skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe the article is oriented to those who feel like the "nice guy" the author is describing, which is my case, and expects you to act on how you feel to his words. I feel myself very reflected on the profile seeking for high affiliation, low power, and high emotional control; however, I am not sure to what extent should it only focus to a work environment.

Over the time, I have found myself more willing to fight over my "slice" of power in the workplace, making my demands assertively and showing that I know my value without traces of regret or false humility. That is something I have had to work on a lot, it makes me uncomfortable; but I understand that I "deserve" some power. If I am doing things right I cam claim my state for influence and being heard. I think this aligns with your point on being responsible with yourself and not just being a bystander.

On the other hand, there are other spheres in which I do not expect such power beforehand, so I'm not usually ready to draw my weapons. This may be a social encounter with barely-known people, friends, or even family. There are power fights there too, but somehow they feel different. Maybe I'm not as convinced of how I deserved such power, or maybe I'm not willing to do the effort anymore and I just want to fulfill my affiliation urge.
unless you are Rajon Rondo and your floor general skills are so good that you can get into the NBA while shooting 60% (considered very low) from the charity stripe.
> 1) function is intrinsically pure in the mathematical sense: it produces the same output for the same input each time. In practical terms, code execution must not have side effects on the system.

Now if we go back to the example and Odersky's citation. If you have a function `foo` that returns `IO[String]` using e.g. cats.effect.IO or zio.IO. And the String is e.g. the content of a file or something else. Then, is this function pure or not? Answer: it is. You can call it multiple times, it proces the same output for the same input.

val x = foo
val x2 = foo
val x3 = foo

No matter which of those x you use, the result will always be the same. You can call the function as often as you want. There is no side effect being executed. Hence the function is pure by your the definition you just gave and hence Odersky's claim is incorrect (I think he probably would not say this again nowadays).

> 2) function has been made pure in the sense that a compiler can reason about its inputs and outputs as if it was actually pure in the mathematical sense. Code execution can have side effects on the system, but this has been neatly abstracted away.

What does "neatly abstracted away" means? How is this function different from a one in 1) and how is it different from a function that is just impure? Can you give an example?

> Memory limitations are not a good analogue: I/O requires interrupts.

They are a very good analogue, because conceptioally they too cannot exist on Von Neumann architectures. Why does the reason matter? I also gave another example: generics. How about those? They don't even require any specific physical limitations, they simply vanish. I can come up with more examples, but I don't really see the point. Obviously people use pure functional programming and they call it like that. If you say that isn't possible, I think we are now discussion (again) terminology and not practical implications.
> 1) function is intrinsically pure in the mathematical sense: it produces the same output for the same input each time. In practical terms, code execution must not have side effects on the system.

Now if we go back to the example and Odersky's citation. If you have a function `foo` that returns `IO[String]` using e.g. cats.effect.IO or zio.IO. And the String is e.g. the content of a file or something else. Then, is this function pure or not? Answer: it is. You can call it multiple times, it proces the same output for the same input.

val x = foo
val x2 = foo
val x3 = foo

No matter which of those x you use, the result will always be the same. You can call the function as often as you want. There is no side effect being executed. Hence the function is pure by your the definition you just gave and hence Odersky's claim is incorrect (I think he probably would not say this again nowadays).

> 2) function has been made pure in the sense that a compiler can reason about its inputs and outputs as if it was actually pure in the mathematical sense. Code execution can have side effects on the system, but this has been neatly abstracted away.

What does "neatly abstracted away" means? How is this function different from a one in 1) and how is it different from a function that is just impure? Can you give an example?

> Memory limitations are not a good analogue: I/O requires interrupts.

They are a very good analogue, because conceptioally they too cannot exist on Von Neumann architectures. Why does the reason matter? I also gave another example: generics. How about those? They don't even require any specific physical limitations, they simply vanish. I can come up with more examples, but I don't really see the point. Obviously people use pure functional programming and they call it like that. If you say that isn't possible, I think we are now discussing (again) terminology and not practical implications.
No, see my other comment. You're doing fine - same as in the other thread, I'm making a general comment about the notion of language "evolving". Evolution is a natural and emergent phenomena. In this case the language is not evolving so much as being forced into strange new forms through a kind of epistemic eugenics programme.

But let me ask, do you really argue that the people arguing that women shouldn't be called women, are not exceptionally aggressive? These are people who routinely throw around accusations of "phobias" and "isms", publicly demand people be fired and often succeed for using language in ways that are entirely normal, routinely destroy people's entire lives overnight and are widely regarded as people you want to stay away from at all costs. There are views being expressed in this thread that are just flat out crazy, like the idea that if you go on a date with someone you should immediately ask them what genitals they have as a matter of course and if you don't and are then caught by surprise, the problem is you!

"you accuse everyone of being exceptionally aggressive, many folks in my camp accuse everyone of being a bigot"

That's exactly the point. Do you see the connection here? Accusing everyone of being a bigot is exceptionally aggressive behavior. There isn't some equivalence here. People who engage in those tactics will be described as aggressive as a consequence, they can't then say "well I think you're a bigot so we're even", that's not how it works. Aggression is about concrete, objective acts.
Bell Works New Jersey
I like open source projects but what I don't like if someone else's ideas are just copied. The interface looks almost like a 1:1 copy of retool.
[super layman speculation]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_shaped_charge

so it's possible, though questions/problems arise such as: the cavity created by the explosion has a high chance of collapsing, the energy might trigger earthquakes, etc.

though smaller scale shaped charges "might" work to push rock out of the way, if the well segments can be advanced down safely into the created space.
This follows the logic that people are an average of all their friends.

Person A and Person C have the mutual interest of Person B, so there's a good chance there would be overlap in a Venn diagram.
Cielab color space should be replaced
My understanding is that JS/WASM is sandboxed within the browser environment. It does have some access (say Camera) but only if you allow it.

Care to develop more on the potential attacks here?
It depends a lot from where you are coming from. It seems like you have prior Nix experience:

The main benefit is abstraction using modules: this allows you to extend, compose and abstract your environment. Processes and pre-commit hooks are only the beginning of what's possible.

There's also higher-level CLI interface for building images, sharing environments, etc.

Note that this is only scratching the design surface of what's possible.
I've recently built house in the USA. Everything is electric. Standard service is 200A. I asked to double it just in case, but haven't exhausted first half yet. Electric company did not have any issues with it.

I also got 10kw gas generator that I can plug into house if there is blackout. It will power essentials like heating, fridge, hot water. And yet I still can roll it into my truck and take it with me on a road trip if needed. It is heavy and loud. But it was something like $1300 from Amazon delivered, so I am not complaining.
https://github.com/scverse
But this is mostly about transriptomics (RNA), not genomics.
The West fights back against Putin’s grip on uranium
From the company's POV, aren't they likely to benefit from setting you up on dates that either go mildly unfortunately, or leading to a short-term relationship at best? The customers are paying for dates after all, not long term relationships.

Certainly one way to deal with ghosting though - I can understand the reason behind it, but it's incredibly inconsiderate and harmful behaviour.
On the other hand I've taken to double checking plans with people 24 and ~2 hours before they were scheduled, which sometimes helps people not forget about plans they agreed to a while back.
This is basically the plot of early Soviet hard sci-fi novel "Победители недр" (1937) [0] by Grigory Adamov. A few intrepid scientists go build a thermal power station deep below the surface in a specially designed subterranean vessel, and somehow a young pioneer sneaks on board with them, eventually saving them all.

[0]: https://archive.org/details/pobediteli_nedr
I've been hacking on VSCode integration as of yesterday, follow https://github.com/cachix/devenv/issues/26 for updates :)

This shouldn't be more than a day of work.
Name on ticket. Check photo ID at door.
Can you provide an example algortithm?
Not when ratio men/woman is 10. Same when there are 10 times many applicants than positions.
Looks like the source is here https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clea... if you want to check it yourself.
The advantage is simple, it allows the amount of cash given to move with the stock price. In the ceo case the board wants to align incentives (between the ceo and the share holders).
Thanks for sharing your story. I am curious what you would do next time if you found yourself asked to build something that you found unconscionable? Would you refuse to work on the project?

Other engineering disciplines have a strong focus on 'engineering ethics' and it may be more acceptable in different branches of engineering to refuse to build something that you consider unethical. I do not know if there are any professional bodies or laws which protect the employment rights of individual engineers who refuse certain work on ethical bases. But I feel that software engineers should be able to exercise their conscience, reference a standard of professional ethical principles, and refuse to work on such projects.
Thanks for your clarification. I really enjoy your arguments.

I reply that I find the idea of from first principles proving the existence of something, e.g. an apple a weird notion. What is the justification of asking for it? That is a rationalistic-philosophic concept I can only chuckle at. What about the human information-processing tract is so special that this would help anything? I completely agree that the trilemma helps against these attempts.

I do not agree that it is a useful or meaningful practice.

I’m not setting out to prove something this way.

I’m saying: you have projects and plans that you want to be successful. Truth found by the scientific method has in general a track record of being repeatably found again, and thus will help you. Religion, philosophy, astrology ideology does not have that track record. That’s what makes science unique and points to that it has found some truths. Otherwise it’s track record would be miraculous.

I’m also saying this is as good as it gets, precisely because of the trilemma.

To try to make myself clear: I’m thinking that this practice of proving from first principles would need to be shown to do anything useful, before I‘ll look into it. I think it’s a failed idea, though I believed it long. It’s often taken for granted, but it’s highly questionable.
Would it be possible to use the Apple Virtualization framework instead of emulating AArch64? That should result in more performance.
At exactly 0. To not be racist or transphobic costs me nothing. I can do it without effort.

To pretend it‘s fair for them to partake in sports or to disadvantage women in favor of trans people upsets that equilibrium when it happens to the first woman. Trans people need to be accepted, not advantaged.
The parent comment said "[t]he west created the monster". The point is, since our technology is only a means of enhancing intelligence, not wisdom, we are unable to perceive the end-leaf monster of each decision tree.

But sure, we can imagine a political-fiction novel à la Philip K. Dick where Oppenheimer, von Neumann, and Feynman team up and after nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they nuke Moscow and Washington D.C., and form a world government ruled by scientists, a techno-solar punk utopia based roughly on Herman Hesse's Castalia from The Glass Bead Game [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Glass_Bead_Game
Didn't Time Warner merge with AOL before and wasn't that also a disaster? Why does this keep happening?

Another example from the NYT comment section:

> I worked at the original AT&T for many years. At that point AT&T decided to buy several Cable companies for $50 Billion, only to fail miserably and sell them a few years later for far less, erasing some $25 Billion in shareholder value. For years I told this story of how the CEO, since replaced years ago, lost more money that any other employee. Sadly the latest effort by AT&T tops that. How sad.

Why? Why do tech companies like AOL and AT&T keep buying and fucking up media companies? Is it just political influence? Cultural influence? Hanging out with celebrities?
You're welcome, that tutorial was written by https://github.com/fricklerhandwerk
I wrote an blog post about my biggest regret in programming:

https://iaindooley.com/post/57313703317/an-open-letter-and-a...

EDIT: actually I just remembered that around 2011 I repurposed SMS subscription software I had written to run a (basically) spam premium SMS service in Ireland. It wasn’t my service, it was for a client, but I knew it was shit and I did it anyway. What can I say I needed the cash.
Maybe the fault is with me for using the word "reactor" a bit loosely.

I don't think anyone knows for sure what is going on down there.

My theory is that it's both critical and quiescent, with a violent
dynamic at play. Gravity will concentrate the heaviest and least
stable elements as you'd expect. As that happens pockets of dense
matter in close neutron proximity will approach critical and heat
billions of tons of matter which then convects outwards, dispersing
the mixture. Think of a lava lamp.
Reminds me of a university project I did 6 years ago: we had to compute a bunch of shortest paths in a large graph, during the computation of reach [^1]. There were a small number of sources but a large number of queries, that were not easily predictible in advance.

The assignment was quite computation intensive and advised to use C++ or Java.

I had a tradeoff to make on each source between computing a full Dijkstra's (distance to all other nodes) or multiple "lazy" Dijkstra's (stopping upon reaching the target node).

Instead, I had a nice idea: what if I could continue computations at the last known Dijkstra's state?

To implement it, I could either:
- create an object, list all variables of my Dijkstra's and put them in a dict state
- use an iterator that looks very much like the textbook Dijkstras's and use the `next()` Python method to pass queries, while the state variables AND the instruction pointer are stored in the closure

This is a really good illustration that `next` makes closures "mutable" and "callable" as the link states.

The resulting code of an "AWESOME ONLINE MEMOISED DIJKSTRA" as I wrote in the docstring back then is stupidly small and simple to read [^2]. It is also easy to call: `dijkstra_with_target(graph, source).send(target)`.

In the end, my Python code (executed with Pypy) outperformed all C++ and Java implementations by an order of magnitude.

I should write a blog post about this (and almost did here)!

[^1]: https://www.irif.fr/~kosowski/INF421-2016/problem.html

[^2]: https://github.com/louisabraham/INF421-project/blob/master/s...
population density is nowhere near efficient levels in most of the US though
I used to be a Gentoo user until about 2013: https://domenkozar.com/2013/07/20/9-years-of-linux-distribut...
> From the company's POV, aren't they likely to benefit from setting you up on dates that either go mildly unfortunately, or leading to a short-term relationship at best? The customers are paying for dates after all, not long term relationships.

Short-term, probably yeah. But long-term, if they want to get a reputation like what parent describes ("I met my wife on platform X") then they better optimize for good dates rather than "unfortunate" ones.
What Is Shadow IT?
My introduction to Forth was tinkering first with Sun SPARC machines in the late 90s and then PowerMacs in the early 00s.

At the time, I had no idea that it was a discrete programming language; it only registered in my mind as part of the OpenBoot/OpenFirmware environments. Then I ran into the FreeBSD bootloader and things finally clicked. "Aha," I thought, "this is an actual programming language." But what made it so popular for the early boot process, and where else was it used?

The modularity was stunning. It was easy- almost absurdly so- to build complex code up from a series of tiny individual functions. That, coupled with the minuscule interpreters and simple stack-based approach, made perfect sense for situations where developers need to perform complex tasks with minimum of storage overhead, and with portability as a first class citizen.
Another option is to build it in space.

Lots of room there.
Modfiying the creator's vision so that it will be legal or sell better is in my opinion compromising the art piece for the sake of making money. I am not denying that it will sell better.

I also believe that localization corrupts the art piece more than controversial changes, the small things such as what the article is about counts too. It all adds up.

I am also not against the authors changing things for games that are releasing later. Iteration is a natural part of the process and it's possible that the extra time you have for making the international release of the game allows you to refine things that you did not like from the original version.
In Common Lisp, all globals are dynamically scoped. Lexical scoping only exists in limited scopes (e.g. a function body). There are non-standard extensions provided by many compilers to expose lexical globals. You can also kind of hackily create your own “lexical global” using a simple symbol macro, but it has some serious caveats.
This reminds me Stockholm Syndrome.
I don't want to go back to social media
openIPMP (https://sourceforge.net/projects/openipmp/). At the time (2002), we were trying to jump start legal content consumption foolishly thinking that providing a POC DRM system might generate either real services/debate. We thought providing an infrastructure that demonstrates rights management within (the great MPEG4IP project) would facilitate this. We tried to implement some 'standards' MPEG-21, ISMA, MPEG4.. but at the end of the day I think it was just a dumb idea. We got some free press, even some consulting work out of it.. but it wasn't very good and we weren't going to move any needles with it. I learned a lot about mpeg4 a/v and built a cool rights store in PKCS12.. but we spent over a year on it and it ultimately went nowhere...
I doubt the one who put the 737-max into a dive, the one who but the A400 into reverse, the one causing the Toyota runaways, and similar cases are going to post.
FFXIV is a great example where characters are just more mean and less wholesome in the English localization compared to the original. I noticed a lot of instances where the English subtitles skipped some appreciative comments from characters that received help, or instances where the subtitles straight up added mean comments that were not in the original lines at all. I have no idea why they do this, maybe the localizers think that being mean is more exciting, but it’s just off-putting for me.
Cool, maybe I'll join!
That's the goal of languages.python.enable knob you can turn on.

There are kind of three levels of language support in devenv:

1) Basic tooling + system dependencies, this allows you to use native language package manager and provide system deps to make sure they build.

2) Compiler/interpreter versioning: pick any version of the tooling as you need

3) Full automatic translation of the language tooling into a Nix expressions for the project. This allows you to get all the benefits of what Nix has to offer. This is the most work for each language but the benefits are enormous.

devenv.sh plans to achieve that step by step :)
MIT has verified the basics concepts at lower power levels. So while there's still uncertainty and risk here, it's wrong to say it's totally untested. It's trying to make the jump from lab demonstration to commercial viability, which is exactly what you'd expect a research project like this to be doing.
Uh. Just yesterday I was thinking about his "Blood Music"[1] when reading the thread on genomics[2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_Music_(novel)

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33671264
Petty remark, comex.

Their pitch is "tiniest".
Before macOS 14, Virtualization framework required bare linux kernel file and initrd to load Linux. I'm not sure if that format is compatible with other systems.

Since macOS 14 you can actually specify ISO file instead. So it makes sense to try out other operating systems.

Anyway there's very little flexibility in virtualization framework. So if one would want to build a proper virtualization solution to support multiple operating systems, Hypervisor framework would be more appropriate. Of course it's low level.

With virtualization framework one can't even provide support for custom storage formats like qcow2. It's very bare-bones.
> Why are tech workers so resistant to organized action?

I am not actually so much resistant to unions, as I do not see what benefit I’ll get from them. What exactly in my life would have changed for better if I had been a part of a union? Just one thing, can you name?
I can see how the sozu is analogous to such an oscillator... but sozu aren't called clappers. The energy a clapper uses comes from you shaking it. There's no buildup and no release.
What a loss.
Basques have original language but not male line. It's R1b is IE steppe genes. The most probable source of Basque culture is from local native Iberian refugium. As well as Albanian/Illyrian in Balcan refugium. Basques are teared between claiming oldest native euroculture & negating IE conquest that drastically changed genetics & culture of Europe. What's understandable since their story seems unique & conflicted (adding rH- story) like Hungarian.
I would love for this app to come to the US.
That's something that still needs to be supported and I'll be working on it next week as part of the https://oceansprint.org
Not the same project, but in Otaniemi they drilled 6km to find the project to not work as planned. Unfortunately this was the best article I could find for now: https://www-lansivayla-fi.translate.goog/paikalliset/4558850...
Did you use the Cachix step?
There is something funny about the financial incentives of a dating app pushing the app to make sure its users don't date.