skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Nationalization of companies rarely works well

It does not need to "go well". All the government needs is control. They have VK (controlled by Putin's people). They will be happy with either outcome with Yandex — kill Yandex entirely, and people will just switch to using VK services. Make Yandex controlled by the government, and then its resources will be used for evil purposes. So either way it favors the government, reducing overall freedom.

> It has no value

It has the value. I insist that the net profit from "killing Yandex" is strictly negative, as it has not even zero effect on preventing actual people from getting killed — the actual effect would be the other way around.

> With sanctions it can't.

Unfortunately, not true. Even if Europe stops buying Russian resources today, the remaining profits from selling to China, India and etc. would cover the expenses. The oil and gas prices will greatly rise (it already happens), so that would compensate the losing of the European markets.
What is `Box<str>` and how is it different from `String` in Rust?
Thanks for the kind words! Mattermost PM here :)
I'm almost 40 and would love to work with older devs. Wisdom and experience is seriously under appreciated in our industry.
I agree that everyone should feel responsible for fulfilling their part of the contract, not just in the most shallow way.

> "the product requirements only said there should be a Save button, not that the data should be saved"

If these were really the requirements, then the PO's salary should be split and go to the developers, because they would need to do that job anyway and at least do not get distracted by an incompetent PO.
2 in 24 three-year slots, so 8.3% again
Looks like yet another reason to switch to modern crypto currencies with low transfer fees.
> The point you did ignore was: Rust is being sold as magically making software safe and people selling that completely ignore the fact that logical bugs are also a thing.

You know, I'm a Rust evangelist. And I can tell you, why I ignore logic bugs when trying to sell Rust. Rust can prevent some logic bugs if they break invariant you managed to encode or enforce in your types. But it is a difficult topic to dive in a internet discussion. The best I could do is to bring some anecdotal data points, like &str being guaranteed to contain only valid utf8 strings. The worse issue (for a discussion) that it may be not obvious what kind of a logic error can be fixed by the type invariant discussed. So to show it I need to find some more examples of bugs that were prevented by enforcing the invariant. But you see, bugs that were prevented were not documented. It goes like this: you write code, it doesn't compile because rustc is unhappy, you fix code and it compiles nice now, you call it a day and move along. When you fixed this small issue it was not a bug, just one of a several complaints of rustc. You would need to speculate a lot about what could happen bad if rust allowed this issue to live.

We can try to get to the point from a different angle and to find logic errors in a wild, and then to speculate how type invariants might prevented them if programmers had written their types in a some particular way. But it raise a question: would they write their types in this way before they faced this particular logic error?

If I tried to talk about complex relationships of Rust and logic errors, I would need to dive into an ocean of speculations. Rust deniers are not very cooperative on this regard, and I'd bet they would just dismiss all the speculations as... well... speculations. And they would keep insist that if we cannot measure a falling frequency of logic bugs, then it is all immaterial. Some even go further and claim that if some tool doesn't prevent all bugs of a kind, then it is a useless thing.

So it is not a fun to talk about logic errors with rust deniers. Among rust evangelists the talk doesn't happen either, because they do not split bugs into two categories "logic" and "memory" bugs, they split them into "can be prevented by type invariant" and "cannot be prevented by type invariant, or too f*king difficult to". They talk about memory safety to laymen because it is something that laymen understand and it doesn't need explaining. And Rust can prevent all the bugs of this kind, so even when we talk to a people who thinks in black-and-white, we can make statements that are defensible in this Aristotelian tradition of excluded middle.
I think the responses are telling, nobody presenting any convincing arguments. For some reason nerds are very unwilling to acknowledge status, power politics, wealth disparity. Maybe they're just all temporarily embarrassed unicorn startup billionaires?
For small sites there's a hobby deployment (https://posthog.com/docs/self-host/deploy/hobby) that costs $10/month to host (we can't get it below that at the moment), or we give a lot of free usage away on cloud for smaller sites. I'd stress we're product focussed (product analytics + session recording + feature flags + experiments), and plausible is web analytics (Google Analytics alternative), so choose accordingly!
A Random Distribution of Wealth (2017)
Original phrasing implied a sort of depressed suicide. In a figurative sense not the in world mechanics
> exchanges KYCing

Offchain.

> companies like chiphertrace actively tracking them

Mostly without attribution, which people would consider anonymous.
>So does a lot of things, including eating disorders and living a miserable life in the first place.

Obesity is the easiest preventable thing under your control that you can directly influence to assure that an early death does not come, you are coping and desperately trying to twist what I said.

>From the parent's post, it's clear that dieting has done significant damage

His incorrect dieting did the damage. You can drive a car well or you can drive it without a drivers license and crash in the first wall and kill yourself.
You are again conflating legit dieting with incorrect dieting.

>This is a text book example of dogma. and if you really meant it, I guess there will be no amount of discussion that actually leads to anything productive on either yours or my side...

I cannot write here what I truly wish to say in regards to this comment as it would get me banned.

There is no other way to reduce fatness other than with a diet change. You do realize that what you wrote makes no sense? How do you expect someone to lose weight without changing his diet? Unless you have a device at home capable or breaking the laws of physics, which I doubt.
Exercise is hardly of any help for fat loss.

The alternative are surgeries: but think about it: would you rather correctly adjust the food you eat or would you rather have a piece of you cut out and risking god knows what side effects of mutilating your body for having delusions of how mother nature designed the human body?
>He was worth $16 billion at the time, meaning he could have bought that house and a hundred more outright

That's not necessarily true. I mean yes, he could, but to do that he'd have to sell a chunk of Facebook shares. He doesn't have $16bn sitting in a big warehouse piled up with mountains of dollar bills, or in a checking account. The $16bn is the notional value of him controlling Facebook, and he still wants to control Facebook.

The way to leverage that into wealth without selling shares is to take a loan out with the shares as collateral, but that's just essentially a Mortgage again collateralised against the shares instead of the house.
> LLVM's own code, seems to use only the rudimentary features of C++ (primarily, single-inheritance). And this absence of complex C++ features made me feel comfortable looking at, reading, and understanding the LLVM code.

Uh, what parts of LLVM were you reading? Because LLVM uses pretty much every C++14 feature allowed by their coding standard. The fact that you felt like no complex machinery was being used is actually a testament of the powers of abstraction in C++.
I'm not saying that a large number of CVEs won't be prevented in Rust, I'm saying that so few bugs are CVEs that the trade-off is not always worth it.

If you have 1000s of bug reports, of which 5 are CVEs, and then have 3 of those 5 be preventable, most dev teams are still going to consider the cost/benefit of going through the pain of developing a long-term product in Rust, or of switching to Rust altogether.
Ask HN: What are the hardest things in starting a tech consulting business?
A garbage collector has saved my brain from overfrying many times.
> Kind of OT, but i find it confusing that apple is even able to ship Safari with Mac/iOS/iPadOS in Europe, after Microsoft was forced to integrate a "pick your Browser" Screen into Windows

The difference is that Windows had like 95% market share and the iPhone has only 23% market share
Please correct me (with citation) if I am wrong: The headline is complete BS / clickbait. The article refferences this story-piece from the uk-guardian about german certified playgrounds (by professionals from TÜV) that are assumed risky by people who don't do certifications in a mix with a study about kindergardens and accident types (yes, they have playgrounds, too, but kids spent their time there in various activities). No Insureance is demanding anything. At least not verbatim if at all. (Yes, I live and work in Germany & am a guardian of a 7 year old).
>The definition of sexual harassment is substantially broadened

I can see why Republicans hate it.
Depending on what kind of work you do, it can also be helpful to learn at least the basics of various "back end" (or "system") languages and libraries out there.

For example, one of the following in each categories:

- something for number crunching and statistics: Python or R (went with Python here, also has nice image/audio processing libraries)
- one of the more popular higher abstraction level languages: Node, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Ruby or another one
- perhaps something for being able to create static executables and packaged tools/utilities: Go, C/C++, Rust
- maybe something for GUI tools (opinions vary, I still like Lazarus/Pascal, most might go for Electron, others grokk Qt/GTK etc.)

Chances are, you won't need all of those in your day job for the most part... until one day suddenly a use case will present itself, where doing it in one of those languages will be easier than whatever you're using already.

Plus, it can make for a fun few weekends, if you have the curiosity and time to spare. If you can get your company to pay for you upskilling yourself and don't have to fall into the "1 year of experience, X times" trap by just fixing bugs, even better! Even better if you learn multiple of these and then can reason about which tool might be better for any given job.
“Dutch sounds like nothing so much as a peculiar version of English

(…)

We would be walking down the street when a stranger would step from the shadows and say ‘Hello, sailors, care to grease my flanks?’’ or something, and all he would want was a light for his cigarette. It was disconcerting.

I found this again when I presented myself at a small hotel on Prinsengracht and asked the kind-faced proprietor if he had a single room.

‘Oh, I don’t believe so’, he said (in English), ‘but let me check with my wife.’ He thrust his head through a doorway of beaded curtains and called, ‘Marta, what stirs in your leggings? Are you most moist?’ From the back a voice bellowed, ‘No, but I tingle when I squirt.’

‘Are you of assorted odours?’

‘Yes, of beans and sputum.’

‘And what of your pits – do they exude sweetness?’

‘Truly.’

‘Shall I suck them at eventide?’

‘Most heartily!’

He returned to me wearing a sad look: ‘I’m sorry, I thought there might have been a cancellation, but unfortunately not.’ “

— Bill Bryson, Neither here nor there: Travels in Europe.
Being an unsecured creditor under US law is much better than the law of the jungle, where rug-pulls are just tough luck. Unsecured creditors are still ahead of stockholders in the event of a bankruptcy.
Here is a right-coded example of a hypothetical agency behavior with many claimed historical occurrences:

Suppose you are the EPA and you'd like to implement some environmental rule that might or might not be strictly within your legal powers.

You work out a deal with a friendly organization and they sue you for improper stewardship of the environment (with details, obviously, according to the rule you want to implement). Then, instead of fighting their lawsuit, you settle it, agreeing to their demands -- which consist of the rule you wanted to implement. That rule is now one you are obligated to enforce pursuant to a legal agreement, instead of something you implemented on your own authority. This structure tends to prevent normal accountability mechanisms from working.

(As a side note, I'm always surprised, when I see descriptions of this tactic, that it's permissible for an agency to agree to take actions that are notionally not within the power of the agency. I would be interested to know more about what exactly is going on there.)
> Wouldn't it be great if it was impossible to do these things based on the currency's intrinsic properties?

It would indeed, which is what I meant by saying this is one established weakness of Bitcoin, which some of its successors (monero, zcash, grin, beam, etc...) try to fix.
Yes, let's all marvel at the accomplishment of making everything funded by exploitative and intrusive but largely useless advertisements.

All digital startups are literally doomed without the indiscriminate collection of personal tracking data.

Side note: thank you modern adtech for consistently recommending me products I already bought days and weeks before. Very effective. Gullible companies just keep paying cold hard cash for these garbage recommendation systems because some sales rep talks fluffy about AI and machine learning, it's so mindblowing....
And he's complaining about Apple, a trillion dollar company that gave up trying to compete against Firefox and IE and finally just started bundling a KDE fork.
Which is ridiculous as kids being shot is extremely extremely low risk.

Slightly tricky to get the numbers here as most sources include colleges full of adults under "school shootings" and most school shooters shoot teachers rather than students, but it looks to be around 70 since the year 2000.

Which is such a small number that it should be completely irrelevant from a public policy and safety perspective. Heck the nuances of road signage law and hazardous chemical labelling are probably hundreds of times more important. The stress of worrying about it probably costs more life years than the shootings (which average at around one life hour per person).
Try to write a non-trivial web app using vanilla JS/HTML/CSS. Then test with the major browsers. You'll find that Safari is always the one where things break and that forces you to go back and rewrite stuff due to (for the most part) bugs and lack of features.

Safari is the modern IE in this respect.
This is something we may never know, but is there actually a backdooor in Dual-EC-DRBG?

It has been know long before Snowden leaks that this algorithm can be backdoored, and even without that, it was considered by researchers to have some avoidable weaknesses. The approval by the NIST is also very suspicious, why use a not-so-good algorithm, with constants that come from who knows where and that may contain a backdoor.

But while there are many claims of a backdoor, there is no actual proof. It is possible that the chosen constants are honest, or even better than "nothing up my sleeve" numbers, as it has been the case for the DES S-Box. AFAIK, we don't have the key to the hypothetical backdoor, or any mathematical proof of it existence, we also don't have evidence of the backdoor being used.

Technically, Snowden didn't say anything on that matter that we didn't already know. He may have insider knowledge, but I don't remember hearing about Dual_EC_DRBG in the original leaked document.

Anyways, I see no reason to use Dual_EC_DRBG. There are doubts, and there are better alternatives.
Can you name what new syntax you abhor?

I mean, other than []<>(){}() being a valid C++ expression [0], C++ hasn't even made any notable sygil-related syntax changes recently. Sure, some keywords were added (auto, constexpr, co_yield...) but I don't see how that leads to "ugly" syntax.

[0]: That's a lambda capturing no state, having no template parameters, taking no arguments, with an empty body, finally being called immediately with no arguments. But half of that is optional. A more usual lambda would look like [foo](int bar) { return foo+bar; }.
I don't understand - you went on keto, it worked, then you starved yourself and felt rubbish, so you gave up keto?

Why didn't you continue keto without starving yourself?
> I feel better about myself knowing I have lived up to my standard, money cannot compensate for that. Money gets you the respect of people who don't know you.

This only applies once you make enough money to be comfortable. Before that point, money directly correlates to quality of living.
More anecdata, but I find it depends on the type of exercise. An hour of cardio equals several hours of appetite suppression. An hour of heavy weight training equals several hours of unstoppable hunger. What I eat in that state (high carb, low carb, whey protein, etc) doesn't seem to affect satiety much.

I believe this could be the main reason why its almost impossible to eat at a caloric defecit (with surplus protein) and train anabolically at the same time. Some people are able to do that, it's just very rare.
Harmony Network's Horizon Bridge Exploited for $100M
Apple's 'Game-Changer' AR/VR Headset Rumored to Launch in January 2023
I have found survey questions to be a good, practical example of the pleasures of OOP.

See, for example, section 3.2 in https://www.econstor.eu/obitstream/10419/66819/1/717744094.p...
Meh. I'd prefer to have a path not in my PATH, and then explicitly call the binary with the full path .. and then append a #comment for easy recall with CTRL-R at some point later in the future.

A bit more fiddly perhaps, but future proof.
The problem is that the older devs are no longer young enough to know everything.

This is a regrettable culture misfit with the younger devs who do.
Ask Hacker News(HN): Am I the only one that gets lost with acronyms?
I am rising this to see what is the general feeling about the arbitrary usage of acronyms across technical articles and documentation.

I've found this paragraph in the Google developer documentation style guide:

https://developers.google.com/style/abbreviations#spelling-out

Don't you feel this is not used at all? Am I the only one loosing a lot of time looking for the correct acronym meaning? Is there any resource collecting all or most of this technical acronyms like a technical dictionary or something?

Thanks!
As an "engineer" with the corresponding university degree, I am absolutely against software engineering being a protected title, for several reasons:

- We are nowhere close to a set of widely agreed required, specific practices for a software engineering project. "Signing a project" is meaningless without those specific practices.

- Even if we had those practices, this world changes so fast that they would need to be updated frequently and get people to examine themselves again.

- There's no test for the characteristics underlying components being used. If I'm building a bridge, I can specify certain characteristics for the materials and the procedures, those things can be tested during/after construction and if something fails, we can try and check what failed and pinpoint responsibility (was it a bad procedure, a bad implementation or a bad material?). That's utterly impossible with software. A program crashes or has a bug, and whose fault is it? Nobody will be signing any project and assuming the responsibility it comes with when there's no reliable way to pinpoint who's responsible for a failure.

- There isn't even a specific set of skills for an engineer that we all agree on. Yes, you might say "know programming languages" or "testing" or "project management", but what does actually mean? Do you need to know Agile to be a software engineer? Or assembly? Or A/B testing?

And finally and the most important thing for me: the amount of knowledge you get from a degree is just a small, often antiquated, part of what's actually software engineering in practice. As someone with an actual software engineering degree, I do not think that the degree is necessary for someone to be a great software engineer. Most of the important knowledge will be learned on the job and on various Internet resources anyways.

In my opinion, making SWE a protected title will, at best, do nothing. At worst it will put good engineers without a title out of a job, for no actual change in the quality of the software.
> Can you show me a "valid program" that Rust rejects?

#[derive(Debug)]
struct Foo {
a: i32
}

fn thing(foo: &mut Foo) {
match foo {
f @ Foo { a } if *a > 5 => {
println!("{:?}", f)
}
_ => {}
}
}

There's no reason it should reject that, as the use of the `a` reference doesn't interleave with the use of `f`.
> of which 5 are CVEs

Those 5 are just the ones you know about...
I wished my Organization would adopt Mattermost. Using it for years as a Chat to stay in touch with my friends.

My Org uses MS Teams (because it is already bundled with MS 365). What Mattermost is missing is a Videochat / Videoconferencing option - there is a plugin but I didn´t tried it yet: https://mattermost.com/marketplace/microsoft-teams-meetings/
Well, if a given architecture doesn't allow for another solution, that might be the only implementable choice.

Remaking the core architecture to solve an obscure bug which only happens when you've got overlapping leap years and leap seconds is most certainly a bad decision.

For a simple example: Phillips hue movement detectors don't work for a very short time before new years. (My guess is that they're validating the year for the activation signal). I don't know how the bug occurs, but i can imagine several ways in which this could become unfixable if a given architecture was chosen... I still want it to work though, so I'd really like it if they'd just added something like your example.
> so little time actually refuting the statement "if WebKit weren't mandated, Chromium would take over"

The author is not trying to refute this point. He's saying it's a re-wording of "we (Apple) can't compete with better browser rendering engines" and he's right.
If it requires to read a whole blog article like this to setup someone can make and sell a product with a one-liner command that does it. They could call it, idk, decker or something
That's completely counter-intuitive to me. My weight and appetite significantly drop when I stop weightlifting.
Knowing Bash is about more than just writing build scripts. I use it every day for one-off tasks and trying to use anything else instead would be a huge waste of time.

> GCP cloud services in a single line in package.json -- how many lines is that in bash?

My whole point was: use the right tool for the job. Sure nobody would do GCP stuff in Bash, just like it would be ludicrous to do certain tasks in TypeScript instead. The original statement was about Bash being a useful skill, and imho that's practically undeniable.

> Installing command line tools via the platform's package manager doesn't work in practice for various reasons

I wish installing dependencies via package.json and npm was as reliable, it would save me quite some time.
> "Couldn't be penalized whatsoever" wasn't enough?

No, I think that's very naive.
How a Recession Could Weaken the Work-from-Home Revolution
You can have that today. In fact, 90%+ of the web is exactly this.

I don't miss it though. Especially enterprise apps based on this model are just hell to maintain.
My guess is that exercise implies that you're doing something important (fighting, fleeing, etc), and it is not the time to be distracted by hunger.
Spent years maintaining a completely different flow for my customers because Safari webcrypto was broken.