skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One of the examples given was a go compiler upgrade for all of their go code. It seems reasonable that some companies would want to have a single team investigate and perform this upgrade all at once.

Sure, each project team could upgrade independently, but the company that’s chosen a mono-repo for their go code is likely to desire to have a single team tackle this upgrade.
Both are valid. https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/the-difference-b...
Fat people can exercise and eat less to lose weight, what can bald people do?
It is not… is actually a completely different thing! Check the dictionary!
Absolutely. I'd probably recommend it earlier, but i also have a somewhat unique work environment. It's a very small team and we have somewhat nonstandard goals. I can't comment on how it'd work on a 50 man team or whatever on a larger project.

That said, I think F#'s beauty comes from how much easier it is to model your code, find errors in compile, and easily restructure once you really get the hang of doing proper design and passing functions. The few runtime errors that occur are pretty trivial to debug as well thanks to immutable by default.

It DOES require a major shift in how you approach your problems if you've been coding with something like C# for a long time, and that can take awhile. The tutorials are not great (often assume you're coming from something else), and the unfortunate mix of library support with awkward issues (you can use specter console, but if you follow the docs you'll hate your life) is brutal on adoption.

I do sincerely believe it's basically this diamond being totally ignored though because "well i'll just use C#" is a fair thing to say when at the end of the day we've all got shit to get done and the library docs are for that.

Learning F# though has made me a vastly better coder and I think it's EXTREMELY elegant in how it enforces good practices and lays out its code. It doesn't have all the advantages of something like haskell which is a shame (Higher kinded types and generic lens syntax for records would be AMAZING), but it also doesn't force you to learn monads to print to the screen.

Being able to jump back and forth between styles as needed is VERY powerful, and you don't have to worry about having sideeffects in your first mockup. And once you REALLY get it, having super light and easy syntax for passing functions around lets you do some CRAZY abstraction on your program logic that makes down the line adjustments/additions trivial and intuitive.

This comes from someone who spent nearly a year being TERRIBLE at the language. In part because the onboarding was even worse when i started (worse tutorials, lots of stuff referencing no longer working framework libraries, weird VS Code bugs that made things harder than it should be, me just not being very good at this stuff).

I think that the biggest shame is that F# almost never makes libraries because "Oh there's a dotnet one already", and while you TECHNICALLY can just use it, you quickly can wind up missing out on the neat features that brought you to F#, until you really learn how to easily swap between styles so you can invoke whatever features you want, and then get them back in idiomatic F# and start shoving around your functions.
Agreed. A list that has Calgary tied as third best city? Sorry Calgary but.. no. Miserably cold, in the middle of nowhere, nothing to do but freeze. Something wrong with the criteria for this list.
You might not need that kind of processing power continuously, but consider that the lamp has to connect to WiFi securely, then talk to your smart home HUB securely, meaning setting up TLS connections, and you want it to respond to commands in much less than a second, you want that kind of processing power in bursts.
This takeaway is pretty much the exact opposite of what’s going on. The algorithmic content chases mass appeal and large demographics. The long tail is niche independent artists doing their own thing and is, for them, commercially really small.
> Rights are given by god

Whose god? Allah? Buddha?

No, rights are natural, books with legends and stories have nothing to do with it, but their legal framework is provided by legislatures.
> Why does everyone assume when you say "traditional" you mean go back to the horse and cart.

Because that's basically what "traditional" means? If "progress has been made on improving the efficiency", then it's not "traditional". By definition.

Did you look at the chart I posted above?
> [sample accuracy] is part of both the AudioUnit and AAX specification

heh, i did wonder if i'd get picked up on this :)

whilst practically speaking often true, this is actually not the case. w.r.t. AAX: during parameter automation events that involve a continuous change (e.g., a linear increase in gain), the process block size is reduced to 64 samples (if i recall correctly), and parameters are interpolated by the host and fed into the processor as fixed values for that time period. it means that it's not possible to answer the question: "at sample n, what is the value of this parameter?"

> Again, AU and AAX are designed with this in mind

you're right, i omitted AU (only because i didn't have fond memories of it), but i stated AAX allows for this type of seperation.

> but there's nothing about VST3 that guarantees this.

which is the same guarantee that AAX and AU give you. i'm not talking about how the host is implemented, i'm talking about what the API models. VST3 - like AAX - defines its presentation and processing interfaces completely seperately. VST3 (initially) didn't allow for a combined processor and interface model, whereas AAX did (through its "singleton" description).

> Every major DAW that supports VST2 also supports VST3

you're right, i was being pessimistic: at the time, i wanted to drop VST2 support, but i couldn't at the time because of ableton live, although i see they now support VST3. but you still have lots of dinosaurs; i still had to support RTAS...
.. unhealthy how? I'm 184 cm and I feel bloated at 72kg already aha, I don't see three more centimeters adding up to 25kg
The last thing this country needs is places where people can discuss opposing viewpoints on controversial subjects. Especially at a workplace where people have existing common ties.
China’s high-speed railways plunge from profits into a $1.8T debt trap
It's not just NIH, after a certain size every external lib is a liability. You don't want to wait for some OSS maintainer to unblock your multi billion dollar business' issue.
> Nothing you say is credible unless you tell me you have tried copilot. Without you having tried copilot and seen its capabilities we have no common ground. So get back to me once you have used it.

I posted elsewhere in this thread talking about my experiences (both old and recent) using it. Dismissing a reply you don't like simply because of a (terrible, given the tool is very available) assumption is just a poor quality response.

> I claim copilot is capable of creating. When copilot writes an amazing lodash one liner in my code --that isn't regurgitating an existing lodash snippet, it's creating something new to fit my use case. This is undeniable and there is nothing to argue here. Copilot regularly looks at my code and writes new code that is highly specific to my existing code. It's honestly better than me at languages I don't know well (like C).

> And yes, 0.1% of the time copilot is spitting out existing code verbatim; the other 99.9% of the time copilot is not overfitting and is synthesizing new code. Luckily most companies don't needs clean room implementations.

Where do you get this figure of 0.1%? I'm not aware of anyone having studied it, and absent that the figure seems entirely fabricated and could be higher or lower. Indeed, the way it works via prompting suggests that an overall percentage is irrelevant if 100% of the time you ask it for specific things it generates copyrighted or strictly licensed code. If you have references though, I'm interested.

> Copilot writes code that is adapted to my existing code base. This is quite obviously and undeniably not just regurgitation because my codebase is unique to me.

Using your code to show you code you might likely write isn't "creative" and is exactly regurgitating what it's seen. Is a Markov chain "Creative"? That's essentially what you're describing here.

> Lastly copilot is a better programmer (locally) than many of my peers. It can write better lodash one liners, amongst other things, and while that's embarrassing it's true.

You've used lodash one-liners as an example a couple of times now. Why? Why is that a litmus test for a good programmer? What makes the copilot generated ones superior? Do you have examples?

My experiences with copilot as I've shared elsewhere are that it produces about 90% of the time code that needs to be debugged, doesn't quite fit coding conventions we use, and often doesn't do exactly what I'm looking for. It's fine if you're using it to stub in specific kinds of boilerplate or using it to generate a function to do some very standard math thing that exists or should exist in a library somewhere.
I imagine he’s just going to introduce a simple yet “radical” solution like allowing people to pay a small fee for verified status and adding the option to filter out all non-validated accounts. That should kill off a large number of the bots and sock puppet accounts.
This could be worth fighting for. If another maker uses your work to build and share an improved lock, as you did, this guy could try suing them for that, as though the basis for their work was his, ruining the spirit of openness and stunting any resulting improvement in lock design.

It might be a struggle to prove prior art but you might have enough sway to be able to find a pro-bono lawyer, and/or publicly pressure or embarrass him into compromising. Patreon would almost certainly help with costs too.

Seriously, you have a tremendous amount of credibility in maker/engineering communities, among others. Thank you very much for doing what you do.
I tried creating a GraphQL API[0] for HN for both read and write operations so I could eventually use it to write a HN client app but I hit a wall due to HN scraping policy. It limits you to fetching a page once every 30 seconds[1]. Yes, I confirmed with dang that I would need to adhere to this.

[0] https://github.com/searchableguy/hackernews_graphql

[0] https://hngraphql.fly.dev/graphql

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/
I interpreted it more that, in domains where correctness is vital (rather than "good enough"), you want more than one implementation no matter what languages you use.

Maybe that's not what parent was going for, but I think it's like the reproducible/replicable difference in research... can you use the author's code and data, getting the same result... can you use the author's algorithm/pseudocode and data, and get the same result... can you use the author's algorithm/code and different data, and get an _equivalent_ result?
How does not having a monorepo solve this problem? They would still need to compile and run the same code in order to run these tests between 1000 small repositories vs 1 large one, presumably they see a lot of value in end-to-end tests.

Is the suggestion just "an easier way to avoid this problem is to not have so many tests?"
Luddites were unemployed people and their protests were struck down by police and military forces. The story that luddites were some Amish/religiously motivated people against machinery is just a myth.
You could put the power (battery) inside the key. Like a car key fob.
In Denmark political ads are banned on TV. That reduces the amount of money necessary for campaigns before an election quite a lot:

https://www.oscepa.org/en/news-a-media/op-eds/the-danish-way...

https://slks.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/dokumenter/medier/rekl...
I think we can all agree that copilot “generates” code. In that the code did not exist until copilot suggests it. I also think we can agree that a compiler turns existing code into new code that does the exact same thing the code describes. If we can’t agree on that, we have some pretty fundamental definitions to figure out in the courts.
This is the claim they were granted:

“A cable-driven additive manufacturing system comprising:

an end effector configured for linear translation within a three-dimensional workspace along an x-axis, a y-axis, and a z-axis;

an aerial hoist suspending the end effector within the three-dimensional workspace by at least one suspension cable, the aerial hoist having a static position within the three-dimensional workspace whereby the aerial hoist is not translated along the x-axis with the end effector and the aerial hoist is not translated along the y-axis with the end
effector;

an aerial cable winder configured to control linear translation of the end effector along the z-axis;

a plurality of motion-control base stations disposed below the aerial hoist and configured to control linear translation of the end effector in an x-y plane defined by the x-axis and the y-axis, each motion-control base station comprising a base station cable winder;

a plurality of motion-control cables, at least one of the plurality of motion-control cables running from each of the base station cable winders to the end effector;

at least one tension-control base station; and

at least one tension-control cable running from the tension-control base station to the end effector.”

Considering all the requirements, it is quite narrow. This means if a particular implementation doesn’t have all of these things it is not covered by this patent.
Mainstream culture is going to be dominated by consolidated media companies until we go back to decentralized, disconnected medieval village life. (Whether that's desirable or whether the path there is survivable is another question.) But when have there been more subcultures in the past decades than now? It's just that they are so niche as to be boring to almost everyone not into them. But for the chosen few, there will often be a commercial element to their interest that is sustaining the "creators". Maybe not to the middle class lifestyle as the author laments. But what does that even mean anymore? Still, there are many people living independently, supported by their small audiences. That is new.
This is almost the only advantage. A related "advantage" is forced upgrades when dependencies change - since you can't have code depending on different versions of in-repo libraries and services, client code needs to adapt or die.

The more clients a library or service has, the more expensive this is, and it's an ongoing maintenance cost for every client. Since people changing the service don't feel the full pain of this maintenance cost, changes keep on happening, and eventually clients get culled because it's too expensive to keep on maintaining them all.

From the outside, this looks like the company abandoning venerable but still working product, and makes people scratch their heads, wondering why.
In theory.

In practice, you often end up with larger changes which are mostly janitorial. Bumping a version of a log library across the infrastructure, or a version of a serialization system. This simplifies dependency convergence and a best handled as if they are cross-project changes.

The other problem is that over time, good factoring tend to deteriorate. A large software project will invariably have people with different brains working on it, and they'll have different needs for the factoring. So the project naturally pushes itself toward situations where cross-project changes become a necessary thing.
> It is really hard retraining the brain it seems.

Have you tried seeing a therapist? A good therapist works a bit like a coach (think: "sports coach", not "live coach" whatever the fuck that means). We're notoriously bad at spotting unproductive thought patterns, and having someone with an unbiased perspective and the right expertise really helps. It takes years, but so far it has been the most effective way of doing so, for me.

Also, you can keep rationalising as much as you want, but your meat sponge is not a rational, logical machine. The average HN reader might make the mistake of believing otherwise (include me on this list). Your amygdala doesn't give a shit, however.

Speaking from personal experience here, hope it didn't come across as patronising. I just noticed that many of the things you've said sound familiar.
Just look at platforms like Patreon, Subscribestar, Twitch, Onlyfans etc. (these days also Youtube with members and superchats). Hell, ironically enough (given the OP), even substack. These are the places where having just 500-1000 supporters can set you up for a VERY comfortable living, and mostly with no need for advertisement driven business (if you don't want to). That's where the long tail is and it's healthier than ever before.
Ok folks…
Move to Costa Rica. You will be welcomed, loved and find live lasting friends here :)
Are those content creators being fairly rewarded?
This is the unfortunate side effect of the Javafication of OOP. Smalltalk doesn't have that problem. Neither does TypeScript, but it has taken us this long to start undoing the Javafication process.
What if the Long Tail was effectively creative venture capitalism in the era of cheap money?

Does that mean media and culture re-centralise in a recession?

The author makes predicts that Spotify will follow other aggregators and reduce its catalogue to blockbusters. We’ll see!
flems.io (lightweight online html, js,css editor) does this also. i was very impressed, when i first encountered this. Everything is encoded in the url to share.

https://flems.io/#0=N4IgzgpgNhDGAuEAmIBcIB0ALeBbKIANCAGYCWMY...

cryptpad does the same, i read yesterday. https://cryptpad.fr/
Getting a valid certificate is really not difficult anymore these days. Github Pages even does it for you, as do many other hosters and web servers.

Given that, it seems like a very bad idea to encourage people to override any encryption-related warnings in the browser.
I find that claim highly dubious, solving differential equations rarely yields to completely generic methods and there are plenty of solver suites in other languages, among them C++ and wrappers for Python. To use scientific machine learning you don't necessarily implement all methods under the sun, just a method appropriate for the domain at hand.
Of note: bootstrapping is (potentially) hackable between two willing parties. At least per Aron’s study[1]. Who knows if it would replicate.

At least in my own relationships I have seen the pattern of escalating personal self-disclosure leading to deeper and more meaningful bonds.

Honestly I think this is why alcohol plays a role in so many early friendships - the disinhibiting effects make it easier to admit personal details to people you don’t already fully trust.

Doesn’t mean you need to get tipsy to make friends, but you’ll need to find other ways to open up.

1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/014616729723400...
This is great; reminds me of these (slightly more 'artistic' vs. diagrammatic) cutaway views of Picadilly Circus done over the years: https://londonist.com/london/transport/london-cutaways
Yeah in my experience "get a faster machine" is so easy it was always done years ago and is no longer a possible improvement.
This video made me think these would be in every garage. If you want to start at the hovercraft part go to 2:08…

https://youtu.be/l-Vs0gYDN20
Not a 42 alumni, but Epitech 2015 (so I saw the split and the creation of 42 while I was between my second and third year).

I'm not surprised that it was much more difficult to get the school to work in the US. Their loss.

Best of luck for qwasar !
I have in fact. I have discovered a forum that used to be quite popular back in the day and very chaotic. It literally spawned 4chan at the time, but in the meantime it kept going, many left and grew out of it and the remaining posters are now in their 30s and I've had some of the best and some of the most inane discussions of the past few years in there, with topics for most of my interest, gaming, mental health, programming, stairs. Surprisingly there's a lot of people with newer accounts. Parts of it are still a bit of a cesspool, but it's what the Internet we love to reminisce was also about, instead of the sanitised corporate web we're dealing with today.

It's been an arduous process but I've managed to replace Reddit with a few forums, HN included, that are still alive to this day.

And I've completely banned myself from Reddit. It's hard given how much information is stored on that site.
Upgrading software and Postgres databases is a difficult problem in general.

The text itself can be changed but it takes at least 15 minutes to mutate to a deployment. We still cannot generically mutate running code to other running code. Ksplice and other live kernel patching and Chrome's binary patching should be generalised and productised.

Patching methods at runtime is another thing that is possible (ruby, python and Erlang) but I am not aware of a general framework for deploying mutations to servers at runtime.
There's another side of the long tail (power law) coin: the head becomes much more popular. Both extremes become more extreme, at the expense of the shoulders.

This seems like what we see: places like YouTube allows small producers to be viable with small audiences -- on the other side, things like Netflix pushes generic content that you can pretty much assume everyone with Netflix has seen.
Everyone is a genius if they tap into latent genius that may be buried inside. For those who have tapped it and continue to leverage their genius, that’s great! You can be a genius with low IQ, however IQ is a bad metric for measuring genius.

What’s it like though? Everything is an opportunity, and opportunities multiply as they are seized, so you will see many doors open for you if you apply yourself. Talent without work is nothing.
Yeah I was wondering that. Isn't half the point of Bazel that is can know things like this without any extra effort?
Xfce is great, I can make it look the way I want by dragging a few things around and setting up a few things, then it stays out of my way. It doesn't try to tell me how to work, I love it.
>Yet now I am unwelcome in your home?!?

There are people that weight over 200kg, why draw the line at 100?
I do not want anyone to suffer. How did you miss that point?
Polymorphism and encapsulation are not features exclusive to OOP.

Isomorphisms exist everywhere. You could say nothing is OOP because it compiles into assembly anyway where pretty much all those concepts don't even exist. You can even say all of assembly can decompile into OOP so everything is OOP.

Think about it. If linus torvolds hates OOP. What is it that he hates? You can say, Linus is an idiot and everything is OOP so he's wrong.

Or you can understand what is it about OOP that he hates and understand the delta between my examples and what is traditionally thought of as OOP.

None* of my examples contain a class. That should be a hint, as that syntax is pretty much used in most OOP languages.

*React still contains class based components except the creators now recommend moving away from class based syntax to functional components.
Little Snitch can be setup whichever way you like, but the default/recommended way is for it to ask the user about every connection attempt, which you can then approve or deny (for a limited time, or forever).

Little Snitch is a gate. It either lets a specific connection through, or not; it does not modify it. It all happens on your own machine. You keep using that term, "MITM", I don't think it means what you think it means.
Why We Don't Have an Exit Strategy (2016)
funny you can advertise this in Germany now but still having virtual blood in video games is somewhat controversial.