skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Funny that SGI some 20 years ago supported more than 32bpp.
>Adding too many abstraction can be exceedingly dangerous in an environment where not having a full view of how memory and hardware registers are laid out leads to even worse errors than just buffer overflows.

svd2rust is pretty good for having safe abstractions for hardware registers. That said, as an example, no, the type system doesn't prevent you from deallocating your DMA buffer while the hardware is using it--I don't think it's reasonable to add that to the type system (and the type system right now doesn't know about DMA).
What's the chess puzzle? Q×h6+ is not working for me?
I'm always a little skeptical of seeking alpha article by <name> covering a report by company owned/run by <name>. There's no information whatsoever about how these estimates were generated. I'm sure you could back them out with decent accuracy from earnings statements, but the industry is notoriously secretive. I don't think there's any way he can even fathom a guess at what the price will be for N2.

It's also worth mentioning that none of the big players will be paying sticker price. They negotiate contracts that pay per KGD (known good die) since the process yields are abysmal for the first year or two.
Why do that when there is pacstrap?
> I didn't "accuse" you of anything

You accused me of cherry picking exceptions and interpreting them as prevailing attitudes.

Show me the evidence that your points are indeed prevailing attitudes.

Where is your evidence that "~30 years ago OOP was the only acceptable and superior paradigm." I've given several counter-examples. You haven't shown anything.

Where is your evidence that "~45 years ago psychology was equivalent to voodoo"? For that all I have a is a pop-culture reference, but your view doesn't explain why a psychologist character in the 1970s is seen as a member of the professional class similar to a dentist or airline flight crew.

Where is your evidence that "~10 years ago a language supporting simple asynchronous paradigms, static and cross compilation was a "waste of time".? I gave Go as a counter-example.

If you can't provide evidence for those things, why should I believe your viewpoints are other things are any better?

> If you look up articles and conversation that reference that first citation

As a reminder, you said "~1.5 years ago", not 3 years ago. And I said things haven't changed in the last 18 months or so.
Mostly? Yes. Google has more than 120.000 engineers. Those 1000 are less than 1% of engineers. It's like having one Rust dude in a 100 person company.

Most of people work in other languages.
This is now my new favorite way to explain to people that passwords should not exist. Long live FIDO2 and passkeys.
As a Spaniard my 2 cts:

- The law had an expiration date for sure (don't know why). Maybe to avoid convenience nationality acquisitions?

- "Why would the descendants of Spanish Muslims not have the same opportunity if the objective is … to reconcile Spain with its past?" Because the Moriscos[1] rebelled against the Crown[2], while the Sephardic Jews were expelled because of their faith (the last Jews of being expelled of Europe).

- "This hypocrisy led Cembrero and other commentators to speculate the law for Sephardim was proposed for economic reasons, or as an effort to appease Israel after Spain voted to recognize Palestine in the United Nations, or as a retaliation for the Catalan separatist movement." This is speculative from my point of view. There was an earlier law that allowed the Sephardim to get the Spanish Nationality but with the condition of residence created by a dictator in the first quarter of the XX century Miguel Primo de Rivera[3].

- All Hispanic-American citizens can acquire the Spanish Nationality after 2 years of residence. You can see that there are a ton of Spaniards of Hispanic-American origin in Madrid, for example.

- Calling the PP (Partido Popular)[4] "a party with Francoist roots" is a bit of stretch. PP is the typical center-right party like the German CDU, Les Républicains in France or the Democrats in USA. However, Vox[5] would be to the right of the PP and that Party could be seen as an inheritor of Franco's dictatorship.

- I'm sorry that there are racist judges, like this one, that asked tricky questions to void the nationality request of some people. He was investigated by the Judges Control Institution but they saw no wrongdoing in 2010 (a dog does not eat other dogs).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morisco

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellion_of_the_Alpujarras_(1...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_Primo_de_Rivera

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Party_(Spain)

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vox_(political_party)

Edit: sources and format
Would it be better if I listed every instance of executives choosing to poison people, willfully put them in dangerous working conditions to save some money against the law, releasing products they knew would maim people or kill people… all for marginal increases in share price? It’s a long freaking list.

This is the way this system is setup. Executives pursue profit at the expense of everything else. This is the cornerstone of capitalism.
Hopefully apple gets heavily fined for this non-sense
Yeah most of these results are meaningless without comparison to other languages. Same with the "how quick is it to learn?" what are the equivalent numbers of Go?

Based on my experience they're overselling how easy it is to learn and underselling the compiler speed.

Compilation is fairly fast these days. I would say it's faster than C++ feature-for-feature, at least for clean builds.

But on the other hand most people could probably learn all of Go in the time it takes to begin to understand the borrow checker.
At least one would hope so...
There was definitely a solid period much longer than a day where Javascript was allowed, and was used to "kick" people via DM.

It was usually just a link with an onhover that popped up an "enter the password" prompt, followed by an infinite loop of alerts if you didn't get the password within five tries. For some reason no one ever just deleted the password prompt and did an immediate alert-loop. We all just c/p'd the same password code, and just changed the password.

I did once get hit by some malformed JS that crashed Netscape as soon as you received it. It was the only instant-kill I ever saw. I think literally everything else was onhover, and almost always "five tries to guess the password". (I eventually learned to view source in another window.)

I was almost entirely in TimesSquare, so it could be that spread to one of the other chats immediately led to the "switch to Java", which was indeed a very sad day.
Well, the unwashed masses cannot handle themselves after several shots.../s
The film hasn't been released yet. There is a 30-minute version that has been shown at various events, but the final version of the film won't be released until late 2023 or early 2024, as there are still some interviews the directors want to do.
> If we accept a new input, our view of things must change, or else we will become insane, mentally ill or internally inconsistent.

This is beautiful.

I subscribe to the belief that "intelligence" is any system that can meaningfully organize information on its own, and, perhaps, is more of an emergent behavior of organized information, rather than used to organize information. Although, I'm not sure those can be separated in a meaningful way.
Amen. The insights that can be gleaned from even innocuous-seeming data at scale are impressive and terrifying.
Obvious applications: anything machine learning related (self driving cars, etc); Photo and video processing on your devices; Graphics processing; Simulation of a million different things, computation for a million different projects.

Your question could be posed to anything. Why does someone want a smaller battery? Perhaps they want their electric car to weigh 500 pounds less so it gets more range. Why didn't we stop when computers were the size of buildings?
This is worth examining, but one of the more enlightening examinations I'd like to see is a proper comparison of Mastodon, which is a big, hot mess with dependency hell, with other Fediverse software like Akkoma.

I'm running Akkoma, for instance, and the CPU and memory overhead has been barely noticeable. I can't help but wonder how many of the issues that people have with Mastodon would be substantially mitigated by simply using better software.
CFTC Chairman J. Christopher Giancarlo Response to Bollettino (2018)
Rust is basically entirely code gen. It’s no surprise that compiling is slow and speeding up compiling is a troublesome endeavour.

Rust itself might as well be considered a highly constrained macro language at this point.
>How long does place and route take?

If you want to avoid 12 hours builds you have to use floorplanning, incremental synthesis/implementation, and dynamic function eXchange (swappable components). I've been able to incrementally change designs to the scale of ~50K LUTs (look up tables, 50K LUTs is a big change) in about 15 minutes of synthesis and P&R with the rest of the design locked.

(The chip here is about 400x the size of a single 50K LUT change so I imagine you could have a 100 hour builds if not using floor-planning and partitioning)
Okay, let me see if I can explain it this way.

Thoughts are nothing but a chemical reaction happening in your brain.

Some thoughts (That are worth having IMO) are impossible to have without a chemical catalyst.

Without certain chemicals, you can't have certain thoughts.

You can't just 'think of anything you want' because you are bound by the laws of chemistry playing out in your brain, and, to go one step further: you can't even control the thoughts you will have next.

Chemistry is what's running the show.
Works great in WSL in windows terminal....
I’m curious. Why are you talking about a situation that does not pertain to the premise of the post I made? I’ve stated, I think explicitly, the type of situation I’m talking about and it is not the type of situation you are talking about. I’ve made no claims about what one should do in the cases that you are talking about.

I suppose you think there are no circumstances under which a person ought to change their mind “on the spot” so to speak. If you can think of such a circumstance then what is the point you are tying to get across?
Amazing !

Died after the URL, it was too much to recalculate the atomic numbers and keep track of Paul.
Maybe this chicken was the most unfair part of this game, the random captcha and country make it impossible to retry easily (maybe the time frame for feeding could be slowed down); but loved everything else, really ingenious.

cshell-may-p4pde-about-bulgaria-00-991-Qg2+-XXXV-bFmN- -iamloved-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWJaxlYRSc0
All of them do. Including bash. It’s just not the same syntax (ie ‘< filename’).

But I honestly think people who try to optimise away ‘cat’ are optimising the wrong thing. If one extra fork() is that detrimental then don’t use a shell scripting language.

For a lot of people, “useless” ‘cat’ enables them to write a pipeline in the order that their brain farts out the requirements for the pipeline. So they’ve optimised for human productivity. And given the human brain is slower than a few extra fork()s, I think optimising for one’s brain makes more sense here.
It's a bit unfortunate that they aren't sharing this statistic for other languages. For example, I'd bet that rather fewer than 77% of Google C++ devs are satisfied with the quality of C++ code. I know that, when I was at Google, I wouldn't have reported satisfaction with the quality of my own C++ code!
Four months to become as proficient in a memory safe, data race safe, and high performance language as in other languages seems like an astonishing accomplishment.

In fact it's frankly unbelievable, I'd have to imagine these guys are coming from a C++ background.
Only if they actually tried to think. Otherwise they don't get automatic passes for believing random things just because I am not 100% guaranteed to end up believing a correct thing.
Wow, a new low code app generator! And it even managed to shoehorn ChatGPT in! How exciting!
The Conspiracy Theory That Conspiracy Theory Research Is Part of Big Conspiracy
Going by stackoverflow surveys, the majority of younger engineers would be happier to see it implemented than not, regardless of whether they've even used the language before.
I've never seen DeepMind do a press release without something seriously impressive to announce. This sort of insignificant chitchat with the press seems like he got pressured by higher ups to talk about LLMs for stock price reasons.
> The effects of corporal punishment are small compared to the effects of molestation and physical abuse.

That even worse abuses such as molestation, rape, and murder exist is not a justification for corporal punishment (physical discipline), which has been shown to cause negative emotional, behavioral, and academic outcomes in children. Corporal punishment is a form of physical abuse, considering these negative outcomes.

> The Resolution on Physical Discipline of Children By Parents, adopted by APA’s Council of Representatives in February, relies on strong and sophisticated longitudinal research that finds physical discipline does not improve behavior and can lead to emotional, behavioral and academic problems over time, even after race, gender and family socioeconomic status have been statistically controlled.

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/05/physical-discipline
Brooks' definition of a silver bullet was "an order of magnitude improvement" and certainly none of those innovations individually come anywhere close. But I agree it's plausible that combined they might amount to one single order-of-magnitude improvement (as compared to average early-1980s development), for the subset of organizations that apply all of them together effectively.

In my personal experience at my workplace I've certainly observed many times that the quote "Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later." is not universally true. When things go well, onboarding an experienced engineer and assigning them a parallelizable task has often proved a relatively lightweight process on teams I've been on, and I've seen the new member's productivity rapidly exceed their communication burden on the rest of the team.

That might be explainable by how several of the innovations you listed reduce the need for communication between humans. For example, we now need less communication about regressions since CI/CD alerts the responsible party immediately, and we need to ask fewer questions when individuals can examine the entire history of a codebase in version control themselves.

(That doesn't mean Fred Brooks's work is now obsolete, this story is consistent with Brooks's underlying analysis of the problem.)
Either way, I've been watching that s6 project for a couple years now and am looking forward to when that happens. Is there any progress on that front? I hadn't heard that the replacement might not actually be s6.
It seems likely that the overwhelming majority of those 1000 people are pushing it into organizational adoption. Rust is not used enough yet that anyone will be forced to use it. Older C++ programmers at Google who are uninterested in moving aren't doing Rust.

As a parallel. A team using Scala at Amazon likely uses it because everyone (let's say 90%) was on board. It's just not something you force on your team unless there is existing interest.

Finally (an perhaps more importantly), the parent comment also mentioned older codebases. It does not seem likely anyone of those 1000 is currently doing maintenance so much as completely new projects/features. This tends to be work software developers enjoy more irrespective of language. So if you were pulled from maintenance in C++ to work on something new in Rust I'm pretty sure you'll say Rust is great just because you feel more productive.
> "Mainly we're cutting out, I think, after-dinner snacks."

I would agree based on my personal experience.
doh, of course the video length is randomized.
This piece from Matt Levine was just a reference to that other WSJ article.
This looks neat but the examples are terrible.

The fact that it's even willing to write a function which removes PII from a string is nonsense. No such function is possible.

And the comment for filterUsersTable is incredibly long, tedious, and unhelpful.

How does the SQL thing work? How does it know what my schema is? That's nowhere on screen.

The only believable example is the Salesforce one which anyone could do.
Hi, Zellij has this feature. Please check out command panes: https://zellij.dev/documentation/zellij-run.html

You can either open them through the cli with "zellij run -- <your command>" when inside a zellij session, or set them up in a layout so it opens all of the ones you want in a new tab arranged the way you like.
So you're saying that there should be someone between PM and the customers? That's just way too much indirection IMO.

Also engineering has not been "a service" anywhere I've worked and engineering typically has done QA as well, without an independent team. Product owner is whoever is ultimately responsible for what the product will do. Often it's PM, but on a lot of teams it makes sense for it to be engineering, especially if it's a product for other engineers.
I want the reverse: earplugs that effectively block kids crying or even just talking, but are still comfortable to wear for 8 ~ 14 hours on a plane.
I'm always amazed that people have so many opinions to begin with. My default for most things is "I don't know enough about that to have an opinion".
Amazon's Driverless Robotaxis Take to Las Vegas Streets
True, that's why it's useful to ask it online where you care less about offending people instead of asking it at a dinner party.
For some reason junior devs / SREs always go nuts putting things into labels, I guess it's the same insecurity and/or brain rot of only-one-class-per-file or three-package deep source hierarchies for a total 1k line project.

The rule of thumb I give them is that if it doesn't make dimensional sense to average across across them, never use a label.
> As I understand it (sorry, I don't have a citation handy)

This is so irresponsible of you to just assert without evidence, and is so out of context to portray VW as the good guys here. They did not break the rules and flaunt regulations to make their system more efficient. They did so to cover up their failure to deliver on a new generation of "clean diesel" tech. VW thought they could do it, they invested billions in it, and they couldn't figure out how to do it without emitting way too many other pollutants. So they built their cars to lie to regulators.

The tests cover an extensive range of use cases, mostly warm running. There were two modes, one that was more fuel efficient but emitted NOx above regulations, and one that was less fuel efficient but was within NOx regulations. They detected when the tires were on suspension that simulates real-world driving for testing. They got caught by academics who wanted to test real-world vs simulated suspension.

Here is actual source, Bloomberg, which isn't some kind of environmentalist or anti-business publication: (https://web.archive.org/web/20160312181801/https://www.bloom...):

"The road tests captured a variety of conditions: high elevations up Mt. Baldy; stop-and-go urban errand-running in San Diego; freeway driving around Los Angeles. The two Volkswagens’ emissions exceeded standards by 5 to 35 times. The BMW’s didn’t. [...] The Lean NOx Trap is a system of concessions. To get cleaner exhaust, you’d need to use a squirt of fuel every few seconds to burn up nitrogen oxide. Or, in the other direction, to get better fuel efficiency, you’d need to spew out dirtier exhaust. Managing this trade-off requires a complex calibration of the onboard computer, the engine control unit, so it can adjust constantly to variables like temperature and speed and optimize both emissions and fuel usage. The trouble was, Volkswagen hadn’t been able to get its new engines to comply with the stringent U.S. standards."

The reason is they had invested in a "clean diesel" engine tech that was supposed to be their market differentiator. VW invested billions into it. Yes, it was more fuel efficient, but it was supposed to also stay within existing pollution emissions regulations. Nobody else made such big investments in clean diesel because they couldn't figure out how to make it more efficient without also emitting pollutants at much higher levels. But everybody was so bought into it that they felt they had to cover it up.
For many languages I absolutely agree: stackful coroutines are the way to go since the programmer experience is much smoother, with fewer hiccups like having different kinds of functions, or being unable to yield in loops. Lua, Go, and now Java got this right; python, javascript, and c# have to live with a bit of a mess.

But Rust is not a language which can dictate its execution environment. It needs to be able to exist in a C-ish world, and that's not something that supports yielding. It's a shame, but at least you can write kernel modules in Rust.
What in gods name are emperor penguins doing 535m below the surface?
MLPerf 3.0 results are out. Now with GPT benchmark
I don't think passwords will be replaced. This is more of a demonstration of over complicated password rules, than against passwords itself.

Hardware and biometric keys can be stolen, cloned and lost. And trusting third-parties with keys to harddrive encryption is also not really trustworthy.
The current code we have for Yggdrasil v0.5 allows creating isolated networks using TLS roots. You can optionally provision the node identity as a TLS certificate and key and specify a root certificate, so that Yggdrasil will reject peerings with other nodes unless the peer presents a certificate from the same root. It should make it significantly easier to manage fleets of nodes under the same root whilst preventing accidental peerings to other networks.
Does Rust give guarantees around paging? Is Rust similar to C++ in that respect?
Hard for me to directly compare, but Rust builds that I have experienced have been comparable to large Node/npm projects built with webpack (JS tooling). Totally different space and output, but comparible.

The long dependency trees are part of it, but usually not too bad and only really bad the first time, since you don't have to rebuild every crate every time (I could be wrong, but it seems that way). I haven't been using it day in, day out though. I've installed a few apps via cargo, and have done some experiments for service applications, and Tauri as well.

As for the day to day use and how painful it is... I haven't had enough exposure to really comment on... it seems "fast enough" but I'm not running compiles often enough, simply because my knowledge and experience aren't really great in Rust. I've looked at it and played with it a few times, then I set it aside for months at a time and every time it's like I'm starting over.

Where I'm working now, there are some serious issues that may result in areas needing better start time on services, so that may be an opportunity to advocate for Rust. I've never really loved C or C++, so I'm less inclined to want to use them.
I feel you, I was chatting with my dad and he said something similar. Your framing as either or though isn’t quite right. I’ve found that the Model S is quite comfortable and quiet inside.

I also think it would be a very cool experience to drive a race car on a track, and I’m glad you get that experience. But I don’t see my interest in that extending or being prioritized enough to make the time and financial investment for such a specific thing. But your framing is again problematic, probably unknowingly, because having a car that can go fast and “going Plaid speeds on public roadways” with the race car comparison conjuring images of irresponsible drivers is almost entirely orthogonal to actually owning such a car.