skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> forcefully shoving recommended content from unknown people down their throats. They just want a chronological timeline of posts made by people they explicitly followed

So... You're saying you like AT Protocol/Bluesky then? Because if that's what you're trying to say, your post kind of reads like you don't like it, but then what you want is exactly what they are trying to provide...
I keep saying this and will say it again: what's really needed is a state-ful GUI markup language. HTML+DOM+JS+CSS is the wrong tool for the CRUD/GUI job, and force-fitting it has inflamed the area so bad many don't want to even try to scratch it.

Bloated JS frameworks like Angular, React, Vue, and Electron have big learning curves and a jillion gotcha's because they have to reinvent long-known and loved GUI idioms from scratch, but DOM is inherently defective for that need, meant for static documents. There are just too many GUI needs that HTML/DOM lacks or can't do right:
https://www.reddit.com/r/CRUDology/comments/10ze9hu/missing_...

Let's byte the bullet and create a GUI markup standard. Perhaps base it off Tk or Qt kits to avoid starting from scratch.
> (The infinite recursion happens before anything is ever returned --- the return type is irrelevant.)

This is not true, the closure is not actually called until the future is awaited. Each instance of do_something does actually return.
Bluesky is literally just full of Twitter addicted journalists who still use twitter
Another way of saying that is to be strategic about where you go against the grain of the organization. I’ve seen that work well when it was something important where the value was high and poorly when someone was either just being dogmatic or overestimated their ability to negotiate.

A long time ago I remember hearing a good bit of advice that for a new project you should innovate the product or the tech stack but not both. I think this is similar: unless you have a lot of resources (people + political clout), don’t buck the existing org chart in more than one area if you can avoid it.
> Credit card names can also be fudged.

Not really, in cases where it actually matters like car rentals they don’t let you do many things that “fool” the half assed systems.

Frankly most queue systems aren’t designed to be robust because the company doesn’t care they are making the same money either way.
Nielsen Norman's research does. That doesn't mean they're never the right choice, it just means it hurts your navigation so they shouldn't be your goto. Use the right tool for the job.
Releasing 3B and 7B RedPajama
phil21, I see where you're coming from, but let's not forget that we're all different, and what might work for you won't necessarily work for everyone else. It's great that you thrived in that environment, but forcing others into the office because it suits you just ain't the way to go.

There are folks who are far more productive working remotely, and we should respect their preferences too. It's all about balance and understanding that each individual has unique needs when it comes to their work environment.

A hybrid model could be the answer here, allowing people the flexibility to work from the office or home as they see fit. There's no point in squeezing everyone into a one-size-fits-all solution. Let's prioritize productivity and well-being over the illusion of a "perfect" office setup.

And yeah, that 50-90 minute commute you mentioned sounds like absolute hell. We can probably all agree that nobody should be subjected to that.
Heh, I had some Cisco gear, from a company Cisco bought. It would crash under certain conditions. They gave me the "we need a support contract" line. I said I didn't need support and don't need new features. I just wanted it work as advertised, they didn't budge. I emailed a mailing list of other large site admins to not buy Cisco. Next morning I had 2 support folks and an account manager on the phone the next morning, they got me my patch.

The idea that you need support for things to work as advertised is insane.
Correct, but the 1st is stronger. This is why fair use even exists. In order to coexist with the first amendment, the copyright clause must allow some wiggle room for freedom of expression and balancing the rightsholder's interests with society's.

Since these "safety valves" exist even for enforcement of the copyrights of private parties, a state government's enforcement would be even more, if not entirely thwarted by the free speech clause.
>Cronyism isn't a theory, it's an implementation detail.

I argue that it's a fundamental defect, an architectural one, and it won't be solved with infinite patches and workarounds.

You can patch a defective design until it's somewhat functional, but it will never compare to a properly architected design. In the case of economics, we need to consciously choose what we want to incentivize based on how we want society to look and function.

>Essentially force an economy with only small and competitive, locally owned ma and pa shops. This is, in practice, the way capital-driven economies worked in the far far past long before the dawn of megacorps.

This is the MAGA argument: "things were better in the old days". This is an appeal to false nostalgia and does not hold up to scrutiny. It also ignores the fact that every successful small company eventually becomes a big company.

Even in the days of small/pastoral/cottage capitalism there existed the same problems we have now, just more isolated and harder to root out because they were very numerous and too widely distributed. Abuse was very common, and any complaints were dismissed as "just the way things are" or countered with "then start your own business" or "get rich enough so you don't have to participate" or "you're gay/black/foreign so you should be thankful for a job" or simply "you deserve it because <X>". These things eventually improved, but every improvement was paid for in blood.

One worker at some 'ma and pa' business cannot effectively unionize, and has little bargaining power. In very small communities where everyone knew each other that worker may have more leverage by way of putting community relationships on the line (if they had some social power), but it never seemed to stop individual business owners from eventually buying up entire towns and running roughshod over the population.

Recent history and contemporary life is full of examples of this sort of thing — towns where everyone works at the same lumber mill or factory owned by That One Guy Who Lives In A Huge Mansion On The Hill. Now it's a Wal-Mart or Amazon fulfillment center owned by One Corporation that's distributed and faceless.

Companies are effectively dictatorships. Workers have little say in how a company is run, except in cases where they rebel against the system and go outside of it to redress their grievances.

Even then, this redress has never changed the fundamental relationship between worker and capitalist: the worker will always be a subject, because there is no democracy in the workplace.

It really amazes me how people can simultaneously support democracy and capitalism (dictatorship).

>The big problem with both ideologies is finding an implementation that doesn't suffer from "scalability" problems.

Even 'small capitalism' promotes severely undesirable incentives at its core, which appear at all levels of scaling. Can you provide an example of where it doesn't, or show that socialism/communism/whatever is just as bad?
CUCM was originally developed by Selsius and never really felt like a "Cisco-quality" product.
As readers we are supposed to learn that we are being misled. One hopes GP commenter would learn they cannot always get away with this sort of deception.

What, if anything, are we supposed to get out of your comment, which seems to question the value of critical reading?
Mari0: Super Mario Bros. Meets Portal
They've always done that - but sterilising children just because they say they're in the wrong body is relatively recent.

The sorts of places that perform these procedures are echo chambers, any dissent is deemed transphobic.

Increasingly trans activists are making claims such as sex being a social construct - and demanding that society accept that view.

https://www.google.com/search?q=biological+sex+is+a+social+c...

Under this ideology men and women are interchangeable, you are what you feel you are.

(Ask your ancestors about that one, we're a sexually dimorphic species for fuck's sake.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproducti...

> In the eukaryotic fossil record, sexual reproduction first appeared about 2.0 billion years ago in the Proterozoic Eon, although a later date, 1.2 billion years ago has also been presented.
Like most articles in distributed systems, this makes wild assumptions about the most important, i.e. the human layer. I would bet $100 that this is written by the same sort of person who thinks "Managers – what do they do all day exactly?" [1]

> If you hire the best engineers....

Guess what, there is no broad consensus on what "best engineer" means. I bet your org is rejecting really good engineers right now because they don't know what Kubernetes is. Same goes for literally any other technology that has been part of a hype cycle (Java in 2001, Ruby on Rails in 2011, ML in 2011; no the precise years don't matter).

> ...trust them to make the best decisions.

A lot of work encapsulated there in less than ten words. If you hire a bunch of people and tell them "you are the best", you think they are going to sit around and run the Raft protocol for consensus on deciding how to architect the system? No, each of them is going to reinvent Kubernetes, and likely not in an amazing way.

Microservices are often best deployed when there is a mixture of cultural and engineering factors that makes it easy to split up a system into different parts that have interfaces with each other. It has little to do with the superiority of the technical architecture.

----------------------------------------

[1] Looks like the article was written by the CTO of Amazon, which...surprises me a bit. Then again, from all accounts, Amazon's not exactly known as the best place to work; so maybe I'm right? In any case, anything written by Amazon is not directly applicable to the vast majority of small-to-medium companies.
When I was younger I visited Timsplace in the Grampians in Australia, just this kinda joing (though it was hiking/climbing, no surfing).

Don't know if Tim has retired, but was a ton of fun to stay there:

https://www.timsplace.com.au/
That's the same thing I ask for wars, if you abhor one then you should abhor all of them and reject all warmongers, but I'm always accused of "whataboutism".
It’s money you can access if you need it. It’s a capitalized loan, so no matter what, it’s a better deal than you’d get if you were pulling the money from a credit card as an example.

Need to pay for your child’s tuition? Start a business? Unexpected major expenses? You have a relatively cheap line of credit compared to every other option on the market.

That’s still wealth no matter how you slice it. And, not even that long ago, that was wealth people could access for almost nothing, who knows what the interest rate environment will be in 5 years.
It's not just the spoiler effect. Republicans and Democrats have voted on ballot requirements that often hold a higher bar for third parties than for republicans and democrats. Like the spoiler effect, these things fixing these things only requires political will— a will that has direct negative incentives for the parties that could change it.
I would argue that all "mapping" structures should use Map these days. Objects should be used only for record/struct data with a fixed set of programmer-named keys.

I think MDN has a good comparison: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

The only real downside of maps is that they don't support JSON serialization. However you can fix this pretty easily by using a map with an overridden `toJSON` for serializable keys.

class StringMap extends Map {
toJSON() {
return Object.fromEntries(this);
}
}
An amendment to the constitution ... that will just be disregarded by those same people?

Also, I'm an old man, no amendments written after I was born have passed.
The NFT sounds better but assuming the police FBI, DEA etc. are smart, which they probably are, they can see that you are not famous in the NFT world so why did someone pay so much. So you would need to almost be able to make a million anyway (just pure NFT grift) to launder a million (some other source)
Why does practically everyone in this comment thread think the author said "you should have to manually scroll to the bottom of the page to get a menu," when he said very clearly (with working example!) that a menu button at the top of the page should give you the menu (which happens to be at the bottom instead of inside a pop-out)?

I mean, I know responding to titles instead of articles is a thing, but here it seems like everyone opened the article and then stopped reading at a very precise point in the middle of the fifth paragraph.
The Copyright Clause is explicit about the authority of Congress to grant exclusivity. You're not going to get anywhere with an argument that it contravenes the First Amendment. They were ratified almost simultaneously.
> I never want someone to resolve hypocrisy by getting rid of the ethics they do have.

That's a really interesting way to put it. I definitely am guilty of reacting to hypocrisy by being more and more biased towards nihilism.
The dirty secret I learned was to find out the name of the firmware file that fixed your issue, and then search for that via various means.

The other thing I realized was that our stupid support contract for some dinky router happened to give us access to any firmware file they had if you knew where to look ...

I assume they've fixed that second one.
Because it’s wrong. Combinatorics taught me that, and I’ll be damned before I ignore what the universe keeps screaming at me
I’m sure he could provide them some office space if he’s worried about the market having to operate outside.
I find the arguments selective and entirely unconvincing.
The examples he brings up are all selected to elicit an emotional response while not really investigating how regulations have prevented significant number of deaths (this is admittedly difficult).

Several of the arguments and sources given make only sense at first glance, e.g. the argument about the FDA would be more convincing if not for the fact that pharmaceuticals still spend as much on marketing (that's the conservative estimate) as on R&D (they even argue that giving away free samples should not count as marketing I kid you not https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2019/7/...).

The arguments that anesthesists give a good example for a liability model because of some improvements made in the 90s, maybe makes sense from a purely US point of view. The question is (and this was not investigated in the source) how did the improvements compare in countries without the same liability but regulations. So would (or have) the same improvements being made with regulation.

Similay he brings up nuclear power and argues that liability would be a better model. Apart from the fact that the cost of nuclear vs renewables is not primarily driven by regulation (there was an analysis here on HN a couple of months ago, which I can't find on mobile atm), liability would kill nuclear in its tracks because no insurance would or could cover the potential cost a nuclear disaster.

Finally, why not talk about the FCC, a regulation agency which has made flying the safest mode of travel in the world. In fact if the aviation industry was as lax as the medical we had planes falling out of the sky multiple times a day. They only recently come under flag, because they have been dropping the ball because they got too cosy with the industry. Largely in the desire to speed up the process, which also refutes the argument that there is not counter regulation pressure.

Another example of pressure to reduce regulations are financial regulations. Their reduction arguably gave us (or contributed) to the GFC.
AWS will tell you as much as you want to know about how munch you’re spending. Cost breakdowns and billing alerts are more configurable than you’ll see pretty much anywhere else. This is a miscategorisation of the problem with AWS billing. The actual problem - which is not misunderstood - is that it’s complicated. There’s a reason that AWS has an unwritten ‘one-time get out of jail free card’ system if you accidentally mess up and charge $50,000 to your corporate credit card. And there’s a reason that a condition of this escape hatch is that you set up billing alerts like you should as a responsible person hooking up a PAYG service to what’s sometimes an effectively infinite line of credit.
Yes! Accessibly features don’t enough credit at all
That is an at rest choice that should be identical in both.

I presume you are thinking of rendering? But, again, that is largely done client side in both cases.
While I understand the sentiment that some in-person time may be beneficial, I'd argue that it's not a strict requirement for a successful work environment. With the advancements in technology and communication tools, we can now maintain strong connections with our colleagues, even without face-to-face interaction. Virtual meetings, team-building activities, and online workshops can serve as effective substitutes for in-person gatherings, allowing teams to stay connected and collaborate effectively.

The key lies in fostering a culture of open communication and trust among team members, regardless of their physical location. By prioritizing these values and leveraging available technology, it's possible to create a cohesive and productive remote work environment without the need for in-person meetings. As the landscape of work evolves, it's essential for us to adapt and explore new ways to connect and collaborate, transcending the boundaries of traditional office settings.
For many things you can rely on others replying for you! For personal things keep a disposable email in your HN profile.
Who knows… until any of this gets tested in a court of law we can only guess (with legal professionals having the best guesses)
You still need to find someone to take the other side of that investment.

Taking a company public is generally profitable because of people’s liquidity preference. Companies will sell shares to an investment bank directly before an IPO as both a form of payment and a hedge. It’s a very nuanced transaction that might otherwise seem dumb on the surface.
https://orbita.terrestre.ar

That's a site I've made to track satellites. Yet another one! It's a 2D map, where you choose / fast-forward time, see the ground track prediction, and horizon radius.
Very sad. Understandable, but sad.
Remote work has been a game-changer in promoting diversity and inclusivity, particularly for underrepresented communities such as Black professionals. By breaking down geographic barriers and providing equal access to job opportunities, remote work empowers talented individuals from all backgrounds to excel in their careers. This shift helps to create a more level playing field, fostering innovation and driving progress forward in the tech industry (thus far dominated by whites).
"Only firms ‘currently leading in the space’ wanted..."

I guess that explains why Amazon wasn't invited either.
You can implement interactivity which doesn't need data from the server entirely client side. Libraries like https://alpinejs.dev help here and pair well with htmx.
That’s definitely a thing in other cities.
My understanding from this and earlier blog posts is that they want an algorithmic timeline where people can choose their algorithm. Those "feed generators" are the pluggable algorithms they promised and they do need global indexes (BGS's) to be able to inject out-of-network content to your feed. It all checks out. Yes you can get a chronological feed of accounts you follow, but that seemingly isn't what they see as the most important use case.
Maybe "U-ey" or "U-ee"?
There's also the small thing that stocks correspond to a fraction of an actual company and cryptos just some silly bytes.
If the headline were succinct there'd be no point in reading the article:

"Sam Altman says startups need in-person work to get going."

Here in the real world, we'll happily keep the policy of "remote first, but not remote only" where we occasionally do get together in a shared workspace for high-bandwidth exchanges of ideas. But I won't be tearing my home office down any time soon.
I'd not go so far and blame everyone involved in carbon capture tech; more specifically I thank that it CAN make sense if you're able to capture at the source (much higher concentration => less efficiency problems).

But I absolutely blame journalists and spokespersons that peddle this as some kind of viable technology when it's ABSOLUTELY not; this is similar to fusion tech, where people (sometimes deliberately!) create the impression that the technology could "solve" climate change and is just around the corner.

But in both cases no instance I've seen so far passes even a rudimentary smell test. If you have a novel method to catch CO2 from the air or are able to run your tokamak for 90s longer than that is awesome and interesting, but DONT run around and pretend to be heralding a scientific revolution in mainstream media (where both average reader and writer have an understanding of the subject and economics behind that is comparable with a average housecat).

I ABSOLUTELY blame people for doing that, and I consider it quite harmful because it creates the impression that there are some kinds of tech-based avenues out of climate change that never really existed at all, and this can even negatively impact decisions from policymakers.
I have no problem with sponsered content, especially if the advertisement is relevant to the content I'm consuming.
The old server broadcasts a 'this person has moved'-message. Your followers will then automatically switch over to the new account.

This implies that:

- If the old server is offline or unwilling, you cannot move
- Your old toots and interactions will still be tied to the old address, so you leave those behind.

There is some talk going on to find ways to mitigate this and it might be possible to fix the second issue.

The first issue is a bit trickier though. If you were to remove trust from the server, it becomes way harder to fight spam.
Agreed! I didn't mean for my comment to imply otherwise. (even Apple's refusal to allow other browsers, which would require JIT to be performant, illustrates Apple is aware the risk)
Comparing with self-hosting or renting a server is just dishonest. At that point you may as well compare with spinning up an actual EC2 instance. Your alternatives miss the main original value proposition of EC2 altogether, let alone spot instances.
Can confirm. judyrecords is built on a near framework-less monolith in PHP + 2 search servers. Searches complete within 100 milliseconds and SRPs return in less than 15 milliseconds on average. Runs a trimmed down version of CodeIgniter 2 (released in 2012) updated to run on PHP 8.2. Still got the CI 2 profiler.

https://postimg.cc/TLbvvSzm

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30481230
But if you don't blend the two, then you have a DRY violation. Someone should only have a say a field (column) is required in one and only one place, for example. The framework should take care of the details of making sure both the client and the server check.

I myself would like to see a data-dictionary-driven app framework. Code annotations on "class models" are hard to read and too static.
Well yeah, that's pretty much the point. San Francisco is not particularly walkable or bikeable by an objective standard (although it's still doable). Imagine if we sunk money into improving infrastructure instead of subsidizing autonomous vehicles.