skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Invest in others, and your relationship to the. Become a better human being as a consequence.

Don't neglect yourself though. But on your own mask before helping others.
Grain farming goes indoors
I have a small wholesale bakery. Every day some baked good is given away to someone whose path we cross while out on deliveries, always in unmarked packaging because it's not meant to be a promotional act.

Thanks to everyone who has posted—lots of great ideas here for additional effective ways to give back.
What problem are you trying to solve by keeping .o files in a processes’s memory without spilling to disk?
See this great article of wikipedia[1] (warning: potentially depressing). The problem is that it's not just one problem, it's a whole bundle of them happening simultaneously. It's not just that CO2 is being taken out of the atmosphere and into rocks, it's that the oceans are evaporating entirely at the same time.

Though you are quite right that this is potentially solvable for us: lagrange point sunshields to manage solar incidence would buy us a lot of extra time. But it's still hundreds of millions of years - not billions.

500 million years from now, we're fighting a losing battle against the sun's death.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
At the highest level of performance needs, if you want to parallelize the build across machines, you're going to need some kind of storage abstraction for intermediate files since translation units are the easiest place to split builds at.

In some places, where builds are particularly optimized, there are special distributed filesystems just for object files. In this case, it's not necessarily true that the object files are backed by disk even.

Being backed by disk locally mainly helps for incrementally building so that you can change one file and only recompile intermediate files for translation units that depend on this file. Disk/FS caching presumably helps a lot with redundant I/O, and I think most of the benefit of building with tmpfs winds up being putting the source itself in RAM.

Edit: also it's worth noting that many compilers can output object files which can be linked by other linkers, allowing you to mix output from different compilers in some circumstances.
Moving the goalpost.
I don't have a copy of the screenshots any longer, but they did not appear to be using hypothetical statements, just going for raw output, unless that could've happened in an earlier part of the conversation cut off from the rest.

There was a flag on one of the responses, though it apparently didn't stop them from getting the output.
Ask HN: How do C11 threads compare to POSIX threads?
Some webpages claim that C11's threads.h header provides basically the same things as pthreads, just with slightly different interfaces. However, I've found that several helpful utilities, such as barriers and semaphores, are only in pthreads. Is there any comprehensive list of the differences between C11 threading and POSIX threading, including optional extensions? How do you choose between these libraries?
Heh. First time I played Minecraft, I went to bed at 8AM the next morning (every block you mine, there's a tiny chance of a diamond). I suspect you were experiencing the same mechanism (the next video in the list might be worth saving), and it's also present in gambling (the next bet might be a big win).

It's a Skinner box. If the reward comes every time, or never, the subject loses interest. It's when the reward only comes sometimes that the pigeon keeps hammering the button.
> is a lack of gratification.

Actually a really big harm is the opportunity cost and substitution for real life.

Video games feel like achievement but they're not --> so they don't get the rewards in life that come with real achievement --> so when they engage with real life it kinda sucks (from neglected chores, to neglected career and relationships) --> So they go to video games for that gratification feeling of status/achievement.
Redefining what female programmers of the first computers as 'key punch operators' is revisionism.

Those women engineered novel software systems to fit the given specifications, fixed bugs, invented the term 'bug', designed usable programming languages, and even invented the methodology of software validation that took men to the moon. Simply put, women created the pragmatic discipline of software engineering before male mathematicians and physicists devoted much thought to it, as it was deemed an activity accessory to hardware design.

The profession was then taken over by men when it became prestigious, not in a small part because of all this. None of this cultural change was caused by genetic determinism.
With certain kinds of reporting/BI tools, I've generally found it's not that risky to test in production, provided certain conditions apply, and it comes with a number of advantages where the QA environments don't truly mimic what happens in production (or the time for updates in QA is way too slow, so you don't see varied output cases appearing fast enough to give a good test).

A common dev concern (usually raised by people who have no idea how users actually use stuff!) is that someone might pick up the report and then do something awful based on it, which would be awful^2 - I then explain that users can't find/use the updated reports till we tell them where they are and grant access permissions etc etc, so it's going to be fine and there's no need to panic, which calms them down till they forget by the time this comes up again!

On a side note, these people seem to get much more wound up about principal based worries (it would be bad to test in Prod being a prime example) compared to concerns based on their own weaknesses (ie they rush, forget a whole section of requirements, make mistakes, can't spot obvious bugs) which they seem to imagine are way less likely to cause problems than experience demonstrates.
Did the Stripe mafia tag this?
Unemployment benefits come on debit cards, which earn very little profit since debit card fees are legally capped and very low. BoA has been on a steady march upward since 2010:

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BAC/bank-of-americ...

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/new-rules-el...

> Beginning October 1, 2011, interchange fees for certain debit cards are capped at 21 cents plus 0.05% of the transaction value. If the issuer meets specific fraud prevention standards, the fee may go up a penny. The cap applies only to large issuers — banks and other card issuers with $10 billion or more in assets (including assets of affiliates).
$600 hard tail mountain bike. Still going strong after 8 years.
You're "bad at tribalism," but describe "BLM & Antifa rioting, looting, and assaulting random people" on the one hand, and "a few yahoos walked around the capital taking selfies for an hour" on the other. The double standard you're astounded by is that the media didn't sufficiently demonize the left and exonerate the right?

No, you're not bad at tribalism, you're just bad at false-flagging. I'll agree you are typical for a HN political poster, though.
There are a bunch of weak arguments here.

> How would we feel if aliens stopped the mass extinction events that led to our existence?

This statement is just appealing to emotion and is commonly used in arguments against abortion or attempts to thought police. There is nothing provable or disprovable in your argument and this question is used to just try and bait people into an emotional response.

> Non-human life seems by and large indifferent to its long-term fate on this planet.

I would argue that self preservation is an innate characteristics of every plant and animal on this earth. Isn't a desire to live the basis for self preservation? Isn't it natural for a plant or animal to stop something from killing them if it impedes in their ability to survive? At a basic level plants compete for sunlight at the expense of other plants. If there was an cognitive leap in a plant or animal wouldn't it be natural for anything to protect their greater habitat? If that's narcissistic than I guess it's the most natural narcissism I can think of.
If I recall correctly it is the standard libraries(such as libstdc++) that need this exception and not the compiler itself.
Leveraging XMPP to deliver notifications for Matrix feels like an odd matchup. Or is that just because Synapse + FluffyChat support UnifiedPush and the use of XMPP is purely coincidental/incidental?

(Trying to wrap my head around the architecture too, with the last sentence there. Presumably the service and client need to know how to talk to the UnifiedPush provider?)
We make use of lots of distributed compiles at work which .o(bj) files are useful for, but to compile something locally it might be useful to keep things in memory - if all of the objects fit. The code base’s objects I work on won’t fit in ram, so will get paged to disk at some point during linking anyway
Sure, taking part in the conversation out of concern for my own mental health and seeking external points of view is exactly the same as saying "oh you think you spend too much time online/watching videos? here's an app for that!"

Adding friction will not solve the problem for people with addiction. Telling me to not take part in the conversation if I dare to call out bad advice (or worse, saying calling out bad advice is just as bad as giving it) is quite disrespectful.
Your link is for app development, not web.
I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or really know anything about him, but it's quite true to say that the establishment power was able to use the pandemic to great advantage against Trump. Mail-in voting has created completely new opportunities for Democrats to collect votes from its various client groups, permanently changing the face of voting in America.

As for the common cold... well its more akin to the common cold than than, say, the Spanish Flu
You did absolutely nothing wrong.

I have similar problems, and used to use selfcontrol when I was primarily a mac user. (I haven't found anything like it for windows, which I now must use for work)

Your app seems to be about phones....? My issue is more with distractions on computers, since I work on a computer with multiple big monitors and I'm far more likely to waste time with things there rather than on a phone.
As others have said, injecting fabricated data into prod wont give you any value. The only reason to test in prod these theys are to try your new feature on data with the breadth and level of detail that prod data has that you can never fabricate. (Hardware differences between prod and other envs really should not be a problem these days).

In almost every case you cannot test new functionality on actual prod data, at least not anything thats not strictly “read only”-functionality. If you have a new feature to send automated mail to someone foreclosing on their property you just do not test that on a real live system.

What you can do is setup a staging environment that is as close to prod config as possible, and then copy the prod database to the staging env. Do your tests in staging. It doesnt matter if data in stg is messed ud. There may well be legal or company policy or security restrictions preventing you from doing this, but its the only way to test on real life data without the risk of f**ing up data in the live system.

Then there are integration tests - to other systems that is, which are a much harder problem
I find specs nearly unreadable when trying to first digest a language; While invaluable for advanced usage and implementation, I can't read a BNF-Style Spec and make heads or tails of what's going on unless I also have an annotated example next to it.
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34360909
The technology used here is nowhere near accurate enough to do something like target a specific city (or country) accurately but as a larger concept, sure. You'd have other hurdles to accomplish too though like making sure nobody comes to suspect a specific secret launch you did was at play and that nobody notices the asteroid needs to be deflected after impact.
Or watch literally any of the hours of video captured from the day.
snapshotting for us is a PITA -- there are lots of distributed elements to the system, data pipelines, async back-end processing, batch jobs, etc. Add to that, we have data masking requirements that mean we need to (for compliance reasons) obfuscate (datamask) sensitive data.

This doesn't mean it's not possible to do, but it's a pretty big lift to get right, and keep right.
Not if the TV is plugged in via ethernet to an old linksys router that just happens to be disconnected from the internet.

that's worked for me... so far..
Shouldn't we have some concern for downstream cascading effects of disrupting one orbit? I don't think anyone is concerned we'll knock this particular asteroid into an orbit that eventually collides with earth.

But what about the other orbits that it interacts with, and every degree of interaction beyond that? I don't see why we should even be confident in estimating these effects past one or two degrees of separation.

Most of the objects interacting with each other have had millennia to settle into a balanced system - is it really so alarmist to think that a small perturbance to one rock could lead to unrecognizably subtle but strong effects on other rocks? And if two rocks smash into each other, then we've got a bunch of new smaller rocks to worry about.

Btw, there is an article on this topic that I posted to HN a while back but didn't get much attention - it's a good read though: https://nautil.us/should-we-really-be-messing-with-asteroid-...
I mean, the problem is that the nature of tires is to have maximum traction so you can take advantage of rolling friction. Which means that you'd have to find some magic material that could really take a beating. Also, road sweepers don't solve the problem. When you drive by someone, you are creating these particulates for them to breath.

Machines with moving parts don't last forever. This is more true under more load. Also, if you wanted to change the number of pollutants, you'd really need everyone to get these new magic tires, so it would have to be a cheaper product, and specifically not a premium product.

It's also worth noting, that the person at risk for all of this is not the driver. The person at risk for all of this is anyone else. You're not kicking up particulates for yourself, you're kicking up particulates for everyone around you.
I don't think a non-anthropocentric perspective is consistent at all. Without humans to observe it, no form of life is inherently more valuable than the other. Simpler life forms are not less interesting than more complex ones. Mass extinction events leave room for the rise of new species, and they seem a natural event in the history of Earth's ecosystems.

We people value our continuing existence, and I share that sentiment! But it's by definition an anthropocentric perspective.
There are 195 countries, so Ukraine is doing well growing six times the average amount of wheat produced, but I'm guessing there are far more than 195 iron mines in the world and so a single mine that produces 1% of the world's iron is way more above the average than Ukraine's wheat production is.
They put in ads into iOS, why wouldn't they put in ads in Apple TV?
> I, for one, find it's important that the team can always quantify how every feature adds value to customers.

Are you me?
I guess you can say I just haven't reflected enough but I really have a hard time with the whole branch of thinking that blames all our patterns and activities on some hidden childhood trauma, and more generally with the obsession over finding the "original sin" cause for the patterns. It just feels like a cop out to have an explanation to something one can't deal with as if we have to blame the universe for our nature.

I find it more interesting to focus on developing modes of thinking and making our immediate environment more conducive to leading a good life, by recognizing bad thought process patterns and actions or people that lead us to do those bad things. Explaining the reason or understanding it always felt completely useless to me and it's why I can't really give the time of day to most of these theories of the mind or however you'd call them.
Google is widely known to be Slacker central. If you're a Googler/Xoogler who joined post 2018 everyone in the Bay will assume that you'll take a week on simple problems.

There are hotshots there, of course, but the reputation of their engineering team is that they prioritize a 10 to 3 workday, meetings, and a diffstat of 0 most days.

Or as Blind would call it, "decent WLB, high TC".
Paying without a credit card is just supporting the credit card fees of those who do pay with one. The price is the same, but you often get 2 or even 3% cash back (depending on offers).

Anyone financially responsible (i.e. that won't get enticed into carrying a balance by the opportunity to get cash back) is leaving money on the table by not using a credit card (with good rewards).
i really don't understand where the losses are coming from here. who is giving money to whom? and why isn't that clearer in an article about it?
A) 3 months is like nothing! I have been learning software engineering for like 9 years and still don't consider myself an expert.

B) You are not a walking reference book to remember everything. Everyone (including me) is constantly googling, especially doing real-world tasks. This is why StackOverflow et al. exist!

C) You are not a designer that creates good-looking web sites. You are an engineer that brings the designer's ideas into reality. May be you are a bad designer, but that doesn't mean you are a bad software engineer.

D) You don't need to repeat tutorials. You need to get the job done. If that requires you to watch a tutorial that's OK. This doesn't differ much from googling stuff.

E) You are getting fluent in language by getting used to it. And this requires a lot of time. Like a lot. Compare this to the real world: you can navigate through world with ease. But this didn't came to you in 3 months. You learned to walk, to talk, to manipulate things with your hands. All of this required several years! And here how you done it: you touched this and that object, rotated, throwed, picked it up, looked at it at every angel, bite, sniff; done this with hundreds of real-world objects and now you are "fluent" in real world. You have experienced all the spectrum of things that gave you skills that is need for you to be able to, for example, go to a grocery store. There is SO much more to experience in life, but at least you already can go shopping by yourself. Same with programming languages. You need to look at every construction at every angel, try and fail, and finally get used to the language (and languages in general). Moreover, this works for everything: math, physics, programming, video games, guitar, chess, etc.

So, don't lose hope man. You will master it if willing to sacrifice enough time.
I've had my YouTube watch history paused for the past 3 years. I only subscribe to channels I consider educational/useful. It cuts down on a lot of garbage recommendations, and makes the YouTube algorithm work harder to find actually interesting stuff to keep me watching, instead of taking the easy route and suggesting me memes.

I also spend a few minutes every once in a while going through my previously liked videos and unliking unhelpful/meme videos.

I don't know if search history contributes to the recommendation algorithm, but I have it paused as well.

There are downsides to this though. If there's something I've previously watched that I want to find, it's a lot harder. On a PC I have the browser search history, but there's nothing I can do for the mobile app.
Keep in mind that a lot of issues with search are oblivious to the general public. I don’t think I have ever heard a complaint, outside of tech circles.
I also see no problem with animations, but they should be “interactive” as in ios app switch gesture — that is, they should be as fast as the movement itself, and should be reversible, etc.
Auditing changes to objects.
This is a great paper to introduce someone to the potential ethical issues that large language models have. A concern I have with these models that the paper only dusts upon is the notion of "truth" when the machine has no method to determine it. Do we admit defeat for what the machine does not have a very high confidence in an answer, or go with a popular opinion/interpretation? These are epistemological issues that I don't see being resolved anytime soon.
Opinionated Guidelines for Any Codebase
The way you are phrasing your question is confusing; without the parenthesis, your two statements are identical. The only meaningful way to interpret "The whole thing is undecidable" is whether you can or cannot decide all (infinitely many) statements at once.

If that is what you mean, then yes: take any undecidable Diophantine equation Q=0 of, say, n variables. Consider the sequence of yes/no problems P_K = {Is there a solution to Q=0 in [-K,K]^n?} parametrized by a positive integer K. Each of those problems is decidable in isolation, but the totality cannot be, since that would decide if Q=0 has a solution or not.
> The same failure happens to government agencies attempting central planned economies. Except that government agencies are never allowed to fail, and we all suffer.

As long as we are talking about democracies that is not true. In every election that particular planned economy can be replaced by another planed economy or privatization.
> there's nothing at the protocol level that prevents the long tail

Severe over engineering, unstable interfaces, massive boiler plate and huge development overhead is preventing the long tail "at the protocol level".

As example: Compare the Wayland "Hello World" [1] with X11 "Hello World" [2]. If you want to add the ability to take screenshots it gets exponentially worse. (Also the Wayland version is not even capable to render strings.)

1.: https://github.com/emersion/hello-wayland/blob/master/main.c

2.: https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Window_creation/X11#C
> Same for the likes of Nvidia

I understand the logic behind Google's position. What's the logic in Nvidia being similar?

Nvidia makes graphics chips and they are a large portion of the market at around two-thirds, but it's not like AMD doesn't exist. While Nvidia is doing very well, Intel looked to have an unassailable position and then they had some bad years and AMD caught up and Apple moved to their own chips.

I'm not saying that Nvidia isn't a great company, but Intel was completely destroying all its competition for a long time and then found itself in a bad place it needed to recover from. Couldn't Nvidia find itself in the exact situation that Intel was in? Sure, it wouldn't be due to fabs, but it could be due to something else.
I read "quantify" a little ambiguously, possibly because I'm projecting.

For me, it's enough to be able to explain the potential customer value. And this often happens after the fact. We actually try to get people here to listen to their gut and do small versions of work, _then_ tell the story of why it might matter.
I think simpler life forms have no chance of surviving long term. Though now that I think about it, you could say caring about that is anthropocentric too. I don't think it's possible to truly be objective because it would require us to escape our own perspectives, but there should at least be some objective measures for this question. Without that, the question is meaningless. Number of species, average lifetime and average happiness seem sufficiently objective to me.
You do know that masks do nothing. There are no studies proving it’s effectiveness. And there are studies w negative effects (teeth, jaw issues, sinus infections)

Well, in india the purple masks were more effective than the red ones;)