skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
WRT your experience at Amazon -

A lesson you don't learn in school, and is even hard to learn in professional life, is that engineering is about getting the best work done inside the constraints you're presented with. Sometimes its time constraints, money/resource constraints, business constraints, political constraints, environmental constraints, etc..

You'll never be given a perfectly well thought out spec/design/etc and infinite time and resources to build the absolute best solution. You'll have to compromise on things when you're doing real work. And sometimes people will disagree with the compromises you had to make, like you are with this team at AMZN.
My recollection was that Prototype.js got a big boost in popularity early on on the back of its inspiration from Ruby on Rails (in the sense that abusing prototype pollution to make DOM elements have useful methods was novel and cool). Dojo and friends were comparatively obscure/niche until much later. I recall only reading about Dojo years later, during the whole Comet hype.

My impression of the era was that visual pizzazz was all the rage, and Scriptaculous really delivered on that front (Flash was also huge back then). Whereas full blown web apps were relatively rare and a lot of library consumers just didn't see the point of things like modularization (despite the interest in "proper" engineering from library authors like Dean Edwards et al)

And even then, once interest in thick clients grew, Ext.js had a lot more fanfare among the heavier frameworks than the Dojos and MooTools, due to its focus on enterprise.
I'm not sure why you think that article proves your point. Of course poor people will get more parking tickets, they're often the ones who don't have proper parking arrangements. Do you think I was saying that wealthy people are responsible for the majority of illegal parking?

In any case, here's an example of a high profile wealthy person paying parking tickets like they're just a normal cost: https://dailytargum.com/article/2020/02/jeff-bezos-parking-t...

This isn't something I made up, it happens.
Many fail on "risking leaving money on the table", long way before "risking loosing their life".

Small steps are steps never the less.
For sure. Good spam filtering was one big reason for people to switch to GMail. And a lot of people who gave up hosting their own email have switched to Gmail as well. I'm sure this doesn't rise to the level of conspiracy, but there's little incentive for them to fix the broader problems.
Here's an attempt with the caveat that I'm not at all an expert on this and may get lots of things wrong:

The basic idea is that there is a world "out there", and then each person has a mental model of that world. Our actions are not based on the external world, but on our internal model of it.

When sensory information comes in, we use that to update the model. The loop is something like:

1. Stimulus comes in.

2. Figure out what that means.

3. Use that to update the model.

4. Take action based on that.

5. See how our action affected the world and goto 1.

Step 2 is the tricky one. Stimulus is often ambiguous and our perceptions of it are imperfect. You see a flash of light. It could mean someone took a photo, the sun glinted off a moving object, or maybe just a spurious firing on our optical nerve. How do we know how to update the model based on that stimulus?

We can't just always assume the stimulus is fully accurate and blanket update the model based on it because there's a lot of noise in the data. We also can't just assume that whenever the stimulus disagrees with the model that it's noise and discard it. The whole point of perception is to update our model to reflect a changing world.

So we have to decide what a piece of stimulus means (since it's ambiguous) and how much confidence we have in that interpretation (since it's noisy). How might we decide a confidence level? All we know is our own model and that the external stimulus.

There are a bunch of different ways that involve things like estimating how likely a stimulus like that is to occur, our previous experience with misinterpreted signals (i.e. what we have learned about our own perceptual hardware), etc.

Of course, none of this is happening consciously. It's how the brain itself thinks.

The thesis of the article is that those with autism have this process miscalibrated where they treat external stimulus as much more precise (i.e. less noisy or ambiguous) than it actually is. The symptoms of autism are then emergent phenomena of how a brain might try to cope with that problem.
but then they just start a new relay.
Because you don't want to endanger yourself, others, or talk to a cop for a half hour?

This is worse than any financial penalty, even to me, and I ain't rich.
If anyone could predict this with any reasonable accuracy, there would never be another recession. Ergo, there is no answer to this.
I feel like "struct of arrays" style coding has really taken off in the past decade, and seems to be the best way to maximize memory operations these days.

Its not so much that "structure packing" is dead, as much as a wide variety of techniques have been developed above-and-beyond just simply structure packing. There's many ways to skin a cat these days, and packing your structures more intelligently is just one possible data optimization.
> "This is untrue" and yet I and others in this thread have been doing this for a long time without encountering the issue that you so confidently claim exists.

When you make a claim that supposedly applies to all people, a single counterpoint is sufficient to disprove the claim. It's as if you had said "all rabbits are black", then I showed you a white rabbit to counter that not all rabbits are black, and you come back with "look, I have a black rabbit here". How does that make sense to you?

> them showing reputation of my domains in their various reputation dashboards.

I never got access to their dashboards because my email volume was so low. If you somehow did, good for you.

> "Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those that are doing it."

I'm not "interrupting you from doing it". I'm interrupting you from giving bad advice to OTHER people.
I think your onto the right track here with the way Apple probably treats repairs but I can't imagine that the parts actually cost this much. Maybe for some specific things it would be decently high (processor, display) but $311 to self repair a screen seems a bit ridiculous when tons of other phones can have a very nice OLED screen put in for much, much less.
I would love to spend a winter at the south pole station. The biggest downside of being able to do my job remotely means I'll never get sent to cool places. :(
And, alas, found guilty:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/03/25/1088902...
Germany Ready to Support EU Ban on Russian Oil If It’s Gradual
This is definitely not representative of the book. But I loved it, as do many others, so I doubt you'll find your time wasted.
It is the same degree as the on campus program.
Coingrig now supports over 2300 Banks, Crypto, and Stocks
Coingrig is your Digital Wallet that can provide you an overview over your crypto, traditional banking finances and stocks.
HITRUST certification is the most demoralizing thing I've done in my life. You need a policy, a procedure and evidence of things like this:

Shared system resources (e.g., registers, main memory, secondary storage) are released back to the system, protected from disclosure to other systems/applications/users, and users cannot intentionally or unintentionally access information remnants.
I do think cookies get unfair treatment.

They are things that your browser happily rebroadcasts back to the server with no real UI for it outside of the shitty devtool bar made for devs, even after all this outcry about cookies.

It reminds me of the meme of the guy riding a bicycle, throwing a branch into the spokes (rebroadcasting cookies), and then roaring in pain on the ground about how evil websites/advertisers are tracking him with cookies.

That said, what a lame HN thread on a post about Haskell.
Node v18.0.0 Release
I agree with you at the industry level, but a characteristic of a burgeoning industry is that it's overextended on the margins. There are plenty of individual companies that are sustainable during flush times but not during a recession.
It's not that shaky. Averages are averages. A very-long-term average is not that unpredictable. People just don't like hearing that their selfishness is getting people killed, so they demand unachievable standards of evidence.
This really only applies where the heat is frequently so low that heat pumps cannot function. Antarctica, or maybe Siberia or northern Alaska.

Beyond that, heat pumps are still much more efficient than direct electric heating.

Also, if you have air conditioning at any point in the year, those incandescent lights are just going to make your air conditioner work that much harder.
> I don't think there's a single thing that I'm justified in saying is true with 100% probability.

Not even simple deductive proofs? 2+2=4 by definition. There's no probability for it being wrong. We couldn't do math if that wasn't the case. It's not even correct to assign those kinds of statements a probability. Now there is a possibility for humans to make mistakes with complicated proofs, as you pointed out. But the correct proof doesn't have a probability, only the belief in it being correct.

For empirical matters, I'm not sure what sort of probability you could assign to some skeptical scenario like it's all a dream, or nobody exists outside your mind, or we live inside a simulation. We take it that there's a world with other people for granted.

Sure, you can be fooled into thinking a black ball was pulled out of an urn of white balls, but whether the urn has all white balls is just a fact, not a probability. And under proper conditions, we should be able to verify that fact. To doubt that is to entertain wild skeptical scenarios where we can't really do science.

At any rate, I don't see that sort of reasoning as Bayesian. It's just radical skepticism.
I think you could pull off a Casioak :)
By unemployment insurance, do you mean state run unemployment?

Or are there reputable private insurers?
I maintain a few packages, some that have been open source for about 20 years.

Reason: I wrote them as part of other larger projects and they seemed useful as standalone things, so I peeled them out and open sourced them.

Motivation: people seem to find them useful, and they’re neat little projects. They’re fun to tinker with. I don’t care about how many users/stars/whatever that they get: I don’t use my open source work as resume content or anything.

Pay: I don’t want pay. Not being paid allows me to ignore the project when I don’t feel like dealing with it without feeling obliged to work on it. Besides, I get paid enough for the day job. Extra money is always nice, but the added stress/obligation it would entail outweighs the benefit of the extra cash.
I think they're saying that married people might have a little more leeway in changing careers because they have the stability of a second income in their household already.
For expensive objects, a lot of the price goes into the limited production runs. A number of these very expensive watches ($100,000k+) might be a single unique piece or limited runs of 100. They take a lot of time to develop, the production expenses are high because of the small numbers being produced, and it's reflected in the final price. For higher end mass produced watches, the expense is in the tighter tolerances, materials, and craftsmanship. You can search for macro videos online to see the difference between a typical $500, $5,000, and $50,000 watch. The extra details and care given to the construction of the watches is impressive. Yes, some brands charge a premium for their name. I'm aware of that, however, it doesn't necessarily indicate the buyer is trying to impress others. Someone could buy a Rolex because it's one of the most iconic watches in history and in their mind it's the peak of their watch hobby.

And you see this with nearly every hobby. If you look at the audiophile community, you'll see people with $20,000 speakers in their living room, yet they live a rather modest lifestyle. You can find people spending thousands of dollars on samurai swords to hang on their bedroom wall. These people are not trying to impress the world. They have a hobby and they are able to appreciate these items.

The special value of the diamonds? People have worn diamonds for ages. It's been ingrained in our culture that diamonds are significant as they've been worn by royalty and noble figures over the years and marketed as a symbol of love. They're also the hardest naturally occurring substance on the planet and look quite nice to the eye. Did you ever see a child dress up like a princess? They didn't do it because they wanted to impress others, they did it because it made them feel special. Wearing diamonds can have that same impact. It can make someone feel special, or represent to themselves their own successes and accomplishments in life. I looked at wedding bands the other year. Many of them had diamonds hidden on the inside of the band. If the purpose of diamond jewelry was only to impress others, why would they be hidden on these rings and only known to the wearer?

I'm not going to say expensive objects or diamonds are never used to impress others. I'm only saying that's one of many reasons why someone might make such a purchase. I don't think it's appropriate to see something of value and automatically assume the owner only bought it to impress you. If you talk to them about the purchase, they might be able to talk your ear off about their passion and what that object means to them.
Yeah, that's right. I talk about some of the details here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-7j0QlGwFk

We're working on some more formal documentation of this, both to help customers understand how to optimize things, and to join the research conversation about container loading. Our solution combines deterministic flattening, demand loading, erasure coding, convergent encryption, and a couple of other cool technologies to both accelerate the average case and drive down tail latency.
> 90% seems way too high to be people who are actively wanting to leave

We are talking about the people who clean up the nastiest human waste that our bodies are capable of producing. I was already surprised that this number was ever less than 100% tbh
Yes, they have massive unions but that doesn't seem to be helping.
Funny enough, monoids/semigroups are one of my favorite parts of Haskell and I really miss having an explicit abstraction for them in other languages.

A lot of the code I write is looping over all of the values of a data structure to either look for a certain condition being true (any/all boolean monoid), look for an extremal value (min/max semigroup), or combine all of the values in the data structure (sum/product/average monoid). The product of a monoid is also a monoid, so if you want to do two or more of those operations at once, the code remains simple and orthogonal while only traversing the structure once.

In particular, all of the those operations are nicely expressed as one-lines using foldMap (https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.9.1.0/docs/Data-F...). If you have a data structure called `xs` and each element in data structure has an integer field called `size` you can do the following by using foldMap with different Monoid instances.

Sum the sizes:

let (Sum total_size) = foldMap (\x -> Sum (size x)) xs

Check if any size is greater than 5:

let (Any over_threshold) = foldMap (\x -> Any ((size x) > 5)) xs

Do both in one pass:

let (Sum total_size, Any over_threshold) = foldMap (\x -> (Sum (size x), Any ((size x) > 5))) xs

Get the first entry with a size greater than 5:

let (First over_threshold) = foldMap (\x -> First (if (size x) > 5 then Just x else Nothing)) xs

Get all entries with a size greater than 5:

let over_threshold = foldMap (\x -> if (size x) > 5 then [x] else []) xs

Since all of these operations are associative, we can completely change the data structure or run the operations in parallel or concurrently and the code will still behave exactly the same. These nice properties mean that when I'm thinking about these sorts of tasks in any language, I think about what monoid or semigroup captures a given operation, rather than any of the mechanics of writing the loop. I find clarifies my thinking a lot.
Definitely this is what they came up with to try to steer the narrative away from requiring right to repair becoming actual law.
Software Tools for Lego
The healthcare industry disaster wasn't born out of regulatory control - though money does now follow the regulations. The disaster was born out of regulatory mistakes(in particular, look back to the 1940's when the govt made it tax free to offer health insurance as a benefit). [1]

The industry is an onion and in order to understand why it is the way it is today you need to peel back all of the layers that have been added by the govt over time and the unintended consequences of those.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2020/10/07/921287295/history-of-employer...
The word "excuse" doesn't require the negative connotation you're ascribing to it.
What are you interested in doing after graduation?
Lexicography with R
I believe you can even be personally liable for HIPPA security violations as a user or dev of a healthcare system. That seems a bit scary. I agree that regulation persuades people not to do things out of fear of breaking the law. We see this in it's intentional form with regulation of other things such as abortion, guns, etc. Put so many laws in place that risk of accidentally breaking one and receiving an extensive punishment isn't worth it.
Stop using Alpine Docker images
> they are demonstrably, clearly broken

Well, gmail, MS and Yahoo have their own ideas about what "broken" means. Google in particular forces changes to standards by simply implementing them in their own services. Those changes never make it easier for small-fry postmasters; so I conclude that Google would like all small-fry mailservers to disappear.

Discrimation through spam-filtering isn't unthinkable, and it would be hard to prove (especially if they claimed there was "AI" involved in the filters). Google used to have really good spam filtering; I can only suppose that the reason it's got worse is that they want it worse.
13 seems low, but I had 3 years of full time programming experience by the time I was 17.

It's really important to note that I'm not particularly gifted. I was required to work "real jobs" over the summer starting at 15 and the only way to convince my parents that programming was a "real job" was to make as much as I could working at the community pool. After the first summer I kept working over the semesters nearly full time. I was doing freelance Perl CGI and PHP+HTML+JS junk. my main advantages were:

1) I could do piece work for $8/hr,

(2) I presented professionally because I was usually the only native English speaker bidding on the project,

(3) I was a single person doing full stack + sales/bidding (the competing offshore outfits mostly sliced up labor between backend, frontend, and sales due to language barriers and extremely low-skilled programming labor. For projects of the size I was bidding on this introduced a lot of expenses/overhead without any real advantages), and

(4) I was available in US time zones when bidding on these projects. Even during the school year my after-school availability was way better than the offshore shops could usually offer, and I could answer emails during the school day.

To reiterate: not a genius! Just a kid slinging super simple HTML+JS+SQL+PHP/Perl. I didn't even know SQL for real; I knew CREATE, SELECT (without joins), UPDATE, INSERT, and DELETE. Joins were implemented using multiple queries and for loops. Didn't matter for my clients, who just wanted cheap CMSes/ordering systems/etc. for random folks' .com get rich quick schemes, pizza shops who thought they really needed a customer website, etc. I'm pretty sure grubhub/slice/google maps/social media destroyed my old market a decade ago ;)

So a real genius getting there by 13 seems like an extreme outlier but not at all impossible.
Thank you for the advice. I generally try to silence the cynic in me, thank you for reinforcing that.

> ONLY judge yourself

This is great and very useful advice.
>Disney is hardly the only business which has negotiated preferential treatment.

Are you making the case that it's very common, and so it's not special nor unfair? I am very skeptical that more than %0.001 of businesses (1 in 100,000) benefit from these special government privileges. Especially if you consider all people, since corporations are legally people. It smells like crony capitalist corruption to me...far from normal, and very unfair to everyone else. Shouldn't be happening. Take it all away, I don't care what the motivation is, because to me, it's not harm to remove corruption.
It's doable, and it's quite easy
My tin hat is twitching. I live in another state near an Air Force Base. My father was killed by a glioblastoma 3 years ago. My boss was diagnosed with one 3 months after my father died. A friend was diagnosed with one a year after that. Next thing I know, I'm catching wind of stories from nurses and aides about the odd uptick of these things over the last decade. I chalk it up to better detection methods, etc, but there exists a nagging tickle at the back of my mind that someone wittingly or unwittingly made a decision in our area that is resulting in an unforeseen risk of brain tumors.

We have to be careful in this territory, though. It is also possible we are trying to explain shadows that were always there.

I do hope the folks in that area get some real answers, though.
One of the more interesting repercussions I see is that Musk wants to
open up the algorithms. There's a lot of dirty secrets in that code,
because a clever analysts will be able to go back through the timeline
and see what past events have been influenced and how those algorithms
have been used politically. Of all the things Musk promises to do,
this is the one I expect him to get cold feet and reverse on.
Charle’s Law
You're talking a lot about fans and ac systems which help you bear the heat.

In the UK such protections are installed in almost no homes, as I'm sure you've noticed. Would it still be comfortable in India if such technology was limited?

When does it start to feel cold in India and when do people begin to use their central heating systems? Are central heating systems common in the warmer regions?
> An honest call for freedom of speech would defend it against all censorship, public and private.

I cannot disagree with this statement more. What speech you choose to publish and not is a vital part of free speech. If I publish a motorcycle newsletter, and choose to publish a letter to the editor about why Harley's are great, and don't publish another about why Harley's suck that is part of my protected speech. It arguably makes my magazine worse, but that's for my readers to decide. Perhaps they are tired of reading endless articles ragging on Harley's and are pleased to have a publication where they can escape it.
Don't US banks have financial regulations that they can't just take savings deposits and buy stocks? I thought they have narrow leeway with risk and deposits are mostly used for loans.
Nothing can be done. Everything will eventually succumb to spam. Spam is omnipotent. In fact, Google and FB are just giant very successful spammers. The only difference between Mastodon and email is that email is 40 years older. As Mastodon grows, spammers will take over.