skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When your customer pages you, his timer starts: return his call immediately

this really depends on the customer. if the customer is of the kind that won't let me off the hook once i respond, then i won't respond immideately. (unless i actually have time to focus for at least an hour). on the other hand my best/favorite customer is wonderful at this front. while i don't always reply immediately, there is never a problem to listen to his message and tell him i'll get to that in a few hours or whenever my schedule allows.

Admit your mistakes

while i wouldn't have returned both the original and the accidentally duplicated fee since the error and the reason for the error was an obvious slipup, returning money for shoddy work or for any work that causes the customer to loose money is definitely something i like to do.

a customer being always late with payments is the least of my reasons to fire someone. i may do that when i have more work than i need. but i rather have a customer that's pleasant to work with and pays late than an uncomfortable one that pays on time.

Generally, you cannot reuse a whole project because it represents customer-specific functionality

hardly. at least in web development the only thing customer specific is the graphic design. most everything else is reusable. i am not even writing custom backends anymore, but i reuse the same backend for all projects. it's mostly just CRUD. and maybe one or two custom functions added to an object in the backend somewhere. to that end, the backend i use is GPL, and together with the frontend framework makes up the bulk of the code. but that's all done. what little code i end up writing is custom for the project, and that is what the customer pays for.
Sure, but that wasn’t the question. How does the punishment play out, assuming they’re acting in bad faith?
Ask TOYOTA and come back to ask again!
The power of law comes from the ability, to confiscate things, kick in doors and arrest people. Usually there is some social consensus such that most comply anyway most of the time.

This is true and always and trumps whatever your software says is meaningless if there is any conflict ("you and what army" is a very valid question.

Now, the law (a court) can of course allow your software and might even enforce a contract bases on your software

In good systems the governed people have a say in how those laws are created. In Bad ones it's literally whatever one person mutters with a mouth full of breakfast cereals and headaches.
I took a look, however stopped. It is all fine, but linux support is "community" and that's just not good enough when there is ubuntu desktop units on the most sr engineer staff.

I assumed it would have linux desktop support on day one, that was a huge miss on MS part.
Care to objectively articulate the arguments against switching to proof-of-stake? Why is it controversial?
> Scrollbars

I don't get it. If I want to see whether/how much I can scroll ... I try it. I appreciate only having to see the information when I actually need to see it instead of it distracting me otherwise.

> Having to hover over the more inner portion of a notification to get its close button to appear

This reminds me of a much worse thing regarding notifications. When you install an app, often you get a notification telling you something like "This app will send you notifications". For some reason these apps don't go away automatically, so okay, you swipe it away manually. But for some reason they keep re-appearing.

After over a year of using macOS I found out a hidden button saying "allow".

A hidden button. Asking you whether you agree to something that wasn't a question.

The fuck?
I was 14-16 when I playing chess programs on my Apple II and even then I didn't consider playing these games well "a sign of intelligence". I understood even then it's a finite searching space and that brute force (with rules to throw away some defective variants) can and will solve those games one day. It was just a matter of better hardware.

So maybe those people who considered playing these games a sign of intelligence were not very bright. And using their obviously flawed take on this is not and should not be a benchmark about our progress towards general AI.

I am not patting myself on the back here. I would never call myself a genius. I am a fairly average programmer. But, if I knew what I knew at 16 then I am pretty sure there are many much more gifted individuals that knew that and more. So maybe those people proclaiming beating chess is a sign of intelligence were just at the right place at the right time; maybe even nepotism or relationships with investors and politicians were involved? And maybe they didn't have that much expertise in the first place?

You know what I'd consider a very good progress towards a general AI? A system that can play StarCraft so well that it can beat all world champions -- and I don't mean with perfect micro-management of units (which I think is already achieved) but with creative strategies e.g. you're losing the center-map fight but you do a drop of troops in the main resource-mining operation of the enemy, severely crippling their economy for several minutes, giving you time to recover troops (something I've seen several times in playoffs).

And you are right here, general AI is most likely first going to be used in the military and maybe in financial markets as well.
Tesla Talk Given at the Workshop on Autonomous Driving at CVPR 2022
PKD might actually have been a psychic time traveler!
Any insight to how influential Monash University School is as an institution? This is interesting work, curious to its salience.
Git really is a mess. The fact that commits and not diffs have hashes should be lampooned despite arguably a few small benefits. Geniuses make mistakes too and git is linuses. The only reason git is respected is because it came from Linus. If it were from Microsoft it would get all the criticism it deserves and then 20 times more
Yeah, I prefer sleeping on the floor now with a thin mattress. Great for the back.
I can see a possible reason behind it: Learning a new language alongside a new problem domain is hard. So it’s possible that some of these projects started out as a way to learn Rust in a problem domain they’re already familiar with.
That’s actually _why_ we used it - the name is well-used enough that people understand what it means and what it does without further description.

That said, this is good feedback - we’ll reconsider the name.

(If anyone else has an opinion for/against, let us know - the reason for this pre-release is specifically to get feedback)
I did a lot of work with transputers and occam in the 1980s and wrote an OS for a machine that used them. The exposure to the CSP way of thinking was a blessing. occam-2 on the other hand was a little too primitive.

I remember when Inmos marketing came up with "We wanted to make occam the FORTRAN of parallel processing". My response was "You have." (a reference to occam-2 having only static arrays and no concept of a record/struct)
The CS program at my university, and most people I've spoken too, wasn't research oriented. At least not until the graduate level. Maybe at really respected places like MIT. Yes there were algorithms classes and such, but it was more about memorization than actually studying how they were made or how you would make a novel one. Final projects were always about building a real-world-ish application on a team.

But I'd say about 20% of the students that graduated still didn't understand things like references very well. They'd write their code with "foo.bar" and when it didn't compile they'd randomly change "." to "->" or add random asterisks around until it compiled.

(Classes were primarily in C++. We did some classes Java as well, and in my 3rd year Microsoft came in with a big sponsorship to change all the Java classes to C# classes.)
Yes, it was pretty obvious sarcasm.

Well, just goes to show that sarcasm is always bad for factual debates.
Wow this sounds like it would make me really productive!
I might be interested if this also supported Edge, any plans for that?

I played around and I think it will be really tough to change existing habits for users (copying and pasting links from the browser into another app), do you have plans on meeting the user in their existing habits to allow them to ease into your experience?
Using GitHub green squares as a basis for offering employment is as stupid as using the color of their hair. Don't play stupid games if you don't want stupid prizes.
OK. Do you have any specific criticisms of the article?
What reason would anyone have to believe in their benevolence? It would be safer to believe in and use their greed and self preservation.
I don't think it's that really. Phoenix pushes a lot of things (especially expensive metaprogramming) to compile-time. For ruby to handle those sorts of things inherently adds cpu time.

I don't super love Phoenix, because a lot of it's metaprogramming stuff "breaks" elixir conventions, but I have to admit, I've done some really strange things with it and never worried about sleeping at night.
I did something almost identical and it's working wonders with haproxy and "mode tcp" to pass the ssl connection just reading SNI to the backend without terminating it.

I've used a delegated zone to achieve that, I like your catch-all approach better since it's cleaner, in a future rewrite I might change it.

I am now testing the configuration with proxy-protocol to pass the information on the client IP which otherwise would be lost, it's working but certbot does not like it so it needs a dedicated backend with a rule.

I've also created an Ansible playbook that does the installation for you and retrieves the haproxy config from a git repo so it's always in-sync on the balancer machines: https://blog.gandalfk7.it/posts/20220201_01_diy-balancer-wit...
What makes you think they are related?
It works for what I need, but yes, if you need to configure something it doesn't support, it's a hassle. If you reconfigure it in virt-manager, Boxes will happily run the new config, until you change something else in Boxes, and then it will obliterate your changes.

The one problem I have, and I can't figure out if this is Boxes or something else: If the machine suspends, spinning it back up again results in a wrong clock. I can reset it, but it doesn't set itself automatically. I can't even find reasonable documentation on the issue.
And there's also Keen Software House (maker of the Space Engineers and Medieval Engineers games) whose founder (https://blog.marekrosa.org/) has an AGI company as well (called GoodAI). Funny coincidence.
These concerns never really made much sense to me. 1/x also has a singularity, but as far as I'm aware, it's a perfectly normal function. So why is it suddenly a problem that the dirac delta is zero almost everywhere? I recall that in my analysis class, they wanted to define the dirac delta as the limit of a sequence of functions. That never seemed very different from defining a matrix exponential as the limit as n -> infinity of a taylor series.
a popular trick is to encode information in NaNs
It's a baffling thought that so much research is spent on which type of sugar water might cause the least amount of bad long term effects.

It's not like there is any medical need for the body to consume sugar water at all.

As recreation, sure, but doing something daily is routine, not recreation. That last part is the strange bit. Consume it every tenth meal and you can pick any type of sugar, an otherwise healthy individual would suffer no long term effects. Consume it every meal and you will.

As a though experiment, it would be interesting to think about how much research would be made into finding out which alcohol we could ingest 50 g of to every meal while minimizing long term damage.
Borne, as in, 'carried', derivative of the verb 'to bear'
FYI, I never click twitter links, that's 1 data point. Not sure how many are like me here.
if you take a coding interview and answer the question by feeding it into GPT-3, does that mean you pass the interview? it must do really well since all it takes is memorizing the solutions to a large body of meaningless challenges.

the implication here is that if GPT-3 can solve your coding question, you are hiring people good at memorizing solutions and not skillfull engineers.
This either satire or laughably naive. You think big brother doesnt have disproportionate access to crack or backdoor the tech that makes you feel so safe?
This is a lot of words to say that PoW involves an inverse-hash problem being solved. Inverse-hash is a mathematical problem. Finding the nonce is solving it.
I'd quibble with the meaning of weakly related vs. not directly related, but fair enough.
Most people I meet with CS degrees cannot code. Not anything. Some can’t declare variables or get a file to compile.
number of exponent bits. bfloat16 has a larger dynamic range with lower precision. e.g. this would be infinity in fp16 https://float.exposed/b0x5f80
Webb Telescope Shatters Distance Records, Challenges Astronomers
Both.

Over time, you can develop a tolerance to the bites. I definitely had this happen while living in SE Asia for 4 years... when I first moved to Vietnam, I had bites all over, after a while, I stopped reacting to the bites almost entirely.
Sounds like you made a good decision.

I am middle aged and completed my EE degree when I was 20, but it was 90% theory with very little practical use (mostly useful if you were to continue climbing up the education chain). Completing the degree made me despise working with electronics, a topic I had deeply loved and had spent my teenage years learning for myself. Most courses were rote learning, and I was very good at passing exams, but it was two years before I realised how pointless the majority of the “knowledge” was, and then I forced myself to finish the degree (sunk cost), which I now regard as one of the few true mistakes of my life (wasted years, for valueless academic “knowledge”). The degree got me a software job, so there is that, but I am sure I would have ended up in software anyway (early love of computers).
Potentially this is a big problem. Especially with OCR, transliterations from and across different languages, characters missing their diacriticals, etc.

Whilst I was aware of the problem I wasn't aware that it's as big as it is. Those of us who use Latin scripts are reasonably familiar with the common ones such as o, O and 0 [l/c, u/c alpha & zero], but there's some tricky ones even in these Latin scripts that many of us get wrong.

As I discovered a while back - but I can't remember how - most of us get the World War Two abbreviation WWII wrong (myself included). The 'II' is not two alpha characters as we almost inevitability use but rather it should be the Unicode characters for Roman numerals. Even then I cannot remember if the correct transliteration for Arabic numeral 2 is supposed to to be Roman numeral '1' used twice/repeated or if Roman numeral '2' actually has its own
Roman numerical glyph (I suspect the latter is correct). There are many more instances like this too, the dash, minus sign, en and em dash for instance.

Yes, I could look them up but it's a nuisance to do so on-the-fly and that's the whole point/trouble.

It seems to me we need much better proofing tools that would flag errors or potential errors. I reckon we've been very poorly served in this regard in that there no simple software tools available of the quality we need.

It's not only symbols or characters we need to correct but also typos that don't show up on spelling checkers such as for and fro and the big troublemakers it's and its. Spelling and grammar checkers should automatically highlight or flag such words whether their usage is correct or not.
You tend to not write concurrency in elixir. You tend to borrow concurrency from your libraries and frameworks, which usually are fairly buttoned down. Most websites are basically stateless data fetch/transformation agents, and even the stateful ones are usually one process. Why muck around with all that when your framework does the right thing for you out of the box?
I mean, the white people who colonized everyone often do themselves as benefactors. I don’t think it’s paranoid to ask what contemporary benefactors are getting out of it for themselves: https://contexts.org/blog/who-gets-to-define-whats-racist/

I’m from Bangladesh and my dad has a lot of beefs with the British, but I can’t say Mercator projection has ever come up as one of them. I heard it for the first time from white people. Who came up with the idea that the Mercator projection is racist? Who popularized it? Who gains power if minority kids learn that in schools and come to believe it’s true?

I think there is evidence to justify skepticism. When we came to this country, white people had nothing to say about Bangladeshi identity. That issue was owned by Bangladeshis themselves—through communities and what parents would tell their children. In the last decade or so, suddenly I’m hearing a lot about “brown” identity (we’ve been reduced to a color) from white people and white dominated institutions. And they really want me to be angry at/scared of other white people, which was never something my parents told me growing up. I don’t think I’m paranoid to ask where that’s coming from.
Are you familiar with petrodollar warfare? It consumes a lot more energy and resources than bitcoin.
Keep in mind there is a broad spectrum of human bodies around. Evolution also didn’t intend for the average male human to weigh almost 200lbs. Softer beds may be a response to joints that have to support a lot more weight.
“They're Parked on the Side of the Crater – They're Watching Us”
I wrote this a while ago https://iximiuz.com/en/posts/computer-networking-101. You may find it useful.
the reason it does well is because you gave it a question that might come up in coding interviews.
> it stings a lot of animals causing them some pain

Isn't pushing back on animals, in particular apex predator types, "good" in some natural sense. Making areas uninhabitable (except I assume for species that have evolved, or will evolve, some kind of symbiosis) seems like an important role. Any lifeform that gets an open field will just grow until they run out of food or invite disease or whatever. Unfavorable parasites or whatever you want to call them are an important part of the balance, even if they are clearly bad from the perspective of whoever they're feeding on.
It’s called path dependence; same reason that the Space Shuttle boosters’ width is constrained by the width of two horses’ rear ends put side by side.
For a web frontend dev switching to backend I'd assume you still want to stay within the web space rather than let's say systems programming - in this case I wouldn't worry too much about the lower-level details yet and instead focus on what's relevant for the web:

HTTP - headers, the concept of forward/reverse proxies, etc

TLS - not necessarily the underlying cryptographic primitives but the high-level overview, how certificates are obtained/managed, the data they encode, how are they validated, etc

DNS - the types of records, etc

The best way IMO would be to learn by doing - set up a basic server-side rendered application (you can add a JS frontend later, this will come with its own challenges such as serving it from another domain and setting up CORS, etc) purely on a dedicated server or even self-hosted hardware. It's not that the cloud is always a bad idea (though it can be in some cases), but doing it by hand from scratch will teach you plenty of things that the cloud otherwise abstracts away from you.

Get yourself a Linux VPS from a provider offering fixed, capped pricing (so a mistake can't cause a huge bill) and serve that web app from it, doing everything yourself - no S3, no Cloudflare/AWS ELBs, etc.

You won't learn anything in depth, but you'll get a good high-level overview of how all these concepts fit together and will be able to know how to dig further and where to dig.
only 3 products ?
While it would likely be prohibitively expensive, I really wish there was an independent board that would certify software engineering as a certification and required an oral defense in the same style as a PhD.

I recognize that it's kind of gatekeeping but it feels like more and more diploma mills are just hanging out degrees, not to mention all the coding camps out there.
This is a very interesting way to think about mosquitoes.
It will yell at you and threaten your account with termination if you try to create anything based on a living person's face, from what I can tell.
this has been my experience exactly.
Finally my sleep problems are over.
Eh, a mathematical puzzle is being solved via brute-force. My intent was to explain briefly that the problem/puzzle is by nature computationally-intensive to the extent that brute-force is the most efficient way to solve/complete it.
Zero is gracefully handled; the mean of a zero-sized set is best represented by NaN, and this would be idiomatic in most languages' IEEE754-style handling.

Saturation is not. This is what really bugs me: If I'm going to drag in a billion GPUs of external computation (or a dependency, which is basically the same thing but with human brains), I want it to provide the hard algorithm I can't write, not the easy one I can. I am not limited by typing speed.

I also wonder what a "detection" is.
How can I post a job here?
Hi, we are hiring for software engineering roles at MedBridge, Seattle. How can I post a job here to get the word out?
Mosquitoes get a lot of shoutouts in The GULAG Archipelago.
It seems the rules and getDominantNeighbor assume it’s a two player game. With more than two players, all 3 ‘parents’ of a to-be-born cell may be from different teams.
If I made a website where you could type text and get images, and I said that your held the copyright to any images you got, could you safely act on that assumption? What if my web site was simply a proxy for Google image search?
Did you reply to the right comment? I never said everyone gets to live in an idyllic neighborhood that serves their needs for housing, work, and entertainment. What I said is it is possible to live near rail and transit but not air.
If you have 2/3 of the validators, there is no way that you can be punished. You will effectively be able to produce the blocks and tell the network that they are valid.

If you don't have that, the most that you can do is to attack the network by proposing bad blocks to slow down block production. Anytime that a (selected) validator proposes a bad block, the other validators that catch your mistake will snitch on you (through attestations) and the validator will get their stake funds slashed. The more your funds are slashed, the less of a chance you will have to be proposing new blocks in the future.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17587796/

Human gastric juice contains chitinase that can degrade chitin

>In this pilot study we tested the gastric juices of 25 Italian subjects on the artificial substrates 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-D-N,N',diacetylchitobiose or/and fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) chitin to demonstrate the presence of a chitinase activity

>AMCase activity was present in gastric juices of twenty of 25 Italian patients

>In the remaining five of 25 gastric juices, AMCase activity was almost absent in both assay methods

>The absence of activity in 20% of the gastric juices may be a consequence of virtual absence of chitinous food in the Western diet.

Their conclusion is correct, but they don't say why....and the why is because eating insects is disgusting and a vector for parasites. Humans may be able to eat the occassional bug that flies into our mouth and gets swallowed but we are not designed to consume insects on a large scale.