skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can't say much about mindfulness meditation specifically, but I've been practicing Catholic (specifically, Iesuit) meditation weekly for over a year now. Also, after my first experiences with it I talked with a friend who tried some non-Christian meditation a few times (can't recall if specifically Buddhist or "secular") - he seemed to say there are apparently a lot of similarities between those (but I didn't explore the topic further, or whether they have common historical roots or not). So, can at least try throwing in a few thoughts being kinda practitioner.

So, in shortest words, what definitely surprised me most was that there seems to be something to it. I went to the first Iesuit "retreat" very sceptic and with an attitude basically of: "meh, I'm a Catholic, so by this logic, praying isn't the worst thing I could waste a ~week on". Trying to summarize most succintly and "secularly", the gist of it for me is, that during meditation, I tend to get thoughts in my mind that I just didn't see coming. It's not any kind of "voice". Those feel 100% like my regular thoughts; just the conclusions and ideas I get from them are quite often completely surprising and unexpected to me - if in subtle ways and generally on topic of "how to live life", what's important, etc. Interestingly to me, I find that those thougts tend to align with and seem to help me understand the Bible. Also what I found very surprising, is that through meditation of the Bible fragments and also trying to meditate scenes from my life that might be relevant, I seem to be finding new meanings in the Bible. That was a huge surprise to me, given how being a Catholic long time, I heard a lot of those quotes tons of time already, and heard them interpreted various ways tons of times, and my general opinion before was that there's not really much more that I could find there, and was rather sceptic towards then notion of people finding deep meaning in Bible by studying it more. So much sceptic before, some suddenly seem understand now, very unexpected and surprise.

One "sceptic/physicist" thought I tend to be having on that, is basically kind of reminding me of "simulated annealing" and leaving local maxima in search for more global ones. Which, even if true (seems a huge simplification, given we still don't really know much about mind, and basically zero about consciousness), doesn't oppose faith to me personally. If I believe that God created the world, I also believe he created physics etc. the way He wanted them, so "trivially" He created them in a way to make meditation & simulated annealing work like that. But that's probably not super interesting to you :)

So, just my $0.02, in case that could help you in any way.
Related:

IBM Selectric Bug - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21947924 - Jan 2020 (4 comments)

Operation Gunman – how the Soviets bugged IBM typewriters (2015) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16246432 - Jan 2018 (18 comments)

Operation Gunman – how the Soviets bugged IBM typewriters - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13255334 - Dec 2016 (9 comments)

Selectric bug - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10773214 - Dec 2015 (17 comments)

Learning from the Enemy: The Gunman Project (2007) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9954159 - July 2015 (43 comments)
Coffee maybe fine for some people, but it's too sterile, formulaic, low-effort, and low-energy like a business meeting. I prefer to do something.

And don't waste 5-6 dates when you know in the first 1-2 if they're worth exploring more. There's too many people and you develop a sense about personality traits.

For example, I avoided a date with someone who presented themselves as a comedienne. She came off as arrogant and unwilling to listen to anyone else initially but I gave her a second try. Her set was so bad, I got up and left after she finished because I'm not going to say it was fantastic. I had a beer somewhere else. Lo and behold, who walks in but this same chick. I hoped she didn't see me but she came over and started bitching me the riot act. I told her that my suspicions were proven correct by her behavior and that she should get lost unless she wanted a face full of pepper spray. I told her to fuck off and let me enjoy my beer.
I had a system that was sped up by 30%+ on Windows by switching from HeapAlloc to jemalloc. Profiling showed that HeapAlloc was largly stuck in a single giant lock. (This was on Windows Server 2016, IIRC.) And that wasn't even that allocation-heavy in the large scale of it; most of memory was done through arena allocations, but a few larger buffers were not.
Non-Free Software Licenses
Developed never really has the meaning that you think it has, imho. In Europe, during a long time, it really meant "like us" without thinking that each European country have a lot of different country. Looks at the difference in the Health system between Belgium and the Nederlands.

Actually the terminology shifted in some organizations as a continum of Low to High income countries (set by the World Bank). It is far from perfect but it frames the differences and terminology differently in your mind.
It seems like the matter is a "won't fix" since september 2020.

>Responsible disclosure history

>This problem was disclosed on 19th August 2020 to the Australian Signals Directorate, with an indicative expectation of a 90-day disclosure period. ASD communicated it to the ATO. At a meeting on 18th September 2020, ATO told us they did not intend to change the protocol, at which point we immediately informed them that we would make a warning to users public on Monday 21st September.
And it is very rare when they actually can, most times they try or are given the chance to it fails. Almost nothing is as easy as it seems from the outside, and giving a critique is a lot easier than executing.
I think pre-commits are useful, but the prediction is basically "trust the client".

What if the client is compromised? Are we throwing away reviews? Should the reviewer re-run all the tests?
Right, bazel lets you do that (it has no notion of version control state), and ships it off remotel if you so choose to have the system work like that.

I stand by this idea that if someone made Bazel, but without all the obtuseness, with strong integration to a hosted CI service, they would quickly overtake a lot of services.
To answer your last question: how much you’re paid has little to do with how hard you tried or how hard your job is.

Secondly your vague statement about ‘within 1-2 sigma of the hardest jobs on Earth’ seems a little hard to interpret to me. If you say the hardest jobs are at 5 sigma (~2k people on earth have them) then 4 sigma gives 250k people and 3 sigma gives about 10 million people. (In the US the numbers give you 85 people, 9.5k people, and 400k people. 2 sigma gives 7 million people, about 2% of the population). So maybe if you say the hardest jobs in the US sit around a Z-score of 4 and programmers at high-paying companies sit around 2 your numbers make sense. But programmers at well paying companies being in the 98th %ile of income sounds plausible to me. It seems programmers are getting a reasonably good deal in that their income percentile is roughly corresponding to their percentile in whatever metric you’re thinking of (if their Z score is about 2). Other professions don’t seem to have this quality. (One assumption I’m making is that not everyone with Z>2 will be a programmer at some well-paying company).
What I learned by packaging for the AUR
Yesterday after I made a small but fast program, I thought since it was simple enough, no dependencies except the compiler, it would be a nice experiment to upload it to the Arch User Repository.

So I started reading some arch wiki pages about PKGBUILDS to have a general idea of how not to mess up badly.
The several variables are described. And there are rules like "Packages should never be installed to /usr/local/".
I ended up jumping between several pages and demo pkgbuilds to get an idea.

The PKGBUILD is simply a file where you describe some properties of the package plus define build and install operations.

The variables includes package dependencies for making the package and for using the package.
This is actually highlighted in the wikis as something that is easy to use incorrectly.

The operations can be a bit confusing as you might be required to "cd" to a directory for them to work.
Also the pkgversion variable is actually generated automatically after you build the package with makepkg if you have a proper pkgver() function.
The pkgver function can be git aware, using the last tag or commit from the repo.

The automatic install procedure is basically, download git repo, run build(), then run package().

The package() function has a bunch of `install -D -m755 somefile "$pkgdir/usr/bin/somefile"`

A big pain for me was getting git to work. You publish to the aur by using git with your ssh key.
After several tries this is the process that worked for me:

- Git clone clone the ssh location
- Copy the pkgbuild, .gitignore, and other files you need to that directory
- Immediately run: git branch -M master
- Then add, commit, and push to master as normal

I made a push.sh file to automate git push and .SRCINFO creation.
.SRCINFO is a file that must be generated with "makepkg --printsrcinfo > .SRCINFO"
It's a required file used for listing purposes.

I ended up making 4 packages (all software I wrote) since I already had the gist of it.
Some packages have different build() steps to download dependencies and what not.

A big thing that happened was that I made changes to my software for packaging to make sense, actual big changes sometimes, it made me rethink a lot of stuff, making the software essentially less complex in a nice way.

I also had to deal with creating some user systemd services, which was almost painless.
You just create the service and copy it to /etc/systemd/user/something.service
Then tell the user to enable and start the service.

Overall the experience was fun, I know that at least I will be using the packages myself, cool if others use it of course.
> dripping with the smug evils of a British-style class system

This smacks of a an entrepreneurial young chancer having a go. The business is founded on the hope that the smug evils of the British class system exist, rather than evidence of them.

Many startups are founded on the idea that there is huge profit to be made by targeting the rich. Sell 'high-end' services at crazy prices. The inflated price is one of the KSPs of the product as the exclusivity itself is what's on sale. The fact that these services exist doesn't really prove anything, other than that there is a perception of something there to exploit. Gray & Farrar looks like a website built by young business guys who have watched too much Made In Chelsea, and The Apprentice. The website is genuine, but yes it's a parody of the British class system, just not a knowing one.
Wow! This is truly the best explanation of this I’ve ever heard. It explains a lot that I’ve seen.
In the history of SourceHut, only one person (setting aside spam/crypto-miner bots) has been banned from the platform. They were harassing maintainers and failed to respond to an email inquiry seeking to discuss their behavior before resorting to a ban.

I have strong principles and I stand steadfast by them. However, one of those principles is tolerance for different views. I want SourceHut to be available for everyone, even if we don't see eye-to-eye. You won't be booted off if you and I happen to end up in an argument somewhere online.

I've made myself personally available to users, as a person they can directly reach about problems and concerns with the services, rather than a support ticket answered by a random lackey. I think this is very valuable. Software is made by people. One of the risks that comes with this, however, is that people can start to view SourceHut and my private identity tangled together. Rest assured, they are separate, and I treat SourceHut with a great deal of deliberate professionalism and reverence for our users.
GNU Manuals Online
I like how GNU appreciated from the start how much good software has its practical usefulness limited by bad or non-existent documentation and has generally made a point of having strong documentation.

You occasionally find books in GNU info documentation, like the gawk manual or the elisp tutorial.
"Github is evil!"... sponsored by (among others) Google.
You're signaling right here, and I bet you've mentioned this before. It's not a problem, people do all kinds of things for signaling, but I hope you're not genuinely convinced you can't find similar bliss for an order of magnitude less than what you paid. That being said, do you have a link to see it?
Obligatory "there truly is an xkcd for everything."
What data is Apple using in Central Europe? Because all weather apps only using data from US providers only are hilariously wrong.
> What problem is WASM solving here?

My understanding is that it's mostly solving sandboxing for multitenant cloud operators. I don't know how right they are, but if they are it's a big deal, because virtualizing and isolating users from one another is very costly today (containerization is not strong enough for isolation – you need vms or something like gvisor). A large portion of that cost comes from overprovisioning, since vms don't scale up and down quickly or cheaply. If wasm holds up to its ambitious aspirations, it could act as a packaging format, a sandbox across users and it could even run in kernel mode (let's pretend spectre and I guess side-channel attacks in general doesn't exist for a moment).

For the customer, it's a compile target, which is a promising direction and means in theory that you can mix and match languages at a granular level, but in practice of course this has countless unknowns (did I hear anyone ask about ABIs?). It's more nimble than containers – you no longer need to think or care about the OS and all it's gritty details. At the same time it's also unclear where exactly the runtime boundary lies. File descriptors? A full https stack? And so on. I've come to believe that this boundary is extremely important, and difficult, to get right.

So yeah, dreamy and utopian, never failed us before right? If you put on rose tinted glasses it could have implications ranging much further than just cloud. I, for one, am crossing my fingers (and yes, I know how naive I sound).
It was round, was it a perfect circle?

How many significant figures was it to? How accurate was construction and measuring techniques? 9.7 diameter would be reasonable as “10”, as would 30.47 being “30”, with values being well within 5%.
I prefer the weather radar for that. Actual clouds and the live direction they're going in is a great predictor of rain. In fact I'd love to improve lightning detection by making a script that also takes into account wind direction, since lightning tends to travel with clouds. It could be as easy as using an ellipsis directed as a kind of weather vane, perhaps stretching out with wind speed. Currently I use a simple circular distance calculation to detect proximity.
Please note that this recap is not a substitute for taking the time to taking the time to learn about this particular approach to meditation through study and practice [0].

- Our every experience has two parts: its content (for example, a thought "pizza") and awareness (our ability to know / feel / experience it). Usually, we just notice the content, but do not recognize our capacity of being aware. As a counter example, unlike us, a computer can store the word "pizza" in its memory, but it does not have the conscious experience of it.

- Meditation consists of simply being with both, in a natural, relaxed way, but without getting lost

- Being with awareness is easy because it is a core part of every experience. Noticing it can be hard for the exact same reason.

- So, we practice being with awareness again and again, both in short formal meditation sessions and informal, while we go about our daily lives

- We gradually discover the built-in qualities of awareness: openness, freedom, creativity, joy...

The signs that we are doing it (any kind of meditation) right include:

- Being able to better handle ups and downs of life with a relaxed, curious attitude

- Increased sense of humor, creativity, spaciousness of where our life happens

- Kindness toward ourselves and others

The opposite would be signs that whatever we are doing is not benefiting us.

[0] - https://tergar.org/programs/
Well, Notion is hijacking it then, but the difference as a reader is irrelevant, the point is that I cannot press neither space nor down to scroll down (if you scroll manually then press down, it'll jump to the "highlighted" paragraph, no scroll down).
You verbally agreed on contract pay rate, payment frequency, schedule, assignment of works, how sensitive information will be handled, whether or not you can subcontract a portion of the work, who provides materials and work accommodations, and a bunch of other important details?

All without a written agreement? I'm surprised you could get people to work with you.
Many integrations between CIs and git frontends (as in showing green checkmarks under your pull request) only work properly if you push. Rebuilding manually in the CI will run the build, but it will no longer be recognized as related to a PR
I’m looking forward to it, but it might be a while, before I can rely on it. It’s almost certainly iOS 16 (and above)-only. I always write my apps to support (at least) one version back, at time of release.

I’m also interested in weather (*<|:o) or not it will be completely free to use, or if there will be some attempt to monetize (like the current Weather app takes you to that God-awful Weather Channel page, if you want anything other than a summary).

At least, I hope the built-in app finally becomes usable.

[UPDATED TO ADD]:

Looks like it’s sort of “the Google API” model (https://developer.apple.com/weatherkit/get-started/).

If your app isn’t that popular (like most of mine), then it’s free (with attribution).
What I usually do when I see promising projects and slow devs.

1. "This one issue is what is stopping me from using this product. Is this current method preferred by your users or do you have any other reason to not want to change?"

2. "The proprietary solution costs $X per month. Is there any way to sponsor development? I am willing to give $X/n (where n is whatever number you are comfortable with) per month to get this issue merged and to have some sort of prioritization when triaging issues.

3. Failing those: write a blog post and propose a fork. This is usually the quickest way to get a reaction from narcissistic developers.
Geniunely asking. As I live in a part of world where we stay in longterm jobs.

Is it not stressful when switching jobs? - from paperwork, interviews, new colleagues, friendships, on-boarding, new place politics - especially for brain.
Sometimes this frustrates me immensely in Mathematics.
Not every programming job skips physics or math. If anything, the fact engine developers generally earn less or equal for a far harsher job than webdev proves the ridiculousness GP illustrates.

People really need to get out of this webdev bubble.
I don't think that you can label the whole wide field as bullshit from just one example.
That's a very interesting point and perhaps worth expanding on (although what's a '4-position'?) but tangential to mine which was purely about general value representations that have to be constrained to finite.
The Michelin guide still uses the Michelin man and the stylistic iconography of the tire brand as theirs. I believe they’re still fully integrated
Open Source Licenses by Category
Mean, mode, median; they're all summaries. People even in science-adjacent fields are still often used to communicating a summary without showing the dsitribution. If possible, I always ask for both mean and median; it's an indication how off-normal the distribution is.

The mean only has meaning for normal distribution, so it's my least favorite summary, because it assumes the most. Imho the normal dist is assumed way too often.
Numbers don't mean much either way. I used to date quantities of women randomly without any consideration to fit but they revealed themselves to be poor fits.

Smoking, drugs, bad habits, already had kids, alcoholism, emotional instability, poor attitude, ego out-of-control, lack of intellectual curiosity, judgmental (conservative or hipster), too boring, not many hobbies, low self-confidence, jealousy issues, cheater-type behaviors, psycho (cluster A B or C), external locus-of-control, taker rather than giver, and/or lack of excellence.

There's tons of women I've met who seem like catches but they're invariably coupled.

PS: What's weird in my life recently is coupled women wanting to be "friends" with me. I'm fine if that's what it is, but the vibes and actions are incongruent to that.
Taking a job in the US under someone else's name and social security number.
> Our scripts have so many retry loops and arbitrary pauses mixed in

This is unfortunately your fault, not Azure's. Their API is explicitly designed around this eventual consistency and weak references, so your client side must take this into account. Typical bash, Python, or PowerShell scripts are the Wrong approach with a capital W, and you will forever be tearing your hair out if you persist on using them. (Or any similar imperative deployment mechanism)

The only robust method is ARM Templates, or better yet, Bicep templates[1]. The latter simply compile down to ARM, so they're essentially equivalent but terser and with nicer tab-complete.

Compared to scripts, templates have key advantages:

1. Built-in incremental / differential deploy capability. A partially deployed template can be simply redeployed[2] to "fix it up", without requiring client-side logic for every corner case.

2. Can deploy multiple changes that would fail if deployed step-by-step. For example, App Gateway can have intermediate configurations that won't validate on the way to a valid final configuration. This is madness to unravel with scripts. Templates generally just take you to the final configuration in one step.

3. Inherently parallel. Anything that can be deployed concurrently will be. Anything. No need to write complex and error-prone parallel loops on the client side!

4. Largely immune to temporary failures like missing reads after writes.[3] The template engine has a built-in retry loop for most (all?) fallible steps. You'll see it has "failed"... and then "succeeded" anyway.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-manage...

[2] Most of the time. All resources should be idempotent to redeployment, but many aren't because this is not mechanically enforced. IMHO, this is just shoddy, shoddy engineering and everyone involved should be ashamed. Being nearly idempotent is like being nearly pregnant.

[3] You still need a few tricks up your sleeve for robust deployments. Anything outside of ARM, such as Azure AD groups and RBAC tend to be a PITA. Generally you want to wrap your deployments in a script that takes the object GUID of the created group and feed that into the template. That works, because the GUID can be used even if the full object is not fully replicated around yet.
From what I have read, artificial heart valves, being artificial, are simply not really covered by the immune system. In other words, you get white blood cells to the point of infection because you have blood supply and mechanical parts don't have blood vessels running through them.

It's foreign matter, not really part of a living body.

Very likely, they probably also attract infections that like eating plastics and such. These are inherently hard for the human body to combat if they get traction, from what I gather. They aren't a normal infection in humans and tend to be deadly when they do take root.