skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
its still possible to do meetings (timewise) between europe and asia at for both acceptable hours though,societal pressure aside
Tokyo has significantly stronger property rights thay make it almost impossible for anyone including the government to stop someone from building something on their land.
Yes but they don't know which card number you bought.
>When fabric is purchased by the yard, it typically comes in one continuous piece — for a person needing six yards of fabric, a couple three-yard packs wouldn’t be adequate because pattern pieces don’t neatly fall into a one-yard increment space.

I only ordered from them once and what's described above is what happened with my order. I got the right amount of fabric, but it was not continuous, making it completely useless for my project. Unlike Amazon who is usually good about returns, Fabric.com was annoying to deal with and in the end I kept the fabric and ended using it for a Halloween costume instead but never ordered from them again.
I have been recently trying https://www.github.com/usebruno/bruno and it allows you to use your own version control
Confidential Computing at Scale with Open-Source Confidential Kubernetes
This is the corresponding repo: https://github.com/edgelesssys/constellation
Stop watching so much popular media, with their sensational catastrophe scenarios. Why spend any time floating ideas like this that have no chance of making any difference? How about we don't build cities in possible war zones, since lots of people get killed in cities during war.

Look up Chernobyl. Ukraine already had a meltdown disaster. Spoiler: Europe survived.
Yes, it starts with the word no.
Try to adhere to the Hacker News Guidelines. I apologize for being annoying but we all benefit from trying to make better posts.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—things like article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting."
Wow, has it is only been around for 5 years? Been using it for over 3. It's very polished and runs fine on my ThinkPad.

Bluetooth sometimes won't connect to some things, but that was true of Ubuntu too. And I've never really relied on it for much anyway as I always find it a bit of a crap shoot whether devices in general will see each other or pair. So no great loss.
And it was, and it did.

Those laws should be abolished.
Time to jump jobs until you find an org that relies more on async comms than scheduled meetings...
All affordable housing I’ve come across require that you make less than 60k and pay 3k rent. There is almost No one who would do that.
I do development and software architecture and I work 8 hours / day.
Similar question to the other one at the time of writing, but more specific: does anyone have a good, thorough introduction to the "async event loop" (sometimes known as "asyncio") pattern? By thorough I mean that it goes beyond a starter tutorial, into both examples of various supporting libraries and implementation details that matter for usage. I'm fine with a book, too.

There are popular libraries for it in both Python and Perl and I suspect I could make good use for it if I understood it.

Unfortunately, I've only ever used it in a cargo cult manner of sticking together functions until the error messages go away (yeah yeah, it was only for "throwaway" "prototypes") so I really don't understand how it all is meant to fit together.
As I understand the principles in the article:

- The representable values are so dense near zero that there will be less practical difference between strict equality and approximate equality. Strict equality would be theoretically significant if you found it, but not really necessary to check for. You'll see mostly false negatives.

- The representable values are so sparse far away from zero that strict equality isn't really valuable theoretically or practically. You'll see mostly false positives.

So perhaps there is a region (the location and size of it depending on what you're modelling), where strict equality is just likely enough that you need to check for it, AND that the ULP at that point is meaningful for your application. But philosophically, in that situation, are you really comparing them for equality, or does your epsilon just happen to be zero? Would it be better to interpret your question as: are there situations where you want to check for strict equality no matter what either of the values are?
Adobe Procreate is great on iPad.
A wonderfully presented publication with lots of colour photos. Should be of interest to anyone in woodworking or cabinet/furniture making.
1) There are enough templates and starter packs with documentation. Frameworks have been tried, but they quickly turn out to limit your Clojure given powers.

2) Thats true, but its not leaky abstraction. Clojure never claims to abstract the host away, it embraces it so you can do all low level Java/JS stuff and seemlessly use their libraries without FFIs.

3) You have all Java/JS libs. Most Clojure libs are simply "done", so they get no commits. I don't know of any unmaintend ones.

4) Java is improving? Clojure is mostly done with that already. It was designed long after Java and makes many improvements obsolete.
This is extremely pessimistic. Same comment could have been made ages ago about internet businesses as well.

The issue is that there is significant amount of money in the space, relatively little regulation making it attractive to scammers. It will be solved.

I sincerely hope people stop investing in things because it is crypto. However, investing in a good project with decent chance for the future will bring along a healthy ecosystem; coupled with a bit more of a decent regulation around it.
I've inevitably heard of the Durov circus dynasty, as they were pretty big around here in the past and iirc have a prominent circus building named after them. However I had no idea that Vladimir Durov was that dapper. Here I thought that Fellini's ‘I clowns’ had some marvellous-looking individuals, by today's standards.
The bill should specify that "on-going cost to the manufacturer" absolutely does not include software, so as to forestall bogus "updates" and also to prevent security updates being an excuse.
> Look at the amount of work she puts into her own Wikipedia page. She's a Wikipedia editor that edits her own page.

What you are saying is verifiably wrong, as you can see yourself that she has not edited her own page even once: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Molly_White_(writ... (her username is GorillaWarfare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare)
Nice to the tools come out to save us from postman bloat

I have been recently trying out bruno - https://www.github.com/usebruno/bruno

It allows me to save my collection on my filesystem (as folders and files) and I use git to save them in my private repo
So run free software?
I don't have it that bad compared to you but I do suffer from v complicated days.

* Several meetings including standup. These vary massively from low level tech discussions, planning sprint work at more of a 'product' level, and some big picture company strategy type stuff. I go though lots of big context shifts basically.

* Ad hoc calls helping people out with problems.

* Mentoring

* Fire fighting occasional production issues.

* Answering questions from the wider business / tech community.

* Sprint work.

The main issue for me is time fragmentation, all of the above can lead to a lot of context switching. My ways of coping are as follows:

* First thing. Write a new todo list. Catch up on lower priority slack messages, emails and so on.

* Decline meetings where they're not useful.

* Split burden of attending certain meetings between teammates eg. we don't all have to be at everything.

* Mute Slack and work for 30 minute periods. Focus on one thing. Do not multi task. After that period, see if there's anything important to reply to. Repeat.

* Try to do the hardest earlier in the day. Admin and lower complexity tasks are best left to end of the day.

This is just what works for me, hope some of it is useful. I frequently don't do all of this. It's just an ideal that I try to strive towards however imperfectly. I'm OK with failure and I don't expect to ever really nail this. That's just another source of stress. A structure with rules really helps lower the cognitive burden for me though.
>he's likely just a

I'm a PRC born person who likes to keep up with PRC related geopolitics, now based in CAN but have lived/worked between East and West with experience in both systems if that helps you calibrate. Not an enthusiastic supporter, nor paid, nor imprisoned by regime. Just some dude whose a nightowl who pass time on forums that responds to posts that pique my interest, usually under different accounts for different subjects on other platforms, but on HN it's just this.

>I remember his name
...
>he's tracked down a post of mine deep inside a thread.

I don't remember you at all, my custom CSS on hn/reddit removes user names by default. And I listen to mass comments with a screen reader. Certainly dont' care enough to track anyone down. If you want, I can mute your account to avoid future interactions.

E: I will just go ahead and do that for both our sake, this account has already been rate limited because people think I'm state sponsored shill. Which gives me ~5 comments day, that I tend to titrate based on interest, which means generally spending them on PRC topics to exclusion of other subjects. Which reinforces that perception. Wish you well otherwise.
My current company has teams in NA and EU but they tries to avoid having many meetings across large time zone differences. Even then there are set hours designated for it which keep the time reasonable for everyone. My team is pretty much 9-5 in their time zone (+/- 2 hours per individual preference) and on-call is fairly rare (both in how often you're on call as it's department level and how often an actual alert goes off). The company generally values WLB although I do now some teams are less good about it.

To answer you question. Interviews are a two way street and it's on you to ask questions to figure out the WLB of the team. Don't ask "how is the WLB" but ask specific questions such as "how many time the last month were there meetings after 5pm" or "how often did pages go off the last few months and what is the rotation schedule."
Exactly, that just enforces the idea that the ownership itself is meaningless, and the investment aspect is the only thing of value.

A landlord owns a house like a hedge-fund owns stocks: its not about the houses or the stocks themselves. Obvious problems arise since houses are actually rare things people want for their own sake, and stocks are not.

I feel like the discussion often trends towards criticizing legislature, but we should not forget that choosing the darwinist approach is still very much a choice made by the individual in their own favor.

Why is lowering risk/maximizing gain at the expense of others a defendable choice because it produces/saves money for an already wealthy individual. Why is this not viewed similarly to other things which are legal but unethical, say cheating on a spouse?

Why is it that the government needs to produce ever smarter and more complicated legislature to prevent people from exploiting others for wealth?

Is government really to blame for this rat race? I don't think so.
have you ever started a local? half the time you can't get a national to commit legal resources so you're screwed if the employer doesn't agree to card check, which they won't

then there's the question of does the union have any real leverage, which varies a lot by industry and trade. ufcw for example has failed both in securing real wins for grocery workers AND in pushing against price gouging by grocers

after being failed by nationals (for me it was usually cwa), tried going more wildcat but iww are just as ineffectual for different reasons, then got involved in the co-op space but groups like usfwc are just as ineffectual for still different reasons
Libertarians don't account for externalities. When the property owner three miles over is dumping toxic waste into the river, what are you going to do about it?

The state works because they have a monopoly on violence and imprisonment. As long as they operate for general good and operate via a strict system of laws which prevents abuses and maintains rights, then that is a good thing.

Making my neighbor stop dumping waste into my drinking water (which I don't own at the point they are dumping in) by having to come up with enough money to buy them out and shut them down is not viable.
It gives good pointers but it falls short on the usual suspects for an article on asyncio.

When teaching it, it's important to emphasis:

- await is locally blocking, so you should isolate linear workflows into their own coro, which is the unit of concurrency.

- to allow concurrency, you should use asyncio.create_task on coro (formerly ensure_future).

- you should always explicitly delimitate the life cycle of any task. Right now, this means using something like gather() or wait(). TaskGroup will help when it becomes mainstream.

A HN comment is not great to explain that, but if you read the article, you should investigate those points. There is no good asyncio code without them, only pain and disapointment.
(From another layman) this sounds a bit like Turing Patterns, which are found all over nature.
After the Apple’s ARM switch I see a big step forward in battery life and what I love the most is the fanless design (without capping so much the performance)
This is exactly it. Europe spreads towards Nato for pure self-interest, to get additional protection against the worst pile of corruption on this world.

If Russia could be trusted, Nato would never have been even formed.
Agile got consultancied to death. If you look at all the certification courses and what not that have sprung up around them, barely any reflect the values of the agile manifesto nor teach you how to design processes and organisations with those values in mind.

When most companies say agile, they mean sexy waterfall. That’s not to say that doing waterfall on a monthly cycle doesn’t have benefits over doing it on a yearly cycle. It does and it’s a good starting point. But that doesn’t make it agile.

DevOps has the same problem. To the point that there’s now companies that “do the devops for you” completely missing the point of it all. But at least the company does devops now. We’re back to 90s throw it over the wall and early 2000s outsourcing.
Seems reasonable to expect someone to have at least some experience in an area before laying down strong criticisms and suggestions for how it needs to be overhauled. Otherwise, yes, it is a futile, speculative conversation.
High availability doesn’t require constant in-person vigilance. And on-call rotations should be brief: 1-2 weeks every quarter or so for any reasonably sized team. Even that is objectionable: the company should have dedicated SRE staff that do that work.

9-5 is possible even at really good paying tech companies. Your manager/org just sounds to be in quite a poor state. I’d suggest looking elsewhere or, if you’re bold, looking at how things can be improved and either spearheading that change possible or making recommendations for it
I believe this was a civil case, not a legal one, so the police don't have the power to seize and copy everything.
Due to Apple, yes.
Nobody seems to have mentioned the (planned) advances for gradients. I love gradients and have had a lot of fun implementing them (beyond what the 2d canvas API offers) in my JS canvas library[1]

> Gradients can't be animated though. They are too flexible and too complex for the browser to "just derive" how you want them to animate.

Animating gradients can be joyful work (with obvious caveats that such animations need to respect accessibility concerns eg prefers-reduced-motion). I assume that CSS gradient animation is difficult because of the way gradients, and animations, get defined in the stylesheet?

[1] - linear gradient demo - https://scrawl-v8.rikweb.org.uk/demo/canvas-003.html
I am confused. Why do you think a nuclear cargo ship would use highly enriched uranium?
> no i'm saying there should be a basic level of fluency in the material beyond regurgitation. saying every course should have people able to write a paper on some assigned part of it, or to prepare a presentation, or to take an oral exam with a previous idea of what the material will be is reasonable and essential.

Writing a paper, presenting or taking an oral exam mostly require regurgitation.

> i think you're making this out to be way harder than it actually is, before almost any exam i can discuss pretty well the material behind it. half the time i end up explaining something to a friend who is wondering about something. it's really not that hard.

Explaining something to a friend isn't the same as the teacher selecting a random aspect of the course, and asking you to explain it with a certain depth. Either they can only ask things that are too basic, or they ask complex things in which structuring the content is very hard. Not to mention that asking to explain it is fairly different from knowing how to use it.

To put one of my oral exams as an example, it was on harmonic analysis. Instead of the full course, the teacher had to limit which theorems could be asked in the exam, because covering everything on the course well enough for an oral exam was an impossible task (not just for students, I bet the teacher wouldn't be able to recall every theorem and every condition). My question was explaining a certain covering lemma. Fairly easy and basic. Second part was proving it, and I didn't know that proofs were going to be part of the exam so I hadn't the proof memorized. I started proving it myself, but of course the limited time of an oral exam was not at all enough so the teacher told me to stop.

IMHO, being able to prove the theorem shows deeper knowledge than memorizing the proof. But oral exams aren't a good place for doing that. In fact, most "good exams" I've taken where written exams where you could even bring your own notes, and had different exercises (do all of the basic ones, choose one of the difficult ones) to prove not that you had memorized the material, but that you actually understood it.
He seems anti BTC Twitter. BTC isn't a scam.
> We test its performance against 21 board-certified dermatologists

From Andre Esteva's paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21056
OpenSilver 1.1 Is Out
You should also think about chemical plants, then.
And not only that, they have a lot of source code on GitHub, so anyone with an annoyance and some free time can fix things up: https://github.com/internetarchive/bookreader
> where would one suggest that most people don't experience theft?

I live in Germany. The only time I ever had something stolen was at age 9, by a classmate who was shortly thereafter diagnosed as a cleptomaniac and who received therapy to deal with it.

Generally speaking, thefts do happen here, too. But if theft is of particular concern for you, it's not all that hard to significantly reduce your chances. Pick an apartment that's not on the ground floor, so people cannot get in through the windows. Put your wallet in a pocket that can be closed with a zipper, and pickpockets won't bother with you. Armed robberies are just not a thing because of gun control laws. Sure, there are a few ones across the entire country every year, but it's rare enough to make the news every time.
Perhaps when you are unit testing a math function on a known input, for a specific platform, and there is a specific value that you are expecting it to return; anything else is an error.
> I default to the obvious culprit: Russia. Am I wrong, and if yes, how?

You forgot Iran, the foreigners, China, Palau, coloured people. Everyone can be a terrorist. Just be alert /s
It is definitely possible, but it depends on what you do, on your company culture, on the legal framework, and how easy it is to replace you. You can do one of three things:

1) Endure in your current position, not making any changes, and live with it.
2) Leave and find something else.
3) Try to change things in the company you are currently working. If that does not work, see 1 or 2.

Here's how I do option 3:

I have, from day one, always recorded my work time and kept a kind of diary in my own independent system. Keeping an independent record is valuable. Without data, there is no argument in negotiations (setting boundaries, salary, company paying courses or books...). Also track whenever you need to work on some completely new topic.

The employer can of course say that your data may be untrustworthy. Such responses try to divert your attention and keep you from recording. You should still do it. Aim for 5 minutes, possibly 10, every other day, where you record what you did. Aim for another 20 minutes each week (I use saturday or sunday) to aggregate your findings (weekly works well for me).

In any negotiation, you should bring up your conclusions. They might "performance evaluate" you, you will professionally provide them with feedback of substance. And this is where you can set boundaries, ask for books, courses, more salary and more. Provide a perspective backed by your data.* If they grant you something, ask "can I have that in writing?" if it is appropriate.

After you have done this once or twice, you can gauge whether it is a lost cause (they just do not care — then consider, strongly, to find something else) or if you helped your situation.

For me, it worked very well. I have no company phone. I am not working on call. Meetings are scheduled regularly, during my work hours, which are an established boundary (with some leeway though). My weekends and my evenings are sacred.

*) Here are some tips:

1) Be aware that managers wish their rear ends covered.
2) Do not engage in blatant, harsh criticism. Phrase it like suggestions: "we might do better if we could somehow..." or "we could prevent situations like this in the future if we...".
3) Never join into ad-hominem talk. Even if you share your co-workers or manager's opinion when they riff on somebody, criticize situations, not people.
4) Never falsify your own records (never lie to them when presenting your conclusions); if trust in your data is actively destroyed by you, there is no coming back.
5) If someone does something well, do say so. If things go well, say so. "I have noticed that X does not happen any more, it's great!"
6) It is a normal side effect that you might actually become interested in your company's well-being if you do the above. You are becoming somebody they wish to keep.
7) YOUR BOSS IS NOT YOUR FRIEND. NEITHER ARE YOUR CO-WORKERS. Always be aware of that.

These are my experiences. They might not work for you, and if so, I am sorry.

Best of luck to you!