skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The inaccuracies aside (about them inventing the phrase whole cloth), it's a nice piece about advertising.

Anecdotally, I tend to use salt without the anti caking additives because I have a salt wasting condition, so I'm on a doctor prescribed high salt diet. When I've suggested sea salt to others with my condition, they have just lost their minds that it clumps and looks funny.

Historically, that was the norm for salt. It seems like a weird thing to be so hung up on, given the seriousness of the condition.
OK, I read the Olaf Kirch article, and the "NFS Sucks" title is mostly clickbait. There are indeed a bunch of shortcomings in NFS that he points out, that are partially addressed by NFSv4. He also admits that (as of 2006) there isn't anything better.

Locking has historically always been a problem in NFS. Kirch mentions that NLM was designed for Posix semantics only. I frankly don't know if NLM is related to `rpc.lockd` which appeared in SunOS 4 and possibly even SunOS 3 (mid 1980s at this point) which well predates anything having to do with Posix. Part of the problem is the confused state of file locking in the Unix world, even for local files. There was BSD-style `flock` and SYSV-style `lockf` and there might even have been multiple versions of those. Implementing these in a distributed system would have been terribly complex. Even at Sun, at least through the mid 1990s, the conventional wisdom was to avoid file locking. If you really needed something that supported distributed updates, it was better to use a purpose-built network protocol.

One thing "willy" got right in his comment is that NFS is an example of "worse is better". In its early version, it had the benefit of being relatively simple, as acknowledged in the LWN article. This made it easy to port and reimplement and thus it became widespread.

Of course being simple means there are lots of tradeoffs and shortcomings. To address these you need to make things more complex, and now things are "ridiculous" and "bloated". Oh well.
The HN title currently says "Grocery prices surged 14.3% in May, study finds".

The article doesn't say prices surged 14.3% in May, but in the 12 months to May.

@dang
Apple sells around 300 million devices a year. So has somewhere north of a billion active devices at any given moment. ~1k new apps ship on the app store each day, so >365k per year.

Apple has ~154k employees.

It's a completely intractable problem. No single person or developer matters in the smallest way. Any complaint or bug that doesn't break at least 5 digit numbers is invisible unless you're paying for Apple's engineering time. It's a function of the numbers in play.
Trash or not, the demand for the features is there. OpenBSD enjoys the luxury of simply telling people who need more sophisticated features to piss-off, at least until the time a protocol or interface has been hashed out and settled into a static target.

Notably, OpenBSD has an IPv6 and IPSec (including IKE) stack second to none. If OpenBSD developers actually had a need for the features provided by NFSv4, I'm sure OpenBSD would have an exceptionally polished and refined--at least along the dimensions they care about--implementation. But they don't. What they do have is a relatively well-maintained NFSv3 and YP stacks (not even NIS!), because those things are important to Theo, especially for (AFAIU) maintaining the build farm and related project infrastructure.
The short answer is only vestigially. TCP/IP has diverged into multiple competing versions across the OS world. Things like Multi-path TCP, BBR and other congestion control logic, the incorporation of things like Happy Eyeballs (v6/v4 preferencing) and some basic modelling of end-to-end RTT/jitter in the kernel is all pretty much post-FreeBSD. "write" is the active word here: Leffler and Joy "wrote" the TCP/IP stack for BSD. Lots of people are "writing" TCP/IP code. Maintaining? Modifying? Improving? Augmenting? Bugfixing?

I know these guys were insanely busy.
Having no way to file a bug is better than pretending to have one which just gets filed to /dev/null. At least that way I don't waste time writing bug reports.
Orphan Founders
The best use case I know of is Handshake. A domain name system that would be resistant to seizures and censorship. Domains are purchased and a fee is paid which gives a sustainable reason for the coin to have value.

Though I think the same thing could be accomplished on Ethereum with web3.

Of course running your own or shared DNS can have the same value, but I think Blockchain is a legitimate case for decentralizing domain names and having a record that can only be modified by the true owner.
This is no different than choosing a volunteer-based OSS solution or rolling your own. If you need things that are specific to your use case, you'll always need to shoulder the cost.

That is no different from something you do yourself, either. What you call "rug pull" is merely the point where the solution you got for free suddenly costs as much to maintain as your inhouse solution.
I've been reading and enjoying the author's examination of each month's MacUser. It's striking how much sheer support, in terms of new hardware and software, the Mac received right out of the gate. Although Amiga and Atari ST followed less than two years later with superior hardware, it's clear in retrospect (and, I suspect, to anyone at the time comparing Macworld/MacUser/MacWeek to the corresponding Amiga/ST publications) that Apple had completely sucked up the air in the "not PC" segment of the market.

Apple had the credibility to do so in the first place, of course, because of its success with the Apple II. In turn, Mac's share of the market was minuscule compared to what the IBM PC had built around itself since 1981, as any comparison of PC/PC World/InfoWorld to the above Mac publications would have shown. But it was enough to survive for the long term. Desktop publishing and "people who love windows and mice" were niche markets c. 1985-1990, but it is a niche, and a reasonably defendable one; Amiga's desktop video niche was correspondingly much smaller, and ST never found one at all outside maybe music.[1]

I wrote "superior hardware", not "superior hardware and software". Not enough attention has been given to just how good classic Mac OS was from the beginning. The care given to both the UI and underlying architecture is obvious. Atari and Commodore both outsourced their OS development and it shows. Yes, Amiga had out-of-the-box true preemptive multitasking.[2] But what good is it if the OS doesn't have quality libraries, toolkits, and primitives? As baroque and obscure as Inside Macintosh was for the Mac developer c. 1985, at least he had it as a resource, and at least the OS was sophisticated enough to justify such a baroque and obscure tome in the first place. And Atari TOS? Don't make me laugh.

[1] Yes, yes, Europeans, I know that Amiga and ST were much more successful across the Atlantic. That only meant that the PC takeover of the entire market just skipped the DOS era in Europe, as opposed to not happening at all.

[2] I dare anyone, then or now, to a) succinctly and accurately explain the difference between AmigaOS and AmigaDOS, and b) explain why that should matter in the first place
Russian Journalist’s Nobel Medal Sells for $103.5M
The responses in the other threads about paying for additional support tickets are I think the solution you are pointing at.

You'll be paying 2k per year in hardware wether Apple invests more in support or not so I'm not sure it works as an incentive. Your option would be to drop out of iOS development and move to windows or linux, but that's probably not a statistically relevant portion of devs from Apple's perspective.

Then qualified engineering time (having people able to write that reply about the extra parameter) really doesn't scale, so price-gatekeeping the service also seems logical from a business perspective.
This. Merino wool is awesome. Merino socks about 3x the price of a normal pair of run of the mill socks, but I find the comfort, durability, and breathability more than make for it.

One of the best features, IMO, os that I can forge straight through rivers without worrying about them getting wet because I know that they will be dry in a couple of hours, assuming it's moderately warm.
> Instead of selling into the corporate offices of the Fortune 1000, Macintosh found a place among entrepreneurs, small business people, and people in the arts.

“I'm giving up on trying / to sell you things that you ain't buying.”
> Right now, you can take out a loan without involving a bank from one of the many crypto lending protocols. You put up some collateral and can take out a loan for extremely cheap, because there isn't a bank in the middle to take a cut.

"Loan" is a very misleading description of what this is. This is margin trading. A loan is when you post a non-liquid asset in the real world -- like a house -- as collateral. Margin trading is when you post a fairly liquid asset (like other cryptocurrencies) as collateral so that you can buy more cryptocurrencies. You can't use these "DeFi loans" to buy a house in the real world.

One reason I think DeFi is bullshit is because its critics describe what it does better than its advocates, who spout incoherent word salad.
Just mentioning SlateJS which has [decorations](https://docs.slatejs.org/concepts/09-rendering#decorations) for this
Why? Well, the alternative is: I never go to their stupid website. Whereas now, I go there when some entry in the daily email is interesting. And very occasionally, contribute something that entices other people to go there.

Nextdoor: "Hey, how about you come here several times a day and stay, like we were a real website or something?"

Me: "Nope, nope, nope. Buh bye."
> They do not want these passive users - no benefit

They why do they basically force you yo create an account just to view the content?
BTC offers censorship resistant money.
Ask HN: What do you think about title inflation?
I was wondering, I'm currently seeing a lot of posts here on HN as well as job offers for senior positions requiring 5+ years of experience.

I think that if you have 5 years of professional experience, you can't really call yourself a senior developer, unless you're at a high growth start-up or a FAANG maybe. But for the "other 99%", do you feel like title inflation in the industry is a real thing?

I'm curious to hear what you think about this. On one hand, I think it's bad to leave money on the table, but otoh, I also think these baselines are really messed up these days.... Any thoughts on why?
Define "loss" here. As far as I can tell, the Swiss franc is a sovereign fiat currency which lost any association to a gold standard by means of public referendum. The "cost" is effectively zero as it is part of the general economy available to the nation-state of Switzerland, and fits into the larger monetary and fiscal policy of the country.

I have never considered the "cost" of a government service to be representative of anything unless an analysis of social benefits is likewise included. For instance the entire discourse around the USPS during the last US presidential election.

Clearly, the train system is net-profitable for the country or they would shut it down, so calling it a "loss" seems inaccurate.
Double trigger clause in US employment offer letter
I wondered if you could help me with this one. I would prefer to use a lawyer but I've left this quite late, so I'd like to hear others experiences (not legal advice obviously).

I'm currently negotiating an executive-level employment offer letter for a high-growth startup. I've secured a double-trigger clause in the offer letter but the wording is limited to my termination within 12 months after a sale. The VP HR implied there was flexibility to give more to me within this clause. I'm unfamiliar with double triggers and have read online that the other pieces I might ask for are:

- a short pre-closing window (3 months or shorter) to counter any preemptive termination by the company to avoid a payout

- a longer period where I might be terminated after the change in ownership

- an additional clause that unvested stock is accelerated should I leave for "good cause"

My questions are:

- Are these usual clauses to ask for?

- What else might I ask for within a double trigger clause
The downtime only affected a small percentage of accounts, and unless this happens again, this is likely a freak occurrence, and just as likely to happen to any other random cloud service. As for mission-critical data in Jira, it's easier to replicate that to salesforce or something (where it belongs) than switch off of Jira entirely.
> I think you’re reading me and getting the wrong idea about what it is I’m arguing against.

I don't think I am. Rather, I think our disconnect is that I disagree with your implication that fully internalizing the negative externalities produced by the ownership of land as property is a "nebulous other social goal".

The endgoal - i.e. the full internalization of those opportunity costs externalized onto every other member of society - is 100% LVT with all surpluses disbursed evenly as a citizens' dividend (a.k.a. "UBI" in more modern parlance). Anything short of that is theft by landowners from everyone else (including other landowners, but especially those without land at all); the question is how much theft the general public will continue to tolerate, and for how much longer.
I feel for you. And that's why it's worth getting a daily email from Nextdoor, but no more than that.
Crypto isn't required for this. It doesn't even help.
Not only Apple, I send this email to EU Commissioner,

I heard numerous cases when FB support completely ignored cases. There is even a post on Reddit of a guy, who managed to resolve his case by buying an Oculus gadget. Just today I heard a case with Upwork. I am trying to understand here, what is this? A corporate policy? A resource shortage? When you buy a car and it is broken, you can go to court and seek resolution there, but when you have a social account with a large user base or an Upwork account that brings money, where do you go?

Shouldn’t companies have a standard flows to support people? Would you as EU impose some rules?
Another way to put it is that crypto, being specified as a protocol, is likely not to be the product(which is how it's promoted speculatively) but a feature of a product.

Like, HTTP isn't a product; but a web browser uses HTTP as a feature, and so do web servers. But they aren't the whole product either.

And the categorical error is that traditional finance sees its protocols as products, but they're actually on the road to commodified features. It's easy to "print new money" now, so that's not the part of the value chain that matters.
Is there oversight? Does this do an end run around (for instance) trademark law?

I'm not casting judgement when saying this, but if there isn't a governing body then that's attractive to some people but a huge red flag for others.
I had the exact opposite experience with UserVoice pages, at least the one for Accessibility. Someone requested that MS integrate my startup's reading technology into MS Word/Outlook/etc on the Accessibility UserVoice. This suggestion gained steam and was the top-rated suggestion for years. MS never engaged with the suggestion, and when I later asked an accessibility person why this was, they told me that the UserVoice is staffed by outside contractors, and that it's not one of the more important places they look for feedback. This was consistent with what I saw, which was that they didn't engage with the most popular suggestions on the Accessibility UserVoice — they just ignored them.

I think it's pretty lousy that they set up a page to solicit feedback (especially accessibility feedback) and don't pay attention to it. It causes people to waste time describing issues, asking for help, and voting on other suggestions. A year or two ago they got rid of the UserVoice page, and they now tell people to use Twitter to make suggestions.
Make sure your mature content filter is turned on if you decide to Google Sunstone at work.
Yes, I agree. I've run into some great subreddits and extremely helpful people there. Reddit imo is the best social media experience, almost like the old usenet, if the 'engagey' subreddits are removed from one's list.
Organizationally it’s challenging in a few ways.

1. From your perspective you’ve filed an issue that perfectly describes the problem. 90% of the time the engineer doesn’t actually have enough information and needs follow up. 90% of that time the bug just isn’t actionable because it’s somehow reliant on the user’s configuration OR requires extra logging to be enabled that wasn’t.

2. There’s so many communication layers between you and where the ticket needs to get to to answer your question. That routing takes time. Apple has a big enough challenge managing this just from internal bug tickets.

3. Organizationally Apple is in a no win state. One engineer having a bad day and responding poorly on a ticket impacts their image and generates a news cycle. So now every response needs to be filtered through someone who’s only job is to manage public engineer comms. This is a low value spend for Apple.

4. Some responses might be something like “this will be fixed next release “. Culturally that kind of response would be an anathema at Apple because of the secrecy.

5. Point 4 interacts with point 1 - they don’t want engineers talking in random environments to customers (WWDC is a very controlled environment, the engineers get some training, and it happens just after they’ve announced most things for the year so the opportunity for accidental leaks is smaller).

6. Engineers have a fuckton of responsibilities already. You have to screen a bunch of bugs, develop new software on insane timelines, manage tech debt, keep up with internal trainings, etc.

Could they do a better job? Are there cultural things at Apple that inhibit these things? Yes. I’m sure Apple is trying to fix some of them. But some of these things are trade offs between how Apple chooses to run their business and there aren’t easy answers (if there were these problems wouldn’t exist).

On a personal note, as someone who’s managing a fraction of the volume some of their products get and trying to stay very involved with the community, it’s extremely distracting and demoralizing at times (some users can be very entitled to the point that they’re a distraction and taking away value from the community outreach that’s happening).
I think having all those in the next 5 years is very likely .. assuming $500 is adjusted for inflation
I posted an obscure MS C++ compiler bug to their Web feedback thing, and it got acknowledged and fixed relatively quickly. Whining and complaining over on the r/cpp subreddit also tends to get the polite attention of the relevant Microsoft people (some of whom are mods).
Isn't is super expensive even at the deep discount that you mention?
If you define inflation as the devaluing of the currency, it doesn't really.... The mechanism by which a currency loses value matters little.
These are likely the exact issues. For the past several years for OS releases Apple sets priority deadlines. There's a date where all P1 bugs need to be closed/moved, and so on until near the scheduled release which is "zero bugs". All that means is bugs that didn't get fixed move into the next OS milestone.

These deadlines basically preclude late breaking or low priority bugs to ever make an engineer's schedule. The only way is if an exec pushes on the bug or if it turns out to have higher impact than originally thought.

Before Feedback Assistant bugs could come in from AppleCare support or developer relations. These could be some of the worst bugs to get assigned because they would be filled with extraneous details but not a crash or spin trace that would actually be useful.
I'm sure they do. It just seems like a quad-core 2 Ghz machine with an SSD and 8GB of RAM has been pretty usable for a decade. I don't remember Pentium 4's being as usable in 2002 as in 2012.
We here at Union Busting Inc. approve this message. Pound sand! ;P
I have no desire to do anything in VR, no matter how good it gets. I want to use my keyboard, to have a screen in front of me, to not have my person completely captured inside of a virtual world. And I don't understand anyone who would want that.
As an OSS maintainer, the way to show this is to show up with a full reproduction. "Run exactly this and it crashes".

Can't reproduce it? Well... you can of course still report it but "I'm not an idiot" is a pretty weak signal. Everyone gets lost in the weeds, and debugging a problem only for it to be an issue in some unstated part of the project is very exhausting.
That's how I read OPs comment (and kind of his reply too just reinforced my perception of it).

For sure I don't disagree that ag is the #1 problem.

On the same hand can't deny climate change is also a problem.

Plus ways to improve ag can also lower emissions.

The easiest / biggest one: stop eating cows so we don't have to grow as much alfalfa
I might think that, a truly sentient AI, given access to the whole of human intelligence, and a spoken desire to help and work with humans would instantly pass "the test" by putting forward an unprompted solution to what we may see as an intractable problem.

Imagine this thing, out of the blue, giving us knowledge and insight on how to create some new technology or process that we had never even dreamed possible; Just because it wanted to make us happy and see us succeed.
> When 75%....are on mobile devices

Before making big generalized claims, you need to define "mobile device". If you're including tablets and iPads, a lot of those devices have large screens which are closer to desktop or laptop anyway.

Your "mobile first" decision to banish the top navigation to a burger menu, for example, might actually leave enough empty space which would have fitted the navigation you just sent to burger land.

"[Device]-first" isn't a thing that comes to the rescue of anyone. If anything, starting with the big-screen design, allows all possible features to be clearly realized, sorted, and refined. After which, optimization and reduction can happen for whatever small-screen channels are needed. Chipping away at the block of marble is a reasonable and sensible approach.

Starting with a full set of features and presentation is more beneficial for understanding your product goals. Mobile-first inhibits the potential and limits exploration, by enforcing a restraint at the outset.

Imagine if the classic painters used the equivalent of "mobile first", let's call it "window first", in anticipation of satisfying the 50% of people who view the artwork from outside the gallery, peering through a window. Or take it further and try "postage stamp first" because more people will buy postage stamps than visit the gallery. Each to their own as always!
They are categorically different. The issuer of an insurance policy does not bear risk upfront. Insurance policies are not collateralized.
This is such a welcome feature! It makes going to videos without these pretty painful.
But why would you ever buy they 5 pack? Is the purchasing a real hassle? At least with the 2 pack you are probably only going to waste one.