skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's their MO. Insults, and playing the victim, with very little contribution to the conversation at hand beyond those two things.
I group those who do not contribute to society into the group that does not contribute to society.

This group ranges from Congress to homeless drug addicts.
Tell ChatGPT to rewrite your article. See why it's output is longer than the original text. That's wordiness.
Calvinism has entered the chat.
Tried to provide a rough summary, hopefully it's helpful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37287128
Heavily cherry picked article that one.

Even with E2E, Meta's ads seem fully aware of my chat topics held over whatsapp.

Are they exfiltrating keywords? From their privacy policy you'd never know because they use the strategy of a single wide-ranging policy for all of their apps and services, so one will never know which apps are doing what.

But if one visits the whatsapp page on apple's app store we can see a bit more truth, Meta self-report that whatsapp collects the following information about you in a non-anonymous, linked way:

- Purchases

- Location

- Contacts

- Financial information

- Specifically linked data for the purposes of advertising

and other data which really doesn't need to be linked to you to be useful, but is anyway:

- Analytics and app usage metrics

Basically whatsapp is the full privacy invading experience of any other Meta property, but the exact wording of your messages are E2E, so they lead with that and hope you dont notice the rest.

Meanwhile other apps presented negatively in that article not only protect your privacy, but don't attempt to mislead you about it.
It is not normalized to the extent you think it is, because like most trends it is overblown by social media, gaining more of a focus there and less in real life. However, this has still distorted reality enough that now young men ask young women if they have onlyfans, as if that is a casual or normal thing to ask someone.
As a counterpoint, I interned at Jane Street about a decade ago—when they were much smaller than now—and they also built everything in-house. I'm not just talking about the trading/finance-specific systems (I didn't interact with those as an intern), but general-purpose internal tools: a code review system, a pub-sub system, custom binary and text protocols, lots of developer tooling, their own build system, their own standard library and async runtime... All with <100 developers total.

And you know what? It worked amazingly well. I'm not just talking about scale, but also about how much any single developer seemed to be able to do. Their tools and APIs were tastefully designed, tailored to their own needs and fit together remarkably well. I remember that they were consistently building things with just one or a handful of people that would have taken multiple teams at other organizations I've seen.

Looking back, that was a remarkably productive engineering environment because of how much they were willing to do themselves. The key insight is that building something for yourself is qualitatively different from building something for external consumption or using something general-purpose that already exists. You naturally tailor the code and tools to what you need, which is much easier than building something for what you think other people might need—and, surprisingly often, easier than bending a different tool to your own ends.

But, perhaps more importantly, you develop a shared mental model of the system you're developing and how it fits in with everything else that you are doing. That shared mental model is, ultimately, worth far more than the code by itself... but it isn't legible to management, so it's hard to foster and preserve without a strong engineering culture backing it up.

The other lesson I took away from that experience (and others!) is that the high-level questions people focus on ("buy vs build", "monorepo vs polyrepo"... etc) are nowhere near determinative. Whether or not any given approach works out comes down far more to the little details and nuances of what you're doing and how you're doing it, as well as a healthy dollop of circumstances beyond your immediate control.

At the end of the day, if everything else was the same, but the startup you're talking about was using perfectly standard and popular tools, would you expect the outcome to be any different? I've seen far too many Enterprise-grade trash-fires to believe that. If the core dynamics that led to a mess don't change, you can have a "not invented here" mess or an "Enterprise Best Practices" mess or a "buy everything, build nothing" mess—but there's no simple strategic direction that won't get you some kind of mess.
Old stationary. The bonding they used for cardboard binders and the coating they put on folders was different, and pulling that out of a drawer or a bag had a very unique smell to it that hasn't been around for at least a decade. It was a combination of chemical sweetness, vinegar, and wet drywall must. The change to glossy coatings on folders has been the biggest olfactory change out of all because now it just smells like a water bottle if it smells like anything at all.
No, a lot of animals kill for fun (not just "pure survival"), including early humans, some apes, and quite probably our common ancestors.
And 1 nanosecond at light speed ≈ 1 foot
I think the author glossed over the terrible adults in his childhood to make the wrong point.

His Dad essentially emotionally abused him over not liking piano lessons and the teacher shamed him for being a quitter. By ripping up the music he showed him by example that being destructive is an acceptable way to respond to challenges and negatives feelings.

Nobody stopped to ask him about his feelings on piano lessons. Nobody asked what he didn’t like about them. Nobody asked if he wanted to play different styles of music, try a different instrument, or a different teacher/method of learning. Just punishment and shame.

In this context the 1% rule seems more like a coping mechanism for childhood trauma than useful advice.
And that station in Antarctica is known for its alcohol abuse.

https://www.today.com/news/are-researchers-antarctica-thin-i...
They just rewrite the impacted mess in Rust?
I believe this line of thinking is actually harmful to many pastors. Once a church hits a couple of hundred, the single-pastor model completely falls apart. I find that churches either figure it out and embrace a mature elder/deacon model or they tend to just chew through pastors every 3-4 years and wonder why.
The part I've been trying to explain to coworkers is that the union isn't just for software engineers at the company, but for the support staff as well. We have it good but I have seen support and sales staff get bullied pretty hard.

Sure you might not even get a raise with a union, but perhaps those same benefits of remote work when needed, unlimited vacation, and an hour lunch can be extended to every worker at the company.

The most expensive workers teaming up with the least expensive to give them more power is a good thing, I think.
Immortal trillionaires.
I wish those medieval people had defined it as 5040 feet, then it would be divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 24, 28, 30, 35, 36, 40, 42, 45, 48, 56, 60, 63, 70, 72, 80, 84, 90, 105, 112, 120, 126, 140, 144, 168, 180, 210, 240, 252, 280, 315, 336, 360, 420, 504, 560, 630, 720, 840, 1008, 1260, 1680, and 2520.
The conspiracy of fools: do you have to be a total jerk to succeed in life?
Reminds me of a “founder” who interviewed me and told me he had done a photo-documentary on the “Flyover states”.

Just because you’ve been somewhere doesn’t mean you’ve got a real understanding of anything that’s going on there. I’m very skeptical that someone wearing a visit to a place with poor people as some kind of badge of authority on the topics surrounding them actually has any clue.

The people I’ve talked to who had “miserable, starvation at the door lives” elsewhere who now live with low incomes in the us have mixed feelings about it… nothing as clear cut as what you’re implying
It seems like we are so close to some huge breakthroughs in longevity. With stem cells we can do things like this.

"The extent of change caused by a heart attack is too great for the heart to repair itself or to prevent further damage from occurring. Notably, however, cardiopoietic stem cell therapy reversed, either fully or partially, two-thirds of these disease-induced changes, such that 85% of all cellular functional categories affected by disease responded favorably to treatment," says Andre Terzic, M.D., Ph.D., director of Mayo Clinic's Center for Regenerative Medicine.

https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/mayo-clinic-re...
I don't think so, modern high level languages tend to be linked to huge runtimes that are usually load entirely in memory. Assembly programs don't.
It's the butt of many jokes and a sign of desperation amongst my various circles. I don't think the service is empowering or pushing the industry forward, just another SaaS "pimp" creating more avenues of exploitation.

Legalize the wide umbrella of sex-related work and stop the exploitation.
I see a lot of squeamishness about deliberately exterminate certain mosquito species.

That is an absolute taboo for many people. How powerful they'll be in the final determination remains to be seen. Hopefully you're right.

For something that kills 1700 people a day, I would wish for a lot of urgency and corner cuttings!
Mississippi, being the poorest state in the union, is as rich as Germany (GDP/capita).
My favorite error message was produced by the Univac Fortran V compiler, circa 1970: “Warning: floating point equality tests are nugatory.” I pride myself on my vocabulary, but I had to use the dictionary.
> It is not normalized to the extent you think it is

I live in the middle of the biggest bar/club neighborhood in a major (usa) city. I meet men and women with OFs at least weekly. It's nothing at all like it was back in the 2005-2010s when I worked in the porn industry. People don't hide it at all. I have Tinder dates that admit to being on OF openly. Even men and women who work at (strip) clubs are way, way more common nowadays. I have a lot of service industry friends and about 1/4 of them have worked at local clubs if not danced at them.

Like, who even are you to say this to me? Lol I worked IN the industry. Are you also in the industry? Are you a dad with 3 kids or something? I have NO idea what your frame of reference is here but it is the absolute opposite of mine. Nothing wrong with that but unless you're more familiar with the industry than I am I'm failing to see why you even commented. But hell, maybe you're Ron Jeremy.
Yes, you could do that too. But you wouldn't have to.
There's been remarkably little sexual assault on the international space station. The much tighter quarters, constant communication between all team members, and constant digital connectivity (even with lightspeed delays or bandwidth limits), combined with the insanely high selectiveness, all contrive to make sexual assault unlikely to happen, and unlikely to go undiscovered if it did.
Maybe he can train a generative AI model on all the highest rated porn, creating some ultimate form of content that people will be willing to trade for their entire income.
First, as a fellow ADHD person... damn. I empathize.

My life is a whole bunch of Rube Goldberg-ass workarounds too. It feels like nothing but workarounds sometimes. A thing held together with so much duct tape that I sometimes wonder if it's just duct tape all the way down.

it didn't end up building any very strong habits
that could stand alone outside this system

I mean, I would say that using the system you came up with was a valuable habit and that is the kind of "hacking" I was thinking of when I wrote the parent post.

Some folks interpreted it as me saying that ADHD (which I initially never even mentioned) and other problems could just be magically mindhacked away or something.

I don't feel that's what I wrote, and it certainly not what I believe.
Woah woah woah let’s not give megachurches extra points for things they didn’t lead in. Tax breaks yes, more dishonestly, no.

If you don’t think every business that makes it, and even more so for those that make it big, don’t have shady dealings to thank for getting them there, you should join one of these megachurches.

Also, Amazon isn’t a church with tax exempt status but I remember headlines a few years back something along the lines of they paid a whopping 0 dollars in federal tax or something just as unbelievable yet actually true.

If anything, churches are looked at harder because they have the tax exempt status, so people are looking for abuses of that, yet we have corporate entities that can sway the global economy skirting taxes in the open and even legally, somehow.

But I get taxed when I make my money, and then again when I spend that money, which was already taxed.

There’s no difference between a FANG and a megachurch. They are both for profit machines that bleed people dry. When the church pamphlet has bar charts on the back with quarterly projections, and the pastor/whomever lets everyone know that they are a few million behind their target, before discussing the scripture, their priorities are very clear.

The screens, coffee bars, childcare, and well produced music and video, are all there to make you feel special, part of something, relaxed, and wanting to come back, next week, after you get paid again.

The same way in Mad Man the account execs would take clients out to dinner and then to strip clubs to make them feel special and relaxed, so they’d later associate good feelings when asked to hand over their wallets, megachurches have what I listed above. If bowls of cocaine could be legally laid out, you’d be handed one while walking in.

Gotta spend money to make money, but they know the high rollers and if you pay attention, they don’t pay any attention to anyone not forking over cash.

Edit: if you want more signal that megachurches are not about God, look at how many of the 7 deadly sins they proudly embody. Greed. Gluttony. Pride. Those are obvious. Sloth probably also obvious. That’s gotta mean something right? These complexes are tiny cities that sit vacant most of the week.
Stop Obsessing over Tools
Was Jane Street searching for product-market fit?

> shared mental model of the system you're developing and how it fits in with everything else that you are doing. That shared mental model is, ultimately, worth far more than the code by itself... but it isn't legible to management, so it's hard to foster and preserve without a really strong engineering culture backing it up.

Sounds awesome, did they have engineering leaders with long tenure?
If you can get laid off, then you're not capital.
in classical manufacturing though, most engineers have to work together with tool and die makers to actually produce the tooling to create the product.

The guys actually physically building the tooling you designed to build a product are definitely unionized, and have been for a very long time.
Crazy that they once tried to ban porn on the platform.
This may be true, but doesn't mean that all other options are better in the view of the community. They may prefer to roll the whole thing up compared to some models.
I wonder how "project cost expressed in terms of hours of labour at national median wage, per mile of track" compares to the Victorian times. That is, hours per mile.

I bet, even digging by hand, the Victorians did it cheaper.
if you live in a climate that freezes, I'd recommend Hops. They grow like crazy and are quite beautiful in the fall.
There are many right to work states that don't force union membership.
When something becomes too easy, a more complex, expensive, brittle, slower, less flexible way of doing it will be invested.

Take GitHub Actions, for example.
It's the star trek teleporter problem. Every time anyone teleports, they aren't traveling through space. Their fleshy meat construct is destroyed, and a nearly identical construct is recreated at the other side. Is it still the same person?
Don't read much Stephen King, do you?

I jest. But seriously...
Cynical take:

The job of the carbon offset is one or more of the following:

- Assuage guilt

- Virtue signal (personal, political, or corporate)

- Profit financially from government incompetence

- Profit financially from corporate PR efforts
I believe the term for this is resume driven development. This also leads developers to focus on learning new technologies and integrating them to their current project, whereas what the business really needs are stable boring solutions. Of course if developers do focus exclusively on serving the needs of the business, they’re not building up their skills for their next job, and the business could still fail for circumstances outside of their control.

There’s a software law called Teslers law [1], which says that complexity cannot be eliminated, the most that can be done is to shift it from one part of the system to the next. You can make a similar law about risk. As a developer, if I ship a build system (complete a project successfully), or I build something with a new technology, I have a point to put on a resume and a successful accomplishment to talk about in my next interview. It may be that this is the wrong move for the business. It may be that they need a crappy spaghetti code abomination to achieve a product market fit in that time. If founders know what’s going on and they stipulate boring solutions the developer accepted risk. They’ve completely invested in the business and are completely tied to the decisions of their founders and leadership for their success.

In a perfect world this would start a conversation about compensation for accepting or balancing risk, but in my experience this absolutely never happens because it gets political. Leaders always win because they’re better politicians than developers. It’s easy for leaders to be willfully ignorant and dismiss these concepts as too detail oriented, and devolves into leaders saying “we’re nice people, trust us”. But the risk is there and someone is accepting it and developers respond to this by mitigating it on their end deep in the implementation details.

We have optimized at a local maximum, but are globally suboptimal. I do not believe we’ll ever achieve something more optimal because in business climates, everyone is trying to get something for very little effort. It takes much time to earn trust, but very little time to destroy it.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_compl...
lol, been in #linux in the last.. say.. twenty years?
Daneel Olivaw has entered the chat
I agree with this, people seriously underestimate the degree to which minimum viable effort is the guiding principle of the education stack. Making students engaged in writing critically and creatively and communicatively is a much more difficult and poorly defined task than inventing or choosing at random (from style guides that have never been used by any impactful writers ever) rules of English grammar and style and then mechanistically applying them. This generates an exceedingly great amount of profit for the textbook writers and professional development folks that reinvent and retrain teachers in ad-hoc ineffective techniques every two years. Teachers, administrators, curriculum, textbook authors, school boards, edtech, local politicians, and students all conspiring to make education as mechanistic and unimpactful as possible because it satisfies the requirements of the world external to education while demanding the least possible effort and interest from all who participate. There are many, many exceptions of course, especially among the two classes that have a primary existence instead of a rent-seeking one (teachers and students), but this is the rule in the United States today.
Ricoh Auto Shot – A collection of interesting and old cameras
Wow, that's the fastest slippery slope argument I've ever seen. In the absence of a specific incident to discuss, this sounds both alarmist and alarmingly misogynist. Especially since nobody has suggested that's what happened in the very specific example that this thread is very specifically about.
By "welfare recipients," I mean poor people on welfare who could work if they had a better attitude.

I mean the kind of people that were offended when I offered them each a cheap flashlight during a power outage. (We were all standing outside.) One of them said he would take what he wanted. He demanded the very best flashlights that money could buy. I declined, and I guess he thought I was tougher than him, so he eventually left after some more posturing. I never got his name.

I mean the kind of people who fake injury claims and collect disability for the rest of their lives, under 8 different identities. Their names were Tony and Theon.
Interestingly, a mile was originally the less surprising 5000 feet. But in the 1500s the English changed the mile to be 8 furlongs, as that made for much easier math around the agricultural measurements of the time.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furlong
The negative outcomes are mainly due to societal stigmatization. Which explains the 'not telling the whole story' pretty well too. It's not exactly great dinner conversation.

Drug addiction is not really something that's compatible with adult performing. I'm sure it would correlate with some type of sex work (the cheapest 'street corner trick-turning' comes to mind) but those are not the type of people you'll find on OnlyFans.

I wouldn't be surprised if you find more drug addicts in a high-speed trading floor than the average OnlyFans performer population.

Ps I'm not advocating it as a career option but I know some people are drawn to it and genuinely like it. Reddit is/was full of people doing it for free and I don't think it's a bad idea to try to make a job out of it for those people.
Whether it is easier to package for snap is debatable. Building docker images is a much more widespread and well established workflow.
Good points. Additionally, PiP is also possible in most browsers.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Picture-in-...
Rules (which don’t involve courts & prisons) are just shorthand for reasons.

The better you understand the reasons behind the rules, the easier it will be to know when to break them.

Or, in an artistic sense, how best to dramatically or subtly break them in service to some creative perspective.

Any of them! All of them!

This is as true in architecture, rocket design, fashion and etiquette, as it is in prose.

—-

And this is why organizations that impose process without delegating and encouraging an organization-wide agency to make intentional exceptions, smother innovation so effectively.

They lose most of their creative and adaptive abilities.
This may drop the cost and significantly increase the feasibility for government / court mandated changes / censoring / edits to models.
I expect $38k is enough to set up a proper trust to run indefinitely.

I would assume that any company offering this sort of approach would have a trust set up to ensure it can keep its promise. (Ex: invest in S&P and draw off 3% each year to cover maintenance and upkeep)

That’s how I would do it, at least.

The fact that Wordpress doesn’t detail anything like this has me doubting though.
this depends on the country actually.

A lot of countries have work's council[0] enshrined into law. Which actually means you have some form of democratic control over what a company wants to do.

i am still bewildered the US has nothing of the sort... in any kind of way.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_council
Connecting 1 mile to 5280 feet happened many centuries after the medieval period. Such precision wasn't really possible nor desired before the 18th century.

To be specific, 5280 feet = 1 mile didn't happen until 1959 and the United States needed higher precision and remove all the fuzziness out of the units. It might be inconvenient on some aspects, but it was also "close enough" to what miles were already established to be.