skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The fact that almost all websites use cookie banners kinda disproves your theory.

Really not true. And it gets better for every year.

Analytics and advertising does not need tracking.

> I understand that your argument will be "so close down those websites". But how about you do not visit them instead?

I try to avoid. I'm not perfect, sometimes I can't be bothered. Cookie-banners helps me decide which sites not to visit and is a constant reminder of what crappy companies still rely on them.

It is a feature. And it is pretty damning to see which developers ruins their UX for this.

Here is the thing, this has run unchecked for far too long and it takes time to change. Just look in this thread (or any other cookie-related thread on this site or on any site on the internet). People that are supposed to know still are confused and have absolute no idea that cookie-banners is an active choice for site operators. They have/had no incentive to care. Now they do, but they are so deep in denial that it will take years and years for them to even realize that the "cookie-law" was never about cookies or that these banners are an active choice.

The default is tracking, for no real reason. Sites that earn on the order of cents absolutely wreak havoc on the internet just because developers are clueless.

But the best part is that it gets better for every year. Really, it is so slow so you barely notice but if you you'd take a snapshot today and one from a year ago the difference is stark.

Only last month google of all places (because of fines, obviously) changed the youtube banner so that rejecting is the same number of clicks as acceptance. Previously rejecting took five clicks (or was it six?) and some scrolling to be able to perform all those clicks.
I've never heard/read/thought of "code smell" as anything BUT referring to maintainability issues.

When you're debugging a concrete issue and have a hunch what might be the cause, that's not a "code smell."
> By using a tamper-evident to store compliance records, you can keep them in one place and simplify presenting them to an auditor. You can cryptographically prove they haven't been tampered with.

Is this realistically the case? Won't most auditors instead say "Microsoft Access with a password is fine. But your homegrown cryptographic black box we can't trust."?
Return to monke. That is the solution.
Again, already covered here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31227560 (and flagged) and here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31290072
I think I would have put whitespace at the top of the list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_langua...
There is no such thing as blanket consent and necessary cookies don't require consent.
> I am open for being corrected

No. No you're not. Because you keep shifting goalposts and ignoring inconvenient truths.

First you claimed that "almost none of the techniques "he" brags about can be applied to a real terminal".

To which I linked and quoted Windows Terminal team: "We actually took the same approach Casey suggested. A lot of terminals implement it that way."

Then you shifted the goalpost to saying "We should distinguish here between renderer and VT terminal backend."

To which I replied: he implements VT parsing and rendering.

Is it a complete VT parsing and rendering pipeline? No. Does it invalidate his approach? No.

And to put this into additional perspective, Windows Terminal was abysmally slow with no VT parsing, and with no color output to begin with. It couldn't handle most of Unicode, wide characters and dozens of other things.

And so on. Now it's "sickness", "plain garbage" and other stuff. Tell me, are you perhaps on Windows Terminal team? Because that's a fine if exaggerated example of their behaviour just a year ago. Now they are like "yup, we're doing exactly the same things that Casey is doing".

But wait, don't tell me. I'm definitely not going to engage in this useless thread any longer.
> We know Tesla's autopilot is safer on average,

We don't even know this (even if you restrict it to highway miles), since it's not an apples to apples comparison. General safety statistics include old cars with fewer safety features independent of who's driving the car.
I was thinking he has a point, then switched to the second list and now think he doesn't.

You can't bring 2007 back.
Perhaps it just triggers some wasted CPU time, as opposed to incorrect behavior.
I think the argument is a bit pointless: most likely somebody’s bonus or career prospects depend on getting a high opt-in results.

Even worse, often the banner is outsourced to parties like onetrust or quantcast. In that case, the site will only ask if the supplier claims to be compliant, and how successful they are in coercing visitors to comply.
> So if it’s going to make that much money per year and that’s “independent of supply and demand” then why should the U.S tax payer help fund the project?

Because growing the economy by $461 million a year grows the economy and hence tax receipts, which then can be spent on good things or on reducing taxes. Note that that’s $461 million for one industry. Reducing shipping costs has benefits that accrue to everyone who uses goods that are shipped on internal waterways or sells them, i.e. everybody. Doing things that benefit everyone is very much in the bailiwick of the government.
Steps to Organizational Change Without the Drama
I think this is like machine maintenance.

Take a delivery truck. Regular maintenance detects, and prevents breakdowns during deliveries. EG, oil changes, lubing, brake pad changes, etc.

Scheduled repairs are far cheaper, and take less time than unannounced repairs.

If the truck breaks down during deliveries, the repairs are still needed, may be more severe.

It also require loads of extra work, a replacement truck must show up and offload deliveries, a tow truck dispatched, someone had to organize this, customers upset and called, etc, etc.

As you say, humans are the same. Reduced sleep and leisure time (scheduled maintenance)?

Well, it's far more work to deal with in the long run. It takes more maintenance to recover from a lack of it.
Unix command line conventions over time
The other argument against writing to disk is that SSDs will wear out.
UK based, and actually the opposite, company wants to hire more developers and I think QA too.
Only language with significant amount of real-life code written get to compete. There's play and there's work.
I want all the niceties of modern society to include high quality widely available single-payer health care, sane non-captured media, politicians who are responsible to voters and not to corporations and extremely rich individuals, significant social investment in education and basic research, no forced personal debt, climate stability, and no indirect incentives which reward crime as a workable path out of extreme poverty.

As you say - how hard can it be?
Unless the NSA, FBI, or whoever comes out and says oh we broke Tor, I don't see how you could ever get a definite answer to that question. And I don't really see that happening.

Or it could leaked, on accident or by a whistleblower. But that's pretty uncommon.
Great article, very well explained.
> For example, one situation where you want an intentionally slow algorithm is when dealing with passwords.

This is true, but there's also more to the story. Modern password hashes like Argon2 force attackers into a "time-memory tradeoff", to try to reduce the advantage that specialized hardware has over the general-purpose computers that human beings use. I find that a lot of folks have memorized a summary like "slow hashes are good", and that's doubly unfortunate, because 1) like the article says, fast hashes are good, and 2) slow hashes in and of themselves are no longer the best we can do for password security. I often wish that password hashes weren't even called "hashes", because it's just a very different problem that they're solving.

> or even just a high number of rounds of SHA-512

Please god no :)
I will explain the reasonings, but I hope that you don't have to read on and just believe my intuition that you really ate beef. This is better for your peace of mind I think :-)

- Dog meat is served in specific places, it's not something widely available (like you noticed in your reply). The place that serves it will usually have "Dog meat" in the name of the restaurant (in Vietnamese: "Thit cho")

- You mentioned sitting outside on "kindergarten-sized chair". This is what Vietnamese people call "quán vỉa hè" and not many of those places serve dog meat.

- You mentioned "a filet of ..." "a piece of meat" "a bit charred" and "red". Out of those 4 bits of information, only "a bit charred" makes sense for dog meat. But dog meat is always cooked into some special dishes, and never "filet" with just "one piece".

- If the menu was all in Vietnamese and only one item had English, saying "American Beefsteak" and being priced higher, then it would be a special cut of Beef aimed towards foreigners.

- "Gamey" "A bit stringy" "Tough" is exactly the words describing texture of Vietnamese beef, some specialty beef places will have this type of beef cut (remember, you're in a country where for most people the best way to eat beef is to have it diced thin stir-fried, cooked well done. people don't usually eat steaks.)

Keep in mind that:

- This varies a lot depending on the parts of the country where you visited. Since you did not specify where you ate this, I'm assuming Urban/City outskirts area, belonging to a Southern city/province or Northern city/province and am basing my intuition on this. If this happened in a very rural area or mountainous area, then my comments on dog meat being served in special places does not apply, but the comments about the meat you described still apply.

Some links to see:

- Some exotic cuts of beef in Vietnam: https://vinpearl.com/vi/bo-to-tay-ninh-va-12-dia-chi-thuong-... ( archive.today link: http://archive.today/Hr9DY )

- Dog meat page on Vietnamese Wikipedia (graphic images, beware): https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%E1%BB%8Bt_ch%C3%B3 (some images from S.Korea and China mixed in, Vietnamese prepare their dogs differently)
For my two open-source projects, Fugu [0] (privacy-first product analytics) and Mapzy [1] (store finder), everyone can self-host for free without any feature restrictions (AGPLv3 license). We then offer a hosted version that people can use who don't care about self-hosting at a price that makes self-hosting not worth it for most users. Of course, there are other reasons to self-host outside of cost.

0: https://github.com/shafy/fugu

1: https://github.com/mapzy/mapzy
That's the whole point of a TPM/Pluton/etc, remote attestation and corporate control over people.
Developers mistaking their personal limitations for fundamental truths and so forth.
Unfortunately, even if the Dredge Act is repealed and everything got dredged, Climate Change will raise sea levels and change the course of rivers, probably making the investment in dredging worse than a wash.

I apologize in advance for this rant. My alternative idea is going to be unpopular. How about we take what we've figured our about what's causing Climate Change, where all those things actually are, and stop it all immediately, by force if necessary, and just deal with the interruption in luxury. And then we immediately figure out another way for all the things. And make the uber rich pay for it all. I mean... would it take more than 10 years to get back to where we were without killing the planet and everything on it? I could go 10 years without electricity, nearly everybody could, but it wouldn't even be remotely like that, we'd just have a lot less power for a while. Really, I feel like if the air was right now actually smokey everywhere from pollution from burning bunker fuel, and temperatures were insane, shippers would still want to dredge because they are losing money. I think the author has great points, and I like his style, I just don't give a damn about... Goddamn ships. Oh, those poor shipping companies, and those poor poor consumers.
So is C++ and JavaScript. The languages themselves are not bad.
I have seen some forms of addiction up close, but I think the term is more general and we shouldnt taboo every with which some people have extremely bad emotional association with.

IMO I should be able to say I was forced to do some work even if I wasnt in a concentration camp myslef. Or that it bugs me that something is messy even if I dont have extreme OCD.

Internet addiction is a normalized term and I think withdrawal fron losing somebody you love or even a place can be more accute.

Also I'm sorry about whatever you had to experience related to addiction.
> For example, if f is defuned in a file, throughout that file you can assume (f x) refers to that f and does not have to be looked up dynamically at runtime.

Unless you declare them "notinline".

http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/d_inli...

> so there is no motivation to write a method unless you actually want the dynamic dispatch methods provide.

Methods have some different functionality in CL than in most languages. For example, you can have the methods from the entire inheritance hierarchy (well, the classes that have had that method specialized for them) all be called as, essentially a pipeline of methods.

https://lispcookbook.github.io/cl-cookbook/clos.html#method-...

But this is a discussion about dynamism of the object system, and most of that is defined before runtime. How about changing an object's class at runtime? https://www.cliki.net/site/HyperSpec/Body/stagenfun_change-c...
> but I think intentions provide a higher floor for the downside risk.

The quote at the end was supposed to convey the opposite message.
> Most subvolumes can be mounted with noatime

This noatime thing is an old-wive's tale that needs to die.

AFAIK, most "modern" filesystems (XFS,BTRFS etc.) all default to relatime

relatime maintains atime but without the overhead

EDIT TO ADD:

Actually,I've just done a bit of searching .... relatime has been the kernel mount default since >= 2.6.30 ! [1]

[1] https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_30 (scroll to 1.11. Filesystems performance improvements)
Macbooks are the worst, they don't even HDD led, or even "switched on" led!. Quite often, I can't tell if it's on already and coming back from sleep, or do I need to press "Power" button again. What a frustrating design.
There is not "one" community of OSS developers who either all want money or not. Some devs want to monetize / get something back and maybe work full-time on their OSS projects and others are totally against monetizing OSS.

From a current survey it looks like 41% of OSS developers want to monetize and 33% would like to work full-time [https://dev.to/joergrech/state-of-oss-monetization-2022-surv...]

So if you have a better approach to monetize OSS go for it.
Any agreement that does not make the parties better off overall is rejected because it is quite literally worse than nothing. That an agreement does not split gains equally between participants because they don’t have equal leverage in no way means that trade agreements freely entered into make the participants worse off.
I don't believe so - QEMU and proprietary hypervisors can emulate TPMs just fine.
"Director of AI at Tesla, leading the Autopilot Vision team"

Whichever way you cut it, that's a pretty significant situation for FSD at this time.

In my eyes, FSD is over, and has been for 2 years. They'll get to Lane Assist ^2 but that's it. None of the pretty youtube videos convince me, and there are just as many which are terrible.
Which works until Amazon becomes flooded with second rate product sources from Alibaba boosted by fake reviews, and a "job" means back-breaking work in a warehouse, or a precarious delivery gig with no security.

This society only operates because a lot of people don't care to understand how it really works. You get your trinkets more quickly, but the negative externalities for others are huge and damaging.

And there's a good chance that sooner or later those negatives will affect you too.

Meanwhile the lift from increased efficiency is often temporary anyway.
On the Microsoft world you get that automated via ETW and in case of running on Azure, Application Insights.

With debug symbols you can even pinpoint those events into code.

The only competition I know to these workflows is using Java alongside Flight Recorder.
> Please take into consideration that Casey's definition of the solution as "simple" can sound quite insulting as well.

It can sound insulting only to people who originally claimed that what Casey suggested requires "doctoral level research into performance". Only to then implement exactly what he suggested.

> If someone stated that something is "simple" with an overtone of "are you blind", instead of showing more humility

Please re-read the original GitHub issue from the start: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362

He is there trying to understand an issue, providing suggestions etc. And generally being baffled how a modern terminal on a modern machine can output text at something like 5 frames per second.

After that Windows Terminal team barges in with "what you’re doing is describing something that might be considered an entire doctoral research project in performant terminal emulation" to... only do exactly that later.

And what Casey said was going to be simple is this: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/10362#issuecomm...

Tell me how this is insulting to anyone except the people who now claim that "oh we'd been aware about this approach before Casey opened the issue"?
For me, ADHD. I don't have a solution for OP.

I'm going to go out of bounds with regards to the original question and maybe overstep but I would suggest that the mindset that this statement hints at

> A person who i would envy and want to be like or someone who no one cares about and is pathetic

is going to detract far more from life than idle Internet-browsing would.

I used to make similar judgement statements with regards to myself and my future but once I realized I don't devalue anyone that spends a lot of idle time online I shouldn't allow myself to devalue myself.

I strive to direct my attention to where I want it to go, and I fail routinely. I've attached my self-worth more to the fact that I strive to direct my attention, and while I do allow myself to take it seriously when I fail I do not allow myself to take it personally.

Attaching my self-worth to if I succeeded or failed was a too fickle and shallow well from which to derive something so important.
This is an awesome "hack".
> It means the statement that "it's meaningless" is, in itself, meaningless. That liberates you to construct any system of meaning that you like.

No. The idea that your life has no transcendent meaning does not free you to “create any system of meaning you like”.

It means your life has no transcendent meaning.

Now the statement, “Your life has no meaning.” is not knowable, but it is true or false. Personally I believe, but cannot, prove that it is false. My point is that if you believe it is true, any follow-up claim you want to make is moot.

What’s even the point?
Eve Online is getting Microsoft Excel support
There are examples from nindalf and freedomben above.

Why do people think it? If they see me say "I work at Google" in the comment, and then say some sort of opinion or recommendation or prediction, they might think that that's an opinion that's widely held or officially promoted within Google, or that the recommendation is something that Google recommends or that the prediction is something Google predicts. The sentence "I work at Google" could be thought of as something I'm invoking to say "I'm an authority believe me", or "I work at Google, so I can provide you info from Google", rather than a disclaimer about a conflict of interest. That's why "I work at Google" is often followed by "but my thoughts are my own".
Debugging JNI is super easy in Eclipse and Netbeans.
When Should You Over-Engineer a Project?
Only if you want someone special to trust your hardware, then it requires effort. Otherwise not.
> And how well have public health campaigns that told people "stop eating delicious things because they're unhealthy" fared?

I did not work with me for a long time of my life. My experience was that it was enough to consciously only eat meat one or two times a week and make myself aware of the supply chain effects (after reading an entertaining book about a self experiment of going all the way to fructarian)

After a few weeks I both did not crave for meat anymore, actually realized the low quality of a lot of it as my taste shifted, and I realized how difficult it was caring about the origin of food. Me and my now wife became vegetarian actually for the convenience of not having to care that much anymore and because of the many disappointments in taste.

Actually I cannot get all away from good cheese and milk. Seemingly I too much enjoy the taste and it is convenient to at least get an organic produce in the average super market.

Edit: waht i forgot to mention. After more than 10 years of rather unhealthy vegetarian diet and unhealthy lifestyle with not enough sports, I got a full checkup at the doctor's lat year. To my surprise all my values seem really good. While I think this is to some extent due to the fact that thresholds were determined for average meat eaters and there is no strong causality between those values and health, I take it as a nice side effect.
I guess you could build a simple "stub" TPM using an arduino nano that just speaks enough of the TPM protocol to make Windows happy. It would have to store some bits of binary data somewhere, and maybe have to implement some basic cryptogrphic routines, but I guess it could be possible?
ProofWiki is an online compendium of mathematical proofs
Not sure, but he/she might be referring to the residency through {work/refugee/student status} other than family reunion.
I think he was shadowbanned on HN due to his racist remarks.
ODFM, an omics data resource from microorganisms associated with fermented foods
Really cool apology! I wonder why you're choosing this hill to die on with this tone. Belligerence in the original post is what led to this and you're continuing with the same tone. You and your team do deserve to be dunked on
> But the main difference would be that failure modes in CS tend to be binary - a piece of code produces the expected result or it doesn't.

I think if you’re talking about CS and code you’re right - it’s a very pure and deterministic system. But if you consider software engineering at scale, you do get scenarios where failure states emerge in a gradual fashion, like the OP example of a worn mechanism. An example would be monitoring error rates on a large fleet of servers. You expect a certain background level of failures, but when the rate starts to rise you might be observing the beginning of some kind of cascading failure mode. The errors might be manageable up to a point, but it isn’t always clear when the system will tip beyond that point. Post-mortems of cloud platform outages often mention these kinds of failures, because they typically arise from complex interactions between different layers which put the system into a state which nobody anticipated.
Good idea. Looks like Paid Hosting similar to Elasticsearch, MongoDB, etc. that can later be converted into a Startup.

Btw. the benefit of a hosted version is not only that you do to not have to host it yourself, but also that the maintenance (updating, upgrading, scaling servers, backups, etc.) is done by the hoster.