skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
# Microservices

Agreed the same database gets difficult but I guess, where two things need to change dependently there's coordination overhead, that's inescapable. You can in general use e.g. schemas to keep domains fairly separate. Whether it's your HTTP API interface changing or the change needs to be coordinated in the same process I don't think you have a way to avoid these meetings. (or like the 3rd party team I work with you just change your HTTP API and break production without telling us :shrug:).

I guess my point is languages like Java and C# are much maligned for their "boilerplate" and it doesn't let 10x genius programmers go brrrrrr etc. But that boilerplate serves a purpose. Projects (in C#, I can't speak to Java but I believe it has a similar concept) compile to separate .dll's, or .so's. In general a project will publicly expose interfaces, i.e. contracts, and keep its internals encapsulated. Crucially projects all live in the same codebase in the same monolith, they're folder/directory level separation, but on steroids. There are tricks with attributes and reflection that can break this separation but with the additional constraint that dependencies cannot be circular you're forced to make decisions about where exactly things live. This is where the dynamic crowd throw up their hands and say "there are so many layers of pointless abstraction!". I'd agree these languages tend to too many layers but the layers provide the foundation which can support a project growing from 1-2 devs all the way through to 50+.

I'm maybe finally becoming a grumpy old programmer and I'm glad much of the consensus is swinging away from the no-types, no schema, no rules position of the past decade. People forgot Chesterton's fence and decided the layers didn't provide anything, then they added them back, as network boundaries, which was indescribably worse and more of a headache.

# Testing

I guess it's a semantics debate really. I think the red-green-refactor loop of TDD doesn't bring much. I've never seen it applied well on a statically typed codebase and where I've seen advocates try and apply it I've seen them tunnel-vision to suboptimal outcomes in order to fulfil the ceremonial needs of the process.

I think a few tests that take place at the project/dll/so boundary and use as much of the real dependencies as possible are far preferable to high coverage. This is probably a no-true-Scotsman area of debate. Maybe TDD has been done properly and productively by some groups, I've never seen it and no one I've met ever has (check out my confirmation bias!).
"And there’s the nagging question of why the Chinese government didn’t classify this research"

Would like to hear informed thoughts on any state's pros and cons of sharing such obviously weaponizable discoveries.
Everyone is finding a roundabout way to say “self modifying code”
I can't find the exact quote or attribute it, but a good take was "the x86 instruction set isn't particularly complex - it just doesn't make a lot of sense".
Energy price will go up in future tho
Avoiding them like the plague doesn't seem very respectful to me.
If you are in prison and have a serious tooth infection (and that can be fatal though rarely) then yes, the state can absolutely force you to have a root canal.

The state only has to show that the care is reasonably required for your meaningful health.
> Being a ward of the state doesn't make you property of the state

They pretty much are, though, legally. Prisoners are Constitutionally permitted to be subject to involuntary servitude.
There are indeed places that have better meters in the USA. In the past we installed two meters but it can now be done with one.
> improving the live of ordinary joe through quite cheap measures needs to be evaluated in great detail to not waste a single cent.

Cost is always what politicians use to avoid having to say they just don't like something for ideological reasons.

A related technique is "Constitutional Concerns".
Think about aluminum smelting. At some point in the past, only a few researchers could smelt aluminum, and while it used a ton of energy, it was just a few research projects. Then, people realized that aluminum was lighter than steel and could replace it... so suddenly everybody was smelting aluminum. The method to do this involves massive amounts of electricity... but it was fine, because the value of the product (to society) was more than high enough to justify it. Eventually, smelters moved to places where there were natural sources of energy... for example, the Columbia Gorge dam was used to power a massive smelter. Guess where Google put their west coast data center? Right there, because aluminum smelting led to a superfund site and we exported those to growing countries for pollution reasons. So there is lots of "free, carbon-neutral" power from hydro plants.

The interesting details are: the companies with large GPU/TPU fleets are already running them in fairly efficient setups, with high utilization (so you're not blowing carbon emissions on idle machines), and can scale those setups if demand increases. This is not irresonsible. And, the scaleup will only happen if the systems are actually useful.

Basically there are 100 other things I'd focus on trimming environment impact for before LLMs.
Show HN: A device that only lets you type lol if you've truly laughed out loud
Try it. Say my concern is that the relevant nuclear operators are organisationally similar to TEPCO. Give me some new information that either explains how they are different, or explains that an organisation like TEPCO is well suited to run a nuclear reactor safely.
Nazi lives don't matter, GTFO.

(user account exists to promote Hitler worship, I checked)
If the results were stable, reproducable and somehow memoizable, this would be actually insanely useful. Perhaps it could modify a cache file somewhere with the generated Python code, and that could be committed.
Clever. I could see this being legitimately useful for generating test data.
Yes - my son and I both enjoy that one. Some of the other speed builds are more his taste than mine.
That's because depression is (as best as I believe) a low dimensional projection of a high dimensional issue.

It's like saying "we aren't learning more about fever from acetaminophen" (or ibuprofen, for example). Of course we aren't! It's a symptom of something else. Depression (I personally believe) is never a standalone syndrome. Ever. Not unless something is wacked out crazy physiologically, in which case for those cases at least you should see a near 0% success rate for talk therapy, I believe (barring a few minor exceptions, perhaps).

Depression can often come from a variety of confounding factors, but the nigh-monotropic tendencies of the field to focus on a singular cause is how we end up with a series of medications where four rounds of different adaptive, extremely well funded and supported antidepressant therapies ended up in an extended remission rate of only ~25% or so. 25%.

I do, oddly enough, disagree that they can't tell us about non responders as the overtly psychedelic nature of the compound does leak information about the underlying system (s) at play. But I think with this reductive approach that many of us (almost necessarily have due to resource constraints) use when trying to tackle the issue, we're going to miss the bigger side of the issue.

On the plus side, in some trials, Ketamine is showing an efficacy of ~%69 or so, or so I've heard, which is quite good. One provider that I've heard about seems to note good long-term results in patients who are initially resistant, which could be for a variety of factors, some of those including simply extremely hardened belief systems that are less game-theoretically compatible with a smooth(er/ish) transition to a less tense-with-the-world strategy set.
> Once everything is automated away, I suspect it won't be the Star Trekian Utopia we'd like.

The Star Trekian utopia grew out of a 21st century devastated by a world war that saw a third of the Earth's population wiped out so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
De La Soul’s Music Is Finally Coming to Streaming Services in March
I liked your photos on Instagram :) It appears to have a certain identify, with nature, natives, mixing history, and with good composition.

I agree with t0bia_s 2 that you should create a portfolio. But please keep posting your work on Instagram (already following you) or wherever you like. Cheers!
> We're not jerks. We're people who notice problems. You're shooting the messenger.

The definition is literally in the title: "disagreeable personalities (selfish, combative, and manipulative)".

So, yes, by definition, disagreeable people are jerks. If that's you, then you, too, are a jerk.

That is completely orthogonal to "people who notice problems". If someone thinks that it's necessary to be "selfish, combative, and manipulative" in order to notice a problem, then that person is not only a jerk, but also deluding themselves that they're just misunderstood.
Name and shame them then. Everyone says these things about certain smart TVs but no one warns which ones they actually are that are doing these things. Mine doesn't, LG 40" 1080p LED smart tv, so put that one in the good list.
Next-generation Qi2 wireless charging standard embraces Apple's MagSafe
Not zero.

They can be, and often are, enslaved. But there arestill constitutional rights that apply
> They are wards of the state which means the state is legally required to care for them to the best of it's ability.

The prisons aren't caring for them to the best of their ability — that's the whole problem.

See also:

> It is important to mention that inducing birth before term increases the incidence of respiratory problems in the baby (beyond the abhorrent ethical issues).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34237144
It's hard to quantify the benefits of prisons, since they primarily prevent the incarcerated from committing further crimes. The harms of prisons, on the other hand, actually happen. TFA here being just one horrific example, but one doesn't have to look far to find examples of inmate abuse either in the present or historically.

So "Should we abolish prisons?" boils down to "are the very real harms of prisons still less than the theoretical harms prevented by prisons?" I'm not confident about either side of that argument but it's worth considering.
Discussed at the time:

x86 is Turing-complete with no registers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7224061 - Feb 2014 (23 comments)
Awesome, thanks! I didn't think about it that way so far but that makes a lot of sense.
> People were half glad to hear that I prioritized my family, and half disconcerted that I’d set my career aside.

People don't really know what to do when you demonstrate you don't have total devotion to an organization. Even if it's for a "higher calling," in the case of care, it still feels like they see it as not fully devoted. There's also this weird undercurrent that your career must be the focal point at all times in your life and that you must be constantly growing and fulfilled in it.

> In many parts of North America, it’s increasingly true that women don’t have the freedom not to work.

Yeah, this is really gross. And the norms are pushed by those who made the choice to not have a family, or to outsource/ignore theirs. In effect, it becomes a game of, "who can sacrifice the most to capitalism?" And games like that favor those who are broken/not smart enough to throw more of their lives away.

> Our culture wants men to be extremely productive and committed to wealth generation.

This drive objectifies men, and men are smart enough to realize they can't fight it, so they instead try to channel it. But it's not at all the same as an intrinsic motivation, it's an extrinsic threat of sorts. It dehumanizes men to see themselves primarily as providers rather than people. This makes it easier to prioritize their career at the expense of other things.
If you already know how to code in python, a framework like django may be a good foundation for a simple web app that can grow to something more complex.
Low-effort version, if he has an EV: get a long charging cable and charge him up when you're generating excess.
This is not my area, but I wanted to mention this before speculation got out of control: some quick feedback from colleagues is that the analysis in this paper seems to assume Schnorr's claims from 2021 [0] without detailed supporting evidence that these claims are true for large parameters like the ones needed to factor RSA-2048. But these claims are viewed skeptically, and this paper doesn't provide much evidence to change that.

[0] https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/933
Once upon a time, I worked with a particular person. At one point we were evaluating version control alternatives and he looked at one. He said it was great, but would never respond when anyone asked, "How do you do X, Y, or Z?" Eventually we picked one of the others (partially because he would never tell us why his was better), but he refused to accept that, resulting in the team lead having to develop a script to exchange changes between the system he used and the one everyone else used. He's also the guy who kept commenting out "-Wall" from our C++ Makefile with comments like "Nobody has time for that." (Though apparently, I had time to fire up Valgrind and track down all the memory issues, most of which would have been caught by compiler warnings.) He also considered "Maybe I'll just throw myself under a bus" to be a valid technical point during a discussion.

I began my career at IBM, where the loudest, most aggressive person got to be in charge. I have a lot of experience working around disagreeable co-workers---usually by doing things their way, whether or not it is best for the project---because there's no other way to get anything done. But then, I don't consider constant bike-shedding arguments as getting things done.

Fortunately, I don't have to do that any more. I've quit jobs because I couldn't stand spending more of my time keeping a disagreeable person happy (well, not happy; they're never going to be happy) than getting my actual work done. (Oh, that co-worker from the first paragraph? A few years later he sent me an email asking if I would be a reference. I said no.)
Rather than "parsing", is it a form of type casting?

To me it feels like downcasting in OOP from a parent class (more general) to a child class (more specific).

In Swift there is the "conditional downcast" operator `as?` which does what the article discusses with the potentially failing conversion to `Maybe thing`: it returns the new more constrained as `.Some(thing)`, or returns `.None` if it is not the appropriate type.

You can also go between non-hierarchical types with casting in most languages, like from ints to floats to strings, etc.

Following from all of that and your language suggestion, I might call the practice a "constraining type cast".

---

Although, all of that written, and I expect it's conversion rather than casting.
Very good point. Tying that back into the Conway's law angle on all of this...

I've been a couple levels up the chain at times in my career. When I've seen technical decisions at this level done well is when those people realize that their organizational decisions are inevitably technical decisions because of Conway's law. When the impact of Conway's law is not explicitly considered, things will often look random at the IC level. Too often, organizational leaders don't realize they are dictating technical outcomes with decisions that appear to just be about reporting structure.

An example is when a major new product feature comes along that is big enough to need multiple teams to build/own it for the long term. Where are those teams placed in the organization? Conway's law helps us see that a huge part of the future architecture is being determined by answering that question. Placing those new teams in an existing org mainly responsible for UX will result in a very different architecture than putting the new teams in an org mainly responsible for monetization. Can the teams be split across those orgs? Well, can you envision a reasonable architecture with an enforced divide along those lines? Without recognition of Conway's law, that last question might not be considered and the decision to split or not will be based on other factors.

Unfortunately that requires multidisciplinary thinking (technical architecture, resource allocation, communication structure, people development, ...). Such broad thinking is not always easy. When leadership starts neglecting one or more of these disciplines, more and more of the people doing the work on affected teams start perceiving the decisions as arbitrary and counter productive. Organizational churn (e.g., teams repeatedly changing location within the org over the course of a year or two) is often leadership looking at a different subset of these dimensions over time, yielding different "correct" answers.
The worst part is every TV has this problem, no matter how much you spend.

You have to buy commercial displays or large monitors if you want to avoid it.

There is no choice left in the market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(social_network)#Cont...
Sure, if you don't care about making money.
> He also worked with a textbook by his side so he could look up formulas he’d forgotten. “You’d think someone who comes up with a great result shouldn’t have to consult Chapter 2 of Elements of Information Theory, but I did,” Gilmer said.

Always enjoy seeing this sentiment reaffirmed. Funny that Gilmer states it in a somewhat self surprised tone.

Rings of the Einstein quote:

“[I do not] carry such information in my mind since it is readily available in books. He also said, “…The value of a … education is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think.”
If they think that is bad, wait to see what 2023 brings. When the recession fully hits (and it will), a significant number of smaller FOMO investors will look to withdraw in favour of traditional liquid to cover basic bills (rent, utilities, food, travel, etc). The slow bleed of big crypto names since the peak a few years ago will not attract large new investors and there is nothing currently that indicates it is a good hedge against inflation (see BTC.X over SPX for example).

Once the larger crypto assets lose value, the liquid (crypto) the stable coins hold in cold wallets will of course devalue. The only liquid they hold of value will be traditional hard to liquidate assets, which will simple be used to pay off the big players in the bankruptcy.

Expect this entire thing to collapse pretty quickly when it gets going. We are yet to see real contagion in this space. A lot of people will be left holding worthless coins like every crypto coin bankruptcy so far.

That said, traditional money is no good to you either. Thanks to fractional reserve banking [1] no currency actually has any value any more. It's difficult to suggest where to suggest to invest, but I don't want to get caught holding monopoly money once the game ends [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

[2] https://coffeespace.org.uk/blogs/crypto-monopoly.html
They are billed for demand, usage and power factor. They use capacitors to help with power factor.
As with everything AI related it seems this sub-field is making enormously fast progress.

The most exciting long-term effect of this, in my view, will be the democratization of storytelling. The sort of stories we get given today by Hollywood / Netflix / Apple TV / national TV channels tend towards duplication and are dominated by particular ideologies and beliefs. The lack of optimistic sci-fi is one symptom of this. I think it happens due to budget increases driving centralization. YouTube is far more diverse and vibrant, but even great YouTube content is very low budget compared to a typical TV show or film. Combining Epic's tech stack (Unreal 5, Quixel MegaScans, Metahuman) with AI generated assets could break this and allow for the production of stories that would be considered too risky, niche or ideologically unacceptable by existing studios. By allowing the assets to be forked it will also become possible to scale up story production far beyond the episodes-in-seasons format required by conventional TV, in which fanfic and canonical lore blur together with "canonical" becoming the set of fan-produced episodes that are blessed by the original creators.
I assume their argument would be that they are just summarizing information that you provided and not giving you advice on what to do with this information. Similar to how summarizing a book's plot isn't an endorsement of that book.

I'm not a lawyer though, so I have no idea if that logic would hold up in court. I'm just guessing that's the rational they are using.
I really like this as a casual user that is going to just scroll through the page and see what it looks like - I wouldn't go out of my way to click on the examples.

This might be useful as an overview of what it is more then live examples
> Yeah, I'd like to see what happens when you go out and tell society that pedophilia is completely normal and fine...

I didn't say it is. I said that society has already decided that who a person feels sexually attracted to is not under that person's control.

Are you seriously arguing that a person's sexual attraction to another is under the control of that person?
Agreed. I started telling my team that most of these are optional and then updated a Slack threat with highlights
Genes and Morality in Ancient Rome
What do you mean by scrums being unfair? If you have any sources you'd recommend on this, it sounds interesting.
Being out with three young children, as a man, is the only time in my life I've had people go as far out of their way to hold a door for me as men commonly do for women (with or without kids). That was interesting. First time I was like "wtf is happening?" before it dawned on me. That only lasted a year or two, a window in which I had enough in the right age range to trigger that behavior, I guess. Wasn't because I had a stroller, since I usually didn't, and wasn't because my hands were literally full, since I usually had at least one free. Like, nobody goes that far out of their way if I'm just carrying a couple drinks or something. It was truly exactly how we (guys) behave when holding the door for women. Neat experience to see the other side of that, I guess.

I got a lot more comments about it than my wife did. I'd get several of the "wow, you must be busy!" sorts of remarks every time I was out. She'd get the occasional one, but nothing like me. Different expectations, I guess.

Never felt shunned or treated with suspicion at parks. Worried I might, but it was never an issue. I tend to dress pretty well, though, by the standards of my area, which probably helps.
Sure, but it can lead to 1000 lines which some people still think is too much.

The point is that a numeric upper bound on LoC is inherently subjective and pointless. Instead of measuring the right thing (concepts) you're measuring what's easy to measure (lines).

In fact, it usually makes things worse. I've seen it over and over: you have N tightly coupled classes in a single file which exceeds your LoC preference.

Instead of breaking the coupling you just move those classes into separate files. Boom, problem solved. Previously you had a mess, now you have a neat mess. Great success!