skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can you explain more about how (you feel) Python is a step backwards? I'm curious if the "steps backward" are syntax level?

I feel the Ruby community is very syntax oriented. As evidence of this:

I see Ruby developers interested in Elixir and Crystal, languages that are syntactically similar, but technically very different.

I do not see Ruby developers interested in Python, even though, if we ignore syntax, Python and Ruby mine as well be the same language. Technically speaking, and in the grand scope of all languages, Ruby and Python are very very similar.
I did not mean the term "flyover country" disparagingly. I used it because it accurately reflects how the coastal peoples think of the silent majority.
so this is almost like a Goodhart's Law problem
In OO languages (Java, C#, C++, etc...), and functional ones (F#, Haskell, OCaml, etc...) types do not validate the correctness of logic, they evaluate the correctness of data structures and their access/mutation as they are manifested in the language.

OO languages consider data correctness as access patterns of encapsulated primitives (or other data structures) through defined behaviors on a "class".

Functional languages consider data correctness as access patterns which preserve previous version of data which a caller may still need to reference, or another part of the system references. Functional languages (in most cases) disallow direct mutation without some sort of immutability or persistence.

Types have little (or nothing) to do with program correctness, or data correctness as it relates to external storage engines and their concurrency guarantees (i.e. FoundationDB, PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc...).

Therefore, in this scenario, what matter's most is the correctness of underlying storage (including the rigor of validating expected behavior) and the event sourcing/messaging systems, not on the internal data structures and their idioms conveyed by the language.
I don't want this level of surveillance either, but if the rapid growth is in 'large part' due to collecting illegal immigrant DNA, doesn't that go against the narrative that illegal immigration is a small problem? Have we caught and released 20 (?) million people since Trump was in office?
Zortech actually went through several iterations and is still available in the form of the Digital Mars C and C++ developement system.

Unfortunately it looks like the X32 DOS extender link on the page below is dead.

https://www.digitalmars.com/
I think there is a baseline specified in the regulation, not sure which features it includes though.
Should it?

I find it very inspiring reading through this. It reminds me of the breadth of programming.
> Why does he need to be “constructive”?

We’re adults having a discussion. And it breaks HN Guidelines; “be nice” and “reply to the argument instead of calling names” [1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I found this blog post low on insight and thoughtfulness. I've worked with engineers in the past who had an inflated esteem not just of their own abilities but of the nature of the business domain they were ostensibly building solutions inside. I have found that in many cases, there's a level of naievete commingled with arrogance that comes from never having worked with an intrinsically complex enough problem to understand the true cost of abstraction, which is always nonzero.

Now, it is the case that there are many cases where the cost of abstraction is low enough to not be ROI negative. But there are many cases otherwise. Other commentators here have done a great job of detailing that space -- that incidental and actual repetition vary, that abstractions should exist to reduce optionality and ease of reasoning rather than simply reducing code, and those are all correct. But at a very basic level, all of those observations reflect the most critical missing factor from this post, which is context.

No software is created or operated in a vacuum. Every piece of software is created by humans to solve problems for themselves or other humans. So every piece of downstream of the working process of those humans. Given that these working processes are subject to change and evolution, changes in requirements aren't edge cases but table stakes. This means that often the cost of an abstraction is not just whether it's the wrong abstraction at a point of time, but also whether it's an abstraction that is likely to erode over time given a particular working process.

With that said, a lot of this post seems like an exposition of this central point:

```

If I were to see a confusing piece of code littered with conditional logic, I wouldn’t see it and think “oh, there’s an incorrect abstraction”, I would just think, “oh, there’s a piece of crappy code”. It’s neither an abstraction nor wrong, it’s just bad code.

```

I've seen this dismissal from many engineers over my career, and in every case, without fail, it reflected an inability to deeply read and understand the code, its history, and likely its future. To all the engineers out there reading this: thinking like this will prevent you from maturing from a junior engineer to a mid level engineer, never mind a mid level engineer to a senior engineer or engineering leader. You've been forewarned.
Although I consider that it is moderately (5%?) probable it was a result of scientific research went wrong, they are wrong because there is dude in Ohio that researches cryptic lineages in the wastewater and his conclusion was that this kind of dS/dN is possible in immunocompromised people.
And to cover the opposite case:

1. Nothing is going to happen

2. Something maybe is going to happen, but we should do nothing about it

3. Maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do

4. Maybe there's something we could have done, but it's too late now
Hundreds more flights cancelled in fallout from UK air traffic control failure
Lizardman’s Constant Is 4%
Interpreter vs. Compiler might be closer to the distinction you are looking for:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreter_(computing)
I don't know. Everyone is convinced he cheated. But if it can't be proven, then what?

It is slander obviously.
California moves closer to historic caste discrimination ban
The internet does not owe a negligent operator peering. No one person controls the internet but you sure as hell can find yourself kicked out if your goal is to be right on principals instead of a good peer. The only hubris which could be at play is someone thinking the rest of the internet should follow their desires instead of the other way around.

Research is great but if you're poking around breaking things via DoS in the internet you're going to be judged as a bad peer regardless what the route daemon does. The security of the internet constantly moves forward but that doesn't mean the expectation of improving has to hold more precedence than the expectation of running. It's still very much a human to human system for all but the actual route exchange.
re: HSLuv, I don't know much of it but I've heard it mentioned several times, so it must be helpful. This comment[1] goes into more detail, but TL;DR the core to me seems to be having L* and whatever H and S measurement works for you, so I'd say HSLuv is spot on.

I love APCA, Myndex (Andrew Somers, APCA author) was an absolute inspiration to me for getting interested in color, I wouldn't have known 1% of what I do or have done 1% of it without his deep dives showing how to work in this space.

It has an interesting effect on the community in that the general language around it is read too strongly: it is an important and crucial advance, getting science-backed data on exactly the right contrast in multiple scenarios is _absurdly important_ in a world of Ambient Computing™.

The mistake that's made is reading into this too heavily as _the previous spec or WCAG aren't based on data at all_.

Yes, the calculation is based on absurd stuff -- 100 nit monitor, you can't track down a source for every bit of it.

But there's a _whole separate field_ that spatial frequency comes from and it is _very_ well known and understood.

Most importantly: the APCA predictions for contrast were only about 5-7 L* different last time I checked. This is important, thats a _lot_ --- but it also isn't a lot, that's on a scale of 100. What we have today isn't completely utterly alienly different and broken.

Comparing the difference in T will be enough as long as the luminance measure APCA relies on is monotonic to RGB (HSL's lightness is hilarious, its the max of RGB minus min of RGB)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314700
Do/could SIM cards prevent this downgrade if 2G isn’t provided by your local provider anymore?

I know my Canadian SIM card somehow hides US providers from network scans, possibly with some geo or if/then rules (but visible from my EU SIM that tries its darnedest to latch onto the US networks and avoid the Canadian ones at all costs)
Censors made the same argument with the Printing Press and since time immemorial. Censorship has always been on the wrong side of history and it still is.

Speaking of abusing systems, censors end up being the worst bad guys who imagine themselves as the good guys protecting you from the bad guys.

EFF understands the long history of this issue.
Three-phase power supply for residential use is common even in India.
But the process isn’t energy-limited — it’s displacement limited. Your arms have a certain length, your body has a certain mass distribution, and you can force the angle by a certain amount.

So, if you want a heuristic, integrate pumping displacement times swing position, where the pumping displacement has a fixed maximum. The result is maximized by a square wave.
Did you ask ChatGPT to write this?
> finding it impossible to have any sympathy for Mr. Bailey

From being arrested?

> finding it impossible to have any sympathy for Mr. Bailey

Nobody asked for sympathy. Just whether you think the state has the right to arrest people who make jokes “in poor taste.”
There's https://github.com/rockerBOO/awesome-neovim, and https://dotfyle.com/this-week-in-neovim.
Yes. They took them out of the bunker. They were sitting there together with Mr. Putin.
I came to say too that 3m is more realistic, from what I did in school. Also, around 1-2m is possible if you jump backwards, but you may end up visiting the hospital as well.

At my school the swing was near a clift, so sometimes you were able to combine swing jump, ski jump and hospital visit with a single jump. Good times XD
This would also solve the problem with testing on various mobile devices by e.g. using browserstack and similar tools or even physical phones.
> and this additional proprietary thing that I really need to open source (I ported Datascript to FoundationDB).

Yes please! I wonder how that plays out as an alternative to Datomic.
So mainly just Ghidra & Hopper were successfully tripped up by fairplayd - thanks for the explanation!

Great article overall, thanks for taking the time to write it up.
I love my E14 Gen 2. It’s actually sturdier than some of my other ThinkPads and I bought it on a whim with the explicit purpose of running ChromeOS Flex—works flawlessly.
> First and for most you can only have one sub chart layer in helm

I don't think that's true?
The NFL should attempt to provide a better product if they want us to pay for it. The current landscape of trying to pay to watch NFL without a cable subscription is frustrating at best and frequently pirate streams simply offer a better product.

Anecdotally, this past weekend I was trying to watch preseason games through the nfl app using an nfl+ subscription. The streams keep stopping, would frequently play audio only with no video, and I’d frequently have to refresh my browser. This was after disabling Adblock and other browser extensions. Finally, I broke down and watched a pirate stream and had no more issues.

Additionally, there is no single product available that shows all games. You either deal with local blackouts or fragmentation as far as Thursday, Sunday, and Monday games.

The NFL makes it as hard as possible to pay to watch all games. You must use multiple services depending on the day and location of the game.

For me, pirate streams are simply a better user experience even dealing with the endless ads and sketchy popups.

Give me a single service with a single price that shows all games including redzone and I’m happy to pay.

Until then, pirate streams win. Every single time.
My experience of banking with both Starling and Monzo (personal and business) has been excellent. Far better than with any of the high street banks.
>> I use pip 100% of the time

What about pipenv, poetry, conda, setuptools, hatch, micropipenv, PDM, pip-tools, ActiveState platform, homebrew, or your Linux / BSD distro's package manager?
I was there.

I learned Python first. I saw Ruby as a "similar language, faster, more syntax-heavy, popular in Japan".

Python "won" because of Guido's focus on ease of use by non-programmers. A bunch of scientists used it to steer long-running computations in C, by binding the fast C math libraries with a Python frontend. Python was so easy to use that new scientists and interns could get started easily.

I don't know why Ruby has stalled out. Its "test first" culture and of course Ruby on Rails, and Chef, are all excellent.
The question was about readability, not performance.
This post is about private servers using a 3rd party mod called FiveM.
How do you expect Rockstar to police them?
I'm happy to help over email or video call. Need to get through this hurricane but let me know if you need help. Chris @ Vivoh plus the dot com.
> I think Python was popular as a general-purpose language first.

That matches my memory as well. I can't find any references, but I seem to remember a quote going around way back circa 2008 that goes something like "Ruby is popular because it's the language used to write Rails; Django is popular because it's written in Python."
I love using nushell, and I hope it becomes a standard going forward. I do sometimes feel slightly annoyed that I have to type out a bit more in nushell, as opposed to simply tacking on another flag, but I think JT makes a really great case for doing just that. In terms of adoption, JT asks:

1. Is Nushell compelling enough for a single person to adopt it?
2. Would adopting Nushell broadly as a community move the needle?

I'm 100% on board with nushell in my personal computing. But I'm still worried about number 2. I think something like rust was able to succeed because enough people really felt like there a need for something to fill that space. Do enough people feel like nushell fills a necessary gap? I hope so.
Please clarify for those of us who aren't Amiga aficionados.
if it isn’t a child-free plane, the child-free areas are the cockpit (once the door is shut) and the cargo hold (hopefully always.)

anyone who thinks a curtain can contain the sounds and/or smells of a toddler has never had one.

and if you think children (or animals) are the only nuisance on planes, you’re likely the other kind.
I am saying that "Just Say No" is not an effective intervention for addiction. A lot of internet content is addictive, and the more addictive it is, the less likely it is to be bound to reality. So relying on individual self-control -- "just walk away from your computer" -- to counter the deleterious effects of misinformation on the internet is no more likely to succeed than it did for drug addiction.
Why Every Car in China Hangs a Rockstar Logo
Hi! Thanks for the heads up. We're only 2-weeks old so we haven't had resources to iron out a privacy policy as we're shipping new features rapidly that might affect our privacy policy.

All of our users data are securely stored on AWS. We do not and will not share your todo items with third-party because we are operating a freemium business model (e.g., Notion), so we don't have the financial incentive the advertise our user data.

Google and Apple are for auth purposes, they only have access to what they already know about you (username, email, profile pic, etc).

I hope this clears your concerns.
You’re right and wrong. MapReduce is two things: a pattern for massively parallel computation, and the name of the initial implementation of the pattern at Google.

While the initial implementation at Google quickly got replaced with better things, the MapReduce pattern is everywhere in the data space, and almost taken for granted now. Hadoop is basically the same: a shitty (I think HDFS is still pretty good, just not the compute part) initial implementation of the pattern that was quickly iterated and improved upon.

Also, a big reason people stopped having to think about eg rack-local operations is that most people operating on huge amounts of data now aren’t doing it on traditional generic servers, they’re using something like s3 on VMs in Public Cloud datacenters if they’re doing something relatively “low level” or more likely just using something like Snowflake, Spark/Databricks (pretty close to OG mapreduce…), etc.
> Why are these API banks always in the UK?

I can think of 835 million reasons: https://www.reuters.com/article/eu-rbs-britain/corrected-uk-...

Plus, Open Banking and Faster Payments (which were EU initiatives before Brexit) maybe helped.
I’m not a troll - I just think you’re wrong. Everyone who disagrees with you is not a troll. Get over yourself.
Perl5 was king in the 90s and early 2000s for building web apps, and as Perl5 faded, Python was the obvious contender and it took over.

Perl5 was built more for CLI programs and text processing tasks, like Awk. As the internet got bigger, Perl5's idiosyncrasies became more evident. People wanted a cleaner and more structured language that could remain readable in large code bases.

I remember building backends in the late 90s in Perl and yearning for something more structured. Perl5 often just felt so hacky and full of magic, often resulting in unreadable code. When I first saw Python I was struck by how clean and uniform it was compared to Perl5.
His post looks like perfectly normal dumb internet shit you yourself would send in chat at 3:00 AM just a couple of years ago, if not today. Admit it.
Anyone who's worked in a restaurant with a soft-serve machine (used to make milkshakes and more) knows how much of a PITA they are to clean...

Which means they don't get deep cleaned often enough, even at reputable places.

Do people get sick and die every day from these machines? No, of course not. But we cannot trivialize the liability and risk here.

If every restaurant had a self-cleaning smart self-diagnosing machine like McDonald's has, all the better.

You should think carefully before ordering a soft-serve anything from most places...
Did they? For llama 2? I remember the first llama license
They aren't search engines, and if you're using them as such you are using them wrong.
I've been writing code since the mid-90's, probably in a dozen languages or so over that timespan.

In my experience, Python is "easy" -- as in, you can quickly achieve what you want. It doesn't get in your way with opinions about types or data structures. You can rapidly create horrific kludges that produce the results you want.

Not sure I'd say it's a programmer's language. It's like javascript that way, but without the absurdity and the footguns. It's overall intuitive, and has all kinds of handy shortcuts.

It's interpreted, which means you can futz around and prototype and get things working, hacking at it until it clicks. There's no hang-yourself-in-frustration build chains, nor even the need for reliable and responsible tooling - no overhead at all.

That's the language itself - but it's embedded in an ecosystem of libraries and tools favoured by the data processing / data science community. Given the mad gold rush in the recent years in these domains, it's no puzzle why python is one of the top choices these days.
High energy refers to the energy imparted to particles, high intensity refers to the number of particles (presumably of the particle beams), at least if the terminology is anything similar to synchrotrons.

So a high intensity 3GeV beam would be one where the average particle energy is 3GeV, with a larger number of particles comprising the beam than a low/medium intensity one.
Yeah, it's crazy how it's less noisy even compared to small drones simply because our propellers turn slower (because we don't need them to hover)
Thanks for the link, the fun reading starts on page 12.

I think I'll change my SSID to 'FBI Supernode'
Well if we swap "genetic curation" with "eugenics" I think you'd be hard pressed to stand up in front of a group and argue that in 2023.
> Making the argument that DNA is private is a hard sell. Which parts?

It is in a way, it just doesn't work as many people think it does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_encryption
100% fair. They're probably right; certainly right from their own subjective view, which is what matters.

I'll also note that the OP focused on how "fun" Ruby was. Ruby is beautiful and fun.

Going back to the original question: why did Python grow more than Ruby? My first answer was going to be a rhetorical question: which beautiful and fun language has been the most successful?

C isn't especially beautiful or fun, not in the same way. (It has a nice minimalism and connection to the hardware maybe.) C++ is beautiful--is a thing that nobody has ever said. Java ain't beautiful. JavaScript, Python, etc, none are especially beautiful or fun.

I think another answer to the OPs question is that beautiful and fun languages are, apparently, not what most people are looking for. Evidently we should not expect a language to succeed because it is beautiful and / or fun.
It changes that instead of killing a person you can carry the pregnancy to completion even if the mother wants to kill her unborn son/daughter.

Right now abortion consists often in dismembering the fetus, killing him/her and then scraping him/her from the womb.

Hopefully in the future we can extract them from the womb and put them in an artificial womb instead.

It's also great for surrogacy and the Men Gone Their Own Way movement.

At the same time I fear it will be weaponised by governments to create humans at will and create armies (before robots are more viable)
That would be similar to saying C isn't a real language while ignoring the existence of C++. Perl 4 wasn't OO, but Perl 5 enthusiastically embraced OO. The first release of Perl 5 was in 1994, whereas Java 1.0 was 1996.

It did take a while for the wider Perl community to embrace OO, though. There were a lot of Perl programmers who weren't into lofty paradigms. Plenty of Perl programmers weren't fully sold on the idea of breaking your program into functions.