skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The other commenter may not have demonstrated any low hanging fruit, but I would say that there is still plenty of that:

• PV is approximately the cheapest electricity available, and not yet saturated in summer daytime

• BEVs have lower lifetime costs and emissions than ICE vehicles

• Not all homes are as insulated as they can be

• Given how cheap food is (and that the government subsidises and regulates it anyway), relatively modest updates can reduce methane emissions even without population dietary changes

And all that's assuming zero new tech. Vat grown meat is aiming for lower emissions, not just ethical benefits; there are efforts to produce low (and zero) emission steel and concrete.

The trouble is, the necessary reductions are around 99.9%, so we need more than just the combination of all the existing and near-term low-hanging fruit, we need all bar one of the apples in all the trees in the garden.
Norse mythology have dark/black elfs (Svartálfar).
You seem to be changing focus. Op is pointing out that 10k fruit transported has a very low amortized cost per piece, whereas driving to the store has a low number of goods to amortize over.

This was pointed out on a freakanomics episode.

Furthermore last I checked the academic analysis I could find found that Amazon prime delivery has smaller footprint than driving to the store unless you’re getting like 14 items at once for similar reasons.
Centrifugal force is v^2/r, so smaller r increases it. And we have higher v, besides.
The coastline paradox comes from the fact that the length of the coastline is literally undefinable; there's always a closer level of granularity you could use to get a longer coast.

For externalities, it seems like there fundamentally is a correct cost -- doing all the accounting might be a real pain though.
Bathroom doors are usually off a small hallway, sometimes a busy one. By design, they don't have windows.

So you run the risk of hitting people with the door. Also, you will still need to interact with the door to open the lock. Having a door that unlocks if you push on it would be a bad thing for people who use the bathroom with their children.
> understand all aspects of "where" data is for the system under design.

There easy! But also useless!
The data is everywhere. That's why every "where" was created. Everything is a potential threat vector and needs to be protected by layers of fallible security.
> In Spain you need a permit for almost anything and one of the reasons
> we don't have more chargers is just because of bureaucracy.

So it's a political problem, not a financial problem. Then why mention the price of copper?
I think it's part of the common "I'm surrounded by idiots" attitude of the many jerks in our industry.
the 13" pro and air are basically the same machine :-/ I'm pretty sure they're keeping that pro because it's a physical drop in replacement for previous models, just for business that want that continuity.

That 8gb though. I had to switch to one when my last macbook died. I could develop on it fine, but chrome and teams killed me. Especially teams where it's just now getting a native release. There's no reason a lot of apps are using as much memory as they do. 8gb _should_ be more than fine for any office worker.

I'm growing on the idea that developers shouldn't be getting massive amounts of memory in their machines, so they can feel any pain their users will.
> Probably the same actions taken on antifa forums that are used to dox Trump-voting boomers with the explicit goal of harassing them: nothing.

We do know that Kiwifarms was doxing people, but I would like to see proof of these "antifa forums", please.

"Antifa" has become such an umbrella term, it's almost mythological at this point.
Finally, an exception to Betteridge's law. But also, a 2,785-word word
salad that obscures an obvious one-word answer.
Any testflight link?
I think, that to a first approximation, the HN-for-X is HN.

The problem facing a dedicated HN-for-X site is that X-experts, spend most of their time doing X instead of talking about doing X with people-aspiring-to-do-X.

I mean Steven King is mostly writing books and when he gives advice he scales it by writing it down (or having it video recorded).
Snap's 'messy' mass layoff happened so fast employees locked out beforehand
Yes, it does.

If you manufacture 100K of them, and save 10 dollars on every piece, you got an extra million in savings.
> It's strangely embedded deep in...

The goal was to deliver advice that wasn't so widely available. "Practice beforehand" is something you can hear a lot of places. "Don't jingle your coins" and "watch the cake schedule" are rare advice.
Given that humans evolved to live on Earth, isn't it quite unlikely that we'll find planets that are more hospitable (to us) than Earth?
About 75% of US adults are overweight or obese[1]. I don't think telling people "eat 10% less and you won't be obese" is a sufficient response.

I blame the companies that are designing foods to be fattening and addictive and advertising them everywhere.

Even Subway (marketed as healthy) tries to upsell cookies and chips and soda. Supermarkets sell "salads" with a bit of lettuce and 500 calories of meat, cheese, and dressing. Even gas stations try to upsell junk food.

Why aren't food companies being held responsible for the harm caused by their products in the same way that, say, big tobacco was?

1: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
No arguments from me; Apple needs to get over itself and let us side load our apps but they're too greedy.
JUCE.
Spot on. The fact that engineers keep having to learn things continuously for years, decades treading through anywhere from technically difficult issues to bad documentation, mostly on their own time for fear of falling behind, while running to honor daily and hourly deadlines and being imaginative, smart and personable at work is insane. Atleast managers get to rely on their experience that adds up while engineers jump through languages frameworks and libraries while attending leet code interviews is crazy. But peasant, get back to work and no quiet quitting for you, and you are a lower form of life is the prevalent attitude among many managers. There are good managers, most of them technical like you said, a smaller portion among them have empathy
As Russia Chokes Europe’s Gas, France Enters Era of Energy ‘Sobriety’
That's brilliant.

This time, maybe I've learned. Thank you.
how is this zero carbon? logging is very carbon intensive. and, i'm not an expert, but from what i've read as a layperson, doesn't removing trees cause a loss of the carbon that's stored in the soil?
Is this any different for those in the typical HN fields - software engineering, IT, etc?
Why did they split? Why do they exist? I don't see a link explaining why.
I have been a manager and a manager of managers and I think we really do not have good data on whether not "management" as a profession in software engineering really adds value. We're bad at quantifying the value of engineers, and we're worse at quantifying the value of managers.

There are definitely a wide range of non-engineering skills required to produce good software but that doesn't automatically justify the existence of a dedicated engineering manager role in most or even any teams.
https://archive.ph/Jkoda
I do think that this is fair and it is a reason why bad managers stand out so much in people's minds. I think that making it feasible for a team to fire its own manager would be generally a good thing.

But this has little to do with the argument that management as a concept itself is self serving bullshit.
Degrading "developing your people and networking" as "politics" just shows the lack of overall business and people acumen that engineers tend to suffer from. This is not necessarily a bad thing if you are aware of this, but these type of statements usually lead to engineers drifting away more and more from the purpose of the company.
> Why is it so commonplace now to conflate climate change with basically armageddon?

As it will lead to war, likely between nations who have large arsenals of nuclear weapons.

The Second World War will look cute compared to what will happen if we reach the 3-4 degree warming scenario's.
You forgot "ridiculously expensive." I got excited by this project several years ago, but like most of its sort: it's completely inaccessible for what it is.
"I`d`ve been Rachmaninoff but Mother Nature ripped me off"
And we're honing in on the pain point of that aspect of life. I'm not having a revelation here, I'm lamenting the fact with my peers on a site dedicated to technology/engineering.
How about tracking your time in increments of 6 minutes?

Also, their system doesn't know what minutes are. You have to convert to decimal hours on the fly.

BUT WAIT THERES MORE

Every six minutes, also need to know which 30 character charge code you were working on.

Also also the 15 character Work Breakdown Structure number (Sending Email, Review Process, etc). Which changes by Project.

Also also also the 24 character project number.

All of these. EVERY SIX MINUTES. OR YOU ARE FIRED. Single mistake, KICK. Here's your box. Goodbye.

Keep in mind this is all for salaried staff. And. AND!!!! You can only charge a maximum of 1.7% hours on overhead tasks. Overhead tasks like . . liiiiiiikkkkeee . . DOING YOUR TIMECARD.

Over the decades they've gotten really good at staffing with people who are good at timecards and/or who lie a lot.

(I've moved on, thanks for asking, but it took me far too long)
Very long time Engineering Manager here.

Engineering Management is not bullshit, though there are many bad Engineering Managers out there, even at companies (like Google, where I've been an EM for over 6 years) that strive to build and support Engineering Managers. Google itself did research into the question of, "Do Engineering Managers matter?" The answer was Yes:

Google set out to determine what makes a manager great at Google. But first, a research team tried to prove the opposite: that managers actually don’t matter, that the quality of a manager didn’t impact a team’s performance. This hypothesis was based on an early belief held by some of Google’s leaders and engineers that managers are, at best, a necessary evil, and at worst, a layer of bureaucracy.

The team defined manager quality based on two quantitative measures: manager performance ratings and manager feedback from Google’s annual employee survey. This data quickly revealed that managers did matter: teams with great managers were happier and more productive.

https://rework.withgoogle.com/guides/managers-identify-what-...

Google currently asks Engineering Managers to focus on three areas: Leading work, developing people, and building community.

What are some ways I spend my time?

1. Making sure my people are supported in their lives and careers. This can mean giving someone a task they will take a long time to finish, because it's the right thing for them (and the team) to have that person learn about that area. You are trading off project/feature delivery for personal and team growth. It can also mean helping someone find ways to still have impact when they are struggling with some aspect of their job.

2. Clarifying strategies and priorities. There are only so many things the team can do successfully, and someone needs to be the person who says No. I am also the person best situated to look outward to other groups and teams to identify areas of collaboration.

3. Making sure we are organized appropriately and effectively, and that we are following good Engineering processes. I hate unnecessary process as much as anyone -- I've always said process should be something that helps you get your job done properly and effectively, not a hoop you need to jump through in order to do your job.

As an EM (and when I worked as a developer), I have had my own share of high-quality and poor-quality managers and Directors above me. If you feel EM is bullshit, I'm sorry you've never experienced what it's like to work on a team with a good, supportive manager.
It’s super hard to get pricing info for radiation hardened chips that are currently being sold, let alone just buying one from Digi-Key. It’s pretty damn annoying if you just want the one super robust chip for a system supervisor or something else like that, to have no idea how to plan the design for a cost budget before you begin doing a lot of contact work talking to people for price quotes. It’s a weird ecosystem that feels surprising antiquated compared to the more modern parts of the embedded ecosystem that I’m familiar with.

Worst price I can remember off hand was $15 grand USD for a radiation hardened microcontroller, pretty sure it was an Arduino mega family chip I could have gotten the industrial quality version of for $25 bucks from Digi-Key… if I didn’t want it radiation hardened.
And yet it seems nearly every organization of meaningful scale has a large amount of this “cruft.”

Why don’t we see companies that “simply don’t” add this cruft, and accordingly sail off into orbit under propulsion of their own excellence?
Having just upgraded from a 6s to an 11, I’d say… meh? The 11 is nice, I guess, but apart from having a new battery and being slightly more responsive (and on the downside, no fingerprint scanner and no headphone jack) it’s functionally pretty equivalent.
The complaint about OKRs - using only specific meazurements to destroy the ability to decide/agency to land actual outcomes/results - seemed pretty spot on. It's not even engineering managers necessarily; knowledge working orgs in general, and, in my view, it's not immature to grumble about, it's immature orgs that ruin their best potential, that dont get knowledge work & actively obstruct it.

Having these ideas in mind, particularly backed up by some good background as is present here - some discussion on knowledge work, Peter Drucker quotes - is context orgs ought to try to be aware of, prevent from happening.

Sad to see such a well written well explained article reduced to "grow out of their mindset" antagonism. There's not any argumentation in this rebuttal, just personal badmouthing & berating. The conflict described is real, but apparently people who feel tensions & dissonance of it all are all just "immature".
Just remember: Dev works in mysterious ways.
Sorry for all the edits, just want to write all my thoughts down in one place.

1. Various interactions I frequently have:

- `va(C-cC-c`. Select the current parentheses text object (s-expression) and send it to the repl.

-`C-aC-a`, switch to repl to view output, interact with debugger, etc.

- `ggVGC-cC-c`, select the entire file and send it to the repl.

- I've never done this one but since you mentioned it as useful to you: `?^(<CR>va(C-cC-c`, evaluate a top level form. Not perfect, but probably good enough especially if a line formatter is used to enforce sane indenting like this one for Clojure[6]. If a line formatter does not exist, the usual `ggVG=` built-in vim indenting works just fine.

- `:set makeprg=<command to run unit tests with line numbers>:make`. Batch error reporting and fixing, very useful[1]. In Clojure, e.g. `lein test` with some additions to set error format might be the `make` program.

vim-slime does not have an understanding of s expressions but vim itself does, using the parentheses object. See `:help text-objects`. I like that vim-slime does not have this understanding because what if I'm using it with Ruby or something. But vim support of text objects is good enough that it's never a problem. While I'm on the subject, `])` and `[(` searching for parens in vim is awesome.

Vim operates using an entirely different set of values than emacs. Selecting and searching for text should not be the purview of a plug-in, it should be built into the editor. Compiling code should be delegated to compilers. Vim does a great job of this kind of separation of concerns, it is the Zen of vim, its core philosophy. Emacs is great and it works fantastically, it just operates using a different philosophy.

2. I work more in Clojure but I'm trying to get more into common lisp. Clojure has suggestions in neovim via language server protocol[2]. The suggestions are very good[3]. This is not as developed for the common lisp story[4] but I'll try it out and see how good it is.

I've never had much patience for autocompletion. I don't even like it when the editor puts in pairs of parentheses when I've only typed the first left parentheses. Vim does have autocomplete through the language server protocol, but I don't use it.

Regarding suggestions as I type, there's ale[5], but I think I would find suggestions as I type a little too distracting and might slow me down. I find the normal LSP stuff to be good enough.

1: https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Errorformat_and_makeprg

2: https://blog.inkdrop.app/how-to-set-up-neovim-0-5-modern-plu...

3: https://github.com/clojure-lsp/clojure-lsp

4: https://github.com/cxxxr/cl-lsp

5: https://github.com/dense-analysis/ale

6: https://github.com/venantius/vim-cljfmt
The amount of global trade in the middle ages was enormous, literally from Europe to china with the middle east in between. If anything the laissez faire spirit of global trade was more alive in the middle ages.
You can still run a node on ethereum for free? You aren't required to be a validator to run a node?
Not even conspiracy. Governments, free markert, natural world all works the same way. Many semi-independent actors making local optimizations, with varying levels of sophistication in organization and hierarchy. Many emergent properties.
IT in the large is like physics, chemistry, biology, psychology anthropology, and sociology. It's not building one precise bridge over and over again.
The number of cars in very walkable cities (e.g. Tokyo) is underestimated also, but the fact remains that if the infrastructure is there people will use it. It's convenient. As it stands, being without a car is not very convenient in many places in N.A.
> They don't even know how to ask the right questions to get to what they want to know.

You're right. If the questions were being asked of someone who was genuinely motivated to answer them, this wouldn't be an obstacle.

The phrase "all your personal data" (or the quote from the article, "every bit of data associated with a given user account") feels vague and imprecise only if you have an internal understanding that for practical purposes, it really is impossible. The Facebook engineers know that and everyone here knows that. It's not literally impossible - an internal team of digital archaeologists with unlimited resources and no deadline might be able to do it for a single user. But practically impossible across the whole userbase.

If you were genuinely interested in providing insight to the hearing, you could explain all that, and then explain how you could go about creating a rough sketch of an answer, and how you'd go about adding some detail to that sketch.

The Facebook engineers have no real motivation to provide insight off their own bat. They can take the question literally, and answer honestly that they don't know, that nobody else knows, and that it's probably impossible TO know. I'm not even sure if this is acting in bad faith. I can easily imagine feeling cagey in this situation, and responding as such. Experiencing an emotion isn't acting in bad faith.

All that said...these questions were asked by a court-appointed subject matter expert. Either the subject matter expert is not the right person for the job, or...and now I realise that of course I haven't read the transcript and there's every chance that what's quoted in the article is not the most insight the court managed to prise out of the engineers. posting anyway in 3 2 1
If Signal stop requiring telephone number, its popularity might skyrocket.
The scheme is easy: to prevent spamming, you can have a pool of registered numbers that are NOT associated with accouts. This is enough to check if a number is already in use. That's all we need!

(almost. subjective. required, but not limited to.)
I work for a large long-living tech company. Where legal compliance and security are concerned, "it is just layering and organic growth" is not something you get to say. If we were speculating about such a thing on a coffee break, maybe we'd get the kind of answer given here, but if a single reference doesn't exist for something that is necessary for compliance, people get paged until it does.

(There may be other things taken as seriously I'm not thinking of, but compliance and security are the two I've seen drag people out of their beds by their ankles)
> Perhaps this is why there are so many bad examples. The job is nearly impossible to do exceptionally well.

I believe that the job is nearly impossible to do well. Which leads a lot of people to suspect that the role of Engineering managers is badly defined. Which leads to all the complaints above. Nobody is happy with the current org structure.
Hydrogen battery startup says it has $700M order backlog
They have an entire RTOS ecosystem which supports a gazillon different microcontrollers.
aka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hanoi_Rat_Massacre
To answer your nitpick with a nitpick, averages can work that way. Do you know the distribution of engineering managers well enough to say that most aren't "about average"? GP was making a claim about engineering managers.. not about all averages.

But regardless, that's missing the point. The point is that the distribution of engineering manager quality is likely pretty similar to that of any other role. So claiming that "there are way more bad engineering managers than good ones" seems likely to be untrue unless you also believe that about nearly any other engineering/management/product position.
Vote what? Monetary policies are independent from the federal government.
I have seen many (extremely smart too) engineers cry at work, but never managers. Make of it what you will.
I think the issue is that it's sort of circular, like, "managers provide value when they convince other managers not to be obstacles". I think there's important stuff managers can do, but creating complex hierarchies that they then have to navigate or circumvent is a neutral contribution at best, from a systemic standpoint rather than an individual one. For this high performer who's earned their promotion, having their manager go to bat for them is incredibly valuable. But if the reason they needed a manager to advocate for them was that other managers were either adversarial or ambivalent, that's just adding back value that was previously removed.

To be clear, I'm addressing this narrow aspect of management, I've had managers who helped me resolve disputes, get access to resources and opportunities I couldn't have gotten on my own, et cetera, and I see the value in that without qualification.
I've never saw a software engineer hoard some knowledge for a competitive edge. I guess it's blue/red ocean market difference multiplied by the fact that average engineer can feel pretty successful with his career, whereas an average writer is anything but.
I have been a part of and creating online communities for 20 years now and there is not going to be anything like HN for "normal people" anytime soon.

The reason HN works is because we are all in the same area and somewhat experts (or trying to be). The problem is that NO OTHER community is online nearly 100% of the time. So there is no writer HN, no science HN, the only thing that comes close is Reddit or 4chan because those are kids, who are also online 24/7.

Real people are in the real world, only techies and kids live online.
> They are praised on Hacker News and adopted by the community as welcome improvements over existing languages... Carbon (for C++, maybe?)

I don't understand why people are taking Carbon so seriously at this stage. Isn't it just a spec and some design docs at this point? And already people are putting it in the running as a better C++? Is this just because it's from Google or are the design docs really that great?