skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2021/02/06/thief-of-joy/

(Seems like a good site for verifying quotes, it's crazy how many commonly-believed-to-have-been-said-by-X quotes simply never were...)

If you want some advice on how to avoid having your "joy" stolen by comparison, you could always go with

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/10/03/life-success/

Though I suppose "Z" these days would logically include "avoid replying to online forum comments..."!
> How about everyone in the world consume as less per capita as some of the poorest countries on the planet

Hmm, live the life of someone from the Congo, or do literally anything else. Not a tough decision.

I think that in practice a lot of countries would choose active genocide over deindustrialization. And it wouldn't even be close. Passive genocide, like that caused by Global Warming... There might be a lot of noise, but absolutely no significant action. So providing choices other than "deindustrialize" and "passive genocide" is critical if you don't want the decision to be "passive genocide".
Also, GIG Car Share will mail users an RFID card free of charge to solve this problem: https://gigcarshare.com/gig-card/
Many advanced nations have already seen pretty significant emissions declines, and this is robust even when you factor in offshoring manufacturing. Many of the huge declines in renewable energy production prices haven’t kicked in yet, so we’re likely to see lots more. Getting to net zero isn’t impossible. The problem is that we may get there when it’s too late.
MacOS actually doesn't support MTP out of the box (which most non-ancient Android phones use). You need to get something like Android File Transfer to do it. They just don't want to support anything other than their own garbage.
In retrospect, no, but in the 1980s even black community activists were demanding harsh penalties, precisely because of the disproportionate impact of crack upon their communities, which was utterly devastating if not existential, at least from a contemporaneous viewpoint. https://www.wnyc.org/story/312823-black-leaders-once-champio... It's fairly well established, e.g. by admissions from Nixon administration officials, that part of the support for the War on Drugs was rooted in anti-black animus. But that's not the whole story.

One of the more intractable aspects of "systemic racism" is that even without any animus, when the majority moves on from an issue, minorities get dragged along. Thus why it took decades for even moderate sentencing reform, despite a general consensus emerging much earlier. Everybody admitting to the same general problems isn't even half the battle; most of the battle is in prioritization, particularities, and process. (This dynamic is also the crux of Dave Chapelle's critique of the Woke movement wrt to how it prioritizes the demands of other minority communities over those of the black community.)
How is it not programming ?
This can be vulnerable to "ticket trick" - often support/helpdesk sites are put on the main domain and have reply-to email addresses that will reflect the content back to the user requesting support. This can be used to sign up for slack, etc.
Genuine question: what does FANGish mean?
> Can’t we just pay these people enough to go away?

“These people” is most of the population. Look at how little people have done to reduce their own meat reduction, transportation usage, etc.

People claim they care about global warming but air travel is back in full force and US citizens are throwing shit fits about petrol prices being a little closer to other western countries.

There is no corporate evil cabal keeping CO2 emissions high. It’s what the population actually wants through revealed preferences despite their expressed preferences.
I find this is a good explainer:

https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/everything+is+a+string
Someone's been watching the partner lounge / Dalton & Michael explain.
I think it is quite possible that humans attempting to “fix” nature is what will ultimately lead to the extinction of the human race. It is pretty fitting too since we are the ones who helped accelerate the mess we are in.

The article points out some of the problems here:

> There are significant and well-known risks to some of these techniques — sulfur dioxide aerosol injection, in particular.

> First, spraying sulfur into the atmosphere will “mess with the ozone chemistry in a way that might delay the recovery of the ozone layer,” Parson told CNBC.

> The Montreal Protocol adopted in 1987 regulates and phases out the use of ozone depleting substances, such as hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) which were commonly used in refrigeration and air conditioners, but that healing process is still going on.

> Also, sulfates injected into the atmosphere eventually come down as acid rain, which affects soil, water reservoirs, and local ecosystems.

> Third, the sulfur in the atmosphere forms very fine particulates that can cause respiratory illness.

Who gets to make the call that these risks are okay and are not as bad as the negative impact(s) we may face from climate change? Who decides that it is an acceptable trade-off to wipe out entire species and ecosystems and potentially some percent of the human population?

The problem is when it comes to climate change impact, it is all hypothetical based on models we have limited understanding of whereas with this stuff there are concrete risks and side-effects now.
Stripe's own claim to fame and much success is making an exceptionally complex topic, like billing, seem simple. It never is. I would imagine most of their own customers have far simpler needs than they themselves do.

FWIW, we're happy Stripe customers, but also candidly do much of our billing outside of of them. Some of the examples GP cited are in a similar boat. Which is all to say that Stripe solves a lot of headaches, but it hasn't solved all of them. I'm sure investors in Stripe see that as a positive opportunity.
The US could be great at shutting down Indian and Chinese coal plants by EO. Just provide asylum to those that would seek to do it by any means necessary.
It was "Toyota Accidently Exposed a Secret Key Publicly on GitHub for Five Years".

Thank you https://hackernewstitles.netlify.app/
I always feel like the term “outliner” misrepresents the approach to note-taking that tools like Logseq, (Org-)Roam, RemNote, etc. have chosen. I don’t really have/know a good alternative label, but there is so much more to it than just “outlining” your thoughts in a list of bullet points.

Often when I write down my thoughts this way, it is more like following associative threads. I focus on a particular thought and relate something to it, which now becomes my new focus. Then I defocus and focus on something completely different. Kind-of like these threads here on HN. I wouldn’t call this outlining, it is more like spawning local contexts, nested textual environments to think in.

This is something that I miss the most when working with linear text structures as in Obsidian. I know you can indent and fold indentations in/out, but for me it doesn’t feel natural the way it does in notebook apps that organize text in block-trees. I also cannot reorganize or reference those indentations easily. I feel liberated (in thinking) with those bullets rather than constrained, but of course it is a matter of personal preference and habits.
oof, that's definitely in the uncanny valley
I spend a lot of time in vscode. So I started keeping notes in vscode. I push my notes to github to access them from my phone. I change file extensions from .md to .old.md to hide old notes. What am I really missing here?!
> I wonder if these people claiming that we are "technically in a recession" will suddenly start saying that economy has recovered come Oct 28.

I absolutely will - that's the whole point of any technical argument.
That's true for me too but it's not allowed now because of DEI and anti-bias processes

so now it's a leetcode packets for everyone even though the candidates we've hired though them have been worse, our org is now filled people folks who studied for the test instead of having geniuine interest and unique aspirations

it's a charade since I had people from more varied backgrounds (economic, national .. etc) who were able to start decent carreres before having to change
If you could wipe out the past and start from day dot then /maybe/ you could transition without too great a risk; even then, you’re looking at a massive transformation project with a lot of temporary contract workers. It’s expensive, because billing fundamentally touches every part of a business - if it breaks, you can’t pay your service providers and you can’t get paid by your clients. Optics doesn’t matter here, dogfooding is a nice bonus and not a given. There’s just no compelling reason for them to move over.
I wrote programs too. Even had them print out the work.

Checked with the teacher at the beginning of the year and she said no problem. After rampant cheating, mostly people just writing notes in the programs section, she instituted a policy of deleting everyone’s calculator before any test. but let me keep mine too, I had asked to not delete it and I’d take a class calculator if she insisted.
They do have an Android app now, though? You can download the apk from their github releases page[1], if you don't mind sideloading apps.

[1]: https://github.com/logseq/logseq/releases
We are barely in the early stages of automation and digitalisation. There may be a temporary bump but we are nowhere near where we should be in terms of automating things. Let alone the existing code that needs maintenance. Large and boring companies, the Chryslers of the software world, will undergo a slowdown. There will be new tech and process coming around. We still have trains driven by people, planes flown by pilots, factory floors maned by workers, tills handled by cashiers, cars that dont drive themselves, we dont yet have robots coming to our door, and so on. The current state is just the beginning.
I’ve read similar narrative before on Reddit (while I was trying to decide Logseq vs Obsidian a few weeks ago). But I don’t get it.

When you open Logseq, you start with bullet points. Is that the only thing that pushes you to create more? In Obsidian, you can just start bullet points on your own.
To be clear: we can (at least us Americans) consume far less and produce far less pollution per capita than we currently do without meaningfully impacting our quality of life. This is directly evidenced by Northern Europe.
Yelp has a "detect-secrets" project that can detect potential secrets and can be used as a pre-commit hook: https://github.com/Yelp/detect-secrets
Unless you write assembly or lower, you have no standing here. Mocking children for learning a high-level language is all sorts of wrong in so many ways.
That is the game, figuring out what pain affects the decision makers personally.

They apparently don't worry much about stocks. Bonds they care more about (I'd guess their personal wealth is mostly there). Sooner or later they'll probably do something (or bigger somethings).

Real estate is the big question. Will they let it really crash or not?
Looks like they are avoiding Tk altogether? Anybody know if that's the plan going forward?
Optimists get either rich or ruined, but the latter isn't something that people like to boast about.
It's just the naming convention of .NET stuff, e.g. someone else has a NuGet package for "Terminal.Connector" and someone else has one for "
Rebex.Terminal.SerialPort" but none of these are related. I will say normally you'd stick some sort of group/developer/company identifier in front though like the Rebex example has but it's not a hard and fast rule.
I joined HN 10 days before you did (back in 2013)…
Your account age of nine years gives you no more authority than mine (or an account age of nine days). You’ve been here as long as I have - there is one dang. You’ve exercised your downvoting ability. Fair enough.

On HN and elsewhere in my > 20 years in the broader technology community I’ve noticed substantially higher interest in “golden era” Simpsons, Futurama, etc. In my experience and understanding they are part of our culture.

I think it’s a bit of a stretch to call a reference to a single line in an episode that aired in 1995 “Pop Culture”.

I simply added context because a reference to a 27 year old episode from a series that seems to have been well respected in the technology space should not be completely lost on a younger generation of HN readers that don’t recognize it (likely because they hadn’t been born yet).
But you just pay _more_ for the contractors, at least if you hire locally. In my experience contract rates for comparable work any place you'd want to work are typically marked up (at least) enough to roughly compensate for the difference in benefits and taxes.

Especially now that remote for FTEs has become so common, there wouldn't be much motivation to take long term contracts otherwise. That may change if the job market goes pear-shaped, but doesn't seem like we're there yet.
You may already know this, but while not 'officially supported' Google will not block you from bringing your own equipment on their 2Gbe service.

The ONT on a stick (aka SFP) plugged into the Technicolor manufacturered router Google provides can me moved to other routers. The difficulty is that instead of negotiating at the usual 1 or 10Gbe, the SFP negotiates at 2.5Gbe (commonly known as Multigig). There's next to no hardware on the market that supports Multigig, this makes it seems like no other equipment works with Google's service.

I wish they just went straight to SFP+ but I'm sure there are good reasons why they did not.
> But how is the output of a program containing a lisp macro for example.

I think you have a fundamental confusion about when and where macros are applied. In a compiled CL implementation, macros are expanded prior to compilation. The code will be exactly the same as if there was no macro involved. If you want to see what that might look like take the function body of this simple function:

(defun bar (filename)
(with-open-file (in filename :element-type '(unsigned-byte 16))
(let ((contents (make-array (file-length in) :element-type '(unsigned-byte 16))))
(read-sequence contents in)
contents)))

And run it through `macroexpand` (`with-open-file` is the macro I'm particularly interested in here):

CL-USER> (macroexpand
'(with-open-file (in filename :element-type '(unsigned-byte 16))
(let ((contents (make-array (file-length in) :element-type '(unsigned-byte 16))))
(read-sequence contents in)
contents)))
(LET ((IN (OPEN FILENAME :ELEMENT-TYPE '(UNSIGNED-BYTE 16))) (#:G659 T))
(UNWIND-PROTECT
(MULTIPLE-VALUE-PROG1
(PROGN
(LET ((CONTENTS
(MAKE-ARRAY (FILE-LENGTH IN) :ELEMENT-TYPE
'(UNSIGNED-BYTE 16))))
(READ-SEQUENCE CONTENTS IN)
CONTENTS))
(SETQ #:G659 NIL))
(WHEN IN (CLOSE IN :ABORT #:G659))))

Now take that output and put it in a new function, call it `baz`. Then disassemble both `bar` and `baz` (I've done this and included the output of just one because they have the same instructions):

EDIT: Snipped the excessively long code, here's a link:

https://topaz.github.io/paste/#XQAAAQCODwAAAAAAAAAQYOhAaDnr7... (still long, but at least HN will truncate it)

It doesn't really make sense to talk about disassembling a macro as a macro is not, itself, what gets compiled when it's applied, but rather its output gets compiled (in a compiled Lisp).

> "The logic inside that helps dispatch based on the dynamic types at runtime" is the interpreter part IMHO.

Then every compiled program that uses a tagged union is really an interpreted program (which is a statement you could make a strong argument for, perhaps). The code above is still machine code, though, it's not being interpreted. This is part of the distinction between an interpreter and a runtime. Dynamic dispatch can be applied to statically typed languages as well as dynamically typed languages.

> We need to generate an example of something we can't do in C, something which requires evaluation at runtime.

Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as something that can be done in Lisp that cannot be done in C. It'll just take a lot more effort in C to do some things like compiling a function on the fly, returning it, and then applying it later. You'd at least need to link in a compiler and feed it some structure which it can then compile into a function which gets returned, probably, as a function pointer.
> but migrating from SAP would cost them millions and take a lot of time.

Microsoft's annual revenue is almost US$200 billion. Even if the migration would "cost them millions", they can easily afford it, it would not make any material difference to their ultimate financial position. And, it would actually be justifiable as an investment in their own ERP suite – "eating their own dogfood" would send a signal to their customers about their commitment to those products, and would also help improve those products over time (by exposing them to the distinctive needs of a Microsoft-scale enterprise). As far as time goes, they could always do it gradually (maybe they already are), and even if it takes several years, before we know it those years will be behind us.
Is this a common theme on HN that when something is a negative critique of a product people love, people hysterically act like they were personally attacked instead of trying to research the problem?

The iOS client does not allow choosing the folder. You can specify either icloud sync or not, but you cannot select a folder.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ObsidianMD/comments/s4kw0k/set_fold...
Yah, that's the OAuth Client Credentials flow but as noted, you still have a static set of creds that are required to generate the short lived access token. Besides being useful for being able to limit scope in some circumstances, the main point of the client cred flow is to appease eager sec arch's who insist on OAuth.
At some point you'll want to do scripting to automate some stuffs so I don't think you could really fully get rid of it.
I mostly disagree with your inequalities. Sure, in a literal sense, they are not equivalencies, but I think often they'd be a fine substitute. It doesn't really matter that the "very old" 200-year-old house" isn't literally "ancient". It doesn't really matter that the kitchen counter you just intensely scrubbed doesn't literally reflect light in a sparkly, flashy way. Exaggeration and hyperbole are valid rhetorical devices, and, given context, the listener or reader will understand what is meant.

Sure, "bleak" doesn't work for "very dark" when you're talking about a literal lack of light, but it would probably work when describing a certain type of film, or an awful situation. I don't think the site is trying to say "every time you want to use 'very dark', use 'bleak' instead"; it's just trying to give you alternatives that might -- but might not -- fit the usage you're looking for.

Beyond that, I do agree with the overall motive here: "very" is often a lazy intensifier, when we could be much more expressive in our speech or (especially) writing. For all its faults, the English language does offer decent breadth when it comes to synonyms of various intensity.
In this thread, everything except the actual cause of the burnout. I'm feeling great, btw. I'd tell you my secret, but I'd get flagged.
You can transfer files to a Google device using a built-in feature of your Microsoft operating system on a Dell laptop.

And in the past you could transfer files from your Windows phone to your Linux workstation with zero extra software other than your DE. Ditto BB10.

God forbid you need to get a file to your iPhone from a Linux computer sans net connection.
I read the book when I was still a right-libertarian, and I credit it with playing a significant part in pushing me left into Anarchism. Thus, I'd say I fall pretty firmly in the camp of "I have read the entirety of Atlas Shrugged and severely disagree with it".

And I have to disagree with the "not an academic treatise" take: the book is a statement of philosophy first, and a story in a distant second. Most character's actions serve to either portray the "right" behavior of the Objectivist Ubermenche, or act a strawman foil to the heroes of the story. Frankly, the most surprising thing is that Rand doesn't stick to easy slam-dunk wins against her strawman "collectivists": she portrays the kinds of monstrous actions that her philosophy encourages, and then celebrates them. Franscisco D'Antonia's bombing of his own mine when he inevitably lost the fight against labor, the reverse-Robin Hood character's outright theft for the benefit of those who really don't need it, heck, the bizarrely rapey sexual encounters between Dagny and Rearden are all portrayed in a unquestionably positive light, and that's probably why so few people who don't already agree with the underlying philosophy finish the book: it's seriously alienating to see evil unambiguously praised.

Atlas Shrugged does not simply "inspire" individualism: It demonizes anything less than overtly selfish behavior, to the point of praising characters for acting against their own interests simply out of spite towards those who fail to live up to the Ubermenche ideal. Contrast that with individualist anarchist writers like Max Stirner, who's philosophy follows something like "Liberation begins with the self, but we can work better together": The former is destructive, where even self-interest takes a back seat to the rejection of cooperation, whereas the latter truely puts self-interest first, acknowledging that cooperation often grants greater benefit to ourselves as well.

As a novel, it's low-effort, monotonous wish fulfillment accented by the occasional romance or absurd moment. As a philosophical statement, it's a lackluster re-framing of the least favorable parts of Nietzche with the overt "Woman only get into academia if they're sterile" sexism being replaced with a more subtle "Women should be more like men" form. The book has few redeeming qualities, and can only really be enjoyed by a reader who already agrees with the premise.
Stuff has been injected into the atmosphere by both humans and non-human processes since the beginning. I don't think this is likely to cause irreparable damage. What man has broken man can fix.

The anti-human ideology of environmentalism needs to end or mankind probably will.

The massive carbon reductions being called for won't happen once people realize the massive toll in human suffering they would cause. A pre-industrial Earth couldn't support anywhere near 8 billion humans.
I’ve been using Bear but it’s only on Apple products so I can’t use it on my work laptop which is Linux. It uses this like visual markdown which I just think looks nice and it’s easy to use.
First they were "likely" doing it. Now they've "clearly" been doing it. But lo and behold, after fooling stupid normies for decades they're ready to announce their doomsday device to the public because......? Were the coherent ones who could look up patents ready to drop some truth bombs on the public?
Is this the feeling that others have about the needless complexity of front-end?

Or maybe I'm missing something, and this really is the simplest way to flush a cache on update.
> What man has broken man can fix.

Citation needed, please.
I was laid off last week. The previous rounds of layoffs at my employer were focused on sales and operations folks. The latest was in IT, seemingly focused on senior level engineers.
Hm - this would work better if keys were easy to scan with regular expressions.

Next time I implement api keys I wonder if it’s worth going out of my way to make them easy to identify. Eg, by prefixing every key with a few well known characters. Like FMLA_xxxxx for a fastmail app key.