skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, I was going to test editing right now on a fillable government form, but eVince insists that it is password protected, and opening it in Adobe Acrobat proves that it is indeed not password protected.

So I must have some sort of malware edition of eVince.

Nuking from orbit now: [== ]
How would they be in a position to judge programmer competence? It might well be the person was hired based on being cheaper and/or a personal relationship (boss' nephew or manager's room-mate) but that is not necessarily an indication of how good they might be.

More often it's just a sign of a new company not knowing what they are doing and making unforced errors as a result, rather than a conscious debt/investment transaction.
I think we've already seen the dividing line drawn between people who can ultimately be replaced by a computer (or at least, those whom top-tier management believe can be replaced by a computer) and people who won't: Work from Home.
https://www.jefftk.com/p/lead-in-chocolate
Florida Scoured Math Textbooks for ‘Prohibited Topics.’ Next Up: Social Studies
Moore's Law is dead and AI is its zombie. Best to just ignore it and spend your time making things.
Impact of the layoffs?
Anyone up for this exercise, I might recommend QBASIC from Microsoft instead. Built in help manual and a "real-ish" IDE. And it was on the Windows 98 CD!

I value "infinite online resources" but having integrated books of documentation in the IDE includes such valuable writing. I miss it so much when going through the hastily-written "getting started" tutorials I end up with nowadays (the scope of problems trying to be solved is way different of course)
>Software is just a tool to help accomplish something for people - many programmers never understood that. Keep your eyes on the delivered value, and don't over focus on the specifics of the tools. - John Carmack

The same as it was in the 80s or 90s, some 30 years later Tech industry hasn't changed. It may have technologically advanced, but in many cases I think the UX, tools and product decisions has actually regressed.

The divide between a product genius and actual programmers has never been greater. At least Steve Jobs used to understand this better than anyone else.

>And, one of the things I've always found is that you've got to start with the customer experience and work backwards for the technology. You can't start with the technology and try to figure out where you're going to try to sell it. And I made this mistake probably more than anybody else in this room. - Steve Jobs.
I have gotten a lot of inspiration, several times during my career, from this classic article by Jack W. Reeves (and its two follow-ups). Let cooler heads prevail. https://www.developerdotstar.com/mag/articles/reeves_design_...
The most recent electrician jobs we've had done were:

- fitting a timer into the switchboard to control the hot water cylinder. A simple job, but the sparky also had to talk to me (the client) to get us both on the same page.

- fitting an EV fast charger in the garage. Not much science, but a lot of cable running and clipping down, then the garage switchboard needed to be swapped out for a larger one that could take the required RCD. And convincing me which brand charger to go for. 2 guys working together for a couople of hours.

- fixing the range hood light (always on due to a broken switch). He spent quite some time trying to extract the broken switch, with the range hood balanced on his shoulder and wires everywhere.

In every case there was no real complexity to the job, not the sort of thing that an AI could have been helpful at at all. Just a lot of common sense, knowledge of the regulations and much skilled manual work.

I don't think AI is coming for electricians any time soon.
> I think the way that people buy supplements is wrong

Well yeah, buying supplements in the first place is wrong, unless you are deficient in something specific for a specific reason.

The supplements industry is just one big scam.
Since I cannot edit, this is the .NET Core rendering SDK

https://doc.sitecore.com/xp/en/developers/hd/210/sitecore-he...

However as you can see, XM Cloud clearly favours JavaScript, specially in the components that replace content editor and page graphical editing,

https://doc.sitecore.com/xmc/en/developers/xm-cloud/sitecore...

And then check the acquisitions, https://doc.sitecore.com/
I’m positive about it, there is a lot of repetition in coding and it’s rare we get to spend the time on the good bits because of it.

If we need a semi-intelligent system to help us with the copy pasta, so be it.
This is a general truism. Focus on the why, not the what or the how
Finally! One "modern C++" advocate less.
I'm pretty sure it's the JVM model. Kotlin collections are "immutable" in that they have no mutating accessors, which is not the same thing as a memory region defined to be immutable by the specification which can be relied on to e.g. trivialize certain compiler optimizations. (I plead ignorance about Kotlin Native, maybe it does such things.)

You can also look at what kinds of things are allowed in class constant pools; you will not find any collections.

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se7/html/jvms-4.ht...
I’d say people on the floor know the problem very well. Frequently they don’t know the solution though and they are often the wrong people to find it.
University is good for giving deep understanding of what is going on and how things work, or even training you to reach for this deep understanding. It's not good at training you to be a good developer. This part takes a long time and some of it is specific to what domain / job you end up working on. Those two parts are complementary, and this deep understanding is part of what makes you a good dev.
I feel when we have truly intelligent machines, programming jobs will be gone. But AI’s like ChatGPT aren’t there yet. It’s just good at faking it - until it isn’t and fails silently.

Maybe it’s the lack of data - it’s difficult to model the world accurately with just words. Maybe it’s an architectural limitation that no amount of data can fix and we need new better algorithms.

Either way, given the state of its current output I don’t think it’s there yet.

Should AI actually reach such a level … I think everyone will be out of a job. Accountants, engineers, lawyers, even doctors will take a haircut. Programmers will just be a drop in the ocean of the jobless.
Ooops, you're right. I stand corrected.
Keep in mind, the proceeds from the weapons sales to Iran were used to finance Nicaragua's Contras, in the Amerikan attempt to create a right-wing puppet state in Central America.
See also, https://thehistoryteamblog.wordpress.com/the-riots-of-1272/
Sunk cost, so just work in tech ;-)
Technical debt is entered into deliberately, as a trade-off for time that must be paid back, with interest.

The implication here is that if only you had enough time you wouldn't have any tech debt. I don't think that's true.

Some of the tech debt is due to not having enough knowledge about the future of your system; what it needs to do, how it'll be used, etc. You have to make a decision about the tech now and sometimes that decision turns out to be wrong, or at least incomplete, which leaves you with some debt that will need paid off some time.

I also believe some tech debt is unavoidable due to churn from outside of the system. Best practises for a given part of an app aren't fixed (eg React class components shifting to functional components), so sometimes something that was once good can turn into debt over time with no input from you.
Curious why the pickle?
How is truth a bourgeois concept? I can see how sneering at the kind of people who go to either a military or a software development boot camp is bourgeois; there’s the fear of being confused with people of adjacent but inferior class position. I don’t see how truth is bourgeois. Could you explain?
Building a Simple Web App with OpenAI’s ChatGPT API, Next.js and Tailwind CSS
That sounds like a fantastic hobby project - but being able to tell the difference between a hobby project and a viable product in the marketplace is... maybe something AI can help with!? :P
The obligatory CommitStrip: https://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/08/25/a-very-comprehensi...
Clearly, you missed this:

> High levels of community masking, including both source patients and exposed people, have been associated with reductions in infections ranging from 10% to 80%, with more protection when there is consistent mask-wearing in high-risk areas such as households.

Not to mention the link in that paragraph, which references 18 studies supporting the effectiveness of masks: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...
I think there is room for interpretation as to whether it equates to telling a musician to become a DJ, or a pianist to wear a jacket, or soldiers to strap a first aid kit on left thigh.
Considering lead's modulus of elasticity is essentially zero, yes :) You can drill, tap, and generally rely on this material to stay in the shape it was printed at in maaaaaany more situations than lead.

Of course the petg in there is a limiting factor, but even plain petg is an order of magnitude better than lead at retaining its shape under a wide range of loads. You can print gears for lathes in petg! And they last years! (If you're wondering why you might do this - it's a good idea to have a cheap point of failure on devices that have enough power to rip themselves to shreads.)

Not to mention this is only v1 of the material. We could see exotic plastics that are far more heat resistant like PEEK get a secondary filler for niche radioactive usecases.
OP here! I can read it fine, personally. There's a trade-off between shininess and legibility.
Mine doesn't predate it but it's very confusing for me to read this opinion.

From my point of view, it totally did happen?
Can you imagine how many programmers the company would've needed to get all the data a business analyst casually queries per day?

What you're looking at is the quantity of people actually employed in the industry, not how many SQL made obsolete. The industry just grew so much that it didn't become an issue.
Mate that revenue came from "sponsored tweets"[1] -- I was excited to be wrong for a second there.. he's counting it, I'm not :P

As mentioned "Kinda just proved that random people will give you money to be a part of something popular."

The AI has made no money. This is working because it got a bunch of attention. It's only a new concept if you've never heard of Twitch, YouTube, Instagram or Tiktok.

Entertaining for many, absolutely! I'm not trying to poopoo the entire thing! Go get your bag, Jackson.

It's not really doing anything new though unfortunately. I'd even be accepting if the AI's plan was to become popular to bring in the cash like this, but it isn't even that. The actual plan the AI is coming up with would be an absolute flop if the audience wasn't interested in GPT-4.

[1]: https://twitter.com/jacksonfall/status/1637113607480647683?s...
Hi HN, author of the post here and long-time lurker, first-time poster.

Like others, recent advances in AI have blown me away. To this end, my current passion project is to help devs learn how to use the OpenAI API through sharing my own learnings.

I had lots of fun writing this post and hope you find it useful. Let me know if you have any feedback.
I don't know if it is enough yet but there has been an explosion of this kind of content on Youtube over the last 10 years. For typical home repairs it seems most topics are pretty well covered.
Such linear allocators are not too uncommon in embedded / static allocation context, but one definitely needs to know how they work. So first thought was you didn't read the docs, but docs do not clearly state that behavoour that is ugly (:
Confirmed; Evince 2.32.0 for Windows is wholly incapable of filling forms or editing PDFs. Its confusion about password-protection seems confined to certain individual documents. I can view 'em fine, I can't change 'em.
While I agree with the thesis, I also believe it is possible to over emphasize it. A couple of examples from someone who is a product of that generation:

Given my age at the time, programming was accessible but modifying hardware was hard. Part of the reason is that few sensible adults would hand a soldering iron to a six year old. Part of the reason is that software is easier to learn than electronics. Part of the reason is the hardware was the product back then, something you did stuff with rather than something you did stuff to (contrast the 1977 Apple ][ to the 1982 Commodore 64, and you'll get an idea of how quickly the mindset changed). It wasn't until my early 20's until I learned that people were not only modifying the hardware, but making their own peripheral cards. Someone ten years older than me likely had a different perspective simply because electronics was more relevant ... since software hadn't started eating the world.

Even those people were likely in the same boat as I if they took a moment to think about the generation prior to them. I remember reading something by one of the grandfathers of computing. They blew my mind when they started talking about hard drives, not in terms of the logical layout of the disk nor in terms of the electronics but in terms of the physics. There was a time when people had to think about computers in those terms because they were in the process of developing those lowest layers of abstraction.

I guess what I'm saying is that each generation will have a different perspective on what computers are and how computers work. They will also have different perspectives on what "low level" means. While it is sad to see a lot of the old knowledge and old ways fade into obscurity, we shouldn't pity the younger generation for not having what we had. First of all, the old knowledge hasn't really disappeared for those who choose to pursue it. Second, they are going to be building a new layer on the technological stack anyhow. What they need to understand is the layer directly below them, not what's twenty layers down.
I DO believe some of their policies could be better, I agree. I’ve never used such a service where I’d end up sore or the trial ends immediately.

There’s truth to the fact this is not right but I have no way of complaining.

The App Store does work well. For a lot of other services, I’ve been delighhtEd in the way they work- and the transparencyy is superbb.!
There are a couple of charities that my wife and I donate to but a few are from people we have come to trust (John Green, MrBeast philanthropy) and something particular happened this year during my taxes (US), it was the first year that itemizing deductions made sense and I received an unusually high tax refund.

This is personal very personal but I see my privileged compensation in tech as a tool to help those who were where I was, and also because it brings me joy to help were I can.
Talking with my accountant it does seem that I’m rather alone, at least among the population she works with, in my philosophy of giving, but it’s brought me satisfaction and unexpected financial benefits! (Who knew that giving gives back!)
Currently, we don't even trust the car's automatic driving capability to let it be on the roads without a human.

Until that day happens, i highly doubt that a business owner would just blindly trust an AI to generate their business code/software, without hiring someone to at least look after it. Therefore, software jobs could evolve, but not disappear.
To clarify: it's a CSR problem to solve, not Struts' (which, as you say, is not subject to).

To answer your original question in a pragmatic way: people used to JS tooling, libraries, frameworks obviously want to continue using these, not revert to Struts. Plus, modern tooling facilitates mixing SSR and CSR, and switching between them as needed.
The point is that the limit should be determined by physical limitations of the hardware, not an arbitrary number chosen by the programmer.
Here are the tests consumer reports did a while back: https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-safety/lead-and-...
No, there are contexts where you exactly want this behaviour is what poster above wanted to say, and I agree. But it needs to be well documented.
So is there no way of actually making a good amount of money through the internet because most of the cash is in the hands of the mega wealthy? Does Vox have anything to suggest?
Good news, like shutting off a leaky sewer pipe.
They finished training GPT4 mid last year, before ChatGPT was released
Pure fantasy with a heavy dose of pretending our own limitations wont come in the way of it all or totally shifting what the outcomes we end up with

Managers exist mostly cause ppl are not machines. Given enough time they want to go off and do things that have nothing to do with what everyone else wants. Its the same reason you still need a farmer to run the dairy even though everything is mechanized cause cow cant run things.

Ppl are too full of shit. The attention economy amplifies this poor to mediocre mental masturbation thats going on everywhere. And Americans have a track record of too much mentally masturbation too much way above their pay grade. Its like watching Alex Jones falling into the trap of taking what comes out of his 3 inch chimp brain too seriously. The only right thing to do is tell Alex to chill the fuck down and go milk the cows.
> I'm not sure what hardware capabilities you think are poorly supported by OpenWRT or the open-source drivers for the known-good hardware choices from the QCA lineage or Mediatek's mt76 family. Can you provide any specifics?

I can't speak for them, but I've used OpenWRT on routers with Broadcom chipsets, so I think they were saying that OpenWRT support isn't a good litmus test for drivers that support the full functionality of the hardware they're for.
hmm.. the Philips MSX manuals were pretty good. Explained basic, guided you through creating a small game.

Couldn't find it only, but found the sony one at https://hansotten.file-hunter.com/uploads/files/sonymsx2basi... fun to see the difference
Am I allowed to say that the number of bugs I see in 2023 is roughly the same as I saw when I was young, or will I get downvoted for disagreeing with the bug hive?
The introduction of the Fed didn't cause booms or busts. Those were already there and happened more frequently, roughly every four years.
The day the CIA had proof and evidence that the soviet union was in a slow downward spiral and "containable", that was the day the carot of middle class shared progress was packed away and it was back to the stick in the salt-mines of the gilded age again.

It may be hard to fathom, but the "golden" age of capitalism was in actual competition with a actual "socialism" aka a rivaling empire.
The nice past we remember, was given to us at gunpoint and is now clawed back. Some societies take longer on this course, because they found the outcome pleasant and want to keep it. But the forces of the market, drag it towards a economic singular entity, which owns politics, with democracy on the label or not.

The figureheads were exchanged accordingly.
This kind of "debt" is seldom "technical". It is a symptom of all manner of factors. In software organisations the symptoms of trouble become visible in codebases and/or behaviour of systems. Thinking about the artifacts as the problem area tends to cause fixing of symptoms and fringe causes, not systemic causes. As far as I've experienced, this sort of "narrow solving due to narrow framing" is endemic in software. It takes a lot of culture building for things like Gemba walk to work in practice, i.e. sure, root about for bad smells because that's how you discover something's fishy, but then work at a systems level to root out the systemic causes and malincentives.

edit: use better words
Children don't have the same level of general knowledge in kindergarten. Adults don't have it either, not even the best adults.
> That's kinda my point?

It’s the exact opposite of your point.

> free is there and does something, but also silently does nothing if you violate a fairly subtle invariant.

Again, not an invariant.

> the leak was essentially caused by the author not realizing that free was silently doing nothing

The leak was caused by the author not knowing this is a bump allocator because that was not clear from the naming (and the documentation is essentially non-existent).

> I'm just saying this particular one's API has quite the footgun.

It’s not the API that’s a footgun, it follows the standard allocator API so it can be used wherever an allocator is expected. If it did not, its usage scope would be extremely limited as you'd only be able to use it for bespoke allocations, and wouldn't be able to use it for allocating e.g. arrays or sets or maps.
Yeah, that is cited in the article along with https://www.asyousow.org/environmental-health/toxic-enforcem...
I just had this thought that now with LLMs we are basically on the front side of something similar to space debris lock in for the global internet.
Nope, you do a bit of DHTML to update the only section that matters.
Is the excellent tooling not also a property of a minimal language? Lisp has the "least" syntax/semantics and the best tooling, because it's so easy to write tools. Go has more complex syntax/semantics, but still much easier to wrangle e.g. control flow out of an AST, compared to other Algol derivatives.
This is the most interesting story, and the most interesting character, I've seen all week. Don't miss it!
>This little parable is, of course, a description of the Cantillon Effect.

Except all the proponents of the cantillon effect can't seem to point at where it happens because it happens everywhere in the economy and every single economic actor has their own cantillon effect as anyone who saves demand deposits temporarily destroys money and creates a reverse cantillon effect at every single point in the economy and everyone who spends off their demand deposits causes a forward cantillon effect even if the central bank does nothing, making the whole theory completely useless as a method of blaming the government or central bank. When you consider the fact that commercial banks create commercial bank money and that there's thousands of them competing with each other the cantillon effect becomes more like a conspiracy theory because if the cantillon effect exists, it would be caused by inequality, not the other way around.

I have never seen anyone who points out the "Cantillon Effect" complain about too high banking profitability, for example. The Austrian Economists, who love the Cantillon Effect, always appear to demand higher interest rates which increases banking profitability, which immediately exposes their hypocrisy.

https://www.aier.org/article/the-mythology-of-cantillon-effe...
This is about as secure as loading a text file that says "licensed=true".

Anyone can easily proxy the server DNS call, put up their own server, etc.

A client app connecting to a public facing database server with no authentication is a huge security risk, aside from anything this whole library is doing.
> I never would have expected these kinds of words from Carmack.

He already talked about this in his interview with Lex Fridman - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzPuGf89vpI