skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been a CTO for 5+ years and have grown a company from 1 to 15+ engineers.

I agree that a CTO SHOULD be technical but it shouldn't be their only skill. The CTO's skill actually varies depending on the stage of the company and being technical, helps in making decisions in every stage. A core part of being a CTO is to set the technical direction of the company, you are a Chief Technology Officer after all. A part of a CTOs job is to know how to execute/deliver the plan of the company in the most efficient way technologically speaking. As the leader in the engineering department, if you have say a budget of 1 million USD, not only do you have to know how to allocate this efficiently, but also know the technical details of why you do so in the grander scheme of things of building the product.

As an example of my said stages, if you are with a company that has:

1-5 engineers: The CTO is mostly likely coding and also making decisions on what technology stack to use and sets basic processes for development (kanban/scrum or basic todo list).

5-15 engineers: The CTO is mostly doing process management and technical analysis of the stack to set further systems and processes for future growth. Here you will start to find the issues of the technology, you are growing the engineering team because there is a further NEED to hire. For example, you hire more frontend engineers because the plan is to build a more ambitious frontend.

15+ engineers: Here you already have established good processes and have the product moving forward with teams being mostly self sufficient. The CTOs job at this point is to work more with product to know the future roadmap and efficiently plan further hires or changes technically speaking.

My few c's from this. I've yet to experience growing a company for 50+ engineers but that is a goal that I have still going forward.
No but neither was tcp/ip.

However both added value.

In the late 90s it was ATM and Frame Relay v MPLS.

rough consensus and running code culminates to standards.

But none of its necessary.
> Why would you want to migrate a firecracker vm?

I wouldn't. I pointed out the lack of live migration as an of example why firecracker can't cut it as the basis of general purpose VM orchestration platform.

> then you can use a different VM tech that supports migration (KVM/Xen/etc)

"KVM/Zen/etc" are in the dark ages compared to the state of the art of Kubernetes container orchestration.

The reason for that isn't technical; KVM is incredible and full-featured VMs conceivably could be orchestrated with the same fidelity as containers. The reason is business: the cloud behemoths invest only in their serverless business models; thus k8s, firecracker, etc. I contend there is an enormous market for orchestration of more complex workloads that VMs suit well.
An update provides no value except as a signal to users that the developer hasn't killed the project. I was wondering how annoyed or reassured users would be if they saw version x.x.x+1 with release notes noting no changes.
Those computers typically wipe themselves with a fresh image after each user, and if they don’t you can assume they had some key logger malware that just stole your login anyway.

There is also browser ingonito mode that works perfect for this use.
i agree that past cheating probably makes it more likely that someone would cheat in the future but i also see a relevant difference in the ease and risk of cheating online vs OTB, so i don't see them as perfect equivalents
A few isolated shows of emotion in two decades is hardly a fair representation for people to judge a man overall. People who have watched this man grow up from a young child in the public eye, know he is a good person.

And even if you're not inclined to believe that, nobody has shown a clip where he has disrespected or accused an opponent of impropriety. This latest incident stands alone as a unique one time event.
I remember it being pretty good. You log in with your library details, then when you hit logout. It resets everything fresh.
I have zero issue with FDB but some worry about mvSQLite.

After reading more about the design it seem to use FDB to store Pages and using FDB transaction to make those update have have Strict serializable isolation.

This would work correctly but it seem that mvSQLite also try to do its own MVCC logic instead of simply using FDB transactions.

It is well known that implementing Serializable transaction on top of MVCC is not trivial. There was a bug in Postgresql from version 9.1 to version 12.3 making it not truly Serializable.

See: https://jepsen.io/analyses/postgresql-12.3
I wouldn't bank on it.
that would make the games themselves extremely boring, which makes it no longer really a game of chess and more like the Penn & Teller Fool Us show but more specific.
I suspect you're probably right to be apprehensive, but it's a slight step forward from a few months back when they were signaling that a bill wasn't necessary. Progress, I guess?
It's pretty much the exact same as their standard undergrad resume guide with a lot more examples for the extension programs https://hwpi.harvard.edu/files/ocs/files/undergrad_resumes_a...
I thought there was a limit to how frequently you can post a comment and if you post more than x in y minutes you can't post for a while....

From my experience I'd say it's something like 5 comments in 5-10 minutes will trip you up.
In a pool of 700+ comments, yeah. Especially if they feel like no one else commenting is representing their point of view.
These are just your personal opinions. It's unclear why anyone should follow them.

Apple itself seems fine with developers updating once every 3 years, or even longer than 3 years, depending on how many downloads the app has.
Covered by Matt Levine of Bloomberg:

(https://archive.ph/2021.04.24-114758/https://www.bloomberg.c...) https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-19/everyo...

(https://archive.ph/2021.04.24-102919/https://www.bloomberg.c...) https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-20/hometo...

(https://archive.ph/2021.04.30-164504/https://www.bloomberg.c...) https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-04-30/hometo...

https://old.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/nfgipo/update_on...
s/hardvard/harvard
> Using that approach, they developed an alloy with higher ultimate tensile strength and vastly higher (x1000) resistance to creep at high temperatures (1100 C) compared to the best available superalloys

That sounds really cool. Do you think this will allow us to build jet engines with higher operating temperatures, improving efficiency of electricity generation and plane travel?
"An advantage of having Gentoo as the base for this distro is its package manager, Portage, which has a system of enabling/disabling compile-time options for applications. This means application binaries can be tailored to the user’s computer hardware and the user’s needs." This is less beneficial than Gentoo fans seem to think it is.
Device attestation is an important piece of the zero trust design, which this esim approach helps facilitate.

ZT / BeyondCorp benefits from multiple layers of security, not the hard exterior and crunchy interior approach of VPNs, and this solution from cloudflare is aligned with that.
That's a frankly ridiculous point of view. You're talking about a literal child cheating at an online video game. It's not that big of a deal, kids do dumb stuff.
If someone published his code under GPL, but then use it in himeself product, is this moral?
chess.com said they haven't provided Carlson with their list of detected cheaters or any info on the cheating detection system
I used to come to HN for more even-tempered high-IQ discussion but it seems to be devolving into the toxicity that ruins all online forums i.e. being outraged about something from a very limited perspective, accusing big corporation of evil-doing, and generally not appreciating the nuances of a complex problem.
The CTO doesnt have to be technical. But they have to have a technical council that folks can go to to hash things out with.

Ideally the CTO or council shouldnt even have to make the decisions most of the time. But every company should have intensive hard debates, struggles, long and hard, about what technically to build and how. Most companies take a hands off approach, and leave folks to hash it out among themselves & figure out in structureless ways what to do. This rarely results in real feedback, in better options being picked; the tyranny of structureless happens, grows amid the absence of there being considered seasoned wise people about who can ask sharp insightful pointed questions at everyone, who can make plainer what the tradeoffs & real costs really will be.

Without sharp technical competency high up in the chain, discussions turn into a formulaic sad debate: the people who dont tech argue for lower estimates (or when they dont like hearing about hard work they force a change in direction), the knowledge workers get sadder and sadder that no one can see what the problems & situation really is or that there is no one around to fave & tackle the obvious/real challenges.

A technical executive team can argue with team the opposite: your plans arent comprehensive enough. You arent accounting for enough cases, seeing enough of the problems. Your scope isnt ambitous enough. The tools & libraries you are picking will have issues here & there that you havent seen.

Very few corps seem able to understand their own hierarchical ignorance & stupidity. They trust in their chain of command as people leaders, with ultimately teams in charge of making good decisions. I tell you: this is not enough. Teams want buy in in a real sense from above. They want senior staff who understand in a real way & can provide some real guidance & advice. Few companies have this at all.

Earlier today there was a 2011 piece on Jobs (a man I'm mixed on, but) his advice on saying no, on cutting out cruft[1], is something that is at least as much technical as it is product. And few orgs know how to keep & retain technical talent, technical council, that isnt people managers, but tech managers. Those companies that can actually take ownership of their product from the top, that know what they are really doing, have a much greater potential to cut the cruft, to steer toward better. Few do.

Technical know-how doesnt have to be the CTO's role, but it really should be a function high up in the org that is visible, respected, & active. Too many orgs are technical only at the bottom, and there need to be more active chains of understanding & respect within an org than that for real positive growth to happen. This is, for sure, one of the hardest least addressed issues in tech, & a key to doing better. But tech is often left out of the room, & closing the gap is hard.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2011/05/16/steve-j... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32985952 (2 points, 9 hr ago, 4 comments)
At least pre-pandemic, that would be hard to do at the last stage (on-sites). You're generally in a room with one or more people and often whiteboarding rather than using a laptop. In the stages leading up to on-sites, in many cases, you're actually allowed to use reference materials like the official documentation -- which might contain examples -- because the interviewers don't necessarily expect you to have the entire standard library of the language you're using memorized. I've certainly Googled stuff during remote interviews myself, but I disclose that I'm doing that and explain what I'm searching for.
This is the opposite of what a computer-assisted player would do. Computer chess engines (generally speaking, somewhat less true of the latest generation) are not great at high level strategy but will never miss a tactic (micro level play).
He is making fun of California laws prohibiting suppressors being idiotic.
Nothing about the increasingly dystopian direction that computing is taking, a prediction which I very much hope will be incorrect but currently shows no sign of it.
Fischer refused to play Karpov in 1975 and lost his World Champion title by default. Granted, Niemann is not Karpov, and no one is Fischer, and the situation was entirely different, but this is known as counter-example. The salient point is that if Carlson has a serious challenge to his title, he couldn't refuse to play and still keep his title.
I think you misread my comment, I made no such assumption.

The commenter I replied to said "I’m unsure about if ... the earth [is] finding a new equilibrium point potentially on the order of hundreds to thousands of years..."

I pointed to NASA measurements showing that atmospheric CO2 is increasing linearly and has been for some time. Whether its increase accelerates or decelerates or remains flat depends largely on many unpredictable factors (primarily humans).

Consequently (I tried to answer) - no, the climate will not find an equilibrium ("a state of rest or balance due to the equal action of opposing forces") as long as one of the primary forces driving the system out of balance continues to change (i.e., we keep dumping more CO2 into the air) without some countervailing force changing at roughly the same rate. Today there is no countervailing force, so there will be no equilibrium.

I don't see how your comment ("this equilibrium you're chasing"?) relates at all.
How do you `docker push` from your laptop to the server with consumer broadband? I've heard docker times out after about 50-75%. Great fun.
If your using a non-github platform without mirroring the repository, your pretty SoL for getting those green squares of activity to reflect your actual activity.
> Well I've literally been in the position where this was true to close a deal so we could stay in business. What would be the best option in your opinion? Risk a critical person leaving right then and loosing the customer and then losing everyone job? Or lying and telling them we are all ok just keep on doing your job and don't listen to rumors?

Well I've literally been in this position too.

Lying to people is ineffective. It literally leads to the rumors you want to avoid. And even if your lies pay off, people aren't dumb. They realize how close to the edge they were and that you are a liar. Next time it will just be worse!

It's much better to be honest. Explain the situation. Explain what it will take. Use it to motivate people and build them up. People love a challenge, they want to feel like they're the hero of a story.

You literally took a situation where your employees would have come out stronger and more motivated to work for you, and you turned it into one where they walked away with mistrust.

> You are espousing false virtue/armchair quarterback. Real life is complex and lying can save many people jobs.

It has nothing to do with virtue! Even if you don't give a damn about being a good human being, this is a terrible way to manage people.
Yah, even to club level players, Magnus played a bad game. Hans had nowhere close to perfect play ( I think the stock fish analysis says it’s close to 70% best moves, which is equivalent to Hans rating ). As a club level player, it blows my mind how many people are siding with Magnus.
: edit, typo
Yeah but just granting it doesn't make it actually make use of it, no? Or are you referring to the recent update where it allows you to give permission on a per-website basis where it will do more blocking? If so, then I believe you and then it's worse than I thought.
n+1. COBOL and various JavaScript frameworks will still be heavily used.
Something that appeals to me about the multitenant security story in WebAssembly is how easy it is to provide alternative implementations for system calls. In most wasm implementations, you begin with a "raw" wasm runtime, and explicitly provide host functions ("system calls") that the wasm code can call. Nowadays the wasm implementation is likely to provide a wasi implementation out of the box, but it's simple to replace the implementation of one or more of the wasi system calls with your own (or define your own syscall interface entirely!). In this way, you can put in extra protections, monitoring, alternative implementations, etc where you see fit.

It's kind of like a built-in mechanism to adopt gVisor's approach to container security. Implementing gVisor is a gargantuan task that few companies would embark on; comparatively, doing the same in wasm is absolutely trivial.
I have experienced no such limitation and never see it myself. Googling shows me the current policy is rate limiting accounts when they "post too many low-quality comments and/or get involved in flamewars."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32771195
I love it. The idea that someone would undergo training as a magician in order to cheat at chess is just hilarious! It’s not totally absurd though, given the history of cheating (as well as espionage) in sport.

The tricks people have pulled to cheat in baseball and (NFL) football are similarly amusing!
I haven’t used Heroku in a few years mostly because I haven’t had the need but also because it feels too expensive.

The 30 minute sleep is way too high and as others have mentioned will easily drain half your hours away. If you could configure it between say 10 and 30 minutes (I’d say as low as 5 but this is the Hobby tier) that’d feel a bit fairer.
Ha. I wasn't familiar with scan_ffs, so I googled it. Given what it does, or purports to do, yeah, a first step of "Panic" makes total sense. Reminds me of something which happened early in my career. An older, wiser coworker came by and said, "You won't believe what I almost did. I was installing a new disk on cyclops (our main NFS server), and I almost typed 'newfs /dev/sda' instead of 'newfs /dev/sdb'" (this was on SunOS 4, iirc). Then he went back to his office, hit return a couple times and... he had left "newfs /dev/sda_" sitting there on the command line. Panic ensued. We recovered from backup tapes.
For a moment I thought it was the axios library (js)
A bit aside, but while working on a kind of CSS for a different purpose this past year I realized that there's no real distinction* between CSS-the-syntax and CSS-the-spec/rules/properties/selectors/etc.

Perpetually blows my mind that there's no great way to describe other lovely uses of its concepts.

* I couldn't find one after hours of reading old specs, searching, cold-calling a small number of people involved with the specs, working groups, CSS parsers, etc. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist--but I gave the tree the best shake I could.
Title still reads "hardvard" for me.
Outlier players exist in every game, probably because of normal distribution.
Federer for tennis, Carlsen for chess, Serral for SC2 and dorkwood for his game.

The only way to certify their level is through strictly controlled competitions. eSports and chess do the same.
ClipDrop
>You’re not addressing the content of the argument and instead trying to dismiss it because of a phrase I used.

The phrase you used has a well-known meaning. If that wasn't what you meant, then you shouldn't have used it.

Magnus may not be great at spotting a cheater, but his expertise in this game suggests that he could be, and adding that fact to an existing body of evidence isn't even close to committing an appeal to authority fallacy. To bring up that fallacy here is just lazy thinking.
Carrying around two devices for many is annoying, so for those BYOD is helpful.
Different systems and apps use different password hashing algorithms. So syncing a hash is often useless.
California, a state known for regulations that ostensibly promote safety, has banned safety devices despite their already being extremely heavily regulated at the federal level.
I've been thinking about this topic for a while. If I ever build any kind of language or framework, I would prioritize backwards compatibility and make sure I don't waste anyone's time with unnecessary changes or deprecations.

I've also had to archive a few of my mobile apps and remove them from the App Store because it just wasn't feasible to get them running again.

I've adopted this practice with my SaaS startup (docspring.com) out of necessity, since I never want to change anything that might break a customer's templates or API integration. I also never remove or rename any database columns. It's been totally fine! I have a handful of feature flags sprinkled through the code, and a solid test suite that makes sure I keep supporting legacy behaviours. It has never bothered me. I don't understand companies or maintainers who are constantly changing things and breaking stuff.

I had a look at a Ember.js project recently and wanted to update everything to the latest version. I couldn't believe how many dependencies were broken, and how painful it was to even migrate to the next minor Ember version. Why??!?! What are all these extremely important changes people are making? The same goes for Rails, React, and every popular library. It's just a treadmill of things constantly breaking for no good reason.

But if you ignore upgrades for a while and fall behind, then suddenly a security vulnerability is announced and you've gotta spend the next 1-2 weeks upgrading libraries just so you can fix the vulnerability.

I had the idea to start a "upgrades as a service" development agency. We would monitor all your Dependabot PRs and fix any broken CI builds, and make sure you stay up to date. I wanted to build an automated code-mod tool that would know how to upgrade libraries between versions. Especially for simple things like a method or class being renamed.

I'd really love to be a customer of that service if it already exists. I waste so much time on this when I should be building new features and fixing bugs.

Maybe GitHub Copilot will be able to handle it one day.
That would be a Chief Liaise Officer.
I suspect that WebAssembly is actually the wrong abstraction here, and you might want something a little closer to BPF for non-process-isolated serverless compute, but also not BPF because BPF can do arbitrary memory reads. WebAssembly appears to be too permissive for this case, and BPF too restrictive to be useful.

Ideally, if you could have a language-level VM that guarantees that you only ever read or write data inside memory allocated to you and calls a limited set of syscalls (which you intercept/rewrite at compile time), you probably don't need any other protection.
> is having me click on an email going to make it more secure?

We implemented this at Mercury recently to stop phishing attacks, and I believe Coinbase implemented it for the same reason [1].

TOTP authenticators are super ineffective at combating phishing. If a user is willing to give their email and password to a phishing site, there's very little standing in the way of them also providing their TOTP code.

WebAuthn solves this by working with the browser to tie authentication to a particular domain, but not everyone has a WebAuthn authenticator yet.

Meanwhile, email verification links are a really simple and effective way to shut down these phishing attacks. The phisher can't click the links, because they don't have access to the user's email. The user can't click the links on behalf of the phisher, because clicking the link only verifies the device that clicks the link.

1. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2rp9o4/beware_coin...
> It's hard to think of things

No, it isn't. Investigate the K8S world and observe the backflips and somersaults being performed there to deal with networking and storage. Much of that is a consequence of people trying make containers do things that should be run in VMs. A full featured Linux kernel and certain key user space tools can obviate much of that nonsense with ease, deliver better performance, use less resources and be vastly less complex.
The reason this exists is because even highly qualified graduates (Harvard included) suck at writing CV's/Resumes. How do i know? I went to a similar kind of college.

All of us go through the same 16-20 year education grind (K-12 + University). At the end of it we are made to differentiate ourselves through our CV's/Resumes.

A simple rule of thumb: A CV/Resume should be strictly-one-page and honest. Not sure if anyone needs cover letters anymore.