skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I spent some time some productivity extensions, for gmail replies[0] and quick notetaking[1]. It was a lot of fun, but like other people have mentioned, porting to and working with manifest v3 is not as nice. I've noticed also that the way Google asks for permissions from the user is done in human-understandable, but worst-case language. For example, I think there was something where I wanted access to the current tab, so I could inject an overlay. I think a friend told me during installation that I was asking to see their history and browsing data. Which is true - knowing what page they're on does let you recreate their browsing history... but when presented to the user like that, it makes it seem like tracking history is the primary thing the extension does? Anyway, frustrating.

[0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/akndolpagcjaolannk...
[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/icdbglcdnjonofjpcf...
Yes, unless you run OOBE\BypassNRO.cmd from cmd to bypass the network connection step, since there's no "skip" button anymore.

Even this is somewhat broken. If you run this after connecting to the Internet then it doesn't do anything and still forces you to use a Microsoft account (unless you somehow get it to throw you back to that page).
That’s a good point. I did briefly think about 24fps for “cinema” but as that’s a bit of a weird frame rate for a streaming webcam I dismissed the idea. But the video does actually have just enough frame rate to look smooth and I suppose that’s because it’s landing near enough to 12fps that combined with “looks like cartoon”, my brain is filing in the rest and barely noticing.
Isn't it easier to do those via User scripts?
No, actually the comparison is rather apt given the way some subjects are treated - as quasi-religious dogma where criticism is being treated as heresy. Critics of the leading narrative around the changing climate are called "climate deniers" who are "anti-Science" and either uneducated knuckle-draggers or nefarious plotters in the pockets of the enemy - usually the fossil fuel industry. Critics of the narrative around SARS2 are called "anti-vaxxers" and "Science-deniers" who do not "listen to The Science™" and probably are *-ists and *-phobes as well.

The parallel is clear, this is how critics of the narrative around the movement of the Earth, Sun, stars and planets were treated in the 1600's. In that case it was the power of the established Church which saw its monopoly on "truth" threatened by some upstart with a telescope. If his revelations about the orbits of the planets was accepted it would undermine their interpretation of scripture which would undermine their authority so they lashed out to silence the heretic. There is a striking resemblance to the way critics of current narratives are treated, as heretics who need to be silenced before their wayward teachings can poison the populace. This is now how science tends to be done and it is not how science (with a small 's') should be done. Everything should be open to criticism, theories should be mercilessly attacked. The more these attacks falter, the strong the theory will be. Should the attacks succeed in proving the theory wrong everybody will benefit from it.

In the discussion around climate models this means the models need to be subjected to rigorous and merciless testing to find their flaws. They should be tested against historical data, the code should be scrutinised for everything from simple errors to the use of fudge factors and 'magical constants' or 'damping mechanisms' or any other such unproven/unprovable manipulations of the data. If the models withstand these tests and actually manage to follow historical data on which they have not been tested to a reasonable degree of accuracy they will be the stronger for it and their predictive ability will be far higher. This would be a good thing for everyone involved.
That's the unexplainable part of DRM.

Every kind of non-interactive DRM media is trivial to break. What's the point of not allowing me to read a book I bought in any device when I will always be able to pirate it? Is there a point other than making software worse to show content creators that something be being done to combat piracy?
1. Isn't the result based on perception of size, with randomized groups?

2. Saying "X people feel shamed so they buy Y" is not itself body shaming.

3. By "good" do you mean "competent"? If so citation needed that scientists that body shame are incompetent or fraudulent.

Jeez, when you called them "frauds" and this a "pseudoscience website" I thought you were attacking the methodology or knew something about the scientists or site!
I always tell the young devs that they shouldn't ask for dedicated refactoring time but it's just part of professional development. You have to trust that using good practices consistently will help you in the long term and actually speed up development.
These are expensive only because of profit taking at all levels. Cancer treatment could and should be cheaper.
> "near collision" implies the very close passing of two objects

Near collision is not about inches of distance. It is how close we got to an accident happening. If the timing were a little bit different, or someone noticed things a little bit late, or the weather were a bit foggier, or the runway a bit slipperier we could have two burning wrecks and everyone on-board dead.

“Near collision” is exactly right here. So many things went wrong here, and the fact that everything turned out fine were up to chance. That is we come near to a collision happening.
There’s an extended discussion to be had about the merits and drawbacks of professional licensing as state-enforced gatekeeping, but equating this with political persecution doesn’t seem useful.

Has it not occurred to you that professionals could lose their licenses for reasons that at are not solely political? Like professional malpractice, or advocating for quackery? (There’s a line to be drawn there, too, about what constitutes reasonable standards, but you seem to be suggesting that there be no standards at all.)
People have a flat earth understanding of many topics because they are complex and take a lot of work to understand. It would be nice if everyone understood the basics of human biology and health care - but it's incredibly complex. I'm a health care flat earther.... I might always be.

Understanding the legal system would likely be more helpful to most than the financial system. But again, takes lot of work to get there.

For most people, this stuff doesn't matter.
It may be also worth noting that the "Separation of Church and State" people often quote is from a poem that a politician was reciting. To my knowledge that concept has never been codified in law.
I agree with this, but it also requires some skilled automation or very well-defined boundaries; otherwise you spend all of your time maintaining and not enough time implementing features.
Without re-watching the video in question, wasn't Carlin's complaint about a "near miss"? A "near collision" is everything he asked for.
That’s hardwon wisdom! I think it’s possible to do this elsewhere if you keep it simple, restrict yourself to a feature set that one understands well.
Not affiliated, just a happy customer, but anyway: I had good luck building around a DIY low noise class-D design (modulus 86) made by a fellow from Canada, branding himself as neurochrome audio. It was the first amp I could find that had a low enough noise floor to keep my high efficiency horns from hissing audibly. Mine is a multi-amp setup with active crossover, so I just use these dual monos for the tweeter channels, but they're great.

edit: My mistake. When I first read your post I thought you said there were quite few as opposed to quite a few good designs, hence the recommendation.
Holy crap, this is news to me.

The only reason I chose Kindle over competitors was so that I could crack, and therefore own, the books I bought.

I guess I'll libgen it up now, and order deadtree from non-Amazon stores to support the authors.
I call this “fighting the good fight”. Hardly anywhere will prioritise making your life better, I say don’t tell them and sneak in tidy ups and refactoring as part of every task. Essentially a codebase is either getting better or worse over time, I prefer to work towards improvement rather than ossification.

Having said that in some places and on some days (and working with some people) I don’t always have perfect energy for the fight.
I suspect they’re trying to avoid a class-action lawsuit. sunsetting software is one thing: it’s not so tangible and software licenses are legally slippery. but when hardware’s involved, you’re on much shakier ground

this idea that its to encourage future investment is predicated on Google thinking that the masses are paying attention to their refund policies. yes this kind of thing may be a big deal for people on HN or certain subreddits, but I doubt it’s a large % of the target market
> You can run GTK applications under KDE (and Qt under Gnome) iff you install the other runtime. When you do, you’re using twice as much disk space, more memory (due to less sharing), and now have twice as many DE-related vulnerabilities on your machine. IMHO, it’s not ideal.

Who cares?

That's an extremely nerd/purist sort of concern -- technically true, practically the vast majority of users won't care if it works well enough. Eg, right now I have KDE running, and on top of that there's Firefox, Steam, VS Code and Discord, none of which quite looks like KDE.

All of those run on Windows, which creates exactly the same situation. Discord looks like Discord, not like a native Windows app.
I’ve been playing with this idea around the time generics arrived in Java and never found a good use case for it. Number of transitions an object may have can usually be counted by fingers on one hand, meaning that you can have a method for each one and retain encapsulation, which lenses break by design.
> Somehow in management eyes rewrites are more palatable than refactors despite costing 10x more

Because many of them are either incompetents or expect to run to another project or company by the time things start falling apart.
There's also a psychological component for the devs. Asking me to fix your trash heap? Bye! Asking me to rewrite your trash heap? Sounds fun.

In all of these discussions about reinventing/rewriting/reimplementing already solved x, people forget that other people aren't interested in maintaining something where the fun, education, and impact was already had by the people who came first! They want to have their own fun, education, or impact.

Pretty much every conversation that starts with an angry "this has been a solved problem since such and such genius from the 70's did y" is born from misunderstanding what drives people to do anything.
Each plane costs more than $150 million, plus at least 300 lives could have been lost. Damages probably close to a billion at least
Star Fort
…okay? That seems fine?
They have been since WWII. In the recent years the CIA has been quite busy in silicon valley. [1] Prior to that many projects funded by DARPA were tested and refined by the general public. The internet was one of the projects.

[1] - https://mattermark.com/q-tel-cias-vc-arm-busy-years/
I don't. Every now and then I access gross stuff online to make uncle FBI or cousins Hacker man puke their meals and lose the will to snoop on my boring Facebook account.

And since the video card is old and internet is spotty, brother Bitcoin miner and ransomware delivery man won't have much to win either.

The rest of automated attacks have to go through basic PC os protection (firewall, antivirus, hardware locks for unwanted code execution, etc).

It's the digital equivalent of "in god we trust"
Internal Security: Hardening Internal Systems
I think mail confirmation or yubikey is fine but I never understood why I need an app on my phone for authentication. What if I lose the phone? How would I get my account back?
Tried some authenticator app on the desktop once also and got locked out of my account after that because my computer crashed and I had to reinstall it. Never again.
Overriding Form Submission Properties Using Button Attributes in Native HTML
A friend once owned Mike Markula's old home. He claimed that is where the Apple garage was. He sold the house for $1M, which was high for the time. The owners then razed the house (and the garage) to build something bigger. But, then came the dot com crash and new owners went bankrupt. So, the alleged "Apple Garage" became an empty lot.

Dunno, if this is where the real Apple garage was; maybe he embellished?
I'd add the Burning Man / burner community to this list too.

It used to be a wild-west sort of escape from real life, and exploration of the ten principles [1].

Now politics dominate and there's only one right-think. When I brought up some of my concerns about this, I had someone in leadership of one of the largest regional burns tell me "you all had your time with the ten principles stuff. We're in charge now".

Sad, that community really helped me grow into a better person.

[1] https://burningman.org/about/10-principles/
Couldn't I credit someone if I ask them questions during my work, even if they gave me bullshit answers based on hunches? Shouldn't I credit them if I ask them a lot of questions, or if their hunches sent me down a good path? I don't see how the person being questioned being an AI changes anything in that regard. I agree it might be silly in the way that crediting a database as if it was a human might be silly, but it's a cute meme.
> it's not scientific, but there's a connection I feel, and the possibility of emotions and thoughts being transmitted across.

And I think it’s worth mentioning that “not scientific” just means science does not currently have much to say about the mechanisms in play, which is meaningful difference from a conclusion that there’s anything “woo woo” going on.

Mirror neurons are fascinating.
I know this hurts as a developer, but using this language is just a way of being sincere to the user.
This is lovely, and it handles three of the largest problems with using SBCs for NAS:

1) Stability due to power delivery. Having dedicated, local power delivery can make a HUGE difference with SBCs.

2) Reliability of SD card media. Spinning rust, or even real SSDs, are worlds more reliable than SD cards. If an SD card is used just for booting, then it'll last forever.

3) Overall reliability of stored data. Having two drives in a proper mirror is definitely desirable.

It matches my criteria for my own colocated 1U Raspberry Pi server. Mine has additional criteria: I have another Pi for OOB serial and remote reset, an ethernet switch so I don't have to pay extra for a separate drop, and USB-3 to SATA adapters with UASP because the Pi 4 supports USB-3 (> 200MB/sec per drive, simultaneously).

https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/15515998004533084...
It really just depends how close you are to the data centre and how your traffic gets routed. A couple ms is probably acceptable, 50ms certainly not.
Unfortunately it's the last 5% of polish -- coming up with cool tech is interesting, tracking down that one weird bug in Akonadi that makes mail break randomly after 3 months of working fine is much less enticing.
> Has it not occurred to you that professionals could lose their licenses for reasons that at are not solely political? Like professional malpractice, or advocating for quackery?

For malpractice such as leaving a scalpel inside of someone or amputating the wrong appendage, sure. But there's no Constitutional right to do either of those things. As for "advocating for quackery", the government forbidding someone for practicing medicine over that absolutely flies in the face of the First Amendment.
I think being cynical about what's going on in DC is a way to show respect for the intelligence of the lawmakers. I don't think any of them really believe a lot of their own statements but just say and do what's tactically best to appease donors and get reelected.
Good article and a good inspiration to debate this topic. Honestly I already get in a bad mood when I read this conversation with the PM - this mentality "We need to timebox that activity so it does not swallow the time that should go to features and bug fixes." - depending on the tech debt and state of the codebase devs are wasting enormous amounts of time working around stupid issues (i.e. tech debt) and even a little bit of team effort might help - there is maybe some company out there where someone argues for rewriting the almost bug free haskell code to use higher kinded types and lenses because at the moment it's not so looking well but I guess in reality often there is just a lot of shitty cruft in java/javascript land that a few weeks of thinking and fixing (in the team, with lot's of discussions) improves much more and gives more time for features than avoiding that.
Well, you have a pretty good starting point. Since you work on the frontend, you should already have a pretty good idea of what an API takes as input and spits out as output, so you already know what sort of data you need to work with on the backend. And assuming that you're fairly up to date with JavaScript, you basically already know a lot about how to work with Node.js, if that's the tool you want to learn.

What kind of company do you work with? Do you have a backend engineer who you can approach and ask to mentor you? Express your interest in learning more about the backend and seeing if they can guide you through building some simple features entirely by yourself. You can start out with evaluating the spec you're given, building the backend, going over any feedback with them, and then using your frontend knowledge to finish that feature entirely yourself. Don't be discouraged about some of the complexity about databases and setting up complicated infrastructure: that can take a while to start to figure out. But if you can get an experienced backend engineer to help you with some of that tricky deployment/infrastructure stuff and just focus on the API you need to build, you can probably gain good experience through that.

Of course, politics being what it is in some companies, a company who wants to restrict employees ambitions to keep them cheap and working for them without threat of being poached into a better role, or a backend engineer that is trying to protect some fiefdom, might give you some grief for thinking about stepping into something new.

If your company isn't a help, a good potential option is joining a startup. In many cases, developers will have to wear multiple hats to try and get a new product off of the ground, so there might be an opportunity to take on some backend tasks there.
I don't think that your phrasing is helpful or appropriate.
Is there a certification for web services that respect users' privacy?

Not that anyone is legally held to, AFAIK. There are plenty of logos that people can copy/paste to their website as a matter of marketing privacy intent or goals.
I am not a lawyer, but it isn’t the Constitution that prohibits lawyers from engaging in (and exploiting) conflicts of interest for personal gain.
yes, thats all true. however people should be able to choose their own level of protection. not have the most secure (and most cumbersome) rammed down their throats.
> I might be doing it wrong

Sounds like you’re doing it right!

> I don't think this approach is suitable for most software engineering processes

I think that’s just badly managed technical teams.

What I started doing a few years ago was to group issues together by module/service. When I’d push work to the todo board, I’d include other, similar work. After all, it’s much easier to fix things when you’re already in context.
Wrongthink is inherently about expressing ideas. Contrast actually putting lead in things with saying that you wish you could put lead in things.
They unveiled it on AI day 2021, talked more about it on AI day 2022, and in theory should start operating Q1 2023.
Maybe you have a Microsoft account
I’ve seen “x% time for tech debt“ rules in several companies and sadly it didn’t work too well.

Since the problem was the culture of continually pushing half baked features in the first place, the rule was quickly corrupted: people would design a good system, throw anything that’s not required for a POC into the tech debt backlog and deliver a barely functioning version.

“This is a technical debt task” was used to prevent everything that wasnt new Features taking time of the other 90% of the sprint.

Basically, if you assign a block of time to quality, you risk people taking that as an excuse to not focus on quality outside that block.
It seems like you're using "autistic" as an insult here. If that's not your intention you might want to edit this comment to use different verbage.
It really is time for the HN mods to review the guidelines. Nearly every comment here has been made almost verbatim thousands of times, in dozens of different forums, repeated for years on end.

The same thing happens when there's any mention of an electron app, or Windows, or software having the temerity to not reveal its source. These issues turn so many HN commenters into echolalics.

This guideline should be extended to cover this kind of repetitive and pointless content:

> Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.

Assuming that the guideline writers really mean the justification stated here: more than 50% of the comments in this kind of thread are so often canonical examples of 'too common to be interesting', so the guideline should apply to this kind of standard trigger issue.
Sorry to break it to you Elon but you really did spend $44 billion on the next MySpace. There's nothing you can do about it now. All we ask is that you please stop trashing your Tesla brand. Oh!!! and by the way recommend to the BOD to make Tom Zhu CEO of Tesla. You can stay at Twitter.
I wasn’t able to purchase Windows 10 license without switching to an online account.
Nothing is keeping you from putting some portion of your salary into long-term low-risk bonds or even into annuities of various types. Your total compensation is presumably the same (given tax effects) so you're basically saying that you'd rather an employer handle some portion of your savings for you than handling it yourself. And there have certainly been defined-benefit failures and reductions of various kinds so there were pretty much never any guarantees.

Again, you seem to be assuming that there was some special pool of money that went into defined benefits that got pulled back. Which isn't true. Companies pay what they need to hire including benefits packages.
It is in the first amendment. That is, the US explicitly can not force all citizens into a single church as was common in England where they were Catholic for half a millennia and then replaced that with the Church of England.

People love to bring up “it’s actually not in the constitution” as if explicitly saying that in anyway detracts from the fact that a foundational principle of the nation /separated/ church from state.
I can't tell if my hardware was not compromised (most likely it was not), but for the data I store on my SSD - I keep it fully encrypted with boot stored on hardware aes-256-encrypted USB drive. Laptop won't boot without the USB plugged in, and USB won't unlock unless correct key is provided. Not too sophisticated but enough for my humble needs (that is I'm the only one who can boot the laptop, and I know my data will be safely forgotten if my flat gets robbed or if I forget my laptop on the train etc.).
> the UX needs to vastly improve

Which client?

Elk (https://elk.zone) seems pretty good to me, though I'm not particularly fussy about UX in this particular case (I only check social media a couple of times a week). But there's quite a range of clients to choose between.
I suspect that Tom Cruise has always been a deep fake ... so do we now have fakes of fakes?