skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A favorite HN comment of mine from a few years back (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21590482):

> Outside of fundamentally better workflow improvements, most professional fields don't randomly change their tools. If you gave a professional artist a new pencil that had to be gripped differently for no reason, they'd throw it in the trash.

>

> But in software, we tolerate buggy tools that change all the time for no discernible reason. We tolerate software that simultaneously targets professionals and casual users, serving both segments poorly. We tolerate software that can't be customized or adapted for specific workflows. It's tough to put into words, but if you watch a musician or a painter interact with their tools, there's a very clear difference that emerges, and over time you start to realize how much better all of their stuff is.

>

> In most professional artistic settings, workflow changes only happen because they have a clear benefit -- drawing from your shoulder instead of your wrist, changing your embouchure if you play an instrument. And even in those fields, it's generally accepted that over time people will end up with very specialized setups that are very consistent and refined and that remain constant for years and years.

>

> Only in the software industry would someone tell me that my professional tools should change because change is inherently good. Only in commercial software would an elegant, consistent interface like Markdown that allowed me to build up decades of muscle memory until my computer was an extension of my fingers and I didn't need to think about the way I typed -- only in software would that be considered a bad thing.
If it was true, the results would be much worse.
The average from my measurements is a bit above 2 kB.
This website says it is 2 kB: https://tpaschalis.me/goroutines-size/
Vivaldi browser, Workspaces, and tab stacks
I didn't say anything about whether or not I expect it to get better (translation from English to code doesn't seem like an insurmountable task based on what these do so far), but I think that cuts both ways.

For every "leap to a conclusion that some things will never be fixed" there's a "leap to a conclusion that this is already some sort of more general intelligence it is."

And that's really key to my main point. The only way to avoid either of those is to actually use the things and see what does and doesn't work. That's a million times more interesting than just unrealistic hype or hate comments.
A bit under 200, but only around 20 that I use with any regularity.
There are many different genres of sci fi. Seveneves is pretty much hard science fiction, in that it deals with plausible physics, which is also one of my favourite genres.

I particularly recommend the Xeelee Sequence (a series of novels) by Stephen Baxter if you like mind bending sci fi over cosmological time).

More classically, The Foundation series by Isaac Asimov is a great (and shorter) read.

First contact novels can also be interesting (meeting aliens for the first time). Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke is great. Also, Blindsight by Peter Watts.

So many others!
http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/newer-paradigms
99% of the time, no. But you only need one person to be absent minded (perhaps tired, maybe stressed and multitasking, maybe receiving constant interruptions from kids or work colleagues, etc).

There was some story I read years ago about how terrorists (I think it was) could have their plot foiled 99% of the time but they only needed to be successful once. Whereas their targets need to be successful 100% of the time. (I wish I could remember where I heard that)…anyways, this applies to IT security too.
Paper was submitted almost exactly 1 year ago, and last revised in Jan 2023.

Not sure if title needs a (2022), just pointing out the above in case anyone else like me read “19 May” and mistakenly thought it was a 2 day old paper :)
As much as it pains me to say so, this is probably fine for configuration languages so long as they’re backwards compatible. Eg toml is used by rust’s cargo tool. Cargo can just say “hey Cargo.toml is parsed in toml version 1.1 format”.
The usability issues here aren't in the realm of "does it have a polished case and nice straps", it's more "the state of the art VR tech isn't good enough for sustained work" unless your work doesn't involve reading or writing.

And, I mean... that's gotta be the bar for $3K, right? Even the most insanely passionate gamers would have a hard time justifying a $3K gaming accessory, IMO. And what else is there? The only usecase that I feel is ready is movies/TV, which... yeah is also a hard sell for $3K, especially since every family member would need one if you want to watch something together.
How does this qualify as hysteria? Who even knows CO2 is being transported via underground pipelines and that during a leak you have to worry about the gas settling and suffocating you, and that any cars/trucks will be un-able to operate in that environment?
Surely the correct solution is having both parties sign the same artifact?
Agreed, enough horror stories have kept me away from using Google as OAuth. The only value I see in it is as part of SSO for employee accounts. Employee leaves and revoke access to everything.
> I never use oauth (like to create a new account / password for everything).

Me too. I have 672. Lots are for accounts I set up for nieces/nephews, etc., so those don’t really count. I bet 100 are stale as well I’ll clean them up one day. Lol.
if man pages and `--help` output were more formal definitions of CLIs, we could make a tool that creates a browsable version of every CLI command that has man pages and/or `--help` text.
Do you need a ChatGPT plugin?
I understand what you are saying. How would you suggest to present it then?
Dragonfly is not faster than Redis when running on a single cpu. It can not be, just because it has the overhead of the internal virtualization layer that composes all the operations over multiple shards (in general case). But Dragonfly can scale vertically with low latency and high throughput unlike other attempts of making multi-threaded Redis that used spinlocks or mutexes. So how do we demonstrate the added value?
On mobile if the browser font is larger the content is off the screen without a way to scroll.
Don't worry: for every No Screens Cafe, there are 35,000 Starbuckses.
Similarly, Intuit Mint has gotten worse and slower over time as well. I used to use it to track all my spending (including manual entry for cash transactions and much manual categorization of all transactions), but I gave up a few years back because it was all taking so much time and was so slow. Now I just use it to see all my account balances in one place, but otherwise don't interact with transactions much at all.
The use case is replacing laptops - calling it now that we'll be reading Bloomberg articles about the "Headset Class" in our lifetimes :). Definitely don't think apple has a shot in hell of pulling that off in 2023, but I'd love to be surprised.
Too late, they cheated through all of the prerequisites.
OpenAI has released a model for that type of detection. It doesn’t work 100% of the time. The idea that you can just “hash all the AI generated answers and compare against them” is flawed because that problem is intractable.
nicely put! many aspects of text at least historically have much to do with its materiality (also in a cognitive development sense, learning how to write etc.). what we can think about nowadays is that text and speech might not be a necessary materiality of language. language might depend more on conceptual systems. more like a substrate of intelligence and that might as well be nonhuman (to stay on topic).
Last time I checked, that part was written in Python...
Bitwarden lists 791. A ton of them are for internal services/local dev accounts/what have you, but that's still a pretty long list.

I don't use most of them. A third of them are for my spam email address. I'm starting to notice Bitwarden taking its sweet time decrypting them all, though.
You can already (and since a while ago) verify GPG signatures when installing Python packages.

Nobody does that. The biggest problem the author didn't really relate to is that most Python packages come with no signature what so ever. So, what are you going to do about those packages if you wanted to verify the rest? -- just verify those that have signatures, and leave those without signatures alone? -- That just sounds ridiculous...

By and large, PyPI is the same story we had with HTML: incompetence that breeds more incompetence. The same way how Web browsers encouraged crappy Web developers to generate ever more broken HTML by "helpfully" fixing the broken parts, PyPI by not enforcing the good practices created a community of people who now don't even understand what the problem is.

Fighting this is hopeless, because security is by far not the biggest reason why people download and use Python packages. So, even if security sucks, the users, who, ultimately should've been the ones responsible for their security won't do squat. Instead, maybe, at best, there'll be some broken / partial solution from PyPI.
This article has some real problems. Here is one.

> Such systems are unwieldy to work with and difficult to get started with. In truth, many of them appear to have been developed as platforms for consulting businesses, though surely nobody would deliberately make their software complex and tricky just to motivate clients to purchase their services.

Or perhaps some businesses have complications to deal with that go beyond what a newsletter website needs? Some businesses have inventory, subsidiaries, multiple currencies, have to report sales tax in multiple countries with ever changing requirements (hence the support and updates that this writer doesn't think are required). Some companies have local statutory books that are different than their group books.

Really it is a bit like learning 'echo "hello"' and calling oneself a programmer. Then maybe one might ask why are lwn making Linux so complicated...
As someone who has primarily gone in the other direction, my anecdata supports the opposite conclusion: static typing tends to help me to prototype over more dynamic languages, even if it takes (slightly) longer to physically write things down. I think this is because of two things:

1. If I'm prototyping things, I find I spend a lot of time trying to figure out what sorts of shapes the data in my program will have - what sort of states are allowed, what sort of cases are present, what data will always exist vs what data will be optional, etc. If I'm doing that in my head, I may as well write it down at the same time, and voila, types. So I'm not usually doing much extra works by adding types.

2. If I change my code, which I often do when prototyping (some name turns out to be wrong, some switch needs extra cases, some function needs more data), then that is much easier in typed languages than untyped ones. Many times my IDE can do the refactoring for me, and if that isn't possible, I can start making the change somewhere (e.g. in a type declaration) and just follow the red lines until I've made the change everywhere. One of the big results of this is that statically typed prototypes are often immediately ready to be developed into a product, whereas in dynamic languages, the prototype already bears so many scars from refactoring and the natural back-and-forth that comes from prototyping, that it needs to be rewritten over more from scratch. (The corollary to that being that I have never once had a chance to rewrite a prototype before releasing it to production.)

I can imagine that some of this comes down to programming/architectural style. I tend to want to define my types up front, even in dynamic languages, because types and data are how I best understand the programs I work on. But if that's not how you work, the tradeoffs might not be the same. The other side is that the type systems I regularly use are almost exclusively modern ones, with decent support for things like product and sum types, so that I can use relatively simple types to model a lot of invariants.
The thing is, in the real world, you cannot rule out that there are cars that don't have the required hw or sw on the road.
Maybe in some future there will be no such exceptions, but the driverless cars technology is not going to wait for that. For the foreseeable future, the solution must be a hybrid (human/old tech/new tech) , unfortunately.
Absolutely, the people taking the photographs is where the actual real abuse occurs. Those should be the number one target for prosecution.

Although I think distribution causes further distress to the victims, it's much less severe than the initial abuse.

The images, they are artifacts of abuse, which is different to the abuse itself. The actual abuse could have occurred decades ago, in some cases....
Shit, just looking at the replies, there's a solid case for password managers. No normal human is going to memorize 100+ unique passwords meeting various complexity requirements. It almost makes shaming people for re-using passwords look like you're out of touch. Of course they're following bad practices, how could they not be?!
HOnest question; would you use a AR headset that wasn't actually see-through but is just streaming video from cameras on the outside? I assumed the answer would be universally no for everyone, but I might be in a bubble. I haaaaate the Oculus Passthrough, personally
963 in Bitwarden
How is that different from putting it into a dividend?

And why would anyone invest in a company that will never pay dividends/do buy-backs?
Yes, it does. Typically I gain that from talking to the client beforehand. I'll do a free consultation to understand what they are looking for, what type of solution might solve their problems, etc, and make proposals from there.

And often, gaining the correct understanding is a project in and of itself. That is really what many consultants do - they research problems, analyze the status quo, propose solutions and plans, and charge a fee for producing a report that includes all the results. Then someone else actually does the work.
Haha, good.
241 in 1password
340 in Google Password Manager
Well, it's part of the contract right? 1 weekend per month on call.

I do find it sad that there is no general requirement to pay employees to be on call.

So as a contractor you need to make sure that there is an extra provisioning in there AND that the rules which govern on call are extremely clear. Like what about you going on vacation? Sick? Grandma dying?
Modelling the market is not the same as allocating capital efficiently. The former requires predicting stupid and irrational investors acting as mob.
So much has been said about this guy as he was playing some 5-D chess with Govt. , CIA, NSA, Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

In reality he was just trying to make money by doing as little real work he possibly could and his preferred tactic was to either become a provider of vices for people richer than him or failing that investigate a billionaire life in order to uncover something and use it as a blackmail weapon.

And all the stuff that emerged up to now indicate that he managed to get in the proximity but never quite made it to the big leagues or score a big blackmail payment.

Because at the end of the day billionaires are not politicians, they don't care about their reputation and they never did.

So maybe only Bill Clinton paid him some millions.
In the EU this isn't allowed any more, any in person transactions need to be done with Chip and PIN or NFC.
> Then, has someone independently verified the Jepsen testing framework?

I don't think it matters. Jepsen finds problems. Lots of them. It's not intended to find all the problems. But it puts the databases it tests through a real beating by exercising cases that can happen, but are perhaps unlikely (or unlikely until you've been running the thing in production for quite a while). Having an independent review does nothing, practically, to make the results of the tests better.

In fact, almost nothing gets a perfectly clean Jepsen report. Moreover, many of the problems that are found get fixed before the report goes out. The whole point is that you can see how bad the problems are and judge for yourself whether the people maintaining the project are playing fast and loose or thinking rigorously about their software. There simply isn't a "yeah this project is good to go" rubber stamp. Jepsen isn't Consumer Reports.
Using JSON for configuration was and continues to be a terrible blunder.

TOML fills that role wonderfully. And it isn’t full of complexity that turns Yaml into a mess.
Hmm it should be working in Firefox - as long as you're using the latest version instead of ESR it should be good; works for me on Firefox 113.0 on Linux.

Some browsers have anti-autoplay-ad protections built in that prevent audio from playing until you interact with the page. You might have to click the page or press a key on the keyboard to get it started.
These "experiences" are visceral but also very short lived and weirdly frustrating for many (most ?) people.

I look at it the same we look at paintings. Some pieces are truely mindblowing, speak to your soul and you could look at them everyday for next decades without getting bored...or not. I think for most people even the most impacting piece becomes a wallpaper pattern after the fifth time they stared at it for 5 min. They might revisit it once in a while, at most.

For a headset, that mostly means it's played with for 30 min the first time and stays in a closet for the rest of its life. You forget about it and don't get a chance to get revisited.

So yes, experiences could be wonderful, but it also needs apps that bring you back to the device on a regular basis to help the ecosystem stay alive.

(the other weird part: the more realistic and visceral the experience is, the more you get greedy and ask for more. Except there's nothing beyond. You'll be looking at that moon landing, wishing to move forward to look closer, except it will be clunky if even possible. And you're reminded that yes, it's "just" virtual, and technology and content is not ready yet)
> (I wish I could remember where I heard that)

You probably heard it from multiple sources since it is a cliche used in all types of security fields. Kind of like how 'if you are getting something of value for free you are the product not the client' is for web-services people.
I tend to work with ERP a lot.

I once offered to fix the tab order on an input form, so the cursor started in the right box. The manager of that team got very excited and asked me not to change anything, the team had got used to the keystrokes!
> Or, not at all - we’re on year, what, 8 of that? There isn’t anyone reputable who thinks there’s a short term breakthrough coming, especially after Metas $$$$ swings at it and Apple failed to.

Pancake optics just recently became a thing and they really are transformative compared to fresnel lenses of the past. You have edge to edge clarity instead of the massive blurry mess of earlier HMDs. They’re also typically thinner and don’t need compute power to compensate for pincushion distortion.

If this Apple headset takes off, I’ll almost feel sorry for Meta. The Quest Pro was their “business prosumer” device that needed another 6-12 months in the oven before it would be usable for that purpose. Great PCVR headset, but nobody makes money on those.

If anything, Meta has shown that VR CAN be sold to the masses as a video game console (Quest 2 sales numbers are honestly impressive in that context), but the console model doesn’t bring in the billions in revenue promised to investors. And nobody wants Metaverse garbage. It’s make or break on the prosumer market, and if Apple bombs I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Zuck pack it up soon after.
Only one anecdote, but I found out a while after starting at my current job that directly questioning the extent to which scale-out was actually needed to solve a problem during a technical interview question is the thing that made me stand out from the rest of the crowd, and landed me the job. Being able to constructively challenge assumptions is an incredibly valuable job skill, and good managers know that.
This behavior drove me crazy enough to get an iPhone and I’ve never looked back. Respect my settings google.
>I'm not sure when this kind of "rent-seeking" turns into the kind of rent-seeking of which people disapprove.

Where I live there are individuals owning entire apartment buildings, >10 houses, in fact, 80% of the entire country's wealth is owned by the top 300 richest individuals.

Single individuals renting out their spare home, doesn't even register on the radar compared to what the rentseeking of the truly wealthy looks like.
Maybe you got Display an error message upon entering an illegal emoji
The concept is cool, but man, have they missed the edginess mark.

>Yes, there’s a bathroom. Inside it, a sign says “Big Brother is Watching”. We don’t have cameras or anything creepy like that. But we can’t say “God is watching”. Because we killed him.

I feel like there is a long-forgotten proto-Indo-European symbol that conveys the amount of cringiness this paragraph exudes.
Chrome is based on a fork of Webkit. Are you going to trust it because Safari passed a review before the fork?
Recognizing stupid doesn't mean you are able to do better or shouldn't imply you need to have a better alternative. You can criticize something without being beholden to offer an alternative.
If I need to login to your site less than once or twice a year, "Forgot my password" is my password manager. Personally, I feel that the utility of me working to keep and maintain that information in a database for high availability is essentially zero.

As a result, I store very few accounts overall and checking out as "guest" hasn't been a problem of any sort. There's like 10 critical things that I feel the need to store the password on and they all use a hardware key for 2fa anyways.

For the two accounts that I absolutely can't lose access to, I just used the "Correct Horse Battery Staple" method and came up with two very long and secure passwords that I have no trouble remembering.
Yeah, I like jsonnet a lot for config files.
I'm not in HW but some of those prices don't look right, especially for a run of 500k. $80 for 3D sensors? $60 for wifi/bt/pmic?
Saying that all parameters are strings isn't really saying much. In the same way one could say that any function is typed because each of its parameters is expected to be a byte string.

Even though CLI parameters are passed to the application as strings, in reality they are often expected to be (and converted to) numbers, enums, lists, file descriptors, … And don't forget that some parameters are optional and/or can be repeated.

In short, there is ample opportunity for proper type annotations.
JSON’s numbers are not IEEE-754. They’re numbers with an optionally infinite number of decimal places. It’s up to a parser to handle it. Python can parse these into integers if there isn’t a decimal place.

It’s in the name, but be careful not to get confused with JSON being JavaScript.
They're only logging if the script failed to load. They just want accurate metrics on how many people are blocking the ad serving script. Personally, I want them to know I'm blocking their ads since it sends a signal to them about what I care about. It's not clear to me that all ad-block users are categorically also objecting to 1st party analytics of any sort. Most ad block rule lists don't even try to block 1st party analytics. And as I said in my comment, this only works because logging is all they're doing. If they tried to use this technique to block ad-block users it would quickly be circumvented.

I understand you might not even want to signal this to them. That's why I shared the endpoint it's hitting. I want people that really don't want even this type of logging to be able to easily add a block rule. I admit in retrospect a less hidden and more obviously named endpoint would have been more polite. Personally, I really think it's a stretch to call it 'disgusting'.