skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been keeping an eye on non-MSM sources, and I've of two minds:

* Is there any evidence that what you say is true? I find it hard to believe most news sources these days, and most nation states often boost their own bravado through press conferences.

* If it is true, then I'm glad that US representatives haven't wasted taxpayer money by sending military aid when it's obviously not needed. I lean libertarian like many others on this forum, so I resonate a lot with similar commentary here.
> I don't need to backup my Discord

If you don't back up your Discord, what will you do when Discord changes how it works or stops working?
Trackless train. Backcountry train
most of the year it's frozen over, the barge transport season to take things to nunavut is very short.
Fun Fact. FileMerge.app has remained essentially unchanged since it was introduced in NeXTSTEP (I think 3.2 or earlier) in the early 1990s.
If you are going through all the trouble to make a nice macOS build, why wouldn't you notarize it?

I know that it's mostly security theather, but those scary warnings that Apple shows for software they haven't notarized must scare a lot of people away.
Depending on your needs, AWS is hands down one of the most expensive ways to put workloads into the cloud.

At the same time it’s a bit difficult to compare them apples-to-apples. In my experience EC2 instances aren’t designed for reliability as much as they are designed to meet exactly what AWS can put on the invoice as being the value exchanged for money. I’m not bashing their design goals, they’re just different from “traditionally VPS-first” firms.

If you’re running not-huge On Demand instances you can definitely get much better performance for your dollar on something like Linode or DigitalOcean, OVH, Hetzner, etc. And then you can still some of the AWS services where they have much less comprehensive competition. IMHO, you can beat EC2 all day but feature-wise it’s extremely difficult to beat S3.
> with Ruby like sytnax

People use Ruby because they like the way it works, not because of the syntax.
I’ve always been puzzled by 3-way merge being remotely common. It’s almost “Here’s your latest file on two branches, good luck!” — There is obviously one leg missing but dare pointing it to a developer and he will tell you “But we have everything there” and when you draw a graph to explain the conceptual problem, “Ok but in general the two ancestors are common.”

A fortnight later, they wreck a merge and they spend their afternoon re-merging conflicts they’ve already had.

Such people almost always use the git tools provided in IntelliJ.
> snake pace

You mean snail or like moving in an "S"?
Thank you! This is great
The inflation rate also hit 13.55% in 1980 and didn't go much below 6% between 1973-1982.
It's such a pretty app, but I can't bring myself to drop $150 for it.
> So not only is this metric inaccurate, but it incentivizes programming practices that are a counter to building good software.

There is a critical error in this statement that some would label as 'subtle' but it's about as subtle as a rusty axe to the forehead. Judging people by lines of code doesn't 'incentivize [] practices that are counter to building good software'. It punishes you for writing good software.

While we do need to be aware of the negative consequences of inaction, that's a problem to be solved once you have stopped actively digging a hole. That's a problem to be solved once you have stopped pushing people into that hole. That's a problem to be solved once you've stopped publicly congratulating people for not being pushed into the hole. By you. With an audience. There is nothing remotely subtle or nuanced about that distinction.

There's an old adage that if you make laws people can't respect, then they will stop respecting the law. This is but one route to that problem.
Hypothetically, socialism could solve the problem of allocation of resources by throwing enough smart people at the problem.

To me the corruption potential (which has been realized everytime socialism has been implemented) is the main argument against.
Ingrams path produces such people because his path is broken. Look at the results. He had a novel idea for how to “optimise Buddhism” and it had bad results

I don’t really think it matters what Ingrams favourite books are if his methodology has been so destructive
I meant it as a joke (hopefully), but a technical reply to your question would be "violating the non-disclosure agreement": https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/28/22696463/tesla-fsd-beta-n...
What are the differences between “Rash driving” and “Zigzag driving”?
Apologies, too late to edit now.
You think Shopify should've written their backend in Rust? I really wonder if people saying this have ever used Rust.

Ruby is great for developers of all skill to learn and be productive.

Rust is fast as the devil but you have to be a damn good coder to learn it. Even then I doubt you can be as productive managing memory all the damn time. It's a low-level language great at low-level things.

Ruby is a great option for Shopify. Rust is a great option for Firefox's Servo (though that project failed so maybe not).
> greyscale highlighting (which I've not looked into yet) could well work out.

It works nicely for books. Can't see why it wouldn't work for screens.
FileMerge is a complete app. There's nothing more that it needs to do. It's trivial to understand, there is no learning curve, and it is my go-to tool when I need to quickly diff two files or folders.
https://github.com/cantino/mcfly it uses small neural engine and pretty fast
I'll do you one better: it's turning HCL into *an opaque golang intermediary*[1] of cloud API calls

It's like a game of telephone were every new participant in the chain is one more place to have "let me help you" turn into "what the hell was that?"

1 = and that's not even getting into the tire fire of the providers being either some Internet rando or an already overloaded team trying to have PRs make it through and out to release. I believe the the recent "we're not reviewing PRs anymore, exhausted" was just scoped to the hashicorp/terraform repo specifically, but it could very easily also apply to every code-gen shim that sits between TF and the underlying cloud SDK
> Trains usually go on rails

Usually indeed. Besides accidental derailments, there was a time in the late 90s when a town in Canada intentionally derailed a diesel-electric locomotive and drove it down the street half a mile under its own power so they could use it as an emergency generator. The road needed to be repaired, but apparently the locomotive was fine and eventually returned to regular service.
Thanks for the suggestion; that’s the plan. However, the options are quite limited when my personal capacity to invest caps at 75k USD right now. Still, working onward and upward (hopefully)…
Note that it’s not really a supported option and was supposed to be removed from the installer for the latest release but that was cancelled because there wasn’t enough time to do so before the freeze. It’s certain to be dropped in the next release.

So by all means, play with it but don’t consider it to be stable.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1966...

https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-installer/ubiquity/+git/u...

Edit: fixed link.
I feel this too. At an earlier role we had a well-architected PHP codebase that we were throwing away and replacing with graphql, scala, and angular. I was a junior dev so they threw me into fixing the "unimportant" legacy PHP system (which just so happened to be the thing making money for the company) instead of the shiny new rewrite. Never been happier in my life.
Just 50s culture I guess, the typical Fallout book of nuclear power.
>but doing that in the dark is really only possible with LIDAR at the moment.

Which seems a good enough reason that we need to add regulation that these vehicles must have multiple redundant sensors that can operate at any permutation of sunlight/night/rain/snow/fog.

Radar can also see at night, but has poor resolution. Sonar is good at looking through fog but may be unreliable at highway speeds. Lidar really seems like the only viable option here. Maybe even lidar + radar.

I think it's interesting that Elon Musk always says we don't need lidar because it's a visual world. Lidar is a visual sensor. Just an active one.
"Road train" is a monicker for multi-trailer semis. These are quite common in Australia. In North America we sometimes see doubles, but I don't think they quite qualify for the name.
Performance. Making every network-element, every hop, have to add something to the routing table is slow. QUIC is either 1 or 0-RTT encryption, depending on if there's existing contact (irrc), so I guess we can't argue encryption delays matter much. There's other abstract concerns though- having multiple short-lived connections in your OS and routing tables consumes resources- minimizing resource consumption is a decent goal.

I don't know how long the "connection" is expected to remain around. It could be long lived. QUIC is over UDP, and connection becomes more a QUIC concept & pattern of use than otherwise. But I don't see how this is worse than what we do now, which involves an ongoing long dialog with one or two select dns servers. I guess one could say there's some ambiguity at the moment, now, about who exactly a request is coming from, if you allow for NAT, and that starts to go away some here. It may indeed be an ok idea to limit the lifetime of these QUIC connections, but you'd probably need to start taking the 1-RTT latency hit for each new connection to really reap a privacy gain- pretend you had never talked to the server before. The spec notes this[1] & mentions the speed vs privacy trade off.

[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9250.html#name-session-res...
Technically, it might be more feasible. But is it really necessary? What actual benefits to users could more P2P bring?
If you are sharing a long video file you likely either work with video or are sharing pirated media. If you work with video then the cost of cloud storage is nothing. It’s like $2/month for hundreds of gb storage which is more than worth the price. P2P is unworkable, you have to coordinate with the receiver to send the file while cloud storage is async. You upload it and email the link and your done.

Skype file transfer used to be p2p and it was a huge pain. If one side closed their laptop or something it would just kill the transfer.
> Even assuming C-T, it's an enthymeme and not a syllogism. The unstated leg is something roughly like "the universe is a computer." Assuming that is basically assuming what is to be proved with respect to whether or not the brain is a computer or some higher category of reckoner that happens to be able to do everything a TM can, at least with enough time, pencil, and paper.

I don't think I'm making that assumption. I'm making an assumption that the process by which the brain determines outputs and inputs has some degree of repeatability - which I think is more than reasonable. Whether the brain is or isn't a computer in the classical sense of the word, there is clearly computation happening that relates inputs to outputs, right?

That is to say, if I took the same person and made them live exactly the same life (that is, everything outside how they react reacts the same way), I'd expect the outcomes as we repeat it more and more to approach some kind of distribution after a fixed amount of time t (that diverges as t gets larger exponentially). Note that this doesn't assume the presence or absence of free will, by the law of large numbers, it works either way.

From then on there is some kind of effective, repeatable procedure, so the brain does do some kind of computation. And of course that's not the only thing the brain does. But we don't need to have the universe as a computer, just the brain.

> There's a related metaphysical question too. I'm not sure how to state it exactly, but it's implied by questions like "When I throw a ball is reality computing a parabola and applying necessary modifications?" The alternative is that whatever way reality determines how that ball moves, it's not by what we'd call an effective procedure.

That's an interesting question. My attempt at an answer is that, if we were to understand the universe as a continuous process which can be defined by some kind of (recursive) semi-random, differential rules - but with maximum frequency - then yes you could say that reality is an ongoing computation. Or you could take another crack at it and think that reality is just as set of probabilities and joint probabilities that merely get (partially) sampled - in which case there isn't really any computation happening, we're just observing a tiny sliver of reality as the ball travels the probability space. There are certainly even other ways to see it. I think we it's a matter of perspective as to how you see it.

Thanks for the conversation! It is great and I've been able to develop my understanding of these concepts :)
> Musk is being openly antagonistic towards twitter leadership and denigrating the people that work there.

Seeing how badly twitter has been managed, (for a laugh, check out their "R&D" expenditure), how mush of a loss making enterprise it has been, and how it always at risk of a take over, is it that surprising?

If it has been Elliot Management (the previous rumored takeover threat for twitter) a group far less prone to public display than Musk... would things have been any less different? The only difference is that Musk is being open about what he has been doing, which I see a public good, frankly.

Elliot's track record shows it is far more vicious in layoffs of cuts.

----

https://fortune.com/2013/10/25/why-is-twitter-spending-so-mu...

https://www.rndtoday.co.uk/latest-news/is-twitters-rd-provid...

https://www.axios.com/2021/11/30/jack-dorsey-twitter-departu...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevindowd/2022/02/27/wall-stree...
yep, otherwise you risk some state being in memory and not on the disk
This is a pretty petty attitude. The point of these social programs is that they are tied to household need - not employment. What's the point of welfare programs if they should only be tied to unemployment?

Moreso, EBT eligibility is usually determined by household size. So I guess it's Wal-Mart's fault for not paying people based on how many children they have?
Regarding cloud sign-up: there's some potentially relevant commentary at https://github.com/balenalabs/balena-sound/issues/558
> I'm more interested in the trade offs they evaluated on this front, or if its such that 500K is just a "hail mary see what happens" situation

It's actually much more than 500K. I think they have at least 6 very senior devs working on it¹. I think 3 million $ per year is a very conservative estimation.

That said, it's definitely very mysterious what their analysis was.

¹=https://shopify.engineering/porting-yjit-ruby-compiler-to-ru...
Governments have demonstrated that they do not have to accept their own currency [0] and have demonstrated a willingness to drive the value of their currency down. [1]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis...
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932022_Turkish_curr...
Housecats are descended from the African wildcat, not the European one. The African wildcat forms colonies just like housecats.

Much of the myth that cats are naturally solitary creatures comes from people studying the behaviors of the European wildcat and attributing them to housecats, which is wrong because that's not what housecats are descended from.
Metrics are for asking questions, not answering them.
> No but the work from a CEO may have way more than 100x the economic impact of the work from a worker.

If only CEOs would be 100x more responsible for their impact.
No industrial rating, unfortunately.

https://octavosystems.com/octavo_products/osd335x-sm/ is probably more interesting for a lot of applications (though maybe not as open... but this is the same chipset as the BeagleBoneBlack).
You wouldn't be here quoting that line if it were correct.
I totally get the sentiment.

At the same time, plenty of us are trying to build businesses with no external funding, where every dollar might matter.

Recently Datadog surprised me with a nearly 21x-over-typical bill for features that had previously communicated as being disabled and non-billed, by their own billing team. Just weeks before. No changes on my side since.

If it were my spouse’s company they’d spend more money (in terms of paid time) retrieving that than they’d get back. They wouldn’t care and it wouldn’t ever show up in the billions on their financials.

For my small business that was a shocker.
> Bill Ready, Google’s president of commerce and payments

Nominative determinism strikes again!
That's not the point here. It's behaviorist.

Prices stay changed because the beliefs change.

If people had thought this was a sane and reasonable move that didn't really affect things the price would quickly return despite the quantity increasing.

The believed durability of the token changed

No matter what strategy is to be used to try to repeg it, it will only work if there's faith in the price.

Price isn't a thing it's a relationship between people about a thing
Different people care about different things :)

I also think about snapshots differently.

For me snapshot is actual copy stored on a different hard drive or other medium. So copy operation is never going to be instant.

Scenario in the article is power loss so that is also not something I worry about that much. Mostly I worry about hardware failure where I would not be able to turn on my laptop/server again. For power loss UPS or battery in laptop is my go to solution.
It's subjective because you haven't defined or quantified elegance or understandability. I could say that zero based indexing is not in fact understandable based on the amount of confusion I encounter explaining the concept to new users. I could say it's inelegant based on the fact it makes algorithms I use harder to implement. Others argue it's more elegant because it makes algorithms they use easier to implement. Same rationale, subjective conclusions.

Dijkstra's argument as well hinges on an undefined notion of "ugliness", which can mean anything to anyone. That's why these conversations never end, because most people are talking past one another based on their own definitions of "elegance" or "ugliness".
A snapshot captures some state of the filesystem that the filesystem actually had at some point. So when you recover that state, and then run the application, it's similar to the OS having crashed or the power having been lost.

Whereas non-snapshot backups don't have that property; the material in the backup is not necessarily identical to any past state of the filesystem that existed. It's something like a past state plus random roll-backs of files, or portions of files, from multiple previous states.

Guess which of these situations applications are much more likely to be able to recover from (if any at all)?

When people write crash recovery code, they typically assume that the world simply stopped, not that it stopped, and then some data was randomly rewound to unspecified older states.

I don't think that you can reasonably defend against data that is restored from a backup, where the oldest part of the backup is an hour older than the newest.

A backup is like a raster scan image of a fast moving object. What should be a rectangular train car looks like a parallelogram: it's not a picture of any scene that existed. Imagine that the raster lines are randomly sampled (not a progressive scan, or even interlaced) and now recover a sane image.
My Dad: "Hey, put that dynamite back down!"

It was just in a box in the back of his truck. Looked fun.

I wince, sometimes, thinking back. But my family was a logging family, so getting blown up was just one in a long list of ways to die.
More accurately, "There is no scenario in which building nukes produces economically competitive power, so there is no value in a capacity to build them." We will need capacity to decommission them for quite some time to come. Each one decommissioned is a $billion not available to spend adding 10+ GW of renewables, but patching them up would cost even more.
> Thank you Parag, for admitting that Twitter needs someone else to clean up the bots and spam accounts plaguing the platform.

This made me chuckle a bit. It’s like a manger thanking to their employees for admitting that a program needs a different team to be bug free. As I see it there is only one absolute: there are no absolutes.

I honestly don’t believe Twitter needs clean up. Rather user needs to use the tools at their disposal. Twitter has the best user-moderation tools and if it’s insufficient I see no reason why a third party client is not a sufficient solution.
Right! But not necessarily a file by file backup.
That is correct. And, fundamentally, this is possible because the Bitcoin chain is not the only ledger out there tracking BTC. Each (centralized) exchange has its own internal ledger, tracking how much BTC its customers have.
You forgot play the peering game which can lead to substantially cheaper bandwidth when you connect to enough Tier1/2 ISPs. I think Hetzner does this some as well.
> There are plenty of captcha breaking services out there

Give it a try and see what happens.

People said greylisting against email spam wouldn't work, since spammers would just resend. It works since 20 years. To get your IP off the DNSBL NiX Spam you just have to follow a link. People said spammers would automate that process. Never happened in 19 years. Sometimes spammers are just lazy.
>read his engineering reasoning you'll see why I speak of it with a sense of awe and wonder

Where can I do this please?

I'm also generally curious what "engineering reasoning" is and how I may be able to use it to sell in new ideas at work
Well, not quite.

If a majority of miners fork their clients away from the bitcoin code repo by removing the coin cap, they would be creating a "new bitcoin". If the inter-subjective consensus of users also decide to use this new bitcoin it will be the defacto. Otherwise it will just be another fork (call it Bitcoin NoCap) like bitcoin cash, bitcoin diamond, bitcoin gold, etc.

The original "bitcoin" network (before the cap removal) would still propagate by whoever has the chain history.

The reality is that any attempts to split the chain to a state without a cap, at least with the current cultural consensus at this time, will result in a dead chain after a short period as people sell off the coins on the new fork.

https://www.investopedia.com/tech/history-bitcoin-hard-forks...
The main difference is that pyinfra is a library, so you can use all the power of a general purpose programming language (functions, data structures, variables, modules, loops, conditions, calling APIs, debugging, etc.).

Ansible uses YAML configuration files, and basically reinvents and tries to shoehorn a lot of above into YAML. Due to the limitations of YAML, it's extremely verbose, and requires a lot of copy paste, and quickly becomes unmaintainable.

Customising and adding functionality is also a lot more difficult and time consuming with Ansible.

Ansible is also extremely slow due to the way it works, and can take ages to run even if nothing has changed on the target device. The slow feedback loop and the lack of debugging can make even small changes painful, even on localhost. On remote hosts, it's even worse.

pyinfra only has a dependency of a shell on the remote target, where Ansible requires Python.

pyinfra cons: smaller community, less modules, doesn't have extensive hardware support (e.g. routers/switches/firewalls). Though usually it's not a big problem, because it's easy enough to add any missing functionality.
0.01%? I'm pretty sure you're too low by at least a factor of 10. More so if you consider only those in the labor pool.