skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Would you describe your inner circle of friends as "quite awful"? I really hope you wouldn't.

I would describe all humans including myself, my circle of friends and everyone I met to have an immense awful side that they cover up. Only when the media focuses on your every movement will these flaws be exposed.

I'm not a fan of Elon Musk. But unlike the people who hate him, I don't see anything abnormal other then failure to put on a facade. He's as inconsistent and emotional as any other human being.

Keep in mind. What he does, from his perspective appears justified and if you can rationalize from his perspective, you will be able to at least understand how it is justified. Very few people on this earth knowingly act out pure malice.
There's definitely a tradeoff between speed and accuracy. We characterize this for various problems in the paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.10860.pdf), but tl;dr is that it speeds things up more at a given level of error when there's more redundancy in your matrices.

Back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that this won't beat tensor cores on NVIDIA GPUs. This is basically because ~half the die is an ASIC for dense (and 2:4 sparse) matmuls, with no support for the sparsity structure we induce. If 1:16 sparsity were supported or there were a batched warp_shuffle instruction, we'd get similar speedups for GPUs as we do on CPUs.
You might be way past that. The teams with great engineers you work with are way past that. But many other teams with middling engineers aren’t.

Here’s my hierarchy of things the average engineer thinks they know well but actually fundamentally never understood and will occasionally screw up badly with escalating consequences as you go down the list:

1. Command line
2. Git
3. eMacs/vim?
4. Docker
5. Kubernetes

I myself personally acknowledge my lack of expertise and try my best to mitigate:

1. This I just try to learn well
2. I only use GitHub desktop (I like it’s limited feature set actually saves you from yourself)
3. Just use py charm? It’s 2022.
4. Docker is necessary but I try to find someone actually decent with it and get them to help me.
5. Just avoid. Unless you have an actual good devops team with 5+ people backing it. Beanstalk or lambda do just fine.
That's an interesting angle. I haven't pictured myself made from chicken before.
Two things. First, I seen text generated by GPT-3, it's not hard to tell it's been generated. Typically the the text is short and could fool someone because it may have been uttered by an actual person (such as a 5 word sentence) or not short and becomes more obvious by the word

Second what is "Optimized for humanity"? If people are hand picking the text then sure you might be able to by chance get a dozen good sentences to put next to a dozen bad sentences from humans. But at that point maybe noone would bother to read it. People barely read past the title anyway
It looked like a a description of personal journey to me immediately. It makes no sense for a person to say such a thing about the company. To simple assume that I find a bit sad. Like to people really think so low of their fellow man?

I think our society has gotten to much cynicism. Maybe we need more nativity, compassion and empathy.
And I would argue that Dwarf Fortress is no exception at all. In all of my time with the game I've enjoyed the idea of the game more than I actually enjoyed playing it. This is the player side of the simulation siren song. The more time you spend with it, the more you understand how it works, the more you realize how incredibly unbalanced it is.

The game's legendary difficulty is entirely due to the impenetrability of its user interface and systems. When you actually finish getting through all the tutorials needed to learn how to play the game it falls flat on its face. It is quite trivial then to get a fortress up and running and produce far more food, drinks, and goods than you ever need and grow your wealth rapidly. And then when the enemy comes knocking it's quite trivial to pull up your drawbridges and line the entry halls with traps and generally grind them into a smooth red paste.

Dwarf Fortress may be a fine simulation and an interesting study in systems and a great conversation piece but it is not a very good game. It is like the Great Salt Lake of games: a hundred miles wide and a few feet deep.
You are right. I should have said some. The point I wanted to make was that having type safety is better for checking null than having no type at all.
> Compared to other languages, Go's concurrency system of goroutines and channels is easier to understand, easier to use ...

True and not a hype: Compared to other languages, Go has a runtime and built-in concurrency primitives that makes it easier to write concurrent code.

> and is less prone to bugs and memory leaks.

Who is actually claiming this? I've got a collection of good Go resources and nowhere something like this is stated. In contrast, some actually make it very clear to be very careful when sharing memory or actually better no sharing memory at all.

Concurrency is conceptually hard in Java, C#, Javascript, Python, C, C++ ... there's no reason to bully Go.

Rust makes the claim of "fearless concurrency" and the compiler indeed saves us from race conditions, but those are not the only concurrency related bugs, e.g. deadlocks are very well possible in Rust. Therefore Rust would be a proper candidate on this "Cold Showers" list.
as an extreme example, consider "garden path sentences"

> "The horse raced past the barn fell."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence
msvcrt.lib includes things other than direct imports to msvcrt.dll; bugs in that code are going to be linked into your binary at compile time.
Git submodules are cool but can be confusing because people are already used to their language package manager. They also add overhead as changes frequently have to be pulled/pushed downstream/upstream. But in cases where it makes sense to use it, it's a great tool. Eg: theme that is reused in 3 sites is in it's own repo and is a submodule in each site.
Yeah, you work at one...

But you don't work in a serious capacity with serious leadership over serious projects, as your comment shows. The Department of Justice doesn't care about the comments in your code or your meticulous documentation of your company's APIs. They care about emails which allege or allude to illegal activity.
So we should coddle and protect everyone from everything? The central bank should make every Bitcoin “investor” whole?

If a company goes public gets investors and then goes bankrupt because of illegal practices and it’s shown it duped investors there is recourse.

If a bank goes under the assets are FDIC insured.

If you “invest” in the next big revolutionary currency that will upend everything and it falls some 60 to 70% from its highs is it really a currency or a stock or a wildly speculative possibly ponzi-style scheme?

So yes folks should know the risks. There’s no historical precedent for any of this. It’s always been volatile and if you wanna stay in it know you might lose your shirt.

But investing for the long term is a function of time and compounding interest. On average the US stock indexes have returned some 8% or more, again on average, for the last day 50 years or something along those lines. Consistent investing day every month for years and years will see things grow. Buying when things go down and as they rise - dollar cost averaging — is a fine and prudent way to put money aside and see it grow. But to think folks could just “invest” in Bitcoin and become millionaires — maybe — but also don’t bet the farm on it if you’re a farmer.
The author implied that it had occurred, but did not actually allege anything specific. That would require describing how the cult members had been hired. The author seemed to have joined a department with a large cluster from this cult, and immediately assumed that nepotism and cronyism were responsible — he needs to be more specific.

To clarify one thing in your comment: innocent clustering isn’t likely occurring “by chance” here — that would be a dubious claim; I’m saying it often happens for innocent, legal reasons. There’s no context or facts for this specific case.

Regarding the “didn’t read my comment” bit, your comment did ignore the last half of my comment that describes plausible innocent clustering and talks about the need for specific facts. You can’t allege something based on “potential” because every perfectly normal situation could be construed as the potential result of a crime. If I was at a bar last night, and home today — can you allege that I drove home drunk? You would need more specific facts to make any kind of meaningful allegation (e.g. did I drive to the bar? Did I drink? Did I return home on my own with my car? Those would be the minimal facts required for even a suspicion). Perhaps I could have addressed this with less snark (and I apologize for this), but we’re also not talking about missing some fact buried in an article, we’re talking about 2/5 sentences in a comment.
For example the ancestor of Trypanosoma had chloroplast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trypanosoma#Evolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euglenozoa#Structure
Well put, my thoughts as well. It just makes me sad on behalf of humanity that we turn out having such bleak and cynical perspective on other people. Benefit of the doubt? Guilty until proven otherwise? Are such ideals just unfashionable today or something?

People should put more faith in each other. Look for the positive instead of just the flaws and shortcomings.
Okay please debug my py2 -> py3 migration bytes vs strings code with no type annotations.

Aaaahg it burns. I basically am going through and first annotating, then upgrading.
Teams working online produce fewer ideas than those collaborating in person
I'd rather not say but it wasn't anything mind blowing. It was a B2B thing with a great UI in the early 2010s. You'd never have even heard of us. All of this predated the popularity of k8s. Docker wasn't really a thing. AWS was just growing and blowing everyone's minds.
Is this a serious question? Code analysis (both static and dynamic).

The same way Rust checks for object lifespans with the borrow checker, which is distinct from the compiler and type system.

The same way valgrind for C can check for use after free.

The same way errorprone can look for null checks in Java.

This is a well tested and proven technique. Static code analysis is a staple of the industry, when it comes to automated code analysis.
thats a really stupid function
> Everything IBM does is so hilariously ugly in the least imaginative, boring, industrial way

Their mainframes and HPC clusters have a sort of "intentional brutalism", almost skewing into a "dystopian, corpocratic sci-fi evil-idol the protagonist blows up at the end of the movie" look, that's actually kind of appealing/fitting for what those clusters are/do. It's the "Hugo Boss SS uniform" of computing.
OK but this war is not even at 4 months. How long did it take before national guard/reserve were sent to Iraq and before talk of US Army struggling to reach its recruitment goals? Surely it was much later?
He was also blamed for not bringing home the American prisoners that Iran kidnapped.
A lot of that post is actually me wanting to be sure that my legacy isn't one of perceived toxicity. When you are in as many minority groups as I am, then you end up becoming an unpaid existential ambassador and you need to be hyper careful to not look like an asshole or do things that could possibly make you look like an asshole because people will assume that being an asshole is a representative sample of those groups. It is not, but logic is not this species' strong suit.

Plus, writing about how V is outright lying in its documentation gets boring because it's too easy. There's no real nuance or the like to it. It's someone overpromising and underdelivering, and then you also get the V cult going after you and sending so much hatemail. It's not worth it.
So does anyone know how Lokiarchaeota fit into this? I remember reading that Lokiarchaeota were evidence against the mitochondrion-first hypothesis, but I have no idea how that claim has held up over time.
Ok, I get that.

The political examples you give are valid, but couldn't gold (for example) work as well to fund Wikileaks?

At some point you need to convert any currency to goods or services so to me the real value of a currency like this would be it's stability of value, but it apparently lacks that.

It seems the lack of a "centrally controlled system" is what makes it so vulnerable to wild swings in real value.

I certainly agree it would be great to have a way to spend and send and receive money without paying a 3rd party a fee, but to do that Bitcoin would need a stable valuation.

From where I sit it appears to have been used as a sort of pyramid scheme. I can accept that's not connected to the intent of the concept, but that is no small part of the reality of it now.

Lacking any way to manage the volatility of value it seems it's either never going to work or it's value must be tied to something tangible, like gold in a vault. But it's not. It's apparently tied to whatever an "investor" might be willing to pay.

The only real value I can see in it is the cost of the computing time it took to run the algorithm to create a bitcoin. The leap from that to trading the result of the output for an ounce of gold or bushel of wheat is where I get disconnected.

If I can convince someone my bitcoin has real value and they trade me a bushel of wheat for it, why would the bitcoin have any value to anyone else? I can see where you might avoid paying a tax or a banking fee but you still have nothing more than a digital file.

I can certainly see how hyping "Bitcoin" could create the illusion of value and that could create a rising market for it, but at some point all you really own is a bit of code that has no real value on it's own. No government that will give you their issued currency for it.

No one likes paying taxes but we do like good roads and safe schools, etc. So if the concept is purely to avoid paying taxes we need to figure out how to tax bitcoin transactions to fund those public services.
To be fair: I am not laughing at people losing their shirts but that the Bitcoin mania is cooling off and this huge sell off in this super speculative, highly energy inefficient panacea-coin-of-the-future-solve-all-our-problems-project is experiencing a sell off.

My sentiments also would be the same for the NFT space. What a hilarious idea that a jpeg of some ape could be worth thousands or millions.

I hope this is a learning opportunity for those “investors” to not gamble
With money they can’t afford to lose.
It's depressing how fast and responsive MSVC6 runs on today's hardware compared with the current version of Visual Studio.
TA works because enough people believe it works. Its a self-fullfilling prophecy. It doesnt matter that there is no technical or mathematical reasons for it to be true.
My showers are about five minutes, a habit from growing up on tank water during a drought. Water on, jump in, wet your hair, soap, shampoo, wait a minute, rinse, conditioner, wait a minute, rinse, jump out. Cold showers are great motivation to be even faster.

Interestingly, one of the theories behind why cold showers might be good for you is that they induce a heat shock response, same as a very hot shower.
> Furthermore, Unicode assigns properties to individual code points - not grapheme clusters. You can't query these properties if all you see are graphemes.

Languages like Swift give you the ability to iterate over encoded bytes, graphemes, or code points. You can access these properties if you really want to, however, the point is that these properties might not be useful in practice.

I kind-of disagree with the author that grapheme clusters meaningfully solve the problem. I think it's just another level of kicking the can down the road, with its own set of problems. But I think that it's at least closer than code points.

> The correct abstraction for working with Unicode text is the code point.

I am not aware of any scenario where the code point is meaningfully what you want. Feel free to inform me of a case.

> UTF whatever is an implementation detail and not something to get hung up on.

Grapheme clusters are not part of the transmission format.
Black is the appropriate color for electronics.
As a general rule for dev work, trying to make evidence based decisions is fairly difficult. There's just not that much evidence around yet that can make it obvious as to if in your particular situation what the best choice might be.

And at the end of the day you have to contend with being in a work environment where politics and personalities rule, not science (or engineering).

That said I do wish more devs would take an interest in the available quality literature. Unfortunately I'm far more likely at work to run into an Uncle Bob recommendation at work, than a recommendation of ACM's Digital Library.
They hate it because then went into it with the wrong expectations. If you expect to be PIPped out after 1-4 years, you can just enjoy the ~50% higher than average salary and relax. Who knows, maybe they'll be thrown off guard by your nonchalant attitude (a la Office Space) and promote you to a VP role...
Author here. If you have any questions about mold/macOS, feel free to ask me as a reply.
Overall a questionable list of unproven claims. E.g.:

> Hype: "Static Typing reduces bugs."

Just because the author has not found proper research proving it doesn't mean it's false.

A great type system with sum types prevents tons of bugs. I wonder how anyone can question this.

> Hype: "Identifiers should be self-documenting! Use full names, not abbreviations."

Same as above. To fix bugs you need to read and understand the code. Not having to map abbreviations to your mental model reduces overhead. I've seen code bases where u was used as an abbreviation for user and users in different methods. That was not a fun code base.
That's not what nationalism means. Nationalism means an ethnic group ("nation"/"people") taking over a state ("country")

You are talking about statism like USSR and PRC.

Also, the US Constitution is very much collectivist in tone

> We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

It was written by Federalists like Hamilton who gave the central government financial control of the whole country, which has been deeply abused (Commerce Clause) for centuries .

The individual rights stuff was added by anti-Feseralists in the Bill of Rights, to rein in the main Constitution a bit.
Unfortunately I don't have any -- I'm self-taught on the job. But as an example -- pick some project that involves high-bandwidth or low-latency I/O to multiple devices. Say, line-rate network packet capture to disk. Hold yourself to the standard of not dropping any packet. Try first 100 Mbps capture, then 1 Gbps, then 10 Gbps. Try first capture to SSD, then to HDD (higher latency). Progressively restrain the number of CPU cores and amount of memory you allow yourself to use -- try to get down to 2 or even 1 core, and under a GiB of memory. Add a requirement to minimize the latency to disk -- 1 second, 100 ms, 10 ms, 1 ms. Spec the problem to push disk and/or memory bandwidth requirements to their limits for your system -- if your code can't perform at the level the hardware should allow it to -- figure out why and address it.

You'll be forced to learn how to multiplex I/O streams. How to minimize memory copies. How to efficiently allocate and reuse memory. How to minimize system call overhead. What the more esoteric I/O system calls are. How to minimize pipeline stalls, cache and TLB misses. Which tools to use to measure all this stuff. If you're not finding these techniques necessary -- make the problem harder by raising the specs, limiting the resources more, or making the problem more involved (say -- build an flow index online for efficient seeking within the recorded data).

(This was basically my first major software project that forced me to learn performance optimization up and down the stack.)
There are plenty of stars well distant from most everything else.

But yes, by the time we are equipped to leave the galaxy we ought to be finished with living on planets. (Which have been known to have their own problems... Cf. Deccan Traps, Yellowstone Supervolcano, Siberian Traps.)
What are recycled jokes made of?

The point of the exercise is to find alternatives that aren't so hard on the environment.

>“By contrast, our process takes a few days to make a steak, has very low water utilization, is carbon negative, uses zero arable land, and minimal land overall.”

The point is not recycling carbon for funsies, but to actually have a positive impact on the environment. Whether the process described actually achieves this is to be determined, but it is evident that animal agriculture today is a big contributor to our environmental issues.
Do you indeed?

It was during the Nixon administration that price controls and rationing of gasoline were introduced, in response to the OPEC oil shock of 1973 (crude oil prices had been set by government since 1971). You mention Reagan's executive order, but that was just closing the stable door after the horse had bolted; Carter began the phaseout of the Nixon-era price controls in 1979.

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/04/06/archives/carter-to-end-pr...
yeah the acceptance of oss is cool but they still ship a lot of weird software and technology... which is fine assuming you can avoid it... but sometimes you can't and then it becomes torturous.
Mozilla’s automated builds of Firefox for Windows, macOS, Linux, and Android are all cross-compiled on Linux VMs. Cross-compiling is faster and cheaper, especially because Windows’ file I/O and process launching is so slow.
Former Amazon employee convicted in Capital One hack
I wouldn't call bioengineering and it's effects on the ecosystem a straightforward endeavor.
Well done for replacing the ambiguous "Federal" in the headline with the word "Australian".
Not sure why you're downvoted because the answer to your question is definitely "no". Everything else, at the moment, is not much more than slides on a pitch deck.
This is an excellent book, easily the best recent one I’ve read on fusion. Interesting and educational without being patronizing or stupidly basic.
I'm surprised that no one mentioned RDKIT. It's an open source cheminformatics platform. It provides software to read and write multiple molecule file formats.
It even has a chemical search feature implemented as a PostgreSQL extension.
https://www.rdkit.org/
True. And it occurs to me that there's a positive feedback loop there. When inflation starts, people tend to pull their purchases forward in time, if they can - they buy before the price goes up. That increases the velocity, which is inflationary, even if the money supply does not increase any further.
I agree with everything but the "controlling open source" bit. I think what they are actually doing is trying to create new platforms they can control, because that's a great business model. Open source, via Github is just a small piece of the pie they want.

Think MS teams/Office365, Linkedin, Gaming, Github, etc. These are platforms they are interested in controlling and deriving revenue from.