skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can usually deal with English well enough but I can’t figure out what “negotiating alignment” means. How is alignment a negotiation? Can you/someone maybe describe with some more words what Bach means?
The problem with bloodwork is it doesn’t look at artery build up. Heart disease is the #1 killer on the US. Our numbers can look great on the way to atherosclerosis
Filmora and Adobe decide to use “Kdenlive” as a keyword in their online ads
Maybe switch to the SerenityOS browser.
clearing the check is centralized obviously.. Think for a minute about the sequence of steps of a transaction. Payment for ________ upon the completion of _________; a third party escrow; conditional transactions of every flavor.
It has a unique identifier of data (their main feature), a naming system and some other features, that makes it quite different than bittorrent (as far as two p2p sharing data networks can be different, obviously).
The problem with standardized tests is that they tend to be very brief slices of time in a very limited format, with no documentation of actual work. They have the advantage of being, well, standardized, but that's also their weakness (think, for example, about the legal requirements that tests be adapted for medical conditions, and then generalize accordingly).

You might think actual work shouldn't matter, it's the endpoint, etc. but think about it this way: tests are subject to cheating problems, and randomness in scores. Let's say you have a choice of two surgeons: one who has passed a standardized written test, and one who has been certified by a panel of expert surgeons as reaching a certain level of proficiency by means of graduated practice exercises over the course of a year. Which would you prefer? This is an extreme contrived example, but it illustrates a broader point, which is the reason why traditional grades exist is because they reflect a long-term process and documentation of actual time in activity, which is important to learning.
Similar channels with more of such content

https://www.youtube.com/@RGMechEx

https://www.youtube.com/@DisplacedGamers
I've never had one of my checks washed, but in second or third grade, a classmate tried "washing" one of my worksheets.

Thankfully the teacher called me to her desk to why didn't I turn in my worksheet (I had), and thankfully my worksheet was on top of the stack which allowed me to see it and point out that I turned it in, and someone else erased my name (still somewhat visible) and wrote theirs.

It seems that many people aren't observant, don't care, and/or don't want the confrontation.
The word for the audience that GNOME developers are targeting is "lowest common denominator".

It's the same problem with all excessively friendly interfaces, great if you are a day one user (pretty rare on Linux), obstructive and shitty if you know what you're doing.
The Stable Artist: Steering Semantics in Diffusion Latent Space
He just ate the cost. It’s five dollars.
It's doubly infantilizing: First, management assumes that their pet programmers are little babies that need play dates with the other office furniture (to mix several metaphors). Second, they assume that the only way to help us is to let us expense a round of laser tag.
people expect complicated features
With a nickname like Dr Doom, what else would you expect? The guy seems like he would be fun at parties.
For all those who tune in to the "checks are so 19th century" tune: please note this is a good story about check fraud, as the OP eventually got his money back.

With Paypal/Venmo/app-du-jour, in the event of an account takeover, the result might be different.

Check fraud is an old problem — as old as the checks themselves — and it's a problem well understood by the banks, the police, investigators, and judges. On the other hand, good luck explaining the police such obscure technical details as "they installed a proxy on my IP" or "they sim-swapped me to intercept the one-time password".

On another note, checks charge 0% commission: to pay someone $5, you need $5.
Yes… most of a program is core. However, in more than one case I dealt with, there was different content and wildly different grading practices in different classes of the same course. Clearly unfair practice.

> Second point I think should be solved by standardized tests which have other benefits.

In a design program the course content is defined generally but a lot of leeway is allowed as to how it is delivered.

The general point I am making is that fairness should be maintained. In my experience, students care almost more about fairness in grading than they do about their grade.
This is why Uniball has SuperInk, and Noodler’s has Bulletproof.
Please name one other sentient, human-equivalent intelligent species.

Animals are awesome and I am indeed amazed by how smart some of the species are. Not a single one is near human level, though, and won't be for millions of years, if ever - which is not at all guaranteed, it's very much possible that human-level intelligence is evolutionary mistake/accident.

Let me know when you find an animal that can do e.g. lambda calculus and relational algebra like a human can. Since this has nothing to do with anthropocentrism, the same argument will be made - we have to preserve this species on another planet to ensure that intelligence doesn't disappear from the observable universe in case something happens to Earth/its biosphere.
From an application manager/solution manager perspective, I see 2 main reasons and a few smaller ones:

1. more and more complex UI. Things that used to be done in a native app are now in a browser, this has good and bad parts.

2. a lot of show off from the developers side going for overly engineered solutions. Nobody likes HTML+CSS and JavaScript anymore, if there is no cool framework with tons of tooling and dependencies than they are not happy. (yes, I know, flak incoming)

Other reasons are the complexity of dependency chains, the lack of security mindset by having hundreds of dependencies looking for a left-pad, the complexity coming from the testing of these overengineered and overly complex solutions, the move towards hybrid front end-back end management of state, rendering etc. There is also the overstretching of the frontend development role, now a fe dev needs to not just write the equivalent of HTML+CSS+JS but also containers, devops, CI/CD, all that jazz.
> That's an ever-shrinking population.

Is that really so? I really can't imagine that "recompiling the world" when the ABI is changed would be considered a normal thing to do or expect from users. Like, all of the sudden all the software that we use on our machines becomes subtly broken since, well, new version of C or C++ runtime library is now out.

I really don't see how this can be considered as a reasonable thing to do and therefore I understand and support the slow and careful ABI increments because the language is there to serve the goal which is beyond being a hostage to a handful of big players.
That's not the point. There's still a difference between arguing in the abstract "my interpretation of the doctrine says this is permitted" and "I support and advocate doing this". Even the 13th Amendment permits slavery for prisoners.

It reads much more like a pedantic nerd who wants to argue the technicalities of the rules rather than someone who's just itchin' to own some slaves.
It’s better than no test because it makes the metric go up, and as we all know, virtuous and rational engineering practice is about recognizing that metrics are the objective truth about The Good and anything else is just your opinion. /s
> Follow up question : Is that complexity necessary or artifically inflated?

Is Javascript's complexity necessary or artificially inflated? Modern frontend development boils down to a bunch of abstractions on top of Javascript.
Kepler, Maxwell, Turing, Volta, ampere, Lovelace, hopper. it's 6 generations old when you include the micro architectures. it would be about a 10x improvement.
Complicated features don't require complicated solutions and processes.
JavaScript as an ecosystem and language became much more accessible than ever, with all the toolings and TypeScript, it's easier to build abstractions upon abstractions; and people love to have their own version of abstractions. It's human nature, it's inevitable.
The point of what? You think there's no point to life if you can't visit it?
I watched every episode of On The Verge, and tend to think the network faded out when Josh Topolsky left.
FWIW, I also wrote a lot of C++ for the first time last year, and found the lack of

> package management, one-liner built-in toolchains, built-in testing and build system

To be by far the least pleasant things about the language, especially C++20 where things like concepts are wonderful to use, but then you can't rely on having a toolchain that actually supports it.
The most recent xcode/Apple Clang do not, so on Mac you need to find your lib(std)c++ elsewhere.

It'd be great if there were at least some way to make this easy, e.g. to create a virtual environment that sets all paths correctly.
Or if the compiler from a toolchain would default to using its own headers and libraries instead of defaulting to the system's. (I assume they don't for a combination of historical reasons, and that you'd then you may be unable to link to system libraries due to things like mismatched std libraries).

Preferably, there would also be a GitHub Action to do it to make CI easier to set up.
A lot of programming seems to have turned into gluing a bunch of poorly programmed and documented systems together. I miss one of my previous jobs where I got to build a lot of stuff from scratch.
I'm pretty sure they are talking about Canada freezing personal accounts of people during the anti-mandate protests.

No clue on the veracity of the statement, but here it is repeated by news media[0] which is sourcing a member of the Canadian parliament[1].

[0]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mp-mark-stra...

[1]: https://twitter.com/markstrahl/status/1495472037438967808
In the Pixar movie "Lightyear", at some point we see Buzz using an E6B calculator to quickly calculate a trajectory correction in space.

The E6B is some kind of nomogram/slide rule hybrid, still widely in use by pilots in flight training for dead reckoning.

Funny fact, the chart that Buzz uses in the film is used to calculate wind correction...in space. (Well he does get 'pushed' off course by the wind of an explosion).
> How would you even tell?

It’s pretty easy to tell if you know what you’re looking for. Most reputable quality pick resistant locks use a different style key or are a specific identifiable brand.
You would need also hide score of every comment and it still won't solve issue with unreadable grey comments work low score or collapsed flagged/banned comments.
I get the impression making a web app was considerably more difficult for a solo developer pre-jQuery. For a while we had an explosion of choices, and ultimately things coalesced around React and similar paradigms. Meanwhile the per-capita productivity has been skyrocketing as increasingly sophisticated cloud services provide everything from raw key-value storage to turnkey caching and auth solutions.

Is it more complex than single-device programming? Perhaps, but the modern browsers represent a nearly universal platform with very low per-user complexity.
I think people author papers on MacBooks at this point more than Windows, but I think my anti-apple bias is doing a number on this one.
Most likely the hacker will use a DEX to convert his funds. But yeah there's no much difference between Exchanges and banks, they work basically the same way.
This has a name. It's called "control coupling." Like the author's example, passing in a flag to a function that controls what the function does is control coupling and you should prefer different functions for each case instead.
I have seen some posts on the Intel FPGA community forum about using Quartus Prime Pro (FPGA design software) on Apple Silicon. Apparently, it works, even though not officially supported.

I haven't had the time or the desire to take it for a spin yet, but I'd love to be able to compile FPGA designs on a nicely configured and quiet M2 system.
>Working together 40 hours a week for years at a time should provide plenty of opportunity

Yeah, but when starting a new project affords almost none. Should it remain like that for years?

I hate the "corporate fun" exercises as much as the next guy but without something to build trust most teams flounder.

Japananese/South Korean salaryman drinking culture (or any after work drinks culture) works well at this coz alcohol naturally makes people vulnerable. It obviously has its own problems.
We can use Monero with our own wallets right now and will continue to do so, nobody can stop that. How is that not evidence? Transactions are occurring right now. It doesnt have to be "everyone" doing it
I guess? It's not a distinction with a very compelling difference. (The 13th amendment is wrong, morally speaking, to do so.)

> It reads much more like a pedantic nerd who wants to argue the technicalities of the rules rather than someone who's just itchin' to own some slaves.

I think if you understood the context better you may feel differently.
The Illustrated Machine Learning Website
Not recognizing that there are substantial populations that read and write it is different from not recognizing it as an official language.
FYI, I'm an Australian and I had my bank account closed without reason 1 month after a $1000 donation to Wikileaks.
AI Powered Quiz Generator
> Exceptions in all but name.

But with added space and branch-predictor overhead in every call site, and runtime overhead in every call event!
> Unclear what you think you’re supposed to do if you decide ‘hmm I probably won’t voluntarily seek out conversation with them in the future’.

For example if a person interrupting you is not acceptable for you, it's healthy to point that out. For example I'm okay woth being interrupting and I don't see a problem interrupting someone who is making a point I already understood but they're being unnecessarily verbose.

Likewise, I'd point out that I resonate with the points they're trying to express and they don't need to be as verbose to make sure they're understood.

However I do see it as rude when a person doesn't understand the point someone is trying to make and then reacts with "Nice" after a long explanation and never seeks a conversation again, because "they didn't get enough time under the spotlight".

That being said, I generally align with what is said in the article, but it is presented from a very weird perspective of a "I-know-it-all" kinda person.
> And the programming landscape fragments further...

This process is called evolution.

There are only the two options when trying out new things: You fragment your language, or the language landscape.

Most languages don't want to have incompatible versions so as a result new languages get created during the evolution process.
The downside is the requirement to stay in Canada during that time. Plenty of people don't want to do it so they commit fraud

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/society/article/2158716/speci...
Russian Cyberattacks
Not exactly as you describe, but very similar and still a good explanation of simple key exchange is [1]. However I believe (Its a long time since college for me...) Diffie Helman as mentioned elsewhere is a bit more complex [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U62S8SchxX4
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa4osob1XOk
>This shows again that even literally core bitcoin people are not competent to run their own banks.

I guess that’s true, but only in the sense of “even core devs can get lazy/stupid/cocky and fail to implement basic security measures (eg. hardware wallets)”, not “securing bitcoins is such an impossible feat that even a bitcoin core dev can do it”
Sounds like a bigger attack surface for malicious actors.
It's artificially inflated and I'm seeing this in almost all areas, not just frontend.

Some of the projects I've seen could have been reduced in size multiple times with no effect on the outcome whatsoever. In one instance I rewrote a GUI app and made it 15 times smaller (!), that's my absolute record to date.

Been wondering for years, so you need to actually be inventive to add unnecessary complexity, it's not that it comes for free or because of incompetence (though that too of course). And a lot of the times it looks almost as if software engineers do it on purpose, sometimes very creatively at that.

Where is this coming from? Is it because we want our work to look important?
My bank allows me to have multiple checking accounts. I have money direct deposited in one account, and I transfer over just as much money as I need for checks into another account, and transfer over just as much money as I need for autobilling into a third account.

I trust the entity that does the direct deposit, otherwise I would set up a fourth account just for that.
Way, way more. This is a 2011 era bitcoin core developer.

I'd be shocked if he doesn't have thousands in paper wallets.
Well why reinvent the wheel with ie Spring in Java - you want well tested automatically scaling thread messaging bus for example, just configure existing stuff. Maybe its boring to some devs, but business like boringly stable tools, and they are the ones paying for our work.

Would you like that architects reinvent 'engineering wheels' with every house, bridge or tunnel and do all feom scratch just because its more fun for them? No you want well tested reliable approach, if they are bored a bit even better. Ie nuclear power plants who have some unique hybrid designs are endless source of maintenance delays and additional costs. Software devs just have much more freedom and little regulation, for now
France’s Mr. Privacy turns cybersnooper (2022)
"The architect has a track record of creating buildings that burn. His Vdara hotel in Las Vegas, with a similarly concave form, focused sunlight onto the pool terrace in 2010, hot enough to melt loungers and singe guests' hair."
It's hard for me to talk about med school cuz that's not my world, I'm talking from CS perspective.

>tests are subject to cheating problems

I think official tests/exams are way, way more cheating resilient than "normal" approach. Think of ceremony similar to school leaving exam
"Just like how America hasn't outright been unable to develop the means to go to the Moon again for the past 60 years, it just has had other priorities."

What would those priorities be?

Other than arming itself and expanding NATO to the borders of Russian Federation? Bombing Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yugoslavia and other nations to the Stone Age?

Honestly, I want to know which priorities made the trip back to the Moon impossible?
A ground crew worker died after being 'ingested into the engine' of a plane
Ottoman authorities banned the production of Arabic/Turkish texts using the printing press in the 16th century. As a result, the first printed publication in the Ottoman Empire was in Hebrew!

This enormous act of self-sabotage probably kept the alphabets in the Muslim world from standardizing during the 1500s-1800s as the Europeans had, so variations in writing remained common. Pre-1400s texts from Europe look weird, too.
Type keys are used in various serialization mechianisms, especially JSON/TypeScript APIs (JSON-RPC, RDF-JSON, etc.). Even XML serializations have type keys with the element names.

In these cases, it makes sense to hide those type keys from the API and only use them in the serialization/deserialization logic.
From an American standpoint I (and in fact my government) is pluralistic and opposed to the idea of an official language, so if you tell me someone is illiterate because they don't speak the official language, you mean something different from what I mean.
The dumb pathfinding only works because the maze is like a grid, and there's no need to backtrack to progress towards the player.
Are you saying that "not signaling" has not been shown to be a total maintenance nightmare as well?

Because the only way it is not ever a maintenance nightmare is when you really don't care that function execution could be aborted at any point without any visual clue. And the only way I can see you wouldn't care is when you go 100% in to everything-context managed / RAII or similar. And that again, sorry but I can't be arsed to prematurely rip everything into little pieces like that. It makes for terrible code IMO.
Imagine if the fuel could be sold as carbon negative. i.e They will (somehow) plant more trees or take the same amount of CO2 from air for every CO2 fuel you burn on top of the CO2 they collect back to make the synthetic fuel.
Diary of Samuel Pepys daily email
Thats true, but people do crave complexity. If something is "too simple", often people, especially developers, are strangely suspicious of it being useful or competent. Present someone with something doing a couple things well but simply, you'll be normally greeted with a million comments of how it doesn't scale or give enough levers or do this or that.
I think that’s a pretty uncharitable interpretation of GP’s comment. They said you don’t need to feel better or worse about yourself due to what your ancestors did or didn’t do and when. It doesn’t mean nobody did any bad things or that we can’t learn from it, but that we shouldn’t let it cause more tribalism today.

IMO, we’re all the same species, our history is littered with awful and good people, and lots of flawed people in between. The retelling of history can be a bit one-sided at times, but it’s sometimes unhealthy to fixate on it as an ongoing cause of problems today.
Stock Market History, Illuminated, 2022 Style
What's the Difference Between Coke Zero and Diet Coke?
Not necessarily reinvent the wheel, but not build the same glass buildings all across the world either. Your analogy is not that far off. Real world architecture is quite the same.
most people do, apparently
> With Paypal/Venmo/app-du-jour, in the event of an account takeover, the result might be different.

You are saying it as if checks vs apps are the only two option.

> On the other hand, good luck explaining the police such obscure technical details as "they installed a proxy on my IP" or "they sim-swapped me to intercept the one-time password".

Why would I explain any such thing? It is not my job to know how the bank got hacked.
Because the browser nowadays is an "operating system" that needs to be capable of handling all manner of dynamic software: maps, video, image editors, games, etc. I haven't done Windows development, but I assume browser-based development complexity will continue trending towards essentially the same complexity as developing e.g. a Windows program.
Xline: A geo-distributed KV store for metadata management
Why? I think mainly FOMO. When react was out with the blessings of Facebook people wanted to use the same library. Of course most people didn't really care/understand that their internal crud app for editing invoices wouldn't need that complexity.

I think my answer should answer your second question: This kind of complexity is actually needed on some apps but these apps are a minority.

Programmers love shiny new things and most managers aren't technically competent enough to lease them...
> For example, our electric grid can’t handle everyone using electric cars. Everything from electricity production to distribution needs to be upgraded. There is a massive cost to that.

Cite for that? That's simply not true. In fact of all major infrastructure media in modern society, electrical transmission is by far the cheapest to upgrade. Even discounting industrial electricity and adding on DC charging of the EV, my household usage has gone up 35%.

You really don't think society can absorb a 35% growth in one infrastructure sector? That's just silly. Obviously there are "costs", but there's no justification for "can't handle" or "massive". At all.