skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don’t know much about kubernetes (I suspect I may soon since our current process annoys me) and I’m not a DevOps engineer (but we don’t have any, and any consultants we’ve tried is basically just a little more confident using the official documentation than we are).

Anyway, how we’ve done it is by setting up a pipeline, that builds and deploys a docker container of a repository to a deployment a lot on a cloud application/function/whatever you call them if it passes the build phase. Then depending on whether or not the deployment passes the criteria set up for it, it either automatically swaps deployment slots with the production slot or waits for manual confirmation to do so. On anything that is allowed a reload, we don’t swap deployment slots but instead redeploy, typically with minimal downtime.

The reason it’s annoying is because it takes a lot of time to set up for each pipeline, and when you need to be able to swap deployment slots with now downtime you also need to handle things like build processes taking global variables or clients needing to be told to reload parts or them.

I’m not sure kubernetes is the answer for us, but we’re certainly going to look for a way to make the whole process smarter as it sometimes takes up more time to setup the pipeline and deployment environment than building the service that needs to be deployed.
>i could play video games

Have you tried gaming in Proton?
> If crypto fails, which is a real possibility in my mind, will I be unemployable because I spend several years in the scammy crypto industry?

I would say that there must be a wide range of possible activities in the crypto space. From well- to ill-intended. From crypto altruism over scientific crypto research to creating new crypto ponzi schemes on a weekly basis. Working on crypto does not automatically turn you into a scammer, but working on scams does.
Most of them here work in someway related to adtech and social media that is polarising communities across world, enabling fake news and allowing governments to snoop into private lives. But no one seems to care. At the end of day its just a job. Your objective must be to maximize your $/hr.
I've worked at a crypto startup few years ago, on a quite high technical position, essentially a co-founder (one of many). The team ended up bullying, abusing and gaslighting me, because I didn't fit the narrative, I guess.

Cryptosphere is certainly a place for predators, that don't give a slightest f*ck about where the money come from.
I can partially agree but we live in a day and age where asking someone their name may be considered offensive. I think there is a lot more value in teaching people self-worth and to not be so easily offended by people asking questions and then they run sway and hide and say that you hurt their feelings by asking them.

A simple disclaimer that says they don't have any obligation, or heck most open source licenses indicate that. Who cares it people +1 something. If open source developers want to focus on perfecting their code to be a haiku there is nothing wrong with that.

However, if they don't get around to implementing important features or merging PRs then they shouldn't be surprised nor offended when people abandon their projects either.

Sometimes people can be demanding and rude, but the key to get anything accomplished is learning how to interact and deal with people. If you can't handle people asking questions or +1 or +2'ing your public GitHub issues then you're probably not cut out for software development even as someone who is an unpaid open source contributor.
They're not just rare, the bigger problem is that most companies don't know how to deal with them.

They either can't pay for them, don't give them enough freedom, weigh them down in a big team, or any number of other issues. One person in a specific role (even if they're not very good at it) is far easier for most organizations to deal with than the 10x generalist that can get things done.

It can work well in very early startups, but there's limited reward there for it to be worth it.
> activism

I take it you are in a country that doesn't support freedom and basic rights.
Largely triggered by the fact that you can only judge the value of information after the consumption. And consumption of information is a one time event. So the only really established payment is subscriptions which people seem to be reluctant to engage with for certain types of information.
> It's free for you, but not for the bank

I should have specified that I'm thinking of intra-EU bank transfers. They're as close to free for all parties involved as something can be.
> As soon as it's worthwhile, there will be RSS spam targeting search engines.

That can be solved with a web of trust.

I don't mind showing my friends which RSS feeds I subscribe to. But I wouldn't let all of them see my browsing history (if I even kept one, which I don't). I also might not mind them seeing some kind of normalized ratio of viewing time for articles from each feed.

I would love to be able to rank my search results based on my friends-friends-friends opinion of the trustworthiness of any particular feed.

Top-level domain isn't the right trust granularity. Feed probably is.
On the other hand, people do not mind giving things for free. Those recipes are not published by some chef that gets paid for creating them. It's the community that created them. If people could easily self-host ad-free catalog of their recipes with a global catalog for a cost of internet service they already have, they probably would. But the emphasis is on ease of use and discoverability.
Regarding adding +1 to issues - rather than doing this, up-vote the issue on GitHub (thumb up). This can be useful to maintainers because they can sort by thumb up and see the most popular ones.

Adding a +1 comment really does nothing - it's just one more useless notifications for everyone, and it won't allow filtering or sorting issues. People might even unwatch the issue because of this and thus missing useful comments.
> As time went on the wording of the +1s got stronger

I think a +1 (as a thumbs up reaction, or similar) can’t be a bad thing. Comments that turn more passive/agressive (or just agressive) most certainly can. I don’t think the later should be mixed up with the former.
Literally a human of flesh and blood. Musk has zero (0) (zero in case you are a little slow) power over any other living being.

Wealth will either be given or it will be taken.
I think Rust shines anywhere performance and correctness are critical. Some examples

- infra projects.

- Resource constrained environment (depends on the hardware)

- Command line program

- WebAssembly for a complicated webapp (like Figma)

- Anywhere security is a concern

Whereas a web service that reads from a database and supports some CRUD operations? Many languages specialise in this problem. If the business domain is complicated and needs a good type system to express that domain - yeah maybe Rust is a good fit. But you're probably better off with Python or Ruby or Go. I could revisit this opinion in a couple of years if the Rust ergonomics initiatives succeed.

Video games - it's very early days for Rust. There's a lot of ongoing work (like Bevy) that could bear fruit in a couple of years but C++ is much better today.
I kinda blame Github for all this.

In the past, there was just a bit of friction before filing a bug or dropping a comment on a project.

You had to sign up for bugzilla. You had to sign up for the mailing list. Something. Anything.

It was just enough friction that you had to want to post that comment or file that bug. You weren't going to waste your time just to be a shit.

With everything on Github, it's simply too easy to quickly slap a thoughtless comment on a project (guilty as charged--sadly).

I know that if I were releasing a project today, I would make sure to use anything other than Github.
>The first person to produce definitive results generally gets all the credit. Those who come in second are soon forgotten.

'Generally'. In more than a few cases, the first person did not receive any credit at all, for years, decades or even centuries. (E.g. who invented the light bulb? or antisepsis? or the transistor? or LEDs? or the first electronic organ? *) Studying those cases may lead you to tactics to prevent being 'robbed'. Several of those 'first' persons were 'inspired' (ahem) by forgotten/obscured work.

* Ever heard of Winston E. Kock?
Yeah, you should be the first to go.
RIP Internet Explorer: South Korean engineer's browser 'grave' goes viral
Robotic tank proves itself in successful live-fire test
> assumes that the depreciation of miners [snip] makes it worth turning them off

Mining rig costs are usually sunk costs: turning off never saves depreciation (which is just an accounting entry). Unless the miner can do something else with the mining rig (repurposed, sold, withhold purchasing new rigs), then t variable costs dominate their decision.

A miner should keep mining if marginal revenue (expected from minting new blocks and receiving block tx fees) exceeds marginal costs (mostly electricity if miner doesn’t get free electricity). https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041315/how-marginal...

Not to say that the system is not unstable (which is an interesting idea). Maybe a control engineer could inform us of the parameters for instability.

Disclaimer: crypto novice.
He literally does not have any right.
>But Elon's hyperbolic tweets and offensive behavior don't actively hinder getting to Mars?

Mhhh... I don't think so. We should consider also the possibility that his activity in Twitter could be beneficial for the company.

In fact it could accelerate the process of sending him to Mars as soon as possible.

Everybody is happy, so... keep tweeting? ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯
If you're afraid to upgrade yourself, you may eventually contract out for help. You'd need that contract to cost less than $1380 for each year of upgrades. Otherwise, you should have picked the managed solution.

Doing it yourself is probably only cheaper if you never need maintenance or upgrades, security patching isn't needed, or your time is cheap.
I hope you cannot vote.
But I understand what you are saying. Back when I tried the language I expected an unfinshed state because of the version number, but I guess they should make more clear that the features are the goal and not the state what is working currently.
Rust has null pointers (which is why it has a function to make a null pointer). But Rust's references, which you use all the time in safe Rust, cannot be "null". As a result Option<&Thing> is the same size as a pointer to Thing, because under the hood the all-zeroes address value is None, other values are Some(address of Thing) but as the programmer you don't need to care how this works, the type system has your back.

You can't do much with a pointer unless you use unsafe Rust. So this provides an easy to see red line for inexperienced developers. "Huh, this is unsafe, I need a grown up".

The affordances for Option<Thing> are - in my biased but experienced opinion after similar time with both languages - superior to those on a nullable type like Thing? in C#. Partly that's historical, Rust has always had Option<Thing> while C# originally had nothing like this, grew nullable value types in a subsequent version and then much more recently got nullable reference types.

The technical mechanism is also much weaker in C#. Suppose a junior dev pastes a Stack Overflow answer in to fix the weird compile error they have. In Rust, if the pasted code is doing something awful with pointer mangling that's unsafe and hopefully your review is like "WTF is this code unsafe?" but in C# maybe there's a null-forgiving operator smuggled in somewhere or some tricks with casting, and now your "Never use null parameters" function is being called with a null parameter. If you complain, Microsoft's C# support will comfort you by explaining that all C# functions are responsible for null checking, even if their signature explicitly says they don't accept null parameters, they need to actually write the checks explicitly, yes this costs at runtime as well as making the code messier with redundant checks everywhere, too bad.

Maybe Kotlin is better? But my guess is that in the JVM ecosystem it's not able to actually deliver better.
Yes it probably is worth “Some”. It is worth about 10 watts
based on the transaction processing rate.
I agree. A short summary and use cases might help. One can't quickly determine what this does, and how they may benefit.
> decentralized, censorship-resistant, programmable money

accepted by nobody who has something valuable to offer
Kubernetes is not for Google scale. At that size you have completely custom infrastructure which is why Google continues to use Borg (and it's evolutions) instead.

K8S is specifically designed for the non-Google's to run with similar capabilities and features. Most anti-K8S sentiment comes from the overhead of installing and running it (vs using a managed service) and those that just never learned it. By the time you setup the same functionality, you will end up spending more work on a less reliable and agile setup.
https://archive.ph/kbJSX

(Site isn't loading for me)
Employees have a natural imperative to use and abuse their companies' resources.

Where the fuck did you grow up?
Maker, Aave, Compound, Uniswap
Reasons to tour by bicycle
Writing his name should be an instant ban :)
It’s a problem everywhere in software, the ones who give back the least feel the most entitled. Having a some form of a treshold is good, whether that is money, or some sort of on-boarding (e.g. can’t comment until you are a member for x days)

Usually the ones with loudest mouths have the shortest attention span and don’t bother with those things. I have seen this in many communities.
There was clear and undeniable video evidence available right while it happened. That changed because it took away the narrative control from the cops.
I guess the "be excellent to each other" note at the end of the post is basically be polite. Often there is a reason why simple request take time. It can be hard to describe why.
This is a very popular opinion. Although companies are not top down unless you are a literal Fascist.

Also I genuinely think you are an idiot.
> Bounds checking

fn main() {
x := []&int { len: 10, cap: 0 }
println(x[4])
}

Again, a bug caused by the auto generated string conversion method for arrays of pointers, that does not check for nil pointers. Once https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/14786 is fixed, that will work too.

It has nothing to do with bounds checking, as you can see if you just use `x := []int { len: 10, cap: 0 }` instead.

> Allowing the user to control the len property is a really bad idea.

Can you clarify what you mean by that?
You can still be relaxed after losing a game, after losing crypto not so much.
It doesn't appear so that everyone would be free to setup their self-sustained rigg and frolic on their own with realistic prospects, as the mantra of "decentralized" (as opposed to a structured environment) alleges. At least, not at a scale that would be decisive for the entire network. Meaning, there's that structured aspect and individual miners come second to this.
How can you see out of that bedsheet?
Prioritisation often becomes harder the closer you become to being an open source maintainer, since you're often more focused on software maintenance/internals than on using the software in real-life contexts. I feel like creating systems for open prioritisation is going to be an important "next step" in open source project management. Igalia did an experiment in open prioritisation in web browser development, but they tied it to funding, which helps with project viability but introduces a prioritisation bias towards people who have money to donate.

https://www.igalia.com/open-prioritization/
> My tool of choice is usually Ansible, so, from the Ansible point of view, deploying to a container, VPS, bare server, or a cluster, looks pretty much the same.

I agree that Ansible is an excellent tool! Though personally, I enjoy establishing a clear boundary between the "infrastructure" and "app" parts of any setup - the former ensuring that OS has whatever runtimes are necessary for any given application to run, user accounts, groups, folders, services etc., whereas the latter is whatever apps are running on the server.

So I'd use Ansible for most of the former, setup a container cluster and then use something like https://docs.ansible.com/ansible/latest/collections/communit... to manage actual application deployments. Why? To make the apps more throwaway and limit the fallout in case of bad configurations/deployments, as well as make sharing the base Ansible playbooks for what constitutes a production ready server setup easier amongst projects.

Of course, you could as well use Ansible to install something like JDK/Tomcat and set up its configuration which worked well for me in the past, but personally that didn't scale quite as well as running Java/Node/Ruby/Python/PHP in containers and approaching them with Ansible almost like black boxes (e.g. copy a bunch of files, like secrets, into these directories, deploy some arbitrary YAML against the Docker Swarm cluster), which was surprisingly easy to do.
> we may already be hovering around or exceeding equivalent human metrics.

Okay, bearing in mind your second paragraph, what are the conditions under which they're safer? I've been in a few self-driving cars and I'd struggle to see how they would ever get to an acceptable standard - like, pass UK driving test kind of standard.
Employees should be able to remove their leadership, no questions asked.
But humanist minuscule is not a cursive script: the letters are separate. Cursive does not mean just hand-written, but written in a style designed for haste achieved by not lifting the pen between letters.
Pointing to this page is meaningless. `mklink /d` only works on NTFS but errors out ("The device does not support symbolic links.") on exFAT. GP acknowledges NTFS has symlinks and remarks that exFAT doesn't.
Running Caprover on a VPS has been a very nice alternative to full K8s. It is like your mini Heroku but not too much magic involved. A lightweight wrapper around Docker containers but comes with a nice GUI and handles networking between your applications. the One Click apps are also very useful for quickly spinning up databases and stuff like that.
This is actually the case, lol. Whether it is the extra cognitive load of not always knowing the types, or whether it actually makes things go faster - IDK, but I definitely want the types.
$340,800/year. If that doesn't make a material difference to your company or department you've never worked where cash is tight. More bluntly: you've been spoilt with excess resources. That's a lot of cash to waste.
How many crosses did you burn this week?
Find a page that's comfortable to read, at a comfortable distance to the screen.

Hold your hand up to the screen.

How wide is the text div?
No rodents will likely gnaw away its wiring well before that.
A linker seems like it ought to be a simple piece of software. What is a linker doing that takes so long?
Well said. Your first 3 points summarize the entirety of the problem.

Kubernetes is basically best practices (with some quirks) of running containers reliably across a cluster of machines with various deployment types, logging, DNS/discovery, networking, storage, load-balancing, high-availability and other features built-in. If you don't need any of that then don't use it, but if you do then you probably won't build a custom infrastructure that does it better.
Sure but the energy expenditure per-person isn't balanced per person for crypto, it's balanced to the amount of energy and money willing to be spent on the thing. If I "enjoy" crypto to the tune of a $1 million dollar server farm, that'll burn ridiculously electricity than the biggest possible monitor and the most powerful GPU available to power one computer for one gamer's enjoyment.
Zipcar? Or do they use Bluetooth?
So you are actively violent is what you are saying.
That sounds like a good fit for redbean. How often are those industrial computers updated? I ask because backwards compatibility has always been a focus of the project. redbean runs on RHEL5+ (c. 2007) and Windows Vista+ (c. 2006) by default. See https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan/#support-vector Lua is real nice and I offer support services too. See my email at https://github.com/jart/
Probably because it’s so disappointed at how Scientific American has declined.
If bitcoin does crash and burn a lot of money with it, and is seen as the industry of scams and empty promises, then you may be tainted, sure.

Look for other jobs. It can’t hurt. And keep your skills and any side projects diverse too. Should you need to get out of the industry you can point at those unrelated projects and skills.

If your skillset is in demand then other companies should jump at you regardless. If you’ve done nothing but focus on Etherum and Solidarity for the last few years then I guess you’ll suffer.
The marketing sentence "A language empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software." is not true.
>as soon as a pool gets to 51%, miners switch to another pool

That's not guaranteed.

"Since no long-term solution to the 51% problem is known, the participants agreed to implement some temporary measures. GHash.io released a voluntary statement promising that it would not exceed 40% of the overall bitcoin hashrate"
I also cross compile and remote debug windows software on Linux (C and Rust programs). Using gdbserver --multi (extended remote mode) is quite comfortable.

The biggest advantage is not having to use different tools for different target platforms.

Unfortunately MacOS is more difficult target than Windows. If anyone has tips for compiling and debugging software of MacOS from a Linux host, please do share.
I think I worded it badly, I meant that if depreciation is high then you wouldn't want to turn it off because you'd want to mine as much as possible while it was still worth something.

So I meant the depreciation would need to be low enough to make turning them off a worthwhile strategy.

Edit: I see what you mean about sunk costs, I had worded it badly but you were still arguing against my intended meaning.
>But DAI has managed to survive even worst market crashes

We said the same thing about Celsius
I’m sure autoconf will insert this if you explicitly tell it to [1].

1: https://github.com/facebook/zstd/blob/b7b7edb3a3017ac8e16d7e...
This goes both ways. It's also fine to ignore your open source users, or refuse their requests. What will they do, fire you? Stop paying you? If they don't like it, it's on them.
I think when an issue becomes highly ranked by users, it’s important that devs give clear feedback. In communication, acknowledgement is very important. Just say it if it’s not on the current to do list and when you project to be working on it (or not at all)

It gives a clear feedback, and allow people to move on, fork it, stick with it, their choice. Politeness should be key.
Not every game has to be fun in the common sense of the word. Flight simulations are another example where you spend dozens of hours to understand how to fly a plane correctly which is much more like work.

There are just different kind of people who like different kind of experiences.
Read the readme. Full compatibility with gold/lld is a non-goal and will significantly slow down the linker IIUC.
> Only if you want to be trendchasing [...]
> still using MSVC6

That's some strange logic - you expect someone wanting to compile things for windows to somehow discover a 24-year-old compiler using some older version of C/C++ and to conclude that, despite modern norms, it still works, is still legally available and still produces working binaries.

And if they don't somehow glean all of the above, you say they're trendchasing, rather than just not knowing and using something two-decades obscure and possibly illegal.
Similar problem to Java applications directly accessing internal JDK packages, and then breaking once access was restricted.
Alan Walker