skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The big rewrite works - but only if you have a team you can trust.
You need a new team of seniors to pair with the current team, promise a promotion to the current team at the end of the task.

Committing to an iterative approach is what I do when I don't have enough authority/ political tokens and I can't afford a rewrite.

Over time it gets less and less priority from the business and you end up with half a codebase being crap and half codebase being ok and maintaining stuff is even harder.
Word of warning: iPhone Firefox dark mode renders the game unplayable. Turn off dark mode to fix the issue.
And that's perfectly fine, don't get me wrong. If that gets you enjoyment from the media you watch, that's great. You definitely don't need a fancy theater room to be happy.

And honestly if it's a nice laptop and a good pair of headphones you're probably ahead of a lot of people watching on a cheap TV with built in speakers. Once again, not that it truly matters.
Shoplifting is shoplifting regardless of the products being stolen.
> LC has a great disadvantage: it's difficult to write a LC interpreter in LC.

It's not; here it is quoted from [1]:

(λ 1 1) (λ λ λ 1 (λ λ λ λ 3 (λ 5 (3 (λ 2 (3 (λ λ 3 (λ 1 2 3))) (4 (λ 4 (λ 3 1 (2 1)))))) (1 (2 (λ 1 2)) (λ 4 (λ 4 (λ 2 (1 4))) 5)))) (3 3) 2) (λ 1 ((λ 1 1) (λ 1 1)))

> LC does not know what a LC expression is.

Again, it's trivial to encode LC terms as bitstrings [1], which are trivially decoded back into lambda terms. That is exactly what the above lambda expression does. Alternatively, you can encode LC terms with Mogensen's encoding, but that one doesn't give you a textual representation like a bitstring.

[1] https://tromp.github.io/cl/Binary_lambda_calculus.html#Lambd...
I have a feeling that any framework for mitigating AI security/injection attacks should not involve AI as its core working as the post suggests.

ACLs and separation of "executable" instructions vs user-input data should be the way. Otherwise it's just another form of circumventing "injection protection" or "buffer overflow"-esque attack (where the user maliciously "overwrites" the supposed-to-be-hardcoded instructions that should be rock solid to the system, with maliciously crafted user input) will be discovered one after the other.
Yes. From beginning: Dog right, dog right, dog up.
Computer science education contains lots of quite tricky algorithms, datastructures, and runtime proofs. So far in my career I haven't had to use anything more complicated than a balanced tree and a hashmap and I certainly didn't have to open my copy of Concrete Mathematics and find bounds for any recurrence equations. On the other hand I do have to be familiar with various idiosyncrasies of operating systems, networks, and an awful amount of tooling, which I managed to almost completely avoid during my time in university.

However, I wouldn't want to change the university curriculum. I believe universities should not be seen as preparation for jobs, but as preparations for research. It is quite unfortunate that institutions that just teach the part of the field that is really needed in the job have such low reputations. Two years at a trade school would be more than sufficient to learn everything you _really_ need to know as a programmer in all but the most specialized jobs.
I’ve felt this way before. But is it the same as your feeling? Probably not exactly, but I bet we could connect on it at some level.

Ultimately I’ve learned that it doesn’t serve me well either way to be too guarded or to expect a lot from others. I strive to be open and vulnerable with people despite past disappointments. It doesn’t always work out, but sometimes something beautiful happens that I could not have anticipated.
There problem with a classic full rewrite is that the existing system is thrown away immediately. All the existing features are not available in production until the rewrite adds them back in. Often incomplete, buggy, changed beyond all recognition, or a combination of all of these. That obviously sucks and is the reason the classic rewrite is rarely done. However, it is clear that something must happen.
Run.

What you need to do is full rewrite. You need business owners backing you up on this intention. From your description they don’t understand the scale of the problem. So that’s a dead end.

When they will understand that they have to halt all new developments for few years and drastically increase budgets for development team meantime, you can start thinking about how to proceed. But they will not.
I write them as

SELECT Count(*) FROM product WHERE id = 123

And if the number looks right I replace "SELECT Count(*)" by "DELETE"
Possible epilepsy warning on completion?

Great little puzzle, thanks for making this and sharing it.
I've heard discussions that C++ modules didn't really give that much performance benefits as it initially claimed, when the dependency graph is huge and you have a large number of threads. Some links:

- https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2019/p14...

- https://vector-of-bool.github.io/2019/01/27/modules-doa.html

Are there any notable new updates related to this controversy?
horrible advice. there's no where on earth this will be accepted and defeats the OP's requirement of being employed WHILE validating an idea. 1. would get you sued
Unraveling a mystery: Why human cells require cholesterol
Is this like Gumroad as well?
Awesome. This seems like the missing piece of the diagram puzzle.
You don't know what the costs are though. The site could have huge costs of content acquisition or any number of reasons to not be making anywhere near $20 million profit.
You can't hope to understand first year physics without calculus. To be a reasonable civil engineer, don't you need to understand structural engineering, including dynamics, which requires differential equations?

On the other hand, what do I know? The civil engineering plans for our place had glaring errors that the construction workers caught after doing half the earthmoving.

Even after it was fixed, the results lasted less than one rainstorm. When we went back and checked the contracts we signed, they made it clear they assume zero liability for incompetence. Hiring a lawyer is more expensive than renting an excavator, and fixing it ourselves.

Anyway, I'm not impressed with the corner of that field I interacted with, and would prefer they tighten the educational standards.
It sounds to me like you did a full rewrite by replacing the app piece by piece, sprint by sprint, releasing changes quite often and bringing that value all the way to the user. I think that is really clever.

My impression from others in this thread is that they mean "start from scratch and build until features are on-par with current product" when they say full rewrite.

Your version of full rewrite seems like it is generally applicable, but I have very little faith in the latter approach.
I actually agree the "Golden Era" is coming to an end. But it doesn't mean it is dying which is sometimes how it is interpreted.

I am just wondering if Tech are moving out of California, or if they are only moving out of Silicon Valley. And if there can be another Silicon Valley outside of California, or even US.
I mean, a 4 or 5 year La Nina would also be a very big surprise.
Interestingly nobody in France needs subtitles. But when I watch english movies and shows I do need them. I was surprised when I realized that Americans used subtitles to watch American shows as well. It reminded me of China.

I still remember watching Tenet and feeling like it was just another movie I couldn’t understand because I didn’t have subtitles. And then I realized that even native speakers couldn’t understand it.
>Why not just build models in JS?

Because ML/Data source has particular numerical requirements. JavaScript has poor mathematical defaults and still misses useful datatypes like float16*.

* Yes, this can emulated. Emulation is slow. You've gained some speed and then paid it back for emulation.
honestly if you have to ask this question and you can't think of actions to take by yourself, i question whether you are cut out for startup, its super risky and you seem risk adverse not only from asking the question.

i would recommend just keep looking at how to make sales. without customers you don't have a business.
The most vexxing parse was a huge problem in C++ and a very niche problem in C not because of "type first" declaration syntax, but because C++ constructor calls in variable initialization are essentially identical to function declarations. This is a big reason why Java or C#, also type-first syntax languages, have no such ambiguity.

The two examples on Wikipedia are both caused by this, even though it's not explicitly spelled out:

int i(int(my_dbl)); // two calls to int's constructor

// in Java/C# style syntax:

int i = new int(new int(my_dbl)); //no ambiguity

TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer());

// in Java/C# style syntax:

TimeKeeper time_keeper = new TimeKeeper(new Timer());

C++ could have also chosen to reserve a keyword for initialization even for in-place values, just like they did with `new`, but they chose to re-use function call syntax instead.

I would also say that just moving the type after the variable name doesn't fully solve the issue - it's the : syntax for initialization that does this. Here is a hypothetical C++ where the syntax remained the same as today, but (return) type was moved at the end of a declaration:

typedef double my_dbl;
typedef int i;
foo (my_dbl double ) void {
i int (int(my_dbl));
//unambigous: i is an int initialized with an int constructed from my_dbl

f (double) int; //unambigous: f is a function from double to int
g int (my_dbl); //unambigous: g is an int constructed from my_dbl

bar((my_dbl)i);
//ambigous: calling bar with i cast to double, or calling it with a function from my_dbl to i (double to int)?
}
Slave holders argued, often correctly, that slaves, as capital, enjoyed a higher standard of living than did wage workers, who could be worked to death and thrown away, and that this justified the institution.

The original comment said

> I'd like to see the argument that those people who chose and choose to work at uber have worse outcomes than they otherwise would

Just as it is no argument for slavery that slaves were better off than wage workers, so it is no argument for gig work that gig workers are better off than those with no work at all.
This reminded me of another joke. Apologies if I botch it, I’m terrible at joke delivery.

A person is driving with a passenger. The driver goes straight through a red light. The passenger is terrified, “that light was red! Aren’t you afraid we’ll be hit?” The driver says “don’t worry, my brother does it all the time.” After crossing several red lights this way, they come to a green light and come to a complete stop. The passenger says, “why did you stop? The light is green now!” The driver says, “my brother might be out driving.”
For what benefit in the end for the individual?
We don't need calculous, software does most calculations. One has to wonder though, based on what principles does the software do those calculations. Black magic I presume?
The most practical approach would probably be writing a new SS13 engine in Unity or Godot to interpret SS13’s existing BYOND scriptures and asserts and also leverage Unity’s or Godot’s tools and game engine.
It makes $20M a year. That sounds like great code.

I would:
1. Get it in source control without “fixing anything”.
2. Get a clone of the prod server up and running, vs a clown of the db.
3. Put in something to log all
of the request/response pairs.
4. Take snapshots of the database at several time points and note where they occur on the log history from number 3.

You now have the raw material to make test cases that verify the system works as it did before, but for bug, when you refactor. If the same set of requests creates the same overall db changes and response messages, you “pass tests”.

First thing to refactor is stochastic code. Make it consistent even if it’s a little slower so you can test.

Once you can refactor, you can do anything. Including a full rewrite but in steps that don’t break it.

If you try to rewrite it from scratch it will probably just never be deployable. But you’d an rewrite it safely in chunks with the above.
seems like when there are no local results they just flood it with global listings
HTTP/3 – HTTP over QUIC is the next generation by Daniel Stenberg (curl creator)
It doesn't work. Especially on mobile.
I love it. Fantastic.

Can you think of a way to re formulate the puzzle so that you can express the rules without words?

Also, the dog / rabbit dynamic (as used in the classic dog/duck/grain river crossing puzzle) made me think that I had to chase the rabbits with dog, or that dogs and rabbits couldn’t share a node. Different animals might be better — rabbit and mouse, perhaps? Or even different coloured rabbits and different coloured carrots?

The words thing though — that’s what you should work on next, I think. Good puzzles like this are word-free in the puzzle itself (Stephen’s sausage roll, English country tune).

It would take this puzzle from great to excellent. Good luck. More please!
Because US citizens have the right to vote in federal elections, no matter where they live, and which set of federal officials (senators and US House district, and state electoral votes for President) you are voting for is chosen by your last US residence before moving, or if you’ve never lived in the US (like my child might), by where one of your US citizen parents last lived. It’s then up to that state whether you can also vote in state and local elections.

If you are a US citizen, even if you’ve never lived in the US (born to a US citizen parent), get on over to https://fvap.gov to get yourself registered and request your absentee ballot. Hurry up, because the deadline for most states is rather soon, and a lot of them still require the registration to happen via paper mail - plus, you need time for the ballot to get to you and for you to mail it back.

As long as the US is going to insist I report all my German income and accounts that I’ve already paid Germany’s well-collected taxes on, you’re darn right I should have the right to vote!
> an LC interpreter in LC could be done in only a few hundred lambda terms.

Make that a few dozen...
i can imagine how some super senior engineer may like this kind of very challenging experience.
X.Y (e.g. 5.1) means X wide range speakers and Y subwoofers. You also sometimes see it like S/T.Y where S+T = X, and it refers to front/surround speakers.

There are standard values and configurations, such as 2.0 (aka stereo) both at the front, 2.1, 3.1 adds a centre channel mostly for on-screen dialogue positioned close to screen, 5.1 (3/2.1) adds a second stereo pair behind you, 7.1 - adds an extra surround stereo pair between the others, etc.
Fire the front/backend developers and hire the best php full stack you can. Start a new php framework project and move code over. 2003 php code is straightforward and easy to port. If you try to move to a new cool language you will lose whatever is special now.
Don't we breath while we do anything else? That must account for parallelism
> What does "viewpoint" mean?

A trending example might be the viewpoint that British colonisation was an act of "settlement" vs "invasion". On one hand it can be argued that life improved for indigenous populations with the arrival of technology. On the other hand it can be argued those populations suffered and are owed compensation.

Choosing one or the other core viewpoint can lead to polarizing branches, such as celebrating the Queen's death with hateful tweets vs acknowledging the Queen's death with respectful mourning.

Both viewpoints can draw on valid arguments and data. Banning one of those viewpoints is not a good plan. It would be unhealthy for any society to ban a viewpoint because it conflicts with political agendas or the views of the owners of the platform.
Honestly craigslist is a lot better moderated
You're making 20M, you spend probably less than 500k between you and 3 juniors.

I've lead rewrites in worse circumstances (larger codebase split in 30 microservices, 15 people across 3 teams, making just 2M per year!) and I don't think you can do it with your current team. In the above examples we downsized the teams to 1 team with 4 people and then rewrote to 2 rightly sized services.

The new team was all new people (introduced gradually), while we shifted out the previous employees to other areas of the business.

The bottom line you have to use with management is you need a more senior team. Hiring seniors is pretty hard nowadays and it doesn't sound like you can offer much of an environment.

Get a good agency for 1M / year and let them work with your team to understand the ins and out and then replace them.
HackerNews has a wealth of information in the comments and also includes a search. Wikipedia would be another consideration
Hmm. I’d love to see which IPCC reports have been found to be wildly wrong if you’ve got any links. Otherwise this just kinda sounds like hearsay to me.
Good point. Using stored procedures / views etc will help crystalise the API for the DB and allow work to happen behind that wall without breaking anything else in the meantime too. Once the work is done, bits of the wall can be replaced with better bits of wall i.e. improved sp's and views pointing to an improved schema.
Go one step further - develop your own script. It's surprisingly useful.
The photos will be obvious enough if its a dealer car or being sold out of a driveway
That was very well made! Are there any more levels?
Universal Logic
The one aspect that took me a bit to figure out was whether, to move between the house and the tree, you needed someone on BOTH the bone and the flower or just one of them. (It turned out to be both.)
Most of the recent segfaults that have been fixed in Zig where Zig related, not caused by C++. (Without even mentioning the segfault in the std lib).

And about tigerbeetle, this gives you an idea of how compelling the zig memory safety story is today:

> All memory must be statically allocated at startup. No memory may be dynamically allocated (or freed and reallocated) after initialization.

And then both river and bun have their shares of segfaults, with river looking substantially better than bun, but it suspect it also has much less usage in the wild.

Overall, it looks pretty much like C as I said.
The engineering team might be 3 people but not the whole company.
PWYC is quite different from pay what you think it is worth. On the Lazy Cow Bakery web site, they list prices:

https://www.lazycowbakeryseattle.com/copy-of-order-form-1

BTW, after reading their interesting web site, I don't think they are leftists at all. Their business model is based on making money through voluntary agreements and exchanges.

"our workers get part ownership of the bakery and to make decisions about their wages and work hours"

Sounds like free market capitalism, not leftism.

"Located inside our bakery is our free community fridge & food pantry. Donations are welcome anytime during normal business hours."

Sounds like charity, not leftism.
https://www.craigslist.org/about/help/flags_and_community_mo...
Art is worse though. From intangible sludge https://www.vox.com/culture/22840526/colors-movies-tv-gray-d... to modern DPs and directors not being able to film a dark scene competently https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/1564633641828884483
I second the UX of clearer way of showing the icon the player pieces are on. I don't know if transparency is the way to go. Maybe the shape of the node can differ.
> I think psychology and history is quite clear that sunlight isn't the best disinfectant

It doesn't seem quite clear to me. Would you care to provide some more information on the topic?

> And it ignores that bandwidth is limited, so kicking off crackpots can actually improve the negative freedom of everyone else to communicate.

And who exactly should have the authority to decide which ideas are allowed and which are not?
I have to assume that at some point in history kangaroos had to escape fires and cheetahs had to swim. The fact that our collective history is limited to history since the camera was invented is crazy.
I buy cheap wines because expensive wines don't taste any better.
Empire biscuits were the original Freedom Fries:

> Empire biscuit was originally known as the "Linzer biscuit", and later as the "Deutsch biscuit". With the outbreak of the First World War it was renamed in England to Empire biscuit and in Scotland to Belgian biscuit because Belgium had just been invaded, but in Northern Ireland it remains known as the German biscuit or biscuit bun.
> Yeah; playing 5.1 mixes on stereo equipment make the side and back channels too loud and the center channel too quiet.

I thought the equipment selected the stereo mix (or did a perfectly compatible mixdown) when playing back a 5.1 mix in a stereo system. Is that not what happens? If it isn't, is it because user error?
Magnitude 7.2 Earthquake 81 km E of Yujing, Taiwan
Yes, but the parent is saying this could be an e-commerce website, or construction company, etc. But having an iOS app feels unnecessary for most of these businesses
Zeekr goes to production on 1k-km electric car using CATL batteries
It isn’t indentured servitude, but it cannot be distinguished from indentured servitude by the willful nature according to which the contract is entered, because indentured servants entered willfully into their contracts as well.
Looks excellent!

Not sure if it’s an issue on iPhone or my IQ, but I can’t figure out what the rules are. I highlight an animal but can’t move it on what seems a bidirectional edge (no nodes light up). But sometimes can. I assume that should work always but it’s not for me.

Also initially assumed I had to keep them separate, but comments here said no.
When I took my job, I was car-free, so I chose an apartment 2 blocks from my office. That has given me so many benefits, not the least of which is going home on lunch for fall-asleep naps in my own bed.
However, lacking that transition time between my two worlds means my mind is neither ready to engage when I get to work, nor de-cluttered before I get home.
I'm looking to move, to extend my commute.
Hm. To me, reaching uncanny valley means they're probably quite close in form and behaviour. But it may well be the case that the remaining 1% (or whatever the percentage is) of the details may be harder than the first 99%.
It's a clichéd response, but it's very hard to do better: https://xkcd.com/123/

(The line about Newton's laws in a rotating frame is, of course, entirely true.)
Many consider the only way to validate is by having someone pay money for it. Lots of people (myself included) will say they will pay for something but when the time comes to buy they don't.

The book The Mom Test also points out well that lots of people will say your idea is good even when they have no intention of buying. They don't want to be assholes so they lie to you to make you feel good.

The real question is, how often are you signing away all of your intellectual property to your employer. Honestly, I've never had that in a single contract.