skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree - I think this is a function of what works well on small screens when people are scrolling quickly. I find IG to be a terrible place to show off hobby photography work, for a number of other reasons like what the algorithm reinforces, and the general lack of appreciation for subtlety via that medium.
Yes. The photographer says 'The goal is to see it and feel what midsummer feels like, with the blinding sun and the beautiful form, canvassed almost in her own unreality'. Unfortunately, he has met this goal by creating something that looks like an 'obvious' mistake (the pushed blue).

As a photographer, I'd be keen to see if I could get the right look in-camera rather than adding an interpretation after the event. As a photoshop user, I'd want to try other ways of achieving the same changes (e.g. more selective editing of the skin tones)
The trailing _t is reserved, and I didn't know that for many years. I learned of it only after an interview candidate pointed it out as a gotcha in my question prompt. They got bonus points, and I learned something. I wonder why compilers or static analyzers don't complain about these things more often?
"I found Jesus and meth-amp-hetamines!" (I realize you almost certainly mean adhd medication)

I do worry that practicioners jump too quickly to antidepressents versus attempting other interventions, but I've also seen practitioners fail to have even basic alternatives. To quote one MD, "Oh that sounds bad... uhm, maybe therapy?" No referral, nothing.

We are starting to see Cognitive Behavioral Therapy take flight not just as a guided therapy but also something where the patient can just work through a workbook solo and try exercises on their own.
Overcomplicated abstraction (e.g., DI frameworks) and unnecessary abstraction are not anyone's friends.
People have been trained to ignore such popup warnings by common superfluous popup warnings like "are you sure you want to quit?", and nowadays ads and newsletter sign up bullshit.
Lots of good suggestions as I write this.

One I'd consider, though I regrettably don't have a convenient reference (and it really ought to be for something you've seen), is finding the director/author/composer of some work you like speaking directly about what they meant to put into the piece.

There's the whole "death of the author" concept (that it doesn't matter what they put into it, it just matters what you see), but I think sometimes that gets taken too far, if not waaaaaay too far, because if you squint hard enough, you can read anything into anything. But if you can do that, there is no point to the reading. There's a "mirror reflecting you back to yourself", and then there's just "yourself", squinting so hard that it ceases to matter what you are squinting at. I am not a big fan of this myself.

But the authors really are putting additional things into their works, and it can help to hear that from them directly.

Also, now that I think about it, the Easy Mode for this sort of thing may be sci-fi television, where the superficial distance from the viewer's life and issues lets them encode things more directly and, well, frankly, at times clumsily than a more direct handling might be able to (because everyone's psychological defenses would raise). You could start with something like the Star Trek Original Series episode "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield": https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708435/ Being a bit removed from your cultural milieu may also help. I dunno if I'd call this one "clumsy" but it sure is blatent. You ought to be able to work out the subtext.
It's a bit of an unfavorable comparison, a more apt comparison would be Ubuntu/Fedora/ElementaryOS hardening vs Windows 11. The desktop versions have much larger attack surfaces than just "Linux", and it is honestly quite abysmal compared to Windows desktop, mostly because there are nobody looking for those kinds of bugs.
Those are orthogonal. The only true limitation was absence of horizontally scalable DBMS which is no longer the case.
Learning Babies
Yea I’ve used and I think it’s cool for prototyping quickly but the idea of coming back and making edits to it in production code a year from now terrifies the bejeezus out of me.
Which makes sense, because it's reasonable to test every iPhone model and the microphone qualities. Less so for every possible android device.
I’m not sure what you mean when you say “discrimination issues”, as there are a plethora of overlapping discrimination issues happening in South Africa.

But I can tell you that the current situation is only making the divide between rich and poor greater. The worse it gets the greater the divide will grow as basic things like water and electricity become more scarce.

It’s not about allowing private/venture capital to intervene. People are going off grid because it’s the only choice. Unless you’re talking about allowing private companies to provide power to the grid? I’m not sure what the solution is there.
This is true for the first car that hit the Tesla but not any of the others behind that.
Yes but as a famous man once said, "when the anecdotes and the data disagree, the anecdotes are usually right". Not sure how accurate that is, but it points to the possibility data is being measured incorrectly.

Whether it's factually right or wrong, it's still important to use your intuition and question science and research.
That cleaner foundation is shared-nothing linking, capability-based security, virtualizable APIs, and more, and a WASI organized around things like streams as first-class types.

The goal is to build a new platform. Initially, that looks like adding layers on top of existing platforms (which, as you say, already have multiple layers). If we succeed, then we get to start taking out some of the layers.
> No, they aren't. The entire point of the big ball of mud is that there are no meaningful divisions in the code. Everything uses everything willy-nilly, at the smallest possible level of abstraction. There is, metaphorically if not always entirely literally, not a single line of code in the system that you can change without fear of bringing something else down that you may not have even known they existed.

This is bit of a strawman. The equivalent strawman criticism for microservices is that every function runs in its own networked service. Is that truly representative of the reality? Of course not, and neither is your breakdown of big ball of mud.

I think this is a fair analysis of the BBOM:

http://www.laputan.org/mud/mud.html
It seems to me that a lot of everyday communication is rather statistical in nature. We don’t necessarily think deeply about each word choice but instead fall back on well worn patterns and habits. We can be more deliberate about how we compose our sentences but most situations don’t call for it. It makes me wonder if we don’t all have a generative language model embedded in our brains that serves up the most likely next set of words based on our current internal state.
I have accepted that most of what I do is recorded and tracked. As such, I have a few options... opt in, opt out, or a hybrid approach. Google provides enough value to justify the cost (IMO). For this reason, most of my products are from Google. I'd rather consolidate my data with a single company rather than spread it out across many.
Birmingham AL approves tiny shelters for city’s unhoused residents
Gardening is a super-hobby: It hits the exercise, creativity, and nature aspects. If you do it with a partner that's time outside the house you're spending with family. It's also free, and at the end of it you typically get the sense of accomplishment. Can't say it better than Voltaire: "Il faut cultiver notre jardin"
> Basically, Lebanon had 30 years to figure out how to build basic infrastructure like a proper electrical grid and production (from 1990, the end of the civil war to present). Instead, crooks, thieves and fraudsters figured out how to bilk the nation of billions while leaving subpar services in their wake.

This is all true but it also did not help matters that Israel perpetually bombed power plants and related infrastructure in the country over the same period of time.
I disagree. When I took foreign language classes I wanted to apply the prescribed/common grammar rules, but I mistakenly used them incorrectly. I wanted to do apply the rules as a native would, but I got it wrong despite my desire to get it right. Therefore I classify that as a mis-take.
"Just exercise vigorously" isn't actionable advise for many people struggling with depression.

Telling people with a disorder that often goes along with sleep disorder to "just exercise vigorously in the morning", and linking it with "laziness and impatience" is either a misunderstanding of the disease or simply mean.
Every single endpoint in a monolith can be deployed and scaled
independently. In a single such deployment the rest of the endpoints are just dead code not costing anything except larger image.

Also in many cases work should not be performed synchronously in response to http requests but in a background queue to keep your service robust and responsive. When taking a new order you should just place it in some queue and respond ASAP so there is zero chance you miss a customer order because of some error. In that case there is no difference in scaling a monolith or microservice as you can indepedently deploy 25 consumers for module X events or 10 consumers for module Y events and so on.
HN has had a couple of those.
I like the idea, but what's going to stop it from devolving into the lowest common denominator like r/books did years ago?
Work management is a custom problem, that no generalized solution will fit.

Unless you're a mega corp - you're not getting a good work management solution.
Lies in the name of politics are increasingly irritating to me. Like when the Governor of Illinois goes on Twitter to lament all those lives we lost on January 6th. If only Karma were real.
What's the cost of building and running a cluster of iPhones vs Mac Minis?
A common pattern in microservices architecture is that each service has its own database: that's what the person is referring to.
Linux development is absolutely hampered by being a monolith. Getting involved in Linux development is notoriously difficult. The average developer won't consider it even though there are many parts of the kernel which very much should be approachable. It is also hard to get some patches upstream if the goals of said patches don't align with everyone else's interests. There are even people exploring userspace schedulers to get around these challenges.

There are also huge maintenance burdens that come from the lack of stable interfaces for modules. There is a reason there is a lot of excitement around ebpf. It is providing the sort of scaling that people have been needing for a while.
Leading underscores help you disambiguate `_name` the field from `name` the member-function. Similar thing in Python. How else do you solve this without it being even more confusing? Is `m_` really preferable? (Honest question.)
Show HN: Manually tracking a subscript isn't any faster than pop() in Python
yep this problem has been solved on Android and iOS where the only place to install software is the App Store.

Windows did try to incite devs to use the windows store but it did not catch on. Restraining third-party installation only from the Store is a good way to remove adwares and co.

Honestly Microsoft did shat the bed with their app store, it has no right to be as difficult to use (both as user and developer) as it is.
I have a "hackish but works for me" meme database: I use my Telegram "self chat" to send memes I like to myself, and I tag them with the kind of words I'm likely to search for when looking for them later.

Works great for me.

It's kind of like trying to come up with a good Google search phrase, based on how other people must have phrased something, but relying on knowledge of how you phrase things instead.
I _think_ they are talking about treating the top level module as the facade for the whole application, which is something I've thought about doing a bunch. IE, it would be full of delegates to all your contexts and then _every_ public function is available off of it.

I don't think this is a terrible idea but I like to draw boundaries and say "It's ok to reach one level deep from any point in the context tree".

ie App.Chat.send_message/2 is cool, but MyApp.Chat.Messages.send_message/2.
I have had similar experience with mirtazapine. As a bonus I sleep much better now.
Well, the efficiency and granularity is the crux of the issue. It's what defines a microservice.
Zig will have a C back-end which will provide support for many of this kind of hardware. And I think you can make avr work at present but I do not know the state of the support.
While it's probably a good idea for most people to eventually switch over to electric induction, not least because it's much more energy efficient, I do think that banning gas ranges nation-wide is a big step that would require significantly more evidence that it was necessary.

Most of the problems with indoor pollution can almost certainly be more cheaply mediated by adding building codes requiring venting range hoods.

The fact that (as far as I have understood, can't find the link) the vast majority of US homes do not have a hood that vents to the outside is crazy. This should be the default for all new construction.
One route to understanding how CPUs work is to explore the computers that have been made in cellular automata. Golly (https://golly.sourceforge.net/) has several, including one by John von Neumann, one by Edgar Codd and another by John Devore. The advantage of course is that the physics is trivial and you can see everything that happens and step backwards and forwards.

Example:

https://timhutton.github.io/2010/03/10/30984.html

https://github.com/GollyGang/ruletablerepository/wiki/CoddsD...
First, a bit of pedantry: UAC is not a security feature. https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20160816-00/?p=94... . It just works to encourage developers to make their software work without an elevated token. The security feature is Windows administrator accounts running apps with non-elevated tokens by default.

Protecting local administrator tokens is also kind of a useless security feature these days. What are you worried about? Data theft? Ransomware? Trojans? Credentials theft? All of those can be done just fine with only standard user permissions, without an administrator token. OTOH, you need an elevated token to install device drivers or whatever.
Since MS is buying it, the new MS Clippy will be an premium feature of your MS office subscription
> It shifts the responsibility to the end-users, exposing beginners and non-technical users to various risks, especially if you install alternative distros.

Thank you! I've been saying that for ages. It's very easy to get hacked on Linux. It's my personal main daily driver but I am fully aware that evem after taking a lot of measures to lock things down, there is probably someone who knows the system better than me who can identify a weak config or exposure and exploit it. Even when doing offensive labs, Linux privesc is always easier for me.

That said, I would like to disagree with the author about windows not being able to prevent users from installing appications or that being the leading cause of a compromise. The leading cause is users running code (scripts,documents,,etc...) which the directly or after a download stage run the attacker's code. WDAC and JEA can prevent any new scripts or apps from running. Some just allow an approved list of signed apps and scripts. There is no easy way to do this in Linux. Can't sign scripts and elf signing hasn't taken off but at least module signing with secureboot is there (I use it).
Worked on both monoliths and micro services.

I'd rather work on a good monolith than a bad microservice and vice versa.

The problem is, working on a bad monolith is almost impossible. I'd rather work on a bad microservice than a bad monolith. Now... tbh this could be survivorship bias where I've never had to help with a well-running monolith, fair... but at the end of the day, I find microservices much easier to manage scope, change and scale.
Relevant to understand how this works:

https://www.artofchording.com/introduction/how-steno-works.h...
I really do not understand the debate on monoliths and microservice anymore.

Context matters so much. Should you have absolutely everything in 1 system. No. And I think no one thinks that anymore.

Should you spilt your system into as many pieces as possible?

No, of course not.

You are prop. storing files one place and have a data in a database another place. And most likely none are on the webserver receiving request. Or maybe you are, because context matters and I'm wrong in your particular case. Could be.

My advice would be to split your application up into enough pices so that;

1.your engineers feels like they have control over the code and are not afraid of doing changes.

2. if you get uptime issues. Get the heavy / unrealiable services over to new node. Don't let one service/endpoint take down other endpoints.

Think and act according to the problems you have in front of you. Don't go extreme in any direction. Context context context
Maybe Haiti the Dominican Republic should be a single country
Good news, there is now a language server!

https://www.unison-lang.org/learn/usage-topics/editor-setup/
> I wonder why compilers or static analyzers don't complain about these things more often?

Because it's not the C compiler's business to care about POSIX.

POSIX and the C standard are different things. If you're writing code against the Windows APIs, POSIX isn't relevant for instance, and you need to be more concerned about colliding with type names or defines from the Windows API headers, and those are all over the place anyway.

...and besides: that rule is entirely pointless in reality, either your type names collide with POSIX types from headers you are including (in that case you're getting a compiler error anyway), or they don't collide, and in that case all is good.
Yes, a branch of the Army Corps of Engineers did make a cat calendar
I don't agree. Almost every candidate during interview likes to talk how their team of 3-5 people manages multiple microservices. It's pretty much hype driven approach to develop a backend application.
DeepMind DreamerV3: Diamonds in Minecraft from scratch
There can be certain beneficial imbalances for particular sports. Rock climbers tend to need disproportionately strong fingers, and legs focused for jumping rather than pure strength. Boulderers need more focus on legs than route climbers, mountaineers need more overall balance and endurance, etc. Too much imbalance can lead to injury (all lats no pecs would be likely to cause back pain, as would the reverse) but some can be useful for particular goals.
> advice is advisory only.

The last three years would like a word.

> But we can and should default to trusting advice from reputable people over hearsay; credentials inform our assessment of how reputable they are.

Tell that to the doctor 50 years ago that recommended his favorite brand of cigarettes. Or the experts that made the food pyramid.
> We’re trying to do better for new headers, but not everyone has gotten the memo.

And memo appears to be one of the disallowed variable names in C11, given the mem[a-z].* pattern
Not to say author is wrong but I don’t get the point of writing a blog that reads like a paper with some political commentary at the end.

If you think the meta analysis was flawed then publish a paper showing why and skip the internet rant about politics. If you can’t get peer review, why should I waste my time reading your findings about something I personally have no expertise in? It’s not like I can or want to fact check the author on their meta meta analysis
There are ML models that solve hyperbolic and parabolic PDEs pretty well right? I’m aware of some interesting full-physics simulations that are modeled to be solved with this class of PDE.
Paint.net is in my collection of programs that I always install right after a fresh Windows installation :) Great app for basic editing needs. I use it in conjunction with IrfanView.
> and while writing this I must follow the synthax of the language or writing the right order otherwise

A good example that is not, word randomised order and kombination with Mrs Spelling and fonetic spel-ing prevent ye knot that which I wrote you to komprehend.

(My apologies to non-native speakers of English; if someone did that to me in German I'd have no clue what was meant).

A better point is that GPT-3's training set is more tokens than the number of times an average human synapse fires in a lifetime, squeezed into a network with about 3 orders of magnitude fewer parameters than the human brain has synapses.

It's wrong to model AI as anything like natural intelligence, but if someone insists, my go-to comparison (with an equivalent for image generators) is this: "Imagine someone made a rat immortal, then made it browse the web for 50,000 years. It's still a rat, despite being very well-trained."
Yeah, it is hard to overcome our antropomorphic bias. We all know Disney animal toons who behave like humans and we don't have a problem identifying ourselves with the animal hero. So we will bias to maintain something having "thoughts".

However this is not enough to simply dismiss ChatGPT having "thoughts".

We need to understand first what it means to have "thoughts".

It is my opinion that ChatGPT does not have conciousness. For that it seems to lack self understanding which does not come from simply parroting some utterances found in the data used for the machine learning.

But could it have some inkling of a "thought" anyway? I am not sure but I don't think so. Yet.
> any sound you hear, etc, those were ALL specifically chosen, if not outright preplanned by the director and his team.

Not ALL. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
I guess it depends on the clarity of the work and quality of the facilitator.

I have had your experience with poorly organized PM and horror stories during sprints...

And I had the best planning sessions with a proficient PM, that made picking up tickets a marvellous pleasure.
don't understand this at all - why would you want to use a keyword as a name, and the last bit of the comment makes no sense at all.
What did you believe about stoves 3 days ago? Lol.
The good old "Statistics don't apply to an individual"
I think the parent comment was a response to an article that lacks nuance "It’s time that we put an end to this over-engineering".

Finding the right abstraction is often an incremental process made of tradeoffs on a case by case basis. It doesn't really help to make absolute statements.
I've been on both sides of this debate. I've seen codebases from teams that want monorepos and macroservices that fit all of the falling criteria:

- The codebase had three primary responsibilities

- None of those functions overlapped in functionality and didn't share any significant code

- They were all written by different people with subtly different styles

- They used infrastructure code for talking to third party services in subtly different ways that made upgrading dependencies difficult

In theory, they were all within the same business domain, so the types that think one business domain equals one service clumped them together. This made little sense.

On the opposite side, I've seen microservices where all the little services depended on one another in complicated ways that made them all a brittle mess.

Finding the right solution to each problem is always the real challenge.
Nobody should be installing gas in new construction, period. We won't stop using fossil fuels if we don't stop making things that need it.
The problem with changing the building code is that the response would be much slower than banning the devices. Landlords notoriously don’t update their properties. But when the stove breaks, which it will, they would be forced to buying something that is healthier and more efficient.