skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Even 100% worthless offsets can be worthwhile, as a monetary expression of preference for less carbon intensive approaches.

But awareness that offsets aren't real is still good, to lessen the lure of moral licencing ("stop complaining that I killed your wife, I've got my letter of indulgence paid, signed and stamped, what more do you want!")
This post refers to full-time employees. You don't really need to fire TVCs; they're generally on shorter term contracts, which you can choose not to renew.
Sure. But this is more of an argument against raising all wages relative to inflation. Inflation (at least in Germany) raised mostly prices for everyday goods - like food, fuel and rent. Raising the wages by an absolute amount meant helping those whose expenses are mostly basic goods, not trying to match inflation with pay raise.
https://archive.is/ph86i
> these people weren't top performers

Problem is that this is not how this is unravelling. Large lay-offs like that cull entire departments, not the lower performers.
there are a lot of popular things that are not very good.
I'm also experiencing this currently. I can sit in front of my thesis and stare into the screen for a whole good day. I also can distract myself with a smartphone but that's merely a distraction from the boredom.
Around the topic of procrastination, I read "doing the thing would be horrible" for the first time and it just rings so true.

Doing this thing (this kind of work) feels horrible and I know I'll need to do it for many, many more days and weeks and these will all be horrible. There's no way around it. I often subconsciously try to make this time less horrible by experimenting with listening to music, have the TV running in the background or other things. This never really works. Or I just haven't found what I need.

At the end, whenever I do get a good chunk of work done, I feel really good about it. But I also acknowledge that it was horrible and I need rest now. And some dread builds up, reinforcing that the work is indeed horrible and the next chunk will require me to go through it again. The good feeling of getting work done does absolutely nothing to knowing that the work is horrible while you are doing it. It's the type of work (writing, editing) that I detest, not so much the content/topic.

I have no idea what strategy can help here (I welcome suggestions!).
Strategies such as Pomodoro do not help me. A 5min break doesn't change that the work is horrible and I'll be doing countless Pomodoros throughout the days/weeks anyway. The amount of horrible work is not reduced and the little breaks don't make it less horrible, so it doesn't help me.

What works for me sometimes is tricking me a bit. Just change this one sentences here and... this one also looks really bad... and when I'm at it, this figure there could use an overhaul... and suddenly you are working on your thesis. Key point here is - I think - that you don't go at it with the intention of doing actual work (which you know is horrible). You just change this stupid sentence there because your inner perfectionist wants you to. Thinking about it like that, the horribleness associated with the work may be a state of mind I can work on. No idea how to though.
why? are you of a 'pointfree' opinion? what are your concerns? https://wiki.haskell.org/Pointfree

personally i detest pointfree syntax. having intermediate values makes it much easier to step through code with a debugger & see what is happening. and it gives the reader some name for what the thing is, which is incredibly useful context. the enablement of pointsfree styles is one of my main concerns about potential pipe operator syntaxes: the various syntaxes that have been raised often introduce implicit variables which are passed, and i greatly fear the loss of clarity pointsfree style brings.

maybe there's something beyond the pointsfree vs not debate here that i'm missing, that makes you dislike the refactored example. personally i greatly enjoy the flatness, the step by step production of intermediate values, each of which can be clearly seen, and then assembled in a last final clear step. that is much more legible to me than one complex expression.
For me, being the first one to become a parent meant saying no thank you to so many invites that they stopped coming. Then aging has dwindled the number of friends I stay in touch with. Covid sure affected things quite a bit, as did breakups and fights between mutual friends, so groups that used to hang out can no longer. Being single as more and more people get married has also been an issue.

For society at large I know many people who still haven't cleaned their home from covid. And for those that are still working from home, it's harder to invite people over to a party at your office.

But for the trend before covid, I think the recent political divides may have had an impact. People on the "left" and "right" are reluctant to socialize with each other, and people in the middle don't want to hear it from either of them. For example, seeing a friend share political memes might make someone think that person will be annoying to be around, and not worth it.

But really I think as we get older less and less people host parties. I know I tried to host them a few times, but I hate it, so I stopped. Certain people are "entertainers" if you're the entertainers in your group, then it falls on you to throw the parties.
This is an interesting debate but one thing to correct, Duane (and many though probably not all other proponents of "don't speak to cops") are NOT saying that cops are bad, or corrupt. This is not a necessary condition for this advice.

One thing that most people don't understand is that cops are 1. regular people 2. with a job; and most people misunderstand what that job is.

In criminal cases like this, a lot of their job is "gather evidence that can be used to prosecute". They will approach it with certain amount of professionalism, jadedness, focus, empathy, skill, awareness etc based on how much of it they started with and how much of it has worn off in this harsh harsh profession. On the other hand, from young age, we are taught their job is "to protect you", which we tend to subconsciously personalize and interpret as "protect me" and therefore "are implicitly on my side".

Two of my close friends are cops, for one I photographed their wedding, and... stories are fascinating and completely not what the naive child in me would expected. My friends are good people trying to do a good job. We are just brought up with a misapprehension as to what that job is.
At least in the US, extreme political polarization has also made it so ~40% of people won't even hang out or party with another ~40% of people, and vice versa. I've got friends on both sides, and I'd never be able to host a successful party that included them all. People can't leave that shit at home anymore.
Standard gun safety procedures are excellent, but don’t really have any bearing here. Just as a professional chemical laboratory has different safety procedures (and responsibilities/expectations for workers) than, say, your house: a film set also has different expectations and safety procedures when it comes to weapons.

I’m no expert, but my understanding is that film sets need to allow actors to use guns in specific ways that would never be acceptable in normal gun ownership, such as to point (“cold”) props at people and pull the trigger. To enable this specialized usage the industry has developed a very specific set of safety standards tailored to this use-case. It involves hiring specially-trained professional armorers to manage all of the prop weapons on the set, and it also puts in place a new set of communication procedures to ensure that armorers can communicate with actors to let them know when they’re dealing with an unsafe weapon. From what I can tell, Baldwin the actor followed these safety procedures exactly as expected.

There is a separate question of whether Baldwin the executive producer has liability. To answer that you can’t just say “but he has a producer credit!” You’d need to actually show that (1) he had responsibility over hiring or on-set safety, and separately that (2) in that role he was negligent. It’s not really clear that an executive producer has that responsibility, usually it’s just a meaningless vanity credit.

What’s confusing about this case (from what I can tell) is that the DA realizes that both of these individual cases is kind of weak. And so instead she’s going for a hybrid case where Baldwin the actor followed the normal safety standards, but this isn’t sufficient because he somehow has to follow a non-standard (higher) set of safety standards because “as the producer he should have been aware that the professional armorer wasn’t trustworthy.” I’m not saying this argument is wrong, exactly. But I think it’s vague enough that it might allow a jury to disregard the legal safety requirements and invent new ones out of whole cloth.

PS I find this case fascinating and I don’t apologize for it! But I do apologize for the long post.
because the job is done, before they have had a chance to interfere

I would say I've been a .1x (uninteresting drudgery, poorly defined goals, toxic workplace) to 5x developer.

The single biggest factor in the 5x instances was a lack of interference. In one particular case, I completely ignored my manager, much to his dismay, and built the system I wanted to. He stopped complaining when integration of new hardware went from weeks to less than an hour.

I don't understand why people demand experience and skills during interviews and then seem to do everything they can to ignore said experience and undermine their workers.
It’s not that simple. It’s possible to create win-win scenarios.

For example, most ad-funded websites post content to Twitter, even though Twitter sells ads too. Why? Because tweeting drives additional traffic, which creates a net gain in ad dollars for the site. Despite the seeming direct competition for ad dollars, both Twitter and websites have made more money by working together.

The argument for Twitter client apps is that Twitter needs free content to sell ads against, and many of their most prolific tweeters loved the client apps. Now Twitter will get to see if killing apps reduces tweet content quality or quantity enough to notice.
No chance the ticket revenue from that operation covered its costs.

It’s an excuse to air out the toys, not a revenue stream.
That's because iOS apps are not allowed to use the microphone and camera in background, unless you are actively engaged in something like a call or video/audio recording.

Whenever an app is using the mic you will see it clearly in the status bar, it's not possible to hide it.

As soon as you close the app completely (swipe up on it in app switcher), those permissions are disabled until the app is launched again by the user.

Based on targeted ads I get, it's pretty clear to me that many (most? all?) apps to I grant microphone access to collect and sell data about me.

That data is most likely collected from text, behavior inside apps/websites or from recorded audio/video calls. It can even be collected from outside methods like credit card purchase data, emails etc.

As a macOS and iOS developer I can say for certain that I have no way to create an app that can listen to you or record video of you while the app is not running. There's simply no API for that.
I mean sure: the fundamentals all point to deflation: the aging population, the increasing debt and technology are all deflationary.

But, in this day and age where the fed has sooo much power, it doesn't matter. see below.

>> If you want an exciting doomer story to believe in, try deflation.

The Govt and the fed are both on the same page, in this regard: they will almost NEVER allow a deflationary spiral to happen. If you watch a lot of financial news from people who read the fed and intrepret what they're signalling, you'll find there is widespread agreement on this (especially as of the 2018 powell put).

In the history of countless countries and currencies from all over the world, all the outgoing empires and countries end up defaulting on their currencies in the end game. See Ray Dalio's latest book, he's got a great explanation on this.

You bring up an excellent point about the T-bond rate. If everyone already knows the endgame, then why hasn't the bond market priced it in yet? Shouldn't everyone be dumping T-bonds en mass? Are they slowly? these are the questions I'm trying to get answered. Part of it is because the fed was already buying up a bunch of t-bonds, hence a sort of partial yield curve control. other participants, must not be ready to give up on bonds yet, especially the institutional investors who are looking at more short term gains rather than long term. You can still make money on bonds in the short run betting on interest rate fluctuations.
The most famous ones off the top of my head: Coq, Agda, Lean, Idris, ATS. Here's a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dependently_typed_lan...
This may be that the prosecutor thinks they have a case for producers, and then piled speculative charges in top for intimidation. Or, in this specific case where actor Baldwin knew the selfsame producer Baldwin was negligent regarding safety, he shouldn't have known better. A different actor who was not also producer might not have caught a charge.
> Shares of google have doubled in the past five years

Doesn't matter. Investors care about the next quarter.
Internet Explorer supported multiple script languages.

The DOM in IE was essentially a COM API and callable from any supported scripting language. This included JScript (their JavaScript clone) but also VBScript and PerlScript.
usually when a company says layoffs, it’s FTEs. contractors probably don’t even get an announcement and aren’t included in this number.
Lets see if the thing where big companies applies here, (it won't).
One guy I worked with whom I would describe as a 10x programmer was not only unbelievably productive as a software engineer, but he had a fantastic attitude. He was the antithesis of arrogance and was universally beloved. He was both a leader and a genius, but the first word anyone would use to describe him was "humble" (and not in a self-conscious or ostentatious way). He was enthusiastic, open to new ideas, intensely curious, and was also notable for how much he wanted to see other people succeed. I've never met anyone else like him.
Wayfair has a several thousand person software engineering org, so: that one.
Sentinel
wow! one little website is busy these days https://layoffs.fyi/
Honestly it just feels like people have less energy these days. People seem more lethargic and they just want to relax alone. I am only 28 and no one my age parties anymore within my vicinity. Even when I was growing up when my dad was 40 he would throw constant parties.

I've also heard that the zoomers don't want to drink or anything, which is pretty surprising to me. I think I caught the end of the crazy drinking party culture when I was at uni around age 20.

People just seem tired and sedated.
This article feels like it was written by an AI
Its entirely that. A business method that relied on inflated valuations over the anticipated future market domination measured in current growth can only be possible in a market that has practically unlimited money entering the economy and it cannot survive in an environment where the money flow stops.

The dollar losing its uncontested dominance as foreign exchange currency due to the results of the sanctions and economic war started over Ukraine with almost entire global south, Asia and most importantly, Arabia moving to trade in their own currencies has killed the zero interest economy. Which stopped the money that Federal reserve and private banks were feeding into the economy. (private banks were doing it through fractional reserve lending).
That's more or less what singular they is, surely?
They're a means of meeting new people or re-encountering acquaintances that you otherwise wouldn't see again, no?
I bought that book recently, as I want to become more of an organizer.

I vaguely recall socializing with co-workers - like back in the '90s. I don't recall it having been a great experience. You don't choose you co-workers.

My good friends now fall into three groups: 1) old high school or college friends, 2) parents of daughter's friends friends, 3) gym-rat/marathon friends. The groups don't overlap. Still LOTS of parties - especially the fitness clan. The vast majority I don't go to, because I'd be out partying a couple times a week.

I'm pretty introverted so I guess I'm just lucky to have strong friends circles. But you are correct that it takes intentional effort.
I mean, it's not like the apps advertise what they are doing somewhere easy for me to see. Yes, I'm sure that somewhere in their ToS they indicate that they may "collect data".

Are you certain you are not using such apps? If so, please tell me how I can easily determine which apps that request access to my microphone are not selling my data :-)
There's some skepticism in the comments around the recommendation for xid. I'm curious if anyone here is using it in production at scale, and can comment on the practical realities.

I saw xid make the rounds about a year ago, and the promise of a pseudo-sortable 12-byte identifier that is "configuration free" struck me as a bit far-fetched.

In particular, I wondered if the xid scheme gives you enough entropy to be confident you wouldn't run into collisions. UUIDv4 doesn't eat a full 16 bytes of entropy for nothing. For example, if you look at the machine ID component of xid, it does some version of random assignment (either pulling the first three bytes from /etc/machine-id, or from a hash of the hostname). 3 bytes is 16777216 values, i.e., with 600 hosts you have a 1% chance of running into a collision. Probably too close for comfort?

There are settings where you can build some defense-in-depth against ID collisions, like a uniqueness constraint in your DB (effectively a centralized ticketing system). But there are many settings where that kind of thing wouldn't be practical. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking of monitoring-type applications like request or trace IDs.
No but the term 'disruption' I would only apply to unproductive moats, unfair governments and dysfunctional institutions. It's not as if the systems we rely on are not disrupted enough already.
No passport in my family of 4 successfully scans at those gates, fwiw.
Avengers Endgame was just ok. I never saw ant man. Thor Love and Thunder was an affront to film making, and potentially a crime against humanity.

So we can agree to disagree.
> I'm surprised that they don't issue speeding tickets based on the time that EZ-PASS sees your transponder in various locations.

They don't want to do this. Toll systems are set up as private corporations (often with government money) so that they can operate for-profit, and are a tacit "Speeding Pass". E.g. usually there is no enforcement in toll lanes / toll roads for speed limits compared to standard roads. They do this very specifically as an enticement for people to pay in order to get to their destination faster, that is the entire USP (unique selling proposition) to a toll road.

If they started using toll data to automatically enforce speed limits, it would immediately making tolling impossible/unsustainable, and nobody would use transponder systems. There's already issues with people cheating tolls using various methods to obscure their license plate for systems which support license plate tolling.
> The article discusses the picture-phone in 2001 as if it's commonplace technology today, but it really isn't. It's available, but people don't actually use it much outside of Zoom meetings for work.

Before Covid this was definitely true. However, since early 2020 there has been a significant trend of people turning their cameras on during conference calls. And not just for work, my local AFOL club has weekly zoom meetings where most participants use video. Family members will sometimes do a group video chat on FB.

I likely participate in more video calls per week than sci-fi writers and scientists of the 1960's imagined, mainly because the incremental cost today is zero (we pay for it whether we use it or not).

> people now prefer to communicate solely by text message, so we're effectively going back to something like a fancy telegraph.

While true, I don't think that makes video calls an irrelevant novelty.
> Based on targeted ads I get, it's pretty clear to me that many (most? all?) apps to I grant microphone access to collect and sell data about me.

You would see a red bar/dot at the top of your screen indicating a background app has an active audio session with microphone access if this was actually happening. That app would have also had to be previously foregrounded, there isn't a way for an app in the background to just randomly turn the microphone on on iOS and start recording (thankfully), everything needs be requested through audio session which is an intermediary between the app and the OS.

iOS aside, people often have this idea that devices are listening to them - not that some particular companies wouldn't like to do that but wouldn't this be insanely expense to do in terms of compute, rendering it a non-starter?
It was probably truer many years ago, like getting pulled over for dark window tint was true then but largely ignored now. The laws haven’t changed. We just have a new cohort generation of law enforcement officers with different interests, like we have baby boomers, genZ, genX, millennial cops.
There was a big change in 2015 when Ruth replaced Patrick as CEO.

Most of the cost cutting dates to then. She has been undeniably good for the share price, but it's a two-edged sword. There is a lot you can't do when you're focused on the share price.
It is normal. I still have the same group of (college years) friends since the early 2000s, and the same group of co-workers from 2016-2019.

The only reason we don't meet weekly anymore is because I moved to another country, for career growth.

I'm betting my reality is also very common for people who grew on small towns and had to move, or for people who live in large countries where you often move around for jobs (like the USA).

I'm flying to Paris to meet one of those friends this weekend, though. But I doubt a lot of people have the money to do this on a whim like we (tech workers) do.
This makes me nervous.

In general, I think adding features like this to a mature language is a misstep because it increases the cognitive load of "things you have to know to read other people's code." And that's strictly increases... Since changes like this can't remove previous approaches (for backwards compatibility reasons), we'll now have three syntaxes for function calls? Yuck.

Left unchecked, this predilection eventually leaves you with languages like C++: a language where you can write good, safe code if you stick to modern methods, but good luck learning what "modern methods" are or finding tutorial books that don't teach you any of the bad-old approaches or, most importantly, working with other people's C++ code that still has `setjjmp` and `longjmp` in it because the language allows for it, therefore someone used it somewhere.

(oblig: https://xkcd.com/927/)
A problem is that you can only declare intermediate constants in a statement context, not an expression context. And with React, more and more JS devs are spending time in expression contexts

Example:

return (
<div>
{foo(bar(stuff))}
</div>
)

There's no way to break out inline intermediate constants here; you have to bail out and do it up above the `return`. In this case that may not be too bad, but when you've got a hundred lines of JSX, things start getting really spread out
I was not replying to the article, I was replying to the question from “peter_d_sherman” asking if any other programming language has types as first-class constructs. And Python does that.