skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To me Ruby syntax looks too magic. Python is much more simple to understand, a person that doens't know python but another language such as C or Java can write programs in like 10 minutes. The only "strange" thing is the use of indentation for dividing blocks, but it's something you easily learn in 2 minutes.

Another thing that helped python is the fact that you can do fairly low-level operations in a very high level language. Python gives you os-level API/system calls that otherwise you would need to use a language like C to have access to. This makes python great to do system programming: indeed a lot of system tools in Linux where performance is not critical are written in python. For this reason you can assume any Linux/UNIX system has a python interpreter, and thus a lot of scripts and tools started to be written in python.

It's also quite easy to call C code from python code, and vice versa (for this reason python is used as a scripts/plugin engine in programs written in other languages). This is the reason a lot of scientific calculation tools are written in python, since they have the algorithms implemented in C for maximum performance with a python API to be able to be used easily.
> It is only natural to make the next step.

One concern is that standardized use of this would seriously risk making humans go extinct in the future.

If we completely remove the selection constraint that humans are able to reproduce, over time functionality bugs will creep into that area. If, at any point in the future, society collapses to the point where we are no longer able to build these machines, we may no longer be able to reproduce and will simply die off.

Maintaining this constraint on humans seems prudent. If and when we can manipulate genetics well enough to fix the issue in the actual human organism in a way that is not fragile, then that would be fine.
That’s any code I haven’t looked at for a while, to be honest. I can’t count how many times I’ve looked at code I wrote or bug tickets I fixed and have absolutely no memory of doing it. It’s almost like the act of committing flushes the local storage in my brain.
Yes, and that's what happens sometimes. But it requires the workers to have a lot of capital in the first place, which is rare. Or they'll rely on family and friends for the funding. Then they're being charitable again if they give more out to hire new employees. Other times, the owner will distribute the business for some charitably low price to the workers, like the Avedisyans did with Cheeseboard.

No matter how it's done, someone somewhere has to be extra generous.
It’s not intended to be inflammatory. It’s the reality that many people operating vehicles are not aware of your (bike) presence and that their careless actions could easily result in your death or serious injuries. Often times people fail to follow traffic rules and create situations that pose little danger to them but a lot of danger to pedestrians and bike riders.
Ahhh I thought it was 32-bit only, not sure if I ever used their DOS compiler in the old days or not.
in the 80's I had a school holiday job driving around with a bloke doing deliveries to shops and pubs. He often had a pint at every pub throughout the day, so it wasnt a surprise to see him downing 10 pints throughout a 12-14hr day, doing 200miles+ a day! I wasnt even 10 years old back then, but my parents thought this was a good way to keep me out of trouble.

The drink drive culture in the UK was very engrained.

Politicians driving to or from UK parliament on parliamentary business (having to vote) were exempt from the earlier drink drive laws until one of them killed or injured someone. Cant find the link for this anywhere now, so probably been silently cleaned up from the internet.
One possible reasons is that repair fees might not show up in planning the way a guaranteed franchise fee bump would. You can get your franchisees to pay more money if they don't know they are going to be paying it ahead of time, potentially.

If the full extent of the repairs necessitated by the behavior were clear, obvious, and known ahead of time, then yeah, this would strictly be worse. But a slightly lower, but secret, fee might be preferable to a higher but obvious fee.

That's just me speculating though. Could also just be incompetence or maliciousness, or maybe just once upon a time a particular person in McDonalds corporate took a bribe to make it happen. Who knows.
Nice over-provisioning; I doubt the gas shortage or electric cars were on the radar when 3 phase became the norm...

How are loads balanced to phases in a standalone house?
Perhaps, flipping it on it's head, the issue is so visible because McDonald's ice cream is by far the most popular fast food ice cream?

From Cones to McFlurries to Milkshakes, I'm pretty sure they all use the same machine. McDonald's sells a tremendous amount of ice cream products.

> I wish I could find the videos now, but there was a decently convincing (although with the usual "documentary grain of salt" caveats) argument that McDonalds took a payout to allow Taylor to predatorily extract value while providing shit service to their Franchisees.

I find that very hard to believe. You're right, it's a meme for a reason after all, but sabotaging themselves makes no sense even if Taylor paid McDonald's for that racket. McDonald's has nothing to gain in that situation, only loss of reputation and revenue.

> This makes the arguments about repuatational risk from shoddy repair parts fall flat.

It doesn't though, and cannot just be hand-waved away. Imagine what the memes would be like if the machines were further degraded by bad parts or worse, got people sick at random locations.

McDonald's has a right to force consistency. It's their brand, and ultimately their wallet that bears the consequences.
It is not just ISPs. It is crowdfunding and payment processing companies. See for example this apparent seizure of funding to independent journalists happening right now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314499

If you care about there being genuinely independent news media then funding these guys is something you can do right now.
Ruby’s English documentation remains terrible, unfortunately.
Open-source Twitter-scale Mastodon implementation in 10k LOC
Yes the UK plug design is the best I've seen. Mandatory 3rd pin to open the shutters, insulated prongs until they are well disconnected, and very solid fit. More often than not I see plugs half falling out of US sockets, with live and exposed terminals. Thankfully it is only 110v, but still a fire hazard
What many others here are saying is correct. Python was fairly popular, and considered a great language that good developers wanted to develop in, way before Ruby became popular.

Just look at this article by Paul Graham, written in 2004, called "The Python Paradox" http://www.paulgraham.com/pypar.html:

> I didn't mean by this that Java programmers are dumb. I meant that Python programmers are smart. It's a lot of work to learn a new programming language. And people don't learn Python because it will get them a job; they learn it because they genuinely like to program and aren't satisfied with the languages they already know.

> Which makes them exactly the kind of programmers companies should want to hire.

This was written more or less at the same time that Ruby on Rails was first released. Clearly by then, people had known about Python for a while.

That head-start led it to be more popular early on, except in webdev circles specifically. But in the other circles, and especially in Academia, Python was gaining popularity, which helped it both get lots of great scientific libraries (making it today's default "data" language), and also made it eventually become a language taught in Universities.
That was the one mantra from the zen of python that I always laugh at too.

Because my #1 complaint with python is that there are so many ways to do the same thing. It sounds nice in theory if you are a new developer because you can create your own voice in python and character.

For example, lets say I gave a simple coding puzzle (think leetcode) to 10 python engineers. I would get at least 8 different responses. A few might gravitate around similar concepts but they would be significantly different.

By comparison if I gave the same puzzle to some Go engineers, all of the responses would be probably very close to identical.

This sounds fun as a new engineer, like this is an argument for using Python. But as you get older and more experienced you will likely find yourself hating the flexibility of python because as you scan any decent size codebases, you start to be able to identify entire parts of the codebase and who wrote them, without even needing to do a git blame.

I am currently an SRE manager who works in a very polyglot environment (primarily Node/js, bash/sh, python, and Golang with just enough java thrown in to ruin your day). When I read through python codebases, I can identify exactly who wrote it, even past employees. Then when you need to fix it, you often have to adapt to that style as you fix a bug or add an updated feature. This is a little true with Bash because you will see certain engineers always lean towards sed and others towards awk and grep to solve problems depending on their strength, but it is less significant. However, in our Go codebases, everyone writes nearly identical code.

I've been writing Python for over a decade and I still learn new features of the language every week or month. Just this week I had to dive into the `ast` library (abstract syntax trees) which was a native module I haven't ever touched before. By contrast, I haven't had to learn any new core syntax and tools of Go and Bash in a long time. You have a fairly small set of syntax and that's it. The power comes in how you use that small set of tools, not learning a new language module.

Again, the infinite flexibility sounds nice. But in a corporate environment the strictness of other languages is actually a benefit because it keeps everyone following the same path.

I truly believe the mantra from zen of python:

> There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it

Sadly, Python lost this tradition far before I ever became acquainted with the language. And the python3.10+ mentality of supporting everything forever is only going to make it worse overtime.
This sounds like it could be a plotline in some futuristic cyberpunk story: encrypted/obfuscated DNA to protect against some antagonist!
You get what you want.
Cool stuff and congrats on the Show HN! Out of curiosity, at what point do you see teams usually adopting something like langfuse? In regular development, you sometimes even have test-driven development - I imagine this doesn't really apply for LLMs. Do you see this changing over time as the process of building LLM apps becomes more mature?
>Like, do you want a 0.01% chance to raise money or a 2% chance to build a business that keeps you and a few others well paid and perhaps out of the rat-race.

I don't do startups to have a job, I do startups to do the hard things in an attempt to build something groundbreaking.

Presenting "raise money" vs "have a job" is a false dichotomy.
Google followed the writing on the wall, nothing else.

Google was known as one of the most academic engineering companies, in the 00-ies.
If it's cludged on like Java's attempt at supporting basic functional programming, it's guaranteed to painful regardless.
Well this is about Germany specifically
It did not use protected mode

https://github.com/keendreams/keen

https://fabiensanglard.net/ega/
Despite the unpopularity here. I am still a fan of cryptocurrency as an alternative to traditional banking.
Yes - I once wrote an AWS lambda that was having issues with cold boot times, so I compiled it to a binary and bada bing bada boom, boot went from 2 seconds to about 200ms.

It's not a silver bullet though - some reflection features aren't supported, and reflection in general requires a bit of config at compile time to make sure all the required classes are loaded. This can make some plugin architectures unworkable, although I maintain that if you need reflection for pluggable code, you're probably doing it wrong.
> you can just...walk away from your computer

I take it that (a) your income doesn't depend on your internet presence, and (b) you're reasonably well off. KiwiFarms has done massive damage to people in "the real world", and some people concerned for their safety cannot afford to ignore it. It is a genuine danger.
For reference, there's 16% Ultra-Orthhodox follower in Israel (which itself has a popultion of 9millopn).
How is that a valid reason?

Standard compliance, especially in something like a website builder should be a top priority. If the builder doesn't work in major browsers, why there be any confidence that the sites it produces will?
Because it managed to produce frictionless adoption in academia. All the rest is downstream of that. MVPs in entrepreneurial initiatives are done with that. RESTful APIs are based on the prototypes that come from academia. Good libraries for data processing of lots of data required by academic studies became easily adopted there. So a less-effort/easiest-convenience law inside academia made it win.

BTW, if you enjoy Ruby, watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4&t=705s
That's one contention, but I don't agree with that either.
having used both ruby and python extensively, my guess is that what gave python an edge is better support for namespacing and stricter adherence to local scoping. it is far easier to read a largish python project and easily see where every symbol the code uses is defined; ruby makes it a lot harder because by default everything is tossed into one big top-level namespace and imported implicitly.

concrete example:

python:

foo.py:
def f():
...

bar.py:
import foo
x = foo.f() # very clear where f comes from, just look up foo.py

ruby:

foo.rb
def f
...

bar.rb
require 'foo'
x = f # grep through the code if you want to know what f is
Unravel number patterns in React-powered time-killer game
You're thinking solely in terms of private individuals. Other entities exist and have to be internet-connected to function; corporations, nonprofits, government bodies, institutions. They can't very well use pseudonyms because their whole reason for being is to be accessible to the public.

So that makes them easy to target for abuse, eg https://oaklandside.org/2023/08/29/chabot-elementary-evacuat...

An episode like that costs tens of thousands of dollars in lost productive time, police response and investigation etc. And it's increasingly common.

I don't think ISPs can or should proactively try to prevent this (or they'd have to preemptively scan and evaluate every packet request), but I also don't think your dunk on the ACLU has any substance. If an ISP knows that a customer is bad actor because it's brought to their attention in a credible and rigorous way, then it seems quite legitimate to me to cut them off.
> you can just...walk away from your computer

Just say no. Because it worked so well for Nancy Reagan.

Oh, wait...

(For those too young to remember: https://www.history.com/topics/1980s/just-say-no)
In the past the ACLU has defended hate groups right to freedom of speech. Do you have evidence that they'd do something to the contrary?
Double underscores are ugly, but not surprising or frustrating. I say they are not frustrating because the language doesn't force beginners to be aware of how they work right away. Double-underscore methods are there for people to seek out when they're ready, but the language and the surrounding community doesn't push people into comprehending them. Intuition is good enough for a long time. Ruby has more focus on metaprogramming which is likely to force users into some pretty complicated stuff before they're ready.

print as a statement is inconsistent and surprising, but the explanation is shallow--they made an exception for print, that's all there is to it. It's not beautiful but it is unlikely to cause a 2 hour debugging session.
These same platform controls allow Apple to restrict user data collection from apps. Meanwhile: the notion of a "digital free society" isn't a thing.
That's surprising. Starling opened a business account for me in less than 3 days. This was back in 2018 though.
...which were completely isolated, until Fukushima led to power shortages so they hurriedly linked /are linking the two with DC interconnects.
I think it's fine for the ISP to police online speech over their network as long as it's clearly stated in their service agreement that they can cancel/interfere with your service if they think you're too mean and as long as they also lose all safe harbor and assume liability for everything transmitted over their network.
that would be great. thanks. will do.
>"Sometimes I wonder why the American public has to be subject to the all the evils of so-called "tech" companies when clearly the US government has the personnel to write safe, reliable software."

It's not just the American public, it's every computer user—everywhere. The reason is because it's easy.

There's plenty of secure software and systems out there. It's hard to use. The costs outweigh the benefits for most people most of the time. We could all be running Qubes or openBSD but we don't because it's hard. It's hard to do simple things. Most of the world runs on Windows and people are logged in as admin. It's a point and click world.

I don't know if the government needs to write software, but I do think there is room for a vendor to step up, particularly in the business world, with systems that offer ironclad security.

IMO we are in an increasingly dangerous world. I'm surprised the internet connected world hasn't collapsed yet. Every day seems to be a new kind of scam or malware. It takes incredible effort to safeguard systems today. One wrong click and in 5 minutes your entire life can be destroyed. I'm curious what the stats are on malware that has completely destroyed businesses. Cyber insurance policies are almost necessary now even if you consider yourself a skilled user.
ruby does a lot of things well - it is still the best language i've found for quickly exploring a problem in code, or prototyping a solution. i'm less happy with the experience of maintaining a large codebase in it but only because i've found other languages that have much better support for that.
In what way is it at odds with the last 30 years of the internet? You seem to accept that as a fact, but I'd definitely agree with the eff.
How is that the worst of both worlds? The harmless jailbreak world also empowers bad actors.
What a hero!
I agree with these as major points. A few other secondary ones

Ruby was primarily maintained in Japanese, so had a barrier to entry for language level issues. It also lacked english-language evangelists and university presence.

When Ruby was new (invented 1995) Python had some older design issues (as it was 6 years older) however it really recovered and implemented a lot of change through Python 2 (2000) and python 3 (2008). Though there were compatability issues in the short term in the long term this change worked out.

Ruby inherited from perl TIMTOWTDI (there is more than one way to do it) philosophy which is a little more at odds with the scientific community
Home – Database of Databases
Adults Only: European Airline Introduces Child-Free Areas on Long-Haul Flights
Or Julia, a language custom designed for data science.

Also, MatLab was the go-to before Python took over the scene. So it definetely has competitors.

Python's strength is that it is the "jack of all trades" language. Its not the best at anything but its pretty good at everything.
Atleast they acknowledge they are doing the best they can.
One billion death by the end of the century. The study does not hint to a reduction in world population, thought.

>as a rough rule of thumb, burning roughly 1000 tons of fossil carbon (creating 3700 tons of CO2) causes one future premature death. Measuring carbon emissions in human lives not only makes the numbers easier to understand for nonexperts but also clarifies energy policy priorities: clearly, allowing a policy to cause manslaughter is intuitively unacceptable.
The high death tolls that can be attributed to current carbon emissions and that follow from this analysis have immediate and direct energy policy implications.

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/16/6074
I think GP confused DLL injection with return to libc.

I see why; in return to libc, which is prevented by ASLR, you are injecting the control of flow into the middle of a DLL(that DLL is libc). The terminology is a little confusing.
No curly braces. I’m serious.
Related discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37301728
There is a legality aspect as well. Drones are not permitted to fly in all places. Where I live, they can't fly above private property (without the property owner's permission) or near airports.

Such rules, of course, do not apply to birds.
Is that something you've reported to them? How do they handle such requests?
Would that be Crissy Field?

http://www.airfields-freeman.com/CA/Airfields_CA_SanFran.htm...

There was also Montgomery Field / Marina Airfield (now the Marina Green), but you would have to be even older than me to have seen that one.

http://www.airfields-freeman.com/CA/Airfields_CA_SanFran.htm...
https://archive.ph/YL3J8
I am in Australia and am in the process of having our home supply wired for three-phase 415v. Everything is heading down the path of electrification. Where previously we had gas central heating, cooking, and hot water, we are replacing those with electric HVAC (30amp circuit @ 240v, admittedly rarely driven that hard), electric instantaneous hot water (40 amp @ 240v), induction cooktop (32 amp), oven (15 amp), and also introducing a car charger (total approx 45 amps across the three phases).. it's likely at least the HVAC, cooktop/oven, car charger, and hot water could be on at or around the same time, which would result in more power draw than a standard single phase connection here (80a) could supply. It's not that it's needed all the time, but it's helpful to have the headroom a 3-phase supply can provide.
That was before the ACLU got hollowed out and skinsuited by activist groups. I'd trust the ACLU of 10 years ago to fight this, but not the one of today.
They literally don't use the same machine. The McDonalds franchise contract requires them to use a specific, made-for-mcdonalds, model (mostly similar to the models sold to other chains, but not identical). And I'm pretty sure that people have done (informal) reliability studies by things like calling random franchises, and Mcdonalds isn't just more popular, it's actually less reliable.
This reads like a book, thank you so much for putting this together!

> About value prop: Thanks for the feedback! We are already trying to be as vocal about it as possible by writing great docs etc. but can probably do better.

> PLG & OSS: thanks for the hint, we will be careful around managing deployments within customer VPCs.

> Pricing: Currently picked storage as the first metric to price on as this varies a lot across users. Some use langfuse to track complex embedding processes with a lot of context, others just simple chat messages with relatively low-context, low-value events.

> OTel: We looked into it but did not go into all the details. We wanted to have a product out there fast and liked the experience of e.g. Posthog SDKs. I might reach out to you concerning this topic after investing more time on it. Thanks for the offer!

> OLAP: Agree, i also learned to tackle scaling issues once they appear and so far we are good. Interesting that Supabase has no horizontal scaling. This would be one of the main reasons to use it IMO.
Whoops, yeah I got the company name wrong.
Cryptocurrency is also even better than Clojure at being auditable as everything is on-chain all the time.
Ok, but so what? We can agree that some people will be upset if some things are genetically curated. Is that an argument for a blanket ban against genetic curation? Because I think it’s weak as hell.