bitter about that when you feel like that time is taken away from you for no clear purpose.
I've had an idea for a while, that I'll probably never get around to. The idea is to throw some ML or other appropriate analysis at privacy policies and eulas to monitor for changes and possibly offer alerts, explanations and practical advice to users.
The easiest, bullshittiest jobs I've had are the ones that burned me out the most.

Go make something for yourself. Or do some consulting work.
My wife has had the same problem for a long time. What finaly got through was to contact one of the travel agencies to point out that she got plane tickets in someone elses name and to please talk to this woman that she has the wrong idea about her email adress. Has been quiet for a few years now.
Intro to Database Systems
You have to make sure where it's coming from - which of course we can't do from a single comment. For example, the best place where it could be coming from is self-expression. Owning and using something can be cultivating a relationship with oneself and also a signal for others, and if it's genuine, then it's basically communication of a very valid human need, which is self-expression and seeking the validation for it, thereby validation for oneself's existence and affiliation.
I said everything I felt the need to say.

I see that you want to scold and give instructions to strangers

In the meantime, I also don't discuss medicine with antivaxxers, or geology with flat earthers

I have no interest in explaining to you that your lambo moon buddies are wrong, that blockchains aren't databases, that montero doesn't search encrypted data, that these things legitimately do exist, etc

It's just an opportunity for you to dutifully recite something that you saw someone else say, then pretend shows you to be technically sophisticated

I don't care about horse apple paste people telling me that I'm not being constructive when I vocally doubt their unevidenced claims

Nobody cares when you demand that other people prove you wrong. Religious people do that all day every day.

There's a reason religion never proves itself right.

I don't need to prove my doubt of you. Science is rooted in doubt.
What is your definition of a functional economy? I'm a millennial with a mortgage and a car loan. Should I get free money so I'm not debt-burdened?
Social Media Will Die
You don't have to consistently generate alpha to make bucks as a small time trader. Even a simple strategy like buying dogecoin everytime elon tweeted about it was a sureshot way to makr money in the crypto market
That wouldn’t work anywhere near as well as doing it yourself and you wouldn’t learn a twentieth as much. Writing the one pager forces the author to condense the book. Discussing it honed his thoughts. Even after that much work thinking, to write a book, discussing it taught him things, made him better able to discuss it. A very similar process if behind the idea of ELI5 or

“Talk to your customers, sell to potential customers or improve your product. All else is distraction.”

Aka

“Make something people want.”
Show HN: Compare your JavaScript tooling with other projects
> where all the spam comes from

The problem is the word spam. What you describe, misdirected mail from completely legal businesses is not really spam, even if it is junk for you personally.

There is aggressive marketing of very vaguely related products you have actually registered for. There is marketing of illegal products mostly using harvested addresses. There is phishing often using stolen addresses.

If you want to understand the problem as the OP obviously does just speaking of spam is not helpful.
Patient portal + electronic health records.

1000 CPU cores, not CPUs. :)
>A problem here is that there are fields of science that are almost certainly bogus in themselves. One very likely candidate is nutrition, which seems to be fumbling in the dark and has a long history of producing worse recommendations than doing nothing (e.g. replace fat with sugar).

It's not the field that is bogus in that case. People were quite literally bribed to push this. This could happen anywhere, anytime, in any field.
Because of the regularization I'm doing. For example, some are in the relative minor and mostly use iv and V.
The AGPL doesn't prevent competitors selling the software, complying with it is reasonably easy even for a SaaS company.
You're not wrong. While nobody should have to do it, some of us just aren't cut out for it. A lot of people can take the bullshit, some of us can't.

I had a boss one time that wanted me to work 50 hours a week. "There's no such thing as a 40 hour a week job anymore" he said. I could get all of my work done in under 20 usually, so doing 40 was bad enough, you want me to put in more time here just so you can prove who's in charge? I didn't work for him very long. There were guys in there that worked for him for years and years, they all looked like husks of men.

If you're not cut out for it don't do it. There are jobs out there that aren't like that, but they're not around every corner. Go try to find one, and don't live a life you don't want because you think you have to.
Gah, I wish I had time to fully read this and get into it, but I have to spend the next few hours driving.

Unfortunately the original article isn't very clearly explained, and it's only on reading the discussion in the comments under it that it becomes clear what it's actually saying.

The point is about signal & noise. Say your random variable X contains a signal component and a noise component, the former deterministic and the latter random. Say you correlate Y-X against X, and further say you use the same sample of X when computing Y-X as when measuring X. In this case your correlation will include the correlation of a single sample of the noise part of X with its own negation, yielding a spurious negative component that is unrelated to the signal but arises purely from the noise. The problem can be avoided by using a separate sample of X when computing Y-X.

The example in the original "DK is autocorrelation" article is an extreme illustration of this. Here, there is no signal at all and X is pure noise. Since the same sample of X is used a strong negative correlation is observed. The key point though is that if you use a separate sample of X that correlation disappears completely. I don't think people are realising that in the example given the random result X will yield another totally random value if sampled again. It's not a random result per person, it's a random result per testing of a person.

This is only one objection to the DK analysis, but it's a significant one AFAICS. It can be expected that any measurement of "skill" will involve a noise component. If you want to correlate two signals both mixed with the same noise sources you need to construct the experiment such that the noise is sampled separately in the two cases you're correlating.

Of course the extent to which this matters depends on the extent to which the measurement is noisy. Less noise should mean less contribution of this spurious autocorrelation to the overall correlation.

To give another ridiculous, extreme illustration: you could throw a die a thousand times and take each result and write it down twice. You could observe that (of course) the first copy of the value predicts the second copy perfectly. If instead you throw the die twice at each step of the experiment and write those separately sampled values down you will see no such relationship.
195 x+kickstarter@xxx
57148 x+newrelic@xxx

The rest doesn't even register.
The key reason behind it is that you don’t care about the company.

It means that either you’re not high enough in hierarchy to feel the ownership, to get noticeable stocks etc.

You’re just being used as an expensive cog in the wheel.

Or/and you don’t care about the company mission.

Why are you still there I wonder?

In my experience as soon as I achieve my own goals with an employer - I leave the next day.
There are a bunch of aspects to optimal play in NetHack that are pretty unfun for humans to perform (but dramatically increase win rate). These things can all be programmed into an AI without too much trouble, some more fiddly than others:

* Always retrace your own steps when backtracking. Only walk on new tiles when it’s absolutely necessary for exploration. This greatly reduces your chances of stepping on unseen traps.

* Abuse shops to the max. Price ID everything you find. Sell every last bit of junk. Engage in credit cloning. Steal everything from shops.

* Abuse the protection racket. Max out on divine protection by spending all of the money from every shopkeeper’s pocket at the temple in minetown.

* Abuse alchemy to make large stacks of holy water and blessed potions of full healing. Increase your max HP to several hundred.

* Pudding farming. This one has thankfully been patched out.

* Polypiling. Polymorph lines of items on the floor. Try to get magic markers to write more scrolls of enchant armour.
Fascinating! I don’t know about supply chain, but I can tell you it’s the same in programming. I suspect these points apply to creative ideas in general.
...and there's more to sql trouble than just troublesome syntax, typical for languages of its generation!

1. Sql is non-modular

2. Non-orthogonal

3. Its parroting of the (beautiful) relational data model is... opinionated at best.

The standard is unreadable and not really implementable, one always has to resort to implementation docs.

Realistically there are no alternatives, but... sql is no good.
We had a unit-wide policy of meeting-free days every week. Everyone knew when they were and knew in advance that could just focus on working full-time.

And I, as a team leader/project manager of sorts, just said to my team not to come into meetings that had no pre-defined agenda. I went in and relayed any questions to the team via the company chat if I didn't know the answer outright. Saved the team from hours of useless meetings.
Noobs deserve to be laughed at when they start taking capital from retail investors.
So it gives more sense to compare eating beef with having children. Not having children has no cost and something that any individual can do.
I usually turn my old lead into gold. I've almost perfected the technique.
If your software is valuable enough, Amazon will just reimplement it from scratch. Often Amazon entering the market for your software will grow the size of the market, taking most of the growth for themselves, but also increasing the amount of customers you get.
Neither of those describes sub-millisecond, programmed trading.

It is, instead, simply gambling. Like poker, it is not really a game of chance, so those with better algorithms and faster hardware win, but it provides society absolutely nothing of value. Generally it amounts to leeching off of other traders who might be providing something of value.

It has got so many have custom electronics connected directly to the fiber that delivers market event reports, and trigger sending an order even before such a packet finishes arriving, the response calculated in an FPGA in under 100 nanoseconds. Nowadays those traders have equipment in cages in the same building as the exchange, and the fibers to all the cages are exactly the same length.

They may have a collection of order packets already formatted, and just pick one of them to send according to the update.

For a while some would trigger sending an order early, and then add a bad checksum if calculation indicated it was not right. The exchanges banned that, not because it was unfair, but because it added load not paid for.

A way to preserve value for the non-gamblers would be to place a (proportionally) small tax on trades, so whoever does it most frequently pays most.
Not sure where you saw this. ABE is an MDM in its own right, and can manage device configuration and push apps from VPP. It is otherwise fairly limited, but you don’t need an MDM for ABE.
For standalone tools that people use in their workflows without linking them to their own code (A)GPL is mostly fine. If it's something that should be used as a library I'd use a more permissive license like BSD-3 or Apache 2.0, as otherwise you'll have adoption problems especially for larger enterprises that use proper open-source license management tools (as those will flag GPL licenses as high risk).

That said think of licensing as one part of your open-source strategy. From my experience licenses won't keep your competitors from copying your code or circumventing your license terms. The best thing is still to keep your most business-critical code closed-source.
https://f-droid.org/de/packages/de.monocles.mail/
That happens when science is politicized, and any scientists critical of the “official” results is destroyed. From climate to Covid, so many areas where that happens.
This could be the key. In the oculus you can't really move away from centre (for text) and I'm finding it weird.
Aqua mail
> And unless you are adding some kind of virtualizing layer, you don’t have .4% of blocks to play with. You have 0% of blocks.

That is a shitty problem to have, there is no perfect solution. If you at all can, change the problem. If that means you need a virtualization layer, use it if possible.

---

> I tried to read your pointer, but the link goes no where explaining it. Mind giving a more useful link? It Could be because I’m on mobile.

The first sentence of the link I gave you reads as follows: "Some applications may need to store the authentication tag and the encrypted message at different locations."

Then it shows you the following function that achieves that separation (with zero performance overhead I might add):

int crypto_aead_aes256gcm_encrypt_detached(
unsigned char *ciphertext,
unsigned char *mac,
unsigned long long *mac_size_p,
const unsigned char *message,
unsigned long long message_size,
const unsigned char *additional_data,
unsigned long long additional_data_size,
const unsigned char *always_NULL,
const unsigned char *nonce,
const unsigned char *key);

If that does not help you, you need more basic training. I recommend Dan Boneh's standford cryptographic course or crypto1O1. And if you need to understand the severity of various attacks at a gut level, you might want to take a look at the cryptopals challenges as well:

http://openclassroom.stanford.edu/MainFolder/CoursePage.php?...

https://www.crypto101.io/

https://www.cryptopals.com/
Nowhere did I advocate censorship. But I do think it should be illegal because this stunt could have started a wildfire if the plane had started burning.
In fact, you can't really run any other legacy option ROMs without legacy VGA support. You can run legacy SAS option ROMs for example and still do UEFI boot because of similar support for Int13, but to even run them require VGA text mode to be working.
Improving Your Statistical Inferences
Imaging being so senior you no longer need to write unit tests yourself, but just delegate them.

Sounds exactly like the kind of disconnected environment that would lead to such bugs.
I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that they meant non-macOS Apple hardware servers.

Also this was never intended for people using an old laptop 'as a server' anyway, of course that works, and people doing that don't need the enterprise features from a server-specific version of the OS.
I don’t care a nit about Sanbergs personal life either, but I certainly DO care that she can apparently silence news stories from phone calls.

I feel like the content of the story itself is pretty irrelevant here. Are you saying wealthy people abusing their influence and power to contain news stories is fine, as long as you personally view the stories as “immaterial” or “muckraking for clicks”?

How would you feel about a public figure you dislike silencing negative stories from a news organization? What if supporters of that public figure think the silencing is fine, because you don’t need to read that muckraking trash?
Yes, there's an EU directive which broadly considers arbitration clauses unfair in consumer contracts, and declares that unfair clauses in consumer contracts must be considered nonbinding in law - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...

(The basic relevant articles in the directive are Article 3, Article 6 and the Annex here.)
It would be amazing if the notifications really are "fixed". It's a fantastic app that has only been let down by the notifications. It happens, in my case to be linked to accounts I don't "check" regularly because they exist only for "important" emails. When I miss them, it can be a real issue for me.
"Just trying to get an idea of if this is still happening even now."

Do you think the spammers retired? I doubt it, there is only a shift towards trying to get more phone numbers instead of email.