skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is no perfect issue tracking system sadly and integration with prs and commits actually is becoming a hard requirement for me. This is not something that people should be updating to an issue tracker manually, ever. Or doing without entirely (more common). Also nice in Github is the integration with Github actions and being able to see whether something can be merged safely or not.

I double as a product manager and CTO, meaning I do both code and planning. We're using Github issues and Asana. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I'd take both over Jira any day. And since I'm in charge, my company is blissfully free of anything Atlassian.

I kind of like Asana for planning. It's got a few sane features one of which is separating issues from projects. This allows me to quickly plan out projects and then add tickets to the relevant team boards. And another one is making it very easy to create issues in a spreadsheet like view that minimizes the click bureaucracy other tools have. Great when you basically are thinking at the bullet point level and just want to hit enter instead of having to fiddle with obnoxious modal forms.

Of course for developers Asana isn't great because it has no markdown support and no usable github integration (a few commercial things exist but they are basically glorified sync tools). Github issues have a few nice features as well. I like working with check lists and then converting the individual items to tasks. That comes close to how I like to use Asana.

Where Github falls off a cliff is what passes for project management. I don't know what their PMs were smoking but it's just completely wrong and useless. It kind of lives orthogonal to issues (!!!!!) and nothing syncs automatically except with really awkward github actions crap. So, it only serves to add a lot of bureaucracy and busy work without actually addressing the core problem. A combination of over engineered and inadequate.

The core issue with Github is that issues are tied to a single code repository. From a planning point of view that is just horrible because I manage a product consisting of multiple code repositories and I need one plan that may involve zero or more code repositories and not several and I don't want to lock in my issues to a single repository before I have even figured out what the plan is. I guess that's what they tried to fix with their project management thingy. Except they messed that up badly.

I'd love a tool that is a bit like Asana but more integrated with pull requests, CI/CD, the notion of work being distributed across multiple code repositories, teams, etc. I don't mean yet another sync thingy that copies tickets from system X to system Y. I would like a one stop shop that can be used throughout the life cycle of a software product from before any code is written until users / customers start reporting issues and everything in between. Doesn't exist.
> then a competitor would have stomped google search into the dust already

You'd think so, but they can't. Forget about Google's brand power due to which every internet user is hard-wired to turn to it when searching. The scale of users they have gives them a monopoly that allows them to collect a vast amount of data that no competitor can match. Without an quivalent amount of data, they just can't improve their engines. A simple example is the search queries - the keywords you use to search for data. I suspect Google gets roughly 1000 new search queries to every 1 new query their competitor gets. So Google has 1000+ new data points to optimise their search engine, where as a competitor is constrained due to the lack of similar data. That is why the competitors offer a poorer search experience with new queries. Which makes users stop using it and adds to woes of the non-Google search engine.

The only fix to this is to recognize Google search engine as a monopoly, and force it to share its data with other competitors till they reach a certain level of threshold of "competitiveness". (Ofcourse, the biggest issue with this approach is the user privacy problem).
Yes ad-revenue offsets ,
I want to point out, premise it self is wrong. their business model itself is not sustainable (as per my understanding)with present free +ads/paid model. you are just subsidizing their bad decisions forgoing your privacy/time/money.

even with ads, hosting free video content is not sustainable.
just look at the trajectory, internet users are stagnating, time of a day is limited. which means all users watch-time is constant. it is profitable now, but not forever(if above premise is true)

but youtube has to host all the data since its inception, and new content is added everyday. (maintenance cost increases day by day + but income is stagnated)

only way out is to charge/limit content creators. or else it will be (never ending increase of number of ads/price increase).
Reprieve for Kentucky's independent pharmacies is saving Medicaid millions
Back then more than now, there was always that one department of “creatives” that insisted on Macs.
The culture does not forcefully assimilate however, and they add the cultural proclivities of any new member as opposed to breaking it down into its elements to be absorbed and reconstructed.
Not sure if it's so much easier in the US. If you sell things you e.g. have different sales tax requirements in every state, and if you have a Delaware C Corp you still need to do you taxes which usually requires an accountant. Overall the system isn't very different in Germany, I'd even say VAT tax rules for Europe are probably a bit easier than sales tax rules in the US. Founding a limited liability company takes 2-3 weeks here BTW, costs are around 2000 T€ I think. Maybe more expensive than opening a C Corp but not by much.
Choose a Word
> Let's be clear: the best targeted ads I will ever see are the ones I get from a search engine when it serves an ad for exactly the thing I was searching for. Everybody wins: I find what I wanted, the vendor helps me buy their thing, and the search engine gets paid for connecting us. I don't know anybody who complains about this sort of ad. It's a good ad.

These ads are good in theory (and great when they work), but I find that, most of the time, they just result in me searching for one product and the first result being an ad for a competing product.

> There's another kind of ad that works well on me. I play video games sometimes, and I use Steam, and sometimes I browse through games on Steam and star the ones I'm considering buying. Later, when those games go on sale, Steam emails me to tell me they are on sale, and sometimes then I buy them. Again, everybody wins: I got a game I wanted (at a discount!), the game maker gets paid, and Steam gets paid for connecting us. And I can disable the emails if I want, but I don't want, because they are good ads.

This I totally agree with (though I might be biased, as a gamedev). These ads are awesome because I told Steam that I want these games and that I want ads about these games.
If anyone is curious about how signals are used for garbage collection (specifically SIGSEGV) check out this article:

https://medium.com/@MartinCracauer/generational-garbage-coll...

It's handy for knowing which areas of the heap have been untouched (and thus don't need to be scavenged in a generational gc).
This is an interesting admission to me... Does recognizing it as propaganda not take away some of the power it has over you?
If it's who a lot of people think he was. That stake is locked down until someone figures out how to revive cryopreserved people and cure ALS.
I can think of so many examples of unwise founders doing the exact opposite. They don’t recognize that their business is still ultimately a niche with a limited addressable market.

I think WeWork is a great example. That market did need some freshening up and maybe even some full blown disruption, as the incumbents weren’t delivering a modernized co-working experience attractive to young professionals.

But the founder took a great idea way too far, mistaking a straightforward office subleasing business for a cultural movement that could change the way people live and work en-masse.

It’s that founders’ hubris of “I invented the next iPhone and the world will never be the same again.”
From Matt Stoller's recent newsletter "Monopoly Round-Up: Chaos and Progress":

"Astonishing story out of Kentucky, the state got rid of corporate PBMs in its Medicaid program, and despite the warnings of massive losses of revenue, it ended up saving about $300 million on spending of $1.5 billion. If you do the math, that means that PBMs cost America about $50-150 billion a year of waste and higher prices, for literally no reason."
WEI is a way to cryptographically prove to a remote website that you're really browsing it with an unmodified build of Chrome. Google hasn't said out loud yet that it's going to be used to block other browsers, but what else is there to use it for?
Significant gains if you want a distributed key-value database because you can take advantage of NVMEoF.
No, same meal cost much less before. We go to the same restaurants and know how much prices went up. The restaurant owners of the ones we visit often all say the same thing, they had to cut down on quality while still raising prices over the last couple of years, and some had to drop menu items because they were getting too expensive and the risk of wasting food because no one ordered it was too high.
On the good[1] old times of x86 segments, you still couldn't assign a segment to each array as segments were a limited resource. Something still has to do the mapping of the segments to physical linearly addressable memory.

[1] spoiler alert: they were not good.
I prefer the way text looks on my Linux install over the way it looks on MacOS or Windows.
Why do they like windows over tabs so much? :-(
I too thought this when I was 26, I'm 36 now. The world won't stop you, but you may also find you just don't care enough to - you have to be spending a lot of time interactively engaging in a culture to be native to the memes, and that takes a lot of time that you might want to spend learning about / doing other things.

Also starting to realise that my "they can't stop me gaming when I'm 80!" attitude will be self-limited by joint pain at some point... probably in exactly the same way as previous generations, just s/gaming/popular activity of the era/
A lot of that is just a property of modern OSs, with good reason, intentionally not exposing these features to userspace processes. It's not really a function of the language itself.
I know this can be a hot button, but some genuine intellectual curiosity in here. Some information I don’t think is widely known, as well as inducing some thinking about how societies operate with regard to the legal system, the constitution, regulatory capture, etc.
Oh, fuck. Where do I send the $100?
But you know how the encryption works—the entire Signal protocol is public and described in minute detail (see https://www.signal.org/docs/). You can use Wireshark to make sure Signal isn't lying, i.e., to verify that the client adheres to the protocol. This is possible since you do have access to the keys.
"Free" is probably the wrong word. They get to do that in places that have a strong social fabric. The diversity of America combined with a capitalism-induced culture of pitting people against each other makes that impossible in the US.
'The helmet made my hair fall out': Jeff Bridges on making cult sci-fi film Tron
Daily trading of Bitcoin is now at ~24B. 5B can move the market but not destroy it.
Is this a fully collaborative tooling with self linking?

Having hundreds of out of date, and insecure word documents is a dismal affair when you get a call in the middle of the night.

For issue resolution, documents steps are moving right in to the ticketing system for linkage to incidents. That’s fine.

For general documentation though. It doesn’t belong in the ticketing system and what a pain in my ass.
The 2022 results[1]...wow. One of Hadi Choopan's thighs appears to be the same size as both of Arnold's thighs combined[2]

1. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/athletics/news/mr-olympia-re...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Olympia#/media/File:Arnold...
In America there's a saying, "D means Degree" or "D means Diploma". D is the bare minimum passing grade.

You're not going to get into a prestigious school with grades like that but community colleges will still take you.
Before Wayland, 100% of the developer effort went towards X. Was shutting up and using X the sensible thing to do then?
The issue is that power tripping mods prevent many questions from becoming great ones.

And I disagree that questions need to have one factual answer. Great questions often have many highly ranked answers showing different ways to solve issues or emphasizing different aspects of solving the question.

A great question is one which others also have.
Perhaps where you live. They are meant to reflect averages.
Hence the observation that every architecture eventually converges to NUMAcc if physically possible.
Worth clarifying that GGML the library is very much active. GGML as a file format will be superseded by GGUF.
For portability by far the vast majority will say C. In my experience the C compiler optimizer will do a lot with -O2 or -03 but it can't always infer correct SIMD optimization for some operations and on occasion you have to drop down into x86_64 assembly. The idea is do most things in C and use __asm__ to write custom assembly instructions. With #defines around the assembly for each processor you plan on supporting you get the benefit of both C optimizers and portability across different CPUs as well as any future updates to the compiler in the future. But the compiler writers will say to use intrinsics and extended assembly rather than raw assembly because when you write raw assembly your code becomes a black box to the compiler and it can't infer optimizations for your surrounding code that interfaces with the assembly. I think C with extended Asm is likely the most sane combination if you don't mind the slightly ugly syntax and the fact that there could be differences between compilers. That being said, C with compiler intrinsics seems to be a happy compromise for those that don't want to shift around registers and deal with the stack.

https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DontUseInlineAsm

https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html

I don't use Rust so I can't comment on it but it also has compiler intrinsics + a memory safety model. It's compiler is really dog slow last time I used it so I hope that has improved but nobody is really killing C any time soon, even if there's enthusiasm for memory safety. Sooner or later you have to delve down into the depths of Narnia and you may as well get comfortable dealing with memory.

My likely favorite combination is Python + C (for the speed stuff) + Intrinsics (for the really speed stuff).
In the UK you pay £12 online, fill in an address and it's done.

So that's not true.

It completely depends on the European country.

And given the Germany is the economic powerhouse of the EU, their bureaucracy doesn't seem to be hurting them much.
and Microsoft heavily invested into Novell, who then stopped any SUSE Linux Desktop efforts, the Gnome team was US based and ummm left the company (and started Xamarin), the KDE folks were reassigned other tasks, and the SAMBA team essentially also left Novell. purely coincidental, for sure.

most interestingly after Satya Nadella took over from Lord Balmer. they started investing into FOSS and Linux, they absorbed github, Xamarin (FOSS .Net), created WSL/WSL2 which now pretty much works, because for heaven's sake, the munny is in managing the cloud and in providing the workplace desktop productivity suite, not the base OS or infrastructure software...

anyhow.

Novell, Balmer and Microsoft was quite a ride.
This is pretty much my issue with this article. By its criteria assembly isn’t low level, which makes the claim pretty uninteresting. You could argue there are/were processors that had low level ISAs (VLIW, no OoO exec, no memory reordering, no caches, no branch prediction, etc.) but they are all niche (usually low power embedded DSPs) or failed to capture the market (Itanium) because they failed to deliver performance comparable to the highly abstracted CPU supposedly “designed” to run C (also a questionable claim, I think the reality is it has more to do with sequential execution being the way humans think, a point Jim Keller has made in several interviews).
I don't think he's saying "expose random implementation details". Exposing the wrong details would obviously be bad. He's just saying c's model has significant shortcomings in the world of modern CPUs.
Seeing Mezzanine then flipping through I thought somehow it’s reading my actual music library on my phone and was both impressed and worried at once. Good job.
Simplicity is security. There are less things that can go wrong.
I mean, if you believed that you would be very long on btc
Reading the module information would be significantly easier. (which is not something swig can do today since swig hasn’t been updated in a while )

Parsing code to define an API is horribly fragile. A single macro or unknown keyword can break it. Hence why you had to specify C not C++ headers.

Having a statically defined metadata like C++ modules do would have greatly simplified binding generation
Somewhat related (for the discussion, not title): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37869760
What’s your app?
Or just use an ad blocker. Also extremely simple.
Accurate comment of the day.

C intentionally leaves behavior undefined to allow flexibility in implementation, which allows implementations to take advantage of optimizations that other languages can't because they are over-constrained for the target architecture.

What's the order of operations for sequence of expressions added together? Do they evaluate left to right or right to left? The answer is, very intentionally, "any order is allowed and order may change between executions of a line." This makes it possible to make C implementations equivalently fast on various architectures where, for example, stacks and stack operation ordering make it more efficient to do one or the other. Hell, the language is even usable in an architecture where each of those expressions could be run purely parallel. Of course, the downside is that you definitely can't assume side effects caused by the left side of an expression occurred before the right side.

But the trade-off is that you do have to be extremely sensitive to making assumptions that the specification doesn't actually specify, or you are going to trip over an error in your assumptions that matters on your implementation. The actual "this is undefined behavior so the program deleted your whole hard drive" scenario is incredibly unlikely on a modern desktop or server architecture, but the languages flexibility does mean that you're perpetually one missed trick away from incredibly perplexing behavior.

This is a feature of the language not a bug. It's how the language gets you as close as it possibly can to the speed you would be able to get hand writing the assembly at every step of the process.
AI-Powered Language Analysis for the Writing Community
Our natural language analysis platform with built-in artificial intelligence streamlines and resolves some of the most common issues that plague these sectors, including:

Assessment and review of submitted text for publishing
Unconscious bias, poor flow, emotion, and readability issues in content writing
Concerns about the quality of a college or university application essay, including structure, argument strength, and informativeness
It's like a scene from some movie, there's a hacker in a dark room, connects to some machine deep inside of mega corp and the login prompt comes on screen...

Connected to 123.4.002.312
Welcome to OpenBSD 6.2!

login:

Hacker: Dammit, it's an OpenBSD system. We'll never get in!
Have fun retiring
> What you've done is turned signals into interrupts, which is .. hokey

No that is precisely what they are - user space interrupts. Thats how they work. That’s why one has to worry about async safety and signal safe calls.

I have no idea where you get off on this “allowing a context switch” nonsense. In most of the systems being discussed, if a signal is delivered and the thread is runnable it will be delivered immediately and asynchronously - there is no queuing going on in that case. If the thread is not runnable/scheduled that’s another story but this does not square with what you’re saying, because it sounds strongly that you’re saying that signals are delivered synchronously (with context switches) and they are most definitely not, generally.

Also longjmp is an entirely user space concept - the kernel on the most common systems being discussed has no idea of its operation.
Borislav lost the key

many such cases
I'm not sure if you're arguing a positive right to general purpose computing (where somebody has to provide you with) or a negative one (where somebody can't stop you from having). Could you please clarify?
I signed up for RacketCon, joining remotely. I am looking forward to it a lot. Usually I use the Racket language perhaps for 10% of my personal projects, but I am currently writing a Racket AI book, so all things Racket are of current interest.

Past RacketCons have been a lot of fun.

I usually use Common Lisp, but Racket is batteries included Scheme, and more, and is a very pleasant language and ecosystem. Just in case you don’t have Racket installed: https://racket-lang.org/
There are some cleverer assemblers that allow to program in assembly while still being able to do stuff like loops without too much effort https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_language#Support_for_...
> Signals are a way for Unix processes to communicate!

Not really. They are primarily a mechanism for processes to be interrupted by their "controlling terminal", inherited from the shell (the session leader). User types something special on the TTY, the kernel translates it to SIGxxxx and the foreground process is interrupted or killed, possibly returning control to the shell.
I'd say the breakup of Ma Bell actually made things worse for about 30 years for consumers. It wasn't until they began consolidating again over the past 20 years that things began to improve.
Since Elizabeth Holmes got 11 years as the head honcho of Theranos, I'm gonna wager "less than 11".
They announce the OS version with every new hardware release. So it is indeed a criteria that consumers use to decide to purchase. And not everybody automatically upgrades to a new OS version.
That's very interesting, thanks for the link.
Release image [1] is inspired by works of Louis Wain[2]. Name of the release image references one of his works[3].

[1] https://www.openbsd.org/images/ImHappyBecauseEveryoneLovesMe...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Wain

[3] https://arthive.com/artists/11470~Louis_Wain/works/466546~Im...
Can we have a new rule? Anytime a clickbait headline such as this is posted, the top comment is just a reworked headline with the missing pieces revealed.
Yeah I think all you need to know about the "gray area" is the threshold of "tax evasion" or "tax fraud" in your country, and don't get even close to it, for me I'd still be worried to make a mistake and it would be on the back of my mind, so as you are saying, if you want to make things right and easy, incorporate a mini-GmbH, use professional help, and focus on your product.
This is a problem for so many SaaS development tools.
I get the frustration, but URL routing correctness is fairly trivially tested in Django and other frameworks to work around this issue, whereas it sounds like the matching algorithm here simply does not support certain common use-cases.
I can’t imagine Apple would leave this enabled once the phone is set up. There’s just no need.
How much is that actually expected to reduce the overall warming effect?