skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I don't think it's accurate to say that the Japanese have been "able to resist" English-language media. Like you said, Japanese culture is insular; xenophobic, to put it bluntly. It's a combination of Japan being hesitant to embrace culturally foreign media and thus producing more locally, and western cultures being more willing to embrace foreign things.

Right, that's... how they've been able to resist it. Even the French, probably the most infamously-jealous and protective of their culture and language in Europe (and against whom accusations of xenophobia are leveled pretty regularly!), haven't been anywhere near as successful, because they don't take it nearly as far as the Japanese. For all its other downsides, a strong culture of xenophobia seems to be the only way to resist this aspect of globalization—even top-down heavy-handed laws don't work, historically speaking, even before the Internet. A genuine (if somewhat cultivated) culture of reflexively dismissing the foreign seems to work, and not much else.

I do agree that Youtube has probably closed the gap somewhat, though that became a usefully-well-populated resource long after I gave up. Even with dedicated instructional material on Youtube, it's goddamn hard to maintain motivation when all the media you genuinely want to read/watch are "high" art and come with language/complexity barriers to match (Proust, Racine, Molière, Renoir, Godard, et c.), with little material to provide the sugary-sweet, approachable appeal of sprawling, crappy anime series, or American sitcoms. Best the French language has for that is comic books, and even that's got nowhere near the volume and selection of, say, manga.

About the only media I still consume in French is the occasional French news article, just because their slant on things or selection of what to cover is sometimes interesting—no coincidence that the ability to stumble through reading a French news article is currently where my French tops out, much reduced from where it once was.
Add it from their github repo
The quote from Cox is "open-source software projects need to explore new telemetry designs that help developers get the information they need to work efficiently and effectively" which does not mention project size.

https://github.com/golang/go/discussions/58409

I'm guessing he implicitly means "larger open source projects" but his statement reads like an imperative that naturally asserts that telemetry be part of any open source project.

It was not long ago that people here had kittens because MS was adding telemetry to VSCode. My personal belief is we are far to subject to tracking as it is and there seems to be little justification to adding it to the go command line tools. At least in my opinion.
That’s not how division of labor works actually.

Also, everyone may decide what to spend their money on, be it on vacations, hobbies, goods or … having stuff delivered.
OpenAI Cookbook Weaviate Examples
Zero? The act of licensing something to myself creates no observables, but it's something I'm legally allowed to do. So it just becomes an argument in a court case.

Now, personally I would probably respect the clearly stated intent of the author, because I like to think myself basically decent. But I also try to advocate for people not undermining themselves by selecting licenses that actively permit people to do the thing they don't want them to do. If you want people to contribute back to your ecosystem in exchange for licensing your code, don't use a permissive license, use a copy-left. If you don't want someone building a business off your code, use a non-commercial license. If you want to put any meaningful restrictions at all on your codebase don't give people a carte blanche to sublicense it.
> Any bets how long it will take JS frameworks to catch up to default behavior?

What does this even mean? I can write a component in any JS framework that uses the dialog element literally today.
I have been back in the office 3 days a week since April 2021. I would say given the lost time due to the commute, I would prefer 2 days in office vs 3 days.

Being able to see people face time face gives a different dynamic you cannot replicate with video calls.
Having your own address in most places is a part of a "dedicated business line". My ISP in Switzerland literally refuses to issue so called "static" addresses at all, business or not.
.5% above inflation for this one year. What about the past 50 years while their employee pay has flatlined and scheduling deteriorated to the point that employees cannot have a life outside work?
To me this is the perfect answer.

Star Trek is good too. Particularly once you get into the ship computer and holodeck concepts. But Banks writes so specifically about about what it would be like for a civilization to thrive working together with strong ai.

The books together form a loose philosophy that is like Seinfeld for AI conversations.
In biglaw, people at most firms are paid this way up until, IIRC, the 8th year.

I think there are many ways in which it is fair. As far as dev jobs, who can usually say, at a big tech company, for example, that one dev adds 200k of value, and another 280k? Aren't salaries artifacts of negotiation and market forces at time of hire than accurate reflectors of job performance?
> This belief is problematic because real (a.k.a. non-bullshit) jobs are typically priced based on the value of what's delivered, not the residence of the person delivering the value.

Whether it is fair or not, this is definitely not true. Companies tend to pay what they can get away with, which means paying less in lower-cost-of-living areas. The people who assemble iPhones provide tremendous amounts of value. But they make around $4/hour. If you bumped that to $8/hour, Apple would still be tremendously profitable, but they assemble their phones in cheap labor markets where they can get away with paying less. Meanwhile, companies hiring in San Franscisco generally pay skilled workers higher than companies hiring in Oklahoma (let alone overseas), because no one would agree to work in San Fransisco on an Oklahoma salary.
If mandating the use of their own productivity tools causes them productivity losses, I'm happy to watch MS either come to terms with that and try to fix Teams or suffer the same losses that they inflict on the rest of the world.

From an outsider's perspective of MS and Github, I think it's the right move.
Over the weekend my wife was saying how nice it would be to have a "hey google" that wasn't sending data to Google all the time. My wife is not a tech person, but she was really creeped out be having a conversation with a daughter about music, and then having the artist my daughter mentioned show up in her YouTube music feed. Could have been coincidence... but...
I think the problem here is in a classification of what is ( I ) in the first place. For us to answer the question of what equals AI we must first answer the question of what equals human intelligence in a self consistent, logical, parsable manner.
No actually.

Instead it is that training AI in this data, is fully legally, with or without your permission.

Fair use allows you to ignore the wishes of the original copyright holder.
Weird, when I worked in the industry, AdBlock was a "30% revenue loss" concern. Can you detail why that's no longer the case?
Also using Tauri in SQLite for a project. I only briefly looked at the provided SQLite plugin and quickly decided it didn't support everything I needed (custom scalar functions for example but there were others) but as far as I know all "official" Tauri plugins use the same event/command RPC mechanism available to you in userland for calling into Rust so I don't actually think the Tauri SQLite plugin "does the access in the UI" in the truest sense -- otherwise it wouldn't be a Tauri plugin it would just be a vanilla JS lib.

If you've looked more closely and know that not to be the case would like to hear what you've seen but my understanding is that anything that leaves the WebView sandbox is using RPC to make calls to Rust.
Hi everyone,
Author here would love to answer any queries.
Women’s underwear is taxed at higher rates than Men’s
An interesting outgrowth of NIH, including and especially places where the choice is defensible (as in the article), is that quite often the external dependency universe evolves or changes sufficiently to put you at a material disadvantage for not participating.

I worked somewhere in the 90s that had built its own database infrastructure to meet business requirements that existed in the early/mid 80s. If you set out to build the same system in 1995 that they'd built before, you absolutely would NOT use the same approach, but they plodded along with a mishmash of internally developed tech for a long, long time -- long enough that it really hurt them. And the first place that this damage showed up was in personnel. To be productive there, you had to know a ton about the internal tools that existed ONLY at 5251 Westheimer (<-- if you know, you know), which meant those skills were useless in the marketplace that was rapidly moving towards open-standards based development, etc., or at least using commercial databases.

It got hard to hire anybody but fresh kids, most of whom would split after 12-24 months.

So even if you do build your own C compiler or whatever, you have to keep an eye out for offramps to that internal dependency if the realities around your product or project change. In this sense, your internal dependency is no different than an external one -- you've always got to be looking for an alternative even if you're perfectly happy with the current path, because the current path might stop being viable.
Not sure the obvious needs to be stated, but it feels totally up to the author to add any detail they like. And perhaps frequent readers are interested in the tools the author uses besides their programming font?
Thanks for that unique insight.

But the question is, are they wrong in that they don't know how to use / promote an otherwise good product, or are they wrong because they are choosing to put forward something that is completely ill-suited for the task?
I'd wager the context in which it is used gives a clue:

> More compact than this overview’s average but so graceful that I’ll take that and welcome the information density.

My guess is they mean how wide or narrow one character is in a given monospace font.
Wow really? I used it for damn near a decade.
I absolutely love these new tools. But I'm also convinced that we're going through an era of trying to mis-apply them. "These new tools are so shiny! Quick! Find a way to MONETIZE!!!!"

I hope we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater when all is said and done. These AIs are incredibly powerful given the correct use cases.
Ask HN: What makes a good senior frontend coding interview?
My startup is hiring a senior frontend developer, and we’re trying to improve our frontend coding loop. Our current loop is React-based, we give them a view of what their page should look like, test that they can design some semi-complex state to make the page function correctly. We give them 3 hours to solve it, with checkins each hour for them to ask questions and show their progress. It’s a relatively simple app to build, and we let them choose their component library.

But we’re struggling to get good signal. In many cases, the candidate’s code has multiple issues, though it’s often not clear whether they would be able to fix it with a bit more time or if it’s core misunderstandings about how to write good frontend.

We’ve debated making it an unlimited-time takehome, but we worry that this is disrespectful of a candidate’s time. We are sympathetic to candidates who are doing many of these interviews for different companies. We do know that there’s the option to pay candidate’s for their time - but we are still hesitant on doing a takehome for other reasons, for example it’s hard to compare an engineer who takes a full weekend to complete a takehome, versus someone who submits it within an hour.

Additionally, we find some value in the check-ins, to see the candidate’s thought process.

So far, though, we’ve had no luck with the current structure, so we’re looking to refactor it completely.

So my question for HN: how do you structure your frontend loops? What works and what doesn’t work? Any suggestions for a small startup looking to get good signal without taking too much of a candidate’s time?
I have been wanting something like this to exist and I'm grateful for it! Also, I love the retro style.
For meetings it's decent. It's the everything else that's the problem.
I have, I used and admin'd Workspace for about a decade before changing to O365. There's some good integrations there and I was a big fan of the simplicity of Meet, but chat is where Google definitely falls apart. We never really got into the new Hangouts as we were already pretty integrated into our Mattermost instance and then we migrated to O365, so maybe its better today, but as far as organizational chat kind of things Google was very very behind and way more fragmented. Things like having chats for Meets and sharing documents in a chat then get integrated into Drive are things that Teams does well and last I saw Google still kind of didn't have a fully-baked solution, at least at the time.

The other side of Workspace is dealing with users who really want Office tooling for various reasons. Workspace and O365 still don't seem to play nice together. Workspace document management is great for Workplace-formatted documents, O365 is great for Office-formatted documents, and things often get messy when trying to combine the two.

I really liked Workspace and its really slick how integrated some of their document tools can be into Google Cloud so its easy to help team members who only really know spreadsheets get data in and out of cloud compute and UI builders and what not. But from last I saw of Hangouts they're still not as complete of a chat platform compared to Teams.
It works mostly fine. It doesn't have the prettiest interface, for example message editing is not great, and search is not great (though it got better than 1 year ago that was unusable). Anther stupid thing is that handling multiple organizations (for example if you are added as external collaborator to another company Teams) is basically broken, you don't receive messages from one if you don't switch to it most of the time.

Sure there are systems that work probably better but Teams is fine, also the alternatives either don't have all the features of Teams or they are difficult to use/setup. A pro of Teams is that if you already have Office365 is mostly well integrated with the other tools (mail, calendar, Office, AzureAD authentication) and you have to manage accounts only in one tool (I can from the horrible AzureAD administration console create a user and it has a mail, Teams, Office, and can login into the company computers).

To me the reason to have Teams is just that you don't have to introduce another tool, have another account, etc. Of course if you decided to use GSuite instead of Microsoft one makes perfectly sense to use Google Meet, but GSuite doesn't yet have all the feature of Office365 and it's more expensive, and like it or not you have to deal with .docx documents when interfacing with other companies.
What are the implications of these changes for someone else wanting to make an interoperable Matrix server or client from scratch?

Will it be easier than before?

(I've written several IRC clients, and a simple one could be done in an afternoon with only a sockets/TLS library. But when I looked at Matrix briefly, implementation seemed very big-moat. And now it's a rapidly moving target.)
I used to use it (Zoom) constantly on Linux Mint, fwiw.

I switched to Mac only because I couldn't get parts for a new desktop at the time. I miss Linux, though :/
> I'm trying out QuikTape now, but it had to clone 1.6GiB.

How far we’ve come from awk scripts that are about 1kiB (https://c2.com/doc/expense/)

> and good date math (`today + 3 business days`)

That’s tricky/impossible in international teams.
If you want an easy win, one thing Rich mentioned in a talk is - if he had to do Clojure all over again today - he would put transducers at the 'bottom'. For data transformation this makes the underlying collection type largely immaterial.

> real structs

I'm not even sure if value types are conducive towards immutable, persistent data structures. I'm certainly excited for project Valhalla but I'm not sure if Clojure, nor any Clojure-like JVM language, written in an idiomatic fashion, would really benefit from it.

> light-weight concurrency like Go

Project loom is already in preview mode. Lightweight concurrency is nearly here for any JVM language, and once it's fully released I will likely have zero reason to use core.async.

> type support

Static typing is A Thing you can choose to do, but I doubt you would get many daily Clojure users agreeing that it is "better". I think it's different and better in some circumstances but not necessarily others. It definitely feels trendy these days, sorta like how dynamic typing felt trendy 15 years ago.
Top/bottom don’t even have anything to do with gender, and it wouldn’t matter if they did.
This is totally wrong - people are much different in 2023 compared to earlier in our lifetimes, even people from 1990 would seem completely different to us now. Cultural evolution is a type of evolution, it's not a "fake" version or something like that.
> I don't think so. The end point of that curve is models with human like reasoning or even superhuman ability.

What makes you think that?
Why is / an invalid path when /a is valid?
As always, just build more nuclear.
> because I turned connectivity on at that moment for the first time that day, and syncing took that long.

So you had to sync all of the messages on the server first before sending a message?
So if I understand this correctly, you and your chat partners use Telegram (possibly because of security?) and then you hand OpenAI Telegram chat transcripts (which may well be used for future training of LLMs)?
> It's easier to show "up and to the right"

I think it's funny how MBA's at the end of the day base their decisions on glancing at a chart. So now, the engineers are catching on to optimizing for that pretty chart.

I made a mistake by spitballing sales figures for a product and someone incorporated it into an ROI calc that was being judged to the decimal place.
Quantum Entanglement isn’t that spooky after all
This is the perfect example of why developers should not write their own licenses.

- The first two paragraphs contradict each other. "deal in the Software without restriction", "Permission is not granted to use this software..." etc. Which one is it? Remember that ambiguity in contracts work against the side that drafted it.

- What is "machine learning models"? Is there an objective definition of it that a judge/jury/court can understand? Why doesn't the license include that definition?

- Where is the attribution clause?

- "MIT" in the title is a copyrighted term, so the license is itself likely illegal to publish.
I see some super hot takes in here. Teams is not ideal, but it does seem to work for us. In total, I spend about 3-4 hours in the actual Teams UI per week, so maybe I don't have enough exposure to lose my mind over this.

We've used other messaging tools in the past - Mattermost, Slack, Skype, etc. For better or worse, Teams seems to be sticking and we are all way too busy to worry about whatever horrific implications this brings.

One thing I'd consider in all of this: Products like Teams are entirely about connecting other people (and businesses) to you. A vast majority of the decision to use that product is going to come from non-developers and other assholes in a typical org chart. Your front-line, minimum-wage employees are not going to have the patience or skills to configure their own federated IRC instances in order to correspond with your development team.
Wouldn't you, at the very least, have to copy repo and change the license text?
Depending on the outcome of the recent court cases related to AIs like Copilot and Stable Diffusion, this might not be of use at all.

If courts rule that training, distributing and using models without regard for the data author's consent is a fair use (which has a high chance of happening) then the license is is worthless.
Why did they go so hard after Z-Library when all of the other Library Genesis mirrors are still up and running? Is it because Z-Library have ads and paid subscriptions while the others are non-profit volunteers?
My supervisor and I once had a Teams meeting on the calendar that was created via Outlook. We both joined, and wound up in different meetings with the same id, wondering where the other person was...

We never scheduled a meeting for Teams again.
Checking their leadership team, there is a "Chief People Officer", "Chief Diversity Officer", "Chief Social Impact Officer", "Chief Digital Officer" and a bunch of pompous and inflated C-level titles. In fact their C-suite has 12 people!

Maybe the shareholders should be asking if their C-suite is going to be downsized appropriately.
Teams is better than whatever we had before. Couldn't cut-n-paste code into a chat because it turned all the punctuation into emojis.
> This is demonstrably not true. It's saying quite a bit, yes it's rather PR-speak like, but that's how it's been trained.

It has used many words, it has said very little, none of it useful or insightful. If you see something insightful in there, I must chalk it up to very different perception of reality.

> WTF? I think the way you are thinking about this seems fundamentally bogged down by cynicism. Proof reading an article written for you is far, far speedier than writing it yourself.

Not if you keep screwing it up. Not if I can't ever trust that you even tried to source correct information. Not if your creative output is trite at best.

> You have just admitted this is WIP, and I see no reason not to expect progress will continue.

I clearly said several times that I expect the technology will get better.
I've never seen an info box that didn't at least link to the point the data came from and if it's at all important I'll usually check to see where it's coming from to at least get a gut gauge on how correct the source seems. With the new chatbots if I'm not going to just trust them I have to do the same basic steps I would have to have found the data through a search engine to begin with.
I was having a minor anaphylactic reaction to something - not enough to restrict my breathing or make me want to use my epipen yet - but I experienced the same thing. Went to the ER, face red and swelling, lips starting to tingle, the whole 9 yards. They had me enter all my personal info, name, address, insurance card, etc. Then swipe for my $250 ER copay all before seeing anybody competent. The worker at the desk didn't understand what I meant when I said "anaphylactic reaction" I had to gesture at my face and say "allergic reaction" ffs!

At least my reaction wasn't as bad the first time. That time was pre-covid and they had somebody with experience and functioning brain cells at the check-in and they brought me right in and started taking vitals and did an IV literally right on the other side of the check-in desk. On that visit they had the payment person come around hours later while I was recovering in a bed on a different unit for monitoring while I was coming down off of the meds they pumped me full of.
And coders from AI that steals their code?
was joke
The problem with small companies is that sometimes, instead of (or in addition to) layoffs, the whole company just go kaput. There was more transparency that the end is near, but it might not have helped.

The same is also true of small teams inside large companies. It's a fractal of transparencies.
There are people who are killed or hurt by overzealous code who you don't know about.