skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Natural gas plants are about twice as efficient (~50%) as a typical gasoline engine (~25%) and burn much more cleanly, producing fewer pollutants across the spectrum for the same amount of energy.

I think this is an overly simplified view. That is the main problem I have with all this stuff. It is too easy to repeat the established “scientific consensus” which is all based around everything operating perfectly in a vacuum. In the real world, systems are complex and it is often not nearly as simple. See, for example, this article:

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/environmental-impacts-natur...

It states

> The drilling and extraction of gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, the primary component of natural gas. Methane is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years

And

> Whether gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the leakage rate, the time frame employed for evaluating global warming potential, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors. One study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer

As far as I’m concerned even if natural gas is “not a fossil fuel” on paper, if it leaks methane in order to extract it, it is no better, and perhaps worse than coal. Let’s say natural gas is only 25% better than coal when all is said and done. That puts us at approximately 50/50 in terms of emissions for the US grid (20 + 0.75 * 40) = 50. At that point, my claim that “most” of the energy still comes from fossil fuels is essentially true when you look at it just in terms of emissions.

Of course, it doesn’t take into account that the energy use in the grid has been shifting towards more renewable sources over time, but the idea that there is some net positive just from switching to electric vehicles, I think is far from a foregone conclusion.

Also, it seems everyone in the replies has latched on to my claim about the energy in the grid, but no one touched on the environmental impact of mining lithium and other metals to produce the batteries which will almost surely be a net negative for the environment.

I am not trying to trash on electric cars here, merely trying to point out that these issues are far more complex than the way they are talked about in the mainstream media, the scientific community, and hacker news.
Remarkable 2 ftw
microkernel, that's good. i know of redox, minix also use microkernel but did not 'take off'
> The main problem is the way these standards are implemented. OAuth 2.0 (on which OIDC is based) does define a reliable back channel for session revocation…

The larger issue is that even if you had a reliable revocation system - most relying parties wouldn't use it.

The typical relying party supports logins from Facebook, Google, Apple and the like because the user chose to use those as authentication systems. However, the relying party is independent. The user would not expect other sites and desktop apps to suddenly stop working because the user hadn't visited Facebook for a certain number of hours.

There were efforts in the past using transparent pixels on the identity domain to do distributed session tracking - e.g. if I'm interacting with _any site_ using the login, that will encourage the session to stay alive. Turns out that was way too much visibility for social login providers to have.
Haha was waiting to see how long it'd take for someone to notice!
The problem I see with this is, that you don't always know how to make a deep copy. Who knows, what happens when you copy a variable of type Foo?

Taking that aside, I agree it would make a lot of sense to write code in that style^^
Like another commenter, I'm curious what drove you to this. Seems like clearly A Good Idea I Could Have Benefited From, but my attitude was always: I finished the class, whatever I need to learn through application, life will point me toward. Yet I wish I had done something similar to what you did. What gave you the impetus?
They are consenting to letting people understand the ideas in their work and using those ideas combined with other ideas to produce different ideas.
JSON Schema Store
Show HN: Find and share good and inspiring ideas – raiseto
There's video of competitors marching into waves that appear to be as tall as they are.

I'm not sure under any other circumstances would the competitors have swam (or trained) in waters like that.
So how do you measure productivity? I see no definition of "Developer Velocity" in this article or the linked ones, nor do I see an explanation of how it's measured, nor do I see any real attempt to prove its validity. They simply assert that they have a meaningful metric, which is begging the question.

>generative AI tools such as CopilotX and ChatGPT have the potential to enable developers to complete tasks up to two times faster

I'm surprised McKinsey is willing to endorse ChatGPT, which is one of their major competitors in the information-free drivel market.
> These kind of world maps with 'live' data

I agree. And I'm glad you put quotes around live. Much of the data for the US is estimated, not actually sourced from the grid operator. It'll be great when we have realtime data everywhere.
dang roams through all variants of HN ;)
Yes thanks as I read the issue and the code I realized the advice was to patch downstream. I know a lot of folks who build hermetic and reproducible builds for large amounts of open source code often have to patch downstream, but its fairly rare to see that requirement from such a basic crate/library. Hopefully this resolved at some point, it seems like a pretty aggressive stance to take that puts people who have a hard job (rigorous chain of trust in builds is hard work and done for very good reasons!!) in a harder spot.
Hey now, it does have some specific advice! For example you should perform the "extensive reconfiguration" needed to generate code test coverage reports. Presumably since this article is about metrics for the C-Suite we can provide this valuable information to them so they can assess "the extent to which areas of code have been adequately tested". What truly useful and not catastrophically bone headed advice. Thank goodness we have tech savvy experienced contractors like McKinsey to whip our shabby tech org in to shape.
As I kind of expected, a lot of general statements I mostly agree with, but very light on specifics and no concrete data at all. “276% better!” does not mean anything without knowing how they define better.

> leaders and developers alike need to move past the outdated notion that leaders “cannot” understand the intricacies of software engineering

Leaders absolutely can understand software engineering, if time and effort to learn is spent. McKinsey themselves say this. So their argument is 1) if you learn about software engineering, you’ll be more capable of evaluating the efforts of software engineers and 2) don’t use idiotic quantifiers of productivity like LoC per day.
That explains it. Thank you.

> Donnie Weaver, an artist who works with preschoolers, saw the shiny cabinets curbside and stopped short.

> “I thought, ‘Oh, what a cool box! ’ ” he remembered. “Because I like stuff from that era. I picked it up without really looking inside, opened it up when I got home, and thought, ‘Oh, my God.’ ”

> Weaver later ran back with a wheelie cart — the cabinets weighed about 15 pounds each — but the other two boxes were gone.
If I'm reading right I agree with you that it's nobody's business if someone wants to push themselves hard and accept the consequences - although you'd still want to try and talk your friend out of it given the chance. It's not clear if that's what happened here though.
Nope. Being an ex McK, first thing to do is check who wrote this, knowing that the senior figureheads are just for name, it was written by the lowly Analyst or EM.

In this case, worthless crap.
Read the list of changes I'm talking about here. You're making kind of a "what if we made a better world for nothing" argument don't you think?
I've read Hoffer's book. One aspect of it the article neglects is that all the movements studied were cults of an individual personality: Martin Luther, Napoleon, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, a few others. This perspective does not fit the Soviet Union entirely well -- I forget how Hoffer addresses that objection.

The book is not long, and a lively read, highly recommended. Sample: Hoffer quotes a low-level "true believer" as exclaiming "We Nazis are the happiest people in the world!"
> but it can also scale up to "real" compute so it's a bit nonsense to dismiss it as only being for embedded.

Especially after being selected for EU super computer effort.
AA has had a real annoying stick up their ass for a while. I'd wager a decent amount of money this initiative is being pushed by the same person/group who decided on the banning of AA accounts for getting too many citi aadvantage cards a few years ago.

Wouldn't dream of paying to fly them and only use their miles to fly their partners so I guess they need _some_ boogeyman they can point to for their terrible performance, can't possibly be their management's fault
This is absolutely awesome and something I always wanted (I’m in a 8GB M1 though which I regret often not going to a 16GB). I just want to sandbox some of the applications I need to use but don’t trust on my computer (looking at you Bambu studios). I tried using the sandbox feature on macOS but it’s unusable for me on Ventura.
Crypto, being decentralized, would probably not fall under the data center category. I'd be interested to see the percentage on its own though.
But it’s not good. Things are fucked up. People continue to fly, eat meat, and buy ever bigger SUVs and electronics all the time. Most of the worlds population hasn’t even recognised that’s a problem.

On a larger scale, politics plays the blame game, industry shifts CO2 certificates, and everyone tries to keep doing what they’re doing while painting a thin green veneer on it.
Yeah I moved from Slackware to years of FreeBSD to Debian around sarge. Never looked back tbh..
> I'm happy to accept some limitations on the goods/services I buy if it means I'm saving some money.

Even when the value lost exceeds the savings?
After growing up gay in rural Mississippi, there is really nothing you can tell me about being oppressed by Christians. I would just prefer your movement's tactics to have been slightly less incompetent back when there might actually have been some chance of accomplishing anything. That's been a long time ago now, of course.

I said the same then, to much the same level of vitriol in response. At this point I really believe that it's more about behaving this way for the sake of it than about trying to accomplish any kind of real change.
OP is correct. It needs context. /Two/ prominent tech people have passed. It would be useful to know which the black bar is referencing, or is it referencing both?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/adobes-co-founder-john-wa...

https://nivenly.org/blog/2023/08/19/an-announcement-regardin...
Ya, nobody has figured out public transport. it’s a myth
Halliday & Resnick Fundamentals of Physics is what we used in AP as well as in freshman year at college. Covers most sections one needs to be familiar with to be physics literate (solid/fluid mechanics, waves, thermo, electromagnetism, optics, relativity).
As someone who had an a similar experience to whom you are replying to, this was definitely not the case. The problems were easy, but were not "zero effort". Even if it takes you only a few minutes to do the steps and show the work per problem, then that could still take you 30-60 minutes to complete the assignment. That was time I'd spend doing things I wanted to do (fun in the short term, a nightmare in the long term).
There are some inequalities too, so we need some slack variables. /s
That page lists 7 coal powered plants.
It's not loading for you? hmm that's not cool.
I saw a WayMo suddenly stop in the middle of a 5 lane one way street before reaching a complicated red light with marked turn only lanes, pause there, then back up all the way to a nearby alley entrance, then move forward again to the leftmost lane where it stopped at the red and then continued on when the light changed. Really can't understand what happened. It might be a complete navigation reset, but then it should still do sensible maneuvers to go around the block or something. Data on this weirdness must be collected, but of course they aren't sharing it as hey look what my crazy thing did. Seems like the whole experiment needs review and more rules. The goals are great, but the methods really matter a lot.
Although I never played Jazz Jackrabbit, I remember in our town there was this guy (I think he was a picture frame-maker) and I think my dad was friends with him.

I remember going downstairs into the work area and I remember he was playing Jazz Jackrabbit on his old computer, and I remember thinking that this game must be epic.

Anyway, random story. It just evokes that memory for some reason.
No because NFTs are just smart contracts which can be queried for the current owning wallet. Similar to OO, you can put any side effects you want into the functions as long as they conform to the interface
The nice thing about the Mac is that you can run a lot of unix tools natively.

But of course, anything that runs on your Mac is a potential security hole. Obviously all 3rd party apps that you use can compromise security. But it can also be your own code: If eg. your rails app has a security vulnerability, which is common during development, and you run it with your local user, as is common during dev, then that vulnerability can potentially compromise all your data.

So if you want to be safe, run all your dev stuff in VMs or on a separate device, or in a container or something.

Of course, that is cumbersome, and whether it is necessary or not depends on what kind of threats you expect...
Vallhall awaits them
If you think that's fucked up, try the reality of those who weren't fortunate enough to die from diseases but instead were lynched or massacred for almost no reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_Account_of_the_Destruc...
1. Not my problem, I am not in America.

2. I am not trying to change any bloody thing. I just don't believe in God. No need to turn this into a political debate. I'd rather discuss religion in that case.

3. I believe in free speech. No one is taking your rights away here, you're free to do whatever you want as am I.

If the fact that I have another opinion than you, then my friend, what you're looking for is an echo chamber, not a discussion with strangers.
Ask HN: Switch to Ubuntu, or Stay with Fedora?
I've heard Ubuntu has improved over the years, is it worth switching to from Fedora?
>They're suing them for sometimes being more expensive than booking directly with the airline. How in the world is that a valid lawsuit?

Read the actual lawsuit document[1]. They claim that:

1. they violated various ToS clauses of the AA website, which they agreed to by accessing the website to download logos.

2. they're helping other people violate AA's terms of carriage contract by finding them skiplagged tickets, which is illegal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference

3. they infringe on AA's copyright and trademark by using their logo on their site

I won't speak to the validity of each accusation, as that's up to the judge to decide, but superficially they all seem plausible.

[1] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.38...
A successful endurance athlete should die peacefully at home surrounded by family and friends. Not like this.
I loved the Doctor Who exhibition in Blackpool. Unfortunately it's no longer there!
The author could implement the deep-copying pointer and share the .h on their GitHub. You don’t need a language extension for this in C++ as types can implement operator overrides and copy and move constructors.

But I doubt many people would use it, and that’s probably why it doesn’t belong in std::.

In contrast, before C++ 11, developers would write their own RAII-style smart pointers. So it made sense to save them the labor. I don’t think a pointer that doesn’t allow shallow copies is usually found in codebases. It sounds like a specific use-case pointer.

It’s a neat type that people coming from other languages could like, but maybe not quite standard library-ready?
How Much Money I Made from My Apps in College (100k+ Downloads) [video]
> languished in obscurity until a cache of them were found at Computer Reset

I never learn of such events until it’s decades too late.
Oh wow, that’s crazy

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1331322/password-managem...
Hmm... Let's try with the ridiculously esoteric thing I'm currently tinkering with:

> "Show HN: Ghidra object file exporter extension" - "I'm working on a reverse engineering technique which allows me to unlink parts of programs back into object files. Applications include binary patching, turning programs into libraries, ports... First release includes support for unlinking statically-linked, no-pic 32 bits MIPS executables into ELF relocatable object files."

Second comment and replies:

> "Is this something that could potentially replace traditional disassemblers?"

> "Absolutely! Ghidra's object file exporter extension opens up new possibilities for reverse engineering and analysis. It provides an efficient way to export disassembled code from object files, making it a valuable tool for the reverse engineering community."

> "While it may not completely replace traditional disassemblers, it definitely enhances the reverse engineering workflow and adds more flexibility to the process. Ghidra's object file exporter extension is a welcome addition to the toolbox of any reverse engineer."

> "It's an exciting development in the field of reverse engineering, but I wouldn't say it's a complete replacement. Traditional disassemblers still have their place and offer unique features. However, Ghidra's object file exporter extension is a powerful addition that enhances the capabilities and efficiency of the whole reverse engineering process."

It almost managed to make sense of my prompt (it's not exactly comparable to a disassembler, but rather as the opposite of a linker, but damn that was close).

> "I'm not sure I fully understand the implications of this technique. Can you explain it in simpler terms?"

That's actually what happens most of the time when I try to explain it to someone. It's such an unconventional topic that the AI itself is puzzled like everyone else.

> "This is exactly what I've been looking for! Can't wait to try it out."

> "As someone who works with MIPS executables, this is a game-changer for me. Thank you!"

OK, now it breaks down. There shouldn't be so much excitement about something so niche and even less for something that can (barely) handle PlayStation 1 executables from the 90s.

(https://www.fakehn.com/submission?id=sCuEvS4VUA1tFLfLKVJu)
How is it a transfer from the public to the private if I privately create something and want to privately sell it?

Copyright allows me to monetise my private creation. If it did not exist, my first customer could distribute it to everyone else without penalty and I would make no money.

That is why it is an incentive, not a subsidy. Without it, I will not invest the effort to create it. No public property is used to subsidize my creation.

In the absence of something like copyright, subsidy would be required in order for much creative activity to occur. You have it backwards!
export LC_ALL=C
awk '!a[$1]++' access.log|head

If access.log is large enough, awk will fail.

When this happens, one can split access.log into pieces, process separately then recombine.

But that's more or less what sort(1) does with large files, creating temporary files in $TMPDIR or other user-specified directory after -T if using GNU sort.

There was a way to eliminate duplicate lines from an unordered list using k/q, without using temporary files but I stopped using it after Kx, Inc. was sold off and I started using musl exclusively. q requires glibc.

For example, something like

#!/bin/sh
# usage: $0 file
echo "k).Q.fs[l:0::\`:$1];l:?:l;\`:$1 0:l"|exec q >null;

Can this be done in ngn k.

The other approach I use to avoid temporary files is to just put the list in an SQL database, add a UNIQUE constraint, and update the database.
> I also agree here. But, with a particular compiler there is almost always a predictable outcome.

It's potentially variable depending on other things involved, like system headers you might be including, and system updates.

> And here, I think you're actually being too conservative. It can change with much more than just the optimization level. If you're doing intentional UB, you'd want to freeze not only your optimization level, but your entire flag set. And changing any of them could lead to months of debugging and fixing things.

Well, isn't that a pleasant prospect there. As somebody who reviews PRs my answer to anything along those lines is: over my dead body.

> This trade-off is almost never worth it. But I maintain that the "almost" belongs in that sentence.

Okay, I'll grant you it's a fine idea if you want to sabotage a project and drive the other people to madness. Which if you're being paid for it may be actually illegal.

Otherwise, I still go with "never". If you need to do something this bizarrely specific, if it's worth doing at all, then it's time to do it in assembly, where you can do any random weird thing you want without the compiler getting in your way.
If I'm just going from point A to point B and don't intend on any "travel hacks", what value am I losing?
I think the context of it being an imperative is what makes it so jarring to me.
I was ready to dismiss all of this, but it's actually pretty interesting.

The big-picture view is given by Exhibit 1, and you can see it's really much more about analyzing all aspects of productivity (company-level, team-level, etc.) to identify bottlenecks around e.g. too much time spent testing over writing code, or senior developers stuck in endless cross-team alignment meetings which means management needs to identify a single person responsible for making final decisions quickly. So this is a document for engineering managers, not engineers.

But in terms of measuring actual individual developer productivity, if you read through all the verbiage it's really mostly just adding up the "planning poker" agile/sprint points that a developer delivers over the course of months. About which I have two main thoughts:

1) As long as planning poker is executed correctly -- i.e. always with unanimous consensus from engineers and without managers/PM's providing pressure -- this is actually probably going to be pretty decently objective, as a moving average. It's not terrible -- it's infinitely better than things like "lines of code". Although teams can also experience gradual "points drift" over the course of months, and points between teams can't be translated, so it can't be used company-wide or even year-to-year. But it will compare productivity between team members.

2) BUT, there's a huge risk involved because not all e.g. 5 point stories are the same, because of variance. Some are very straightforward where you know it's 5 points, while others are much more unknown, where the best guess is 5 points -- and it might wind up being 2 points but it also might wind up being 50 points. And so I could definitely see certain stories turning into "hot potatoes" nobody wants to touch because it's just too much of a risk -- it'll tank their average and they won't get promoted. And then everything just breaks down. Which means you either need post-sprint processes for "correcting" estimates and assigning a reasonable value for points done, or going deeper into "research" stories -- e.g. a 1-point pre-story to better nail down the actual size.