skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I would pay 10 EUR. :)

Would 3 EUR or even 10 EUR / year for each customer be enough to run operations?
4th of July Reminder [video]
It's still a decent option for dating and an outing with friends/family.

Personally, none of the cookie cutter Hollywood movies interest me anymore. It's expensive. People use their phones. People talk. People eat very loud. No subtitles. It's honestly a miserable experience.
Mullvad 2023.4
I'd read that children could regrow fingertips. This article suggests that just having the base of the fingernail is what's needed. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2013/06/10/1903854...
Is it? My bank accounts in two European countries have in the last year transitioned from Visa Credit Cards to Vise Debit cards. Because the banks in both cases wanted about 2.5 euro per month for something that does not provide any value to me. Unfortunately Visa Secure seems to be changing its validation mechanism every 3 months though, which each time is super annoying.
Startup20 Group seeks $1 trillion investment in global startup ecosystem
How is crypto a passing fad? ETH is $2k and BTC $30k. Shouldn’t this be 0 by now?
> when we say CI, what CI really meant was actually integrate your code regularly. Code living on separate branches is, by definition, not integrated.

When I work on a long lived (say, a week or two) branch, I just rebase it on main every morning or some times several times per day. It always contains 100% of everyone elses code. But their code contains 0% of my commits yet. Because that's the point of the branch. That none of it is visible to anyone else, until I deem it ready to. The point is that when I merge it, it looks like an atomic change on main, which takes it from one working state (100% passing tests and so on) to another working state. And the only way to ensure that is to make the validation take place IN my branch.

If I'm eager to "publish" my work, I can do that. I can make multiple branches with just one or two commits each on monday and tuesday with new functionality behind some feature flag. And then the final friday commit is basically just flipping the feature flag. But it doesn't change the fact that I do want to make sure main stays healthy so I still want to gate the commits. I don't think there is a pattern of development that works everywhere, and whether one thinks that feature branches is an overhead I think will vary.

People who are used to a project taking 3 months and having multiple builds per day, perhaps having their tests run in seconds via a commit hook, will think that the overhead of a PR is massive. But if validation builds/tests take multiple hours anyway then the overhead of making branches isn't really going to have an impact on productivity.
Yes, as part of SE you are already strongly encouraged to turn down the evolution factor growth if I'm correct.

I myself do keep on playing with biters as I feel personally no enjoyment if there would be no biters.
Wikipedia link does not work
I see a lot of claims in your article without any examples etc. to prove these claims.

It's hard for me to distinguish what is factual and what is "only" evangelism ... Additionally it's probably a lack of knowledge on my side, since I only worked with git. So examples would be very helpful to make this topic more accessable.
Why does cycling feel harder than running at the same heart rate?
the longer we leave it to commit our changes, the higher the chances our commit will clash with someone else's changes

The further you let your branch deviate from the trunk the worse it gets, sure, but you can alleviate that problem pretty much entirely by regularly merging develop into your feature branch. When it's time to merge your feature into develop there aren't many conflicts because you've already got all the changes in your branch.

Trunk based dev is still better in my opinion, mostly because it forces people to check their work properly, to write robust tests, or else they risk breaking the build. If you work on a team with people who aren't particularly careful then it's not worth the hassle though.
"Man who boycotts all privacy-violating companies now alone in cave with his Goya beans and copy of Stallman's GNU manifesto"
Isn't constellation just relaying the inference job from the worker to a more powerful machine?
The biggest advantage I see of branch based development is that you land a single fix/feature with one merge commit. This makes it relatively easy to revert a change if necessary as it's more or less an atomic change.
in the 90's one search engine after another went this way. Each new engine worked for a while then advertisers started to game it and it gradually became useless.

It actually impressive that google has managed to avoid this flaw for so long.

The only thing I am not sure of is have advertisers finally found ways to game the system or is google doing it to themselves having forgotten why we all started using it in the first place.

I reckon that chat GPT will end up like the Douglas Adams HHGTG dystopian elevators at some point too :)
We have a saying in my country that roughly translates to “Stupids gift, but who don’t take are idiots”. If you give something away for free, there will be always someone who takes it. Facebook is free, and people were using it. But they left once people got exasperated due to ads and other stuff. TikTok is free now, but you’ll see a similar migration once the enshitification process begins.

I don’t have ads on YouTube in my country, but my feed is still being manipulated (it’s eery to see how they want my attention). I travel or use a VPN and the experience goes straight down the drain. I could pay, but would they stop manipulating the feed or collecting my data? I’ll be using YouTube as long as they keeping it free. If it becomes paid, I will if the terms are worth it.
> if you have any belief in philosophy [...]

You're going to have to explain which part of philosophy you mean, because what came after this doesn't follow from that premise at all. It's like saying a Chinese Room is fundamentally different from a "real" solution even though nobody can tell the difference. That's not a "belief in philosophy", that's human exceptionalism and perhaps a belief in the soul.
Most studies have shown that diversity training either does nothing to decrease racial bias, or is actively harmful[0]; The only intervention proven to decrease racial bias is union membership[1], which unsurprisingly executives don't like to promote.

[0]https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/17/opinion/dei-trainings-eff...

[1]https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12537
https://archive.fo/mk28t
> reasons for why everyone seems to have moved away from 1 big SQL database

I'm sure there are going to be other answers for the code side of things, but for ops:

Depends a lot on the size of the service, but in some cases: We got enough data that 1 big SQL store makes ops hard. (Took me 3 days to drop a table recently in a way that wouldn't affect the users) And splitting data became easier than before with specialised backends. (A sharded 2nd layer cache of live data seems way simpler to achieve than say 2 decades ago)
I had no idea RealPython was so well respected, but the example article is really quite egregious. I think the problem is the title was written for experts, but the contents were written for a beginner. Content mismatch.
when I say IBM is probably not involved in this decision. They may be, but I don't think so.

IBM mostly staying out of Red Hat business decisions might have been true while folks like Jim Whitehurst and Paul Cormier, members of the old guard, were still in leadership positions, but I don't think it's true anymore.

Over the 4 years since the acquisition, I have heard from many Red Hatters that things have continuously eroded, day after day.

And is that very surprising? Something like this was inevitable, given IBMs track record with other acquisitions.

Nothing gold can stay.
Yay, more bolt-ons. Like I said, I left all this behind.
I still love how years ago, Stallman basically added a backdoor to GNU FDL just for wikipedia (and similar wikis) just for the few months when Wikipedia was migrating the license.

It worked though

to elaborate… wikipedia used to be GNU Free Document License, which is a terrible license. But there was no way to easily migrate to CC, as you would need to contact all the authors and get agreement.

So FSF used the “or later” clause to make a new version of FDL that said “these few months, wikis can migrate from this license to CC”. The new version of the license was made just for wikipedia, just so they could migrate to CC.

Here, part “relicensing”

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html

edit
also see

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3-faq.html
There's only one Magnus Carlsen.

Now ask yourself what's the point of playing chess if every chessplayer except you is a copy of Magnus Carlsen.
Microsoft, Google, Apple, Meta have all recalled workers back into the office. Meta even said they thought remote work would be permanent at the start of the pandemic. Zuckerberg changed his mind.

It's quite clear now that big tech have developed some productivity/creativity metrics that shows remote work is worse than office work for profit. Hence, they've all recalled workers back.
Indians were not hired at my previous job.

I figured something was weird because we shared a parking lot with another IT firm and I noticed their staff looked different.

Later I established a relationship with HR and found out that the recruiters actively tossed any resumes with Indian looking names in the trash because they assumed they’d have need a visa and had problems with English.

Needless to say as a senior engineer, I confronted HR and offered to help with recruiting. We went from 1 to 5 highly qualified Indian engineers that same year.

What am I saying? Diversity is your fault.

Senior engineers and EMs are directly responsible for not advocating for others!

Things you can do:

- Actually meet new people who don’t look like you

- Help a junior find their next company

- Join forces with other seniors and tell management and HR to be better about hiring
And the old(er) building right next to it is named after Kristen Nygaard.

Simula was used as the first programming language for informatics students at the University of Bergen until the mid 1990s, when they switched to Java. I was among the last batch of Simula students there.
The SC was only asked to consider race. It isnt writing legislation, it's asked a very specific question: is race-based admissions policy consistent with the existing body of interpretations of the constitution. It's answer: No.
The evolution of cable television in the U.S. might be instructive.

At first, TV (broadcast) was free, with ads.

IIUC, when cable TV later rolled out, it was ad-free. Viewers paid for it instead.

But eventually even those paying for cable TV were shown ads.

So one lesson is that paying for a service might only delay its enshitification.

EDIT: It seems I was wrong about cable TV starting out ad-free [0]. So my example isn't strong evidence for my enshitification claim.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18409942
Every time this is reposted I giggle at this comment:

> @chx: I already have a master's thesis. This was harder. – ais523 - high effort answers Oct 29, 2021 at 1:17
Do you send thank you cards every year to the communistic coastal city dwellers that funded rural electrification, the TVA, etc?
While I agree with your point, the map example is not entirely well represented in your comment.
The idea is not to just store keys and values in separate arrays, the idea is to look at your use case and model your data after the transformation you need.
So if you have a case where storing keys and values as pairs because of your access pattern, then do that, if you have a case where you do a lot of searches through keys, then store them in separate arrays.

The point of DoD is to look at the data you have and the data you need it transformed into and then structure your data after.
Kmymoney?
This is the funniest aggro answer I've gotten on any site in many years.

Reading a book on IBM/Japan will not make the analogy built on sand become built on concrete. I'm not complaining about IBM/Japan, I'm complaining about room temperature superconductors. Also no one will read a book to make sense of a short comment
Have you tried Cosmopolitan perl? (https://computoid.com/APPerl/)

Now that APPerl XS support has improved, I want to play again with it again.

Earlier this year, I did fatpack few things in a "dirty" way: by adding them to APPerl.

Still, this gives you a perl.com working anywhere, with all the modules you need, executing by default the payload of your choice.

I had a lot of fun writing a very barebonne webserver (https://github.com/csdvrx/PerlPleBean), along with a few side utils to do mDNS to expose the webserserver on .local (https://github.com/csdvrx/PerlPleBean/blob/main/experiments/...), run perl scripts on uploaded files etc

Someone with your experience could certainly do many more interesting things with APPerl :)
> Consider hot code reloading to be like changing the tyres on a moving car, the pieces and tools are there to make it possible, but in almost every situation it's more sensible to stop and change. Backwards compatibility for all API changes, code correctness and deployment methodology need to be fixed before you can start a hot rollout. That's not even to consider a flexible application architecture that will be compatible with such changes in functionality (OTP does indeed ensure this is compatible on the basic process level, but there is no magic bullet around high level architecture).

This was an interesting discussion I had with a few of our B2B customers at a customer event.

Even with redundancy and everything, something like a major postgres upgrade is a tricky thing. You either have to do some amount of work of setting up several clusters, setup logical replication, decide a cutover point (most of them things pg_easy_replicate (if I remember the name right) does), while juggling the backup solution on the side and such. It's overall understandable, but a decent number of steps to do right, and if you don't you might even lose transactions to the upgrade. And losing transactions is way worse than being down.

The alternative though is somewhat brute: After testing everything, shut the app down, shut the cluster down, upgrade binaries, run pg_upgrade. Restart cluster, check cluster, start application. This requires downtime, but as a procedure, it is very straightforward, very testable and overall predictable. Running a readonly version of the application sadly wouldn't be possible because of choices in the application.

Interestingly, many of our larger customers obviously preferred if vendors don't go down, naturally. But for a complex migration or update, most of them have been burnt by horror stories of upgrades going entirely sideways. If an outage is of predictable time, well-planned and communicated in advance, they can prepare for it and deal with it. One just shrugged and said "So what, then we just tell our customers we don't provide that service for half a day. No big deal with a month in advance or so"

This gave me a very valuable perspective of how much energy to put into avoiding downtimes for rare procedures and interactions. Talk with your customers, and sometimes the correct answer is indeed "don't".
I don't see that in the comments. (and whould argue it's an orthogonal point anyways, many VCS, including git, can easily accommodate different development styles)
“No one”?!?

Poorly written headline for a very thin article.

Sure, lots of people who are white and deny systemic racism or the effects of it exist. That’s literally the problem we’re fighting and why we need diversity efforts.
My experience has been that most people have not heard of it, most people that have heard of it have not tried it meaningfully, and most people who tried it meaningfully did not unlock massive productivity gains yet.
I like this concept. If what you're trying to communicate is so formulaic and devoid of actual significant content that AI text generators will output nearly the same text: reconsider.
The thing is — I'm actually quite stupid. I don't even understand what a monad is. I just FP because it's a good tool. So, here's an example. I'm building an automatic storyteller on top of GPT-4 — it's a toy project to build the LLM-based functional library. Here's how the code looks, with comments: https://gist.github.com/golergka/3fdc6b9cf9717bd1c0b315925a8...

This is literally 20 lines of code, and it doesn't take that much to learn to read it easily. When I originally implemented LLM-based applications in Python, it would make about 10 times more, and all the components wouldn't be as modular. I can change the functionality of this code in a very drastic way with minimal code changes and with safety of completely statically type checked code.
Something I've recognized as I grew up and had kids especially, is that your real outcomes in life are often the product of the expectations placed on you.

Eg - I grew up in a poor, 50% immigrant area in Brooklyn. The Russian and Asian immigrant kids had better outcomes than their American peers despite fewer resources because their parents kicked their ass and failure / slacking wasn't an option.

Whether perfect meritocracy exists or not isn't the point, the point is to maximize your own input to increase your own chances.

In contrast I see a lot of modern approach to problem solving is to lower expectations to make things more equal for some. But I expect that this lowering (eg: no need for SATs, no more selective magnet schools, easier admissions by race, etc) will have a negative effect, the opposite of the immigrant mentality described above.

I see a similar trend with lowering enforcement of some laws because the enforcement appears racist based on who's doing the crime. By making it "okay" you are perversely worsening those people's lives in the long run.

It's a little sad because I am sure all of this comes from a good place but it doesn't truly elevate people.
Go the airline route and put names on the tickets and check for ID when entering the venue
This specific change shall excite many as CC BY-SA 4.0 is one way GPLv3 compatible, but CC BY-SA 3.0 is not. Which means that free software developers can now embedded many Wikimedia contents in their GPLv3 applications. This seems not mentioned in the blog post though.
Fwiw, I think a lot of that is familiarity. I'm trying to create a Python backend right now, and it's something I've done before, but still every time it feels like a pain - what are the best practices for dependencies now and how do I install everything, how do I set up a server, how do I get it to work with SSL/TLS, where should I be putting my assets and my templates, how do I get them to link together, how do I get this into a container, etc, etc.

But I think that's just a familiarity thing. I know what I'm doing when it comes to frontend development, so it's not an issue to get a new project off the ground, but backend development - and particularly backend development in Python - is something that I only touch occasionally, and therefore have to futz around with every time.
> Arguably the needs of the standard library of a language designed in the 70s compared to today are very different.

C supports modularity since the 70s. You do not need a standard library with everything and the kitchen sink. The standard library is not the only component you're able to consume.

If there's a lesson from high level languages such as python and node.js, it's that being able to consume third party libraries is all anyone needs to get stuff done, and standard libraries bring convenience to the table but they aren't critical to get stuff done.
The first "C" stands for "Cython".

/s
slice of life snap is very different from street photography... it's the blurry unfocused faces or other parts of your friends being in the moment feeling doing things
> the average person is using it to genuinely provide value

I absolutely do not believe this to be the case. For starters the average person probably isn’t even aware, but the vast majority of folks I’ve seen use it have found it super interesting for like a week then dropped it because it wasn’t actually more helpful/better than the previously available tools.
> Why race only?

Because it was only asked to consider race and only for admission to academic institutions. So that's what it did.

> why did the Supreme Court make an exception for military school?

Because the Solicitor General argued that the military could have considerations different to civilian academic institutions such as national security. And the Supreme Court agreed that they might so included the exception.
there's a whole ecosystem in Python originally developed for high energy physics data processing: https://github.com/scikit-hep/awkward all because Numpy demands square N-dimensional array

Same technique used everywhere, here's a simple Julia pkg for the same thing: https://github.com/JuliaArrays/ArraysOfArrays.jl/blob/3a6f5b...

But Julia at least has the decency to just support ragged Vector{Vector} out of the box, and it's not that slow
Nobody gets what they want with that guy. Right hand drive: nope. Tweets about Tesla’s with no right hand drive: nope. This is somewhat ironic that some people’s inclination will be to complain about a Tesla issue on Twitter, how long before the conspiracy theorists put this all together?
For many people it is already a lasting improvement. It simply saves us so much work that we can improve in many other areas. And that is improving too; we have a slew of internal tools build with several LLMs, including the openai ones, that effectively replaced full time employees. The entire process of transforming arbitrary json or xml to another json with a required knowledge of the field semantics is now done quite perfectly using LLMs. And that is a lot of the work we do. Creating json schema’s based on a pdf, text, arcane line feed format etc is also now seconds vs hours. Debugging previous (and we have 10000s of these) transforms is also automated and simply, measurable, more accurate and faster than humans. And it was boring work so we can focus on other things.