skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> They are inseparable.

They are quite separable, both logically and in practice; Kendi’s approach to antiracism is not uncontroversial even among people who accept CRT as a correct approach to analyzing the status quo.

In fact, in regard to the particular quote you see as emblematic, CRT tends to see the problem of the status quo situation of marginalized racial groups not as being a past discrimination which needs correction by present discrimination, but currently-existing structures which prevent progress which need dismantled. While Kendi’s statement isn’t logically excluded by CRT, it is far from the most natural conclusion from it. Generously, CRTs observation of the scope and breadth of subtle systemic discrimination through superficially race-neutral policies might lend support to a
idea of compensatory overt discrimination as an easier stopgap while those systems are identified and dismantled, which is rather different from what Kendi articulates but similar in policy recommendation.

> treating people differently based on the color of their skin (which is a core tenet of CRT)

That’s not a tenet of CRT at all. CRT is an analytical approach to how racial inequality occurs and is preserved through law and institutional structure. While people interested in it naturally tend to have views on a desired end-state and also be interested into policy prescriptions as to how best to achieve that, those are beyond the scope of CRT.
I don't think the article's `CopyFile` function is a good example for either `guard` statements or exceptions.

We can come up with better examples (feel free), but I'm going to focus on that since it's the one used in the article.

As a library consumer, I would like to know if the error happened in the source file or the destination file, ideally without requiring me to know implementation details of the function, so I don't have to worry if the implementation changes and now my `if errors.Is(err, fs.PathError)` no longer works and instead became a bug.

For example, the caller might want to:

* Show a user-friendly message to the user if the problem is in the source file.

* Return gracefully if there's not enough space to create the destination file (e.g. "copy as many files as you can to this drive, and tell me which ones you copied").

* "Bubble-up" the error in any other situation.

A function that lets me know which file was the cause of the problem might look like this:

type ErrSourceFile struct{ error }
type ErrDestFile struct{ error }

func CopyFile(src, dst string) error {
r, err := os.Open(src)
if err != nil {
return &ErrSourceFile{error: err}
}
defer r.Close()

w, err := os.Create(dst)
if err != nil {
return &ErrDestFile{error: err}
}
defer w.Close()

if _, err := io.Copy(w, r); err != nil {
return err
}
if err := w.Close(); err != nil {
return &ErrDestFile{error: err}
}

return nil
}

Since now errors are actually useful to the caller function, the `guard` statements became unnecessary everywhere except in the `guard io.Copy(w, r)` case, because now we must handle nils (though I guess with generics we can create a wrapper that allows doing stuff like `guard WrapIfNonNil[ErrSourceFile](err)`, but whether that's better is debatable).

If we tried to do this with exceptions so that we can actually catch them, the code would become:

type SourceFileException exception
type DestFileException exception

func CopyFile(src, dst string) throws error {
// Now necessary because the `try` blocks introduce new scopes.
var (
r io.ReadCloser
w io.WriteCloser
)

try {
r = os.Open(src)
} catch err {
// Wrap exception because we don't want to hide
// the inner exception.
throw SourceFileException(err)
}
defer r.Close()

try {
w = os.Create(dst)
} catch err {
throw DestFileException(err)
}
defer w.Close()

io.Copy(w, r)

// The caller might want to check the hash to decide if it
// should delete the file or not.
try {
w.Close()
} catch err {
throw DestFileException(err)
}
}

... which is even more cumbersome than plain `if` blocks.

Exceptions have their advantages in certain cases, but they also have their downsides, it all depends on the situation and what you want to do.

As everything, it's a trade-off.
Huh? Theres's a long history of doing this — 'computers' were people long before they are machines.
We’re Giving Up on the (Frog) Pandemic
Yeah the A* search had a bug. It "bugged" me enough that I made a PR to fix it...

https://github.com/eoin-barr/pathfinding-visualizer/pull/1
> only 4% of homes are broken into using this method

I'd spend a few dollars to eliminate that 4%.

I don't like electric locks anyway. Over time, door frames tend to shift and the doors tend to sag, to the point where the bolt jams in the frame. Electric bolts won't work with that, whereas manual bolts will still work fine, because you can jiggle it to get it in/out.
It all depends on the culture that your organizational leaders support.

If they support your team's culture, then you are in a wrong org.
Options: 1) Exit, 2) Invest your time to change them, 3) Challenge yourself to fit with them without losing your motivation, 4) Become like them.

Life is short, and this team is not a good benchmark/reference point for your career in job market, so easy route is #1.

If your leaders do not like such culture, then you have an opportunity to become a change leader. Assuming you are an IC, this path will likely require you to transition into a people leader. Make sure your leaders in sync with your change plans. (see HBR paper: power failure in management circuits).
> Sorry, do you honestly think that Tweets are more complicated than real time video and voice

do you not? have you heard of metcalfe's law? the value of a network is proportional to the square of the nimber of users. so too is the difficulty in supporting & running the vastly more interconnected network.

video is easy as shit. yeah you need bandwidth/transit. but people join & leave infrequently. they are low impact consumers: them joining does not change the total load significantly, it's only a little more linear growth. whatever to that, irrelevant.

twitter is a vastly wider & more connected not-so-micro- cosm. if there are 50m followers, and they tweet, the burden of rippling that event out is huge. tracking & making visible every fav, retweet & reply further escallates the difficulty by more deep deep orders of magnitude.

it's laughable to me that you would try to say discord has a higher event rate than twitter. first, i think thats horseshit, totslly absurdly flat wrong in extreme if you count favs, retweets, et-cetera. but more so, event rate is pointless. it's event receievers that actually count, that matter. and the little intranet micro-world discords are, by any measure, totally pointless & irrelevant by compare versus the all-connected fabric that is twitter. discord has no scale, is itrelevant entirely, in how far it has to spread any given message/event. discord is a large number of the tiniest little fishbowls; it compares not at all to the sea.
looks like one of those wind-powered walkers
Git as a janky Twitter replacement
Those two methods seemed very simple and not a high skill attack at all. Aren't there a lot of commercially available lock cylinders/cores that prevent these attacks from multiple manufacturers that Level could swap their sourcing for?
now they just need to be a nobody scammer who has $8/mo
If the lock is picked, the burglary may go unnoticed for a long time. With a broken window, you'll find out quickly.
Sure. My point was more that - at least on android - you can compare decompiled binaries with the open source implementation, presumably making it reasonably likely that it’d be noticed and reported on.
All I'm getting is a message: "Oops! Unauthorized F4map API usage. If you are this website administrator, please contact the support at support@f4map.com."
Text: https://archive.ph/5BA7M
Pretty sure some google employees can read others gmail.

I know yahoo employees read email, I got my account back once by telling them recent subject lines.
If it's the one I am thinking of, this is a connection to the Portland Oregon metro. To which locals have an air of "ew, Portland." Which is still a bit ridiculous that they then want Portland to pay for the bridge that would let them jump in and out of town easily to escape taxes but not let locals over.

(Although, to give them a bit of credit, Portland's light rail sucks. They made a ton of bad design choices so it's slower and not much higher capacity than an equivalent bus route. )
well... after shirtshows like this one, software engineers are going to be way more open to unions and actually looking our for their own.

not a total loss, if the net effect of this is that it catalyses more critical thinking and in the long term we get a better deal
Nice, thanks. The original article's claim that "Though the effect of stripes on flies is well-established, the source of the effect remains unexplained." is over-broad and incorrectly pessimistic.
This is actually another brilliant move by Elon Musk. While some users on here still continue to doubt him, this is showing excellent leadership skills and business acumen that many here fail to grasp.
What could have been a serious economic impact commentary on the impact of digital nomads is, in-fact, a fluff piece to help Computerworld readers justify their presence to the other parents at their kids' school winter pageant in the formerly-charming community they have ruined.
"Gender bender" does not accurately describe what gender changers actually did, so whatever.
I’m trying to come up with a reasonable discussion to have with you but you’re just so off base that I’m not sure it’s possible.

1. What “rights”, dude? The right to sign up to an instance? Anyone can. And all those instances have different rules, different instances they federate to, etc.

2. Who do you think works at the EC if not people?

3. What does the ccp or trump have to do with this?

4. Do you realise how insane it is to even ban individuals because they work in politics? Or because of where they work in general? Does your ban apply if they left their position? Does it apply to congresspeople? Mayors? Neighbourhood watch? Any government employee? If yes then teachers too yes? What about other countries political systems?

I… don’t know why I’m even entertaining your post.
Technology Connections has a great series of video on these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tURHTuKHBZs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3rncxf4Or8

and others...
> do most of any nomads actually pay the same taxes that a local would in the places they visit?

No, of course not. The rub is that 0 nomads are employed by companies in the places they visit. If they’re American, they’re still paying US tax (although there is a set aside for your first 100k if you spend 330/365 days outside of the us).

Incentivized visas are becoming more widespread, but you haven’t really presented a clear case that nomads _should_ be paying tax. It’s by-and-large legal to not pay tax on the income you earn while on vacation in a foreign country and there are clear prohibitions against working for local companies.

If the country your passport is from doesn’t require you to pay income tax when you aren’t residing there, then you haven’t met the requirements for tax in any country that you visited this year.
It doesn’t matter what I think about his public behavior. If you have an example of Elon abusing his employees I’d be interested in seeing it. Posting Reddit-tier memes doesn’t seem like abuse to me. Unless you consider being cringe abuse.

You could argue layoffs are abuse. But you’d have to convince me Twitter’s specific implementation of layoffs are more abusive than any other company’s. From what I read, 3 months severance was offered, which they have no legal obligation to offer. That doesn’t seem abusive to me.
So firing most employees kept a sick company alive for ten years.
Reviewable | Bay Area, CA, USA or Remote | Full Time | Generalist / Backend Developers | Typescript | https://reviewable.io/

https://github.com/Reviewable/Reviewable/tree/master/careers

Reviewable is a very small, bootstrapped business that sells our code review software to some of the largest companies around. We've been around long enough to be much more stable than your average startup, yet stayed small enough to avoid crippling bureaucracy — everybody reports directly to the founder/CEO. We're engineer-centric and fully remote. However, we prefer hiring US residents and offer the usual benefits: health and dental insurance, 401(k) plans with company contributions, unlimited vacation, etc. We've built a company and a codebase where we enjoy working day-to-day and hope that you will too!

Apply at https://github.com/Reviewable/Reviewable/tree/master/careers
What do you mean by that? The sun sets in the west whether you live in the northern or southern hemisphere.

That said, I’m not there’s any appreciable/perceptive difference to which way the sun sets for us anyway. It’s not like we have some internal compass that naturally grounds our cardinal direction. Our only frame of reference during the day on which way is east or west is the movement on the sun. If it suddenly started going the opposite direction it’d be weird if your were experiencing it in a familiar location. If you were somewhere where you’d never experienced a sunrise or sunset before (i.e., as little as a few miles away) I suspect you’d not even notice the difference. You’d have no frame of reference to suggest anything had changed.
lemme guess, anti-vax, or biden laptop? which one is it?

edit: from your post history, looks like anti-vax. ok.
Fascinating take. Anyway, I’ll likely be contributing deletion of at least 1000 loc from a codebase I maintain, sometime in the next couple weeks. My rate of code change in the month leading up to that will have been approximately zero. A week of that was on the road. The rest was the real work, and quite a bit more of the real work preceded that week on the road. No lines of code changed for weeks on end. That work was instrumental in being able to make a -1000 loc change. Glad I work with people who communicate about the work being done rather than communicating with commit logs.
I was on the fence when it came to Musk before he started peddling dodgecoin and doing his dog and pony crypto show. that's when i knew he jumped the shark.

Before that I was considering a Tesla as my next car. And I was actually excited for SpaceX developments. Not anymore. It's a shame to see a clown digging the grave of really nice tech that thousands of people have worked for ages to create (Twitter, Tesla, basically everything Musk touches).
I would love to get a lawyer’s opinion of this.

I don’t think the OP understands copyright law. They include a warranty disclaimer right after they say the work is not copyrightable and therefore not licensed. So which is it?
It's not hard to use. Make an account and visit the web page or use a client app. But people feel they don't have a valid reason _why_ they'd use it over Twitter.

So geeks explain the geeky benefits, which are substantial, but virtually no non-geeks care about.
The technology isn't there yet. The resolution needs to be probably 6x what it currently is to be good for reading and productivity purposes. The strain on the eyes and weight on the head/neck from having VR headset on for extended periods is also significantly higher than the strain from just a viewing a monitor and that problem is not going away anytime soon.
I noticed the height of quite a few buildings in Ft Worth, Texas is also wrong. A number of buildings are way off. I made an OpenStreetMap account to leave a note but decided that was not the way to go about reporting that type of issue since this appears to be a separate product built on top of their work so I didn't leave anything.

Anyway, nice job. I also could not find a way to see things using a satellite overlay. Maybe I didn't click enough buttons.

Side note - The symbol used by OSM for trees causes the area around my place to show palm trees. I thought that was funny. I live on a rock outcrop and I think you would need to hire a tree sitter to keep a palm tree alive near my house. I understand the symbols are generalized. That was funny though.
But I'll add that:

1. It's possible that Japanese flies are repelled for different reasons than African flies.
2. It's possible that flies are repelled both because the stripes interfere with the flies' vision in some way, and because the (African) flies prefer other animals.
Biden imperiled Democratic chances in the midterms due to accelerating inflation in exchange for helping an industry that hates him and is populated with people who hate him boost sales?
I worked at NASA JSC for three years in the ISS cargo division; although I never interacted with the JPL teams, I did coordinate with a ton of people across SpaceX, Northop-Grumman, JAXA, ESA, Boeing, etc.

I simply cannot explain the level of organizational dysfunction in that institution. In many cases there were thoughtful and talented people in the job roles, but there were many blinding, glaring failures of basic information storage and availability across the entire org. My favorite example is having a hard time finding all of the requested cargo transactions for resupply flights in the cargo database because the "desired flight" field was a free-text entry instead of a drop-down menu connected to a central list of NASA flight title strings. I hammered on that issue for fifteen months straight and got absolutely nowhere with it, and I had a list of similar issues about seventy items long. If all of my issues had been addressed we probably could have reduced the number of people in the loop in cargo logistics by half.

The article is talking about leadership "walking the floor"--we had something similar happen, where I couldn't convince any of the major ISS divisions to fix their cargo data so we didn't have to interact face-to-face, but their higher-ups would call and email me to double check the status of a cargo request. They were "walking the floor" and "staying in touch", but only because they wouldn't (or couldn't) adopt any policies to make a streamlined system work. I don't know if the same thing is happening at JPL, but I have to assume that it is, given the pathological nature of the repeated communication failures I saw.

A well-organized institution should be able to provide clear visibility into their data and projects just through smart organization of their digital assets. If they don't have that basic competence, then they would be extra screwed by remote work.
Just because something is legal does not mean it's not abusive. Every time you play 5D chess with people's livelihood you are effectively abusing their good will. For Twitter: good luck retaining great employees. Also good luck finding other people willing to work there if through some sort of miracle Twitter survives.
They generate value to society, not profit. Any amount of profit extraction comes at the expense of value creation.
If it were an honest mistake then it would have been easier to digest but it seems like this guy (musk) has no regard for people. If i was a twitter employee i’d go back, buy my time and sort out my finances, then leave for a better job mid project. Not illegal either but he should be treated with the same lack of respect.
>Yes. But for the runtime error to occur, you need to trigger it by passing the wrong object. Unless you have a test case for every possible wrong object in every possible call sequence (approximately nobody has such thorough test coverage)

And I'm saying from a practical standpoint manual tests and unit tests PRACTICALLY cover most of what you need.

Think about it. Examine addOne(x: int) -> int. The domain of the addition function is huge. Almost infinite. Thus from a probabilistic standpoint why would you write unit tests with one or two numbers? it makes no sense as the your only testing a probability of 2 out of infinite of the domain. But that probability is flawed because it is in direct conflict with our behavior and intuition. Unit tests are an industry standard because it works.

The explanation for why it works is statistical. Let's say I have a function f:

assert(f(6) == 5).

The domain and the range are practically infinite. Thus for f(6) to randomly produce 5 is a very low probability because of the huge number of possibilities. This must mean f is not random. With a couple of unit tests verifying confirming that f outputs non-random low probability results demonstrates that the statistical sample you took has high confidence. So statistically unit tests are basically practically almost as good as static checking. They are quite close.

This is what I'm saying. Yes static checks catch more. But not that much more. Unit tests and manual tests cover the "practical" (keyword) majority of what you need to ensure correctness without going for an all out proof.

>If you had been catching these during compile time, like a static type system allows, that can never happen.
>I started developing in C++ in 1992, so I have a few years with it.

The other part of what I'm saying is that most errors that are non-trivial happen outside of a type system. Seg faults, memory leaks, race conditions etc... These errors happen outside of a type system. C++ is notorious for hiding these types of errors. You should know about this if you did C++.

Python solves the problem of segfaults completely and reduces the prevalence of memory leaks with the GC.

So to give a rough anecdotal number, I'm saying a type system practically only catches roughly 10% of errors that otherwise would not have been caught by a dynamically typed system. That is why the type checker isn't the deal breaker in my opinion.
> Gopher

Now I know what being old means. It means you can make references to things, and younger people will completely overlook them.

Of course I can do a small bit of internet search to get the answer to my rhetorical question. But I thought (wrongly) that it would be more entertaining to make a Monty Python reference. "Is your wife a goer? Know what I mean?"

> that's explicitly not letting it die. That's returning it and forcing it to be manually "dealt with"

That is letting it die in the sense of not handling the error locally. It is allowing the failure to go upstream, and either assuming the caller will handle it, blow up, or further pass it up.

> Erlang

As I understand it, the supervisor processes ensure that the workers are up and running. If one dies, it gets restarted within the constrants of failure count limits and such.

Instead of handling errors, you can choose to allow a failure to blow up the "process" (it's not a full OS process, I believe) and be comforted in the knowledge that your process will be restarted.

If you look at many business processes (take web app activities for example), you see that failures don't get resolved in perfect tidy fashion. Instead of trying to handle the multitude of possible failure cases, you just accept that many failures cannot be recovered from. You just let it silently die, and you maybe provide a general "sorry, try again" message to the user.

That is acceptable in a lot of cases, especially when it is virtually impossible to properly handle all failure cases gracefully. Imagine if a user were uploading an image to a web app, and CopyFile() failed. How would you handle that? Would you tell the user, "Sorry, we got your upload, but we couldn't put it in its proper place, so it failed. Try again."? Or could you let it "blow up" and just tell the user, "upload failed; try again".

Now imagine you try to handle failure cases and properly report them all upstream. Now if you write tests, your tests must test for the success path and multitudes of possible failure cases and resolutions. In practice, this just is not done (outside special high risk scenarios like commercial flight and such).