skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Poor Firefox users are 5% edge cases everywhere :(
For supported cards, this function is built straight into Chrome. Works on my AmEx for example, every time Chrome prompts to auto-fill payment details one of the options is a one-time virtual card that gets automatically handled by Chrome itself. Works a treat!
Shopify only went remote in March 2020, after being strongly anti-remote for a long time. You're right that they have leaned into 100% remote since the pandemic, however.

There were remote employees before (especially in Production Engineering and much of Support), but R&D was almost all in person.

(Source: I miss the productivity of the Elgin Street office ...)
> The strong Turing test remains unconquered for now. It remains useful, because its use is primarily philosophical. Once it's been solidly beaten, Pandora's box will be fully open on artificial people.

"Artificial"..?
IMO this is the worst kind. It means I can be interrupted at a moments notice. Unfortunately, even the act of asking "hey are you free?" means I am sometimes broken from very deep concentration.

Remote Work lets me silence the things I don't need to deal with right away while those that truly need my attention I can prioritize ahead of time or there are ways to "break through" the silence because its urgent enough to warrant it.

I hated not having that level of autonomony in the office. Mostly, so did everyone else once they realized how this wasn't as nice as it seemed
Why do you think soft bank is so popular with the frauds
The way some employers do silently abuse employees indeed is very difficult to talk about without risking future employment.
Hyundai and Kia rethink the EV drive unit with Uni Wheel idea
RTX 3070 Max-Q (laptop)
SEEKING PROJECTS : I'll happily volunteer to tranqulize wild animals, ranging from shooting darts to the actual work that has to be done to the animal while they are napping.
So many of these managers are basically saying, "in-office is better because I get to engage in high-status behaviors with other people IRL." I get that it makes you feel good but that's not necessarily translating to the bottom line.
I'm not sure what to make of articles like this because, on the one hand, I appreciate someone trying to stay close to the data, but on the other hand, I don't trust the data they use, and feel like it could all be spun in different ways.

Just to take one small example: Thompson cites as an example of happier workers a poll question showing that there was a 20% increase in people saying that it's "a good time to find a job.” But what does that mean? That there are lots of openings because people have in fact left their jobs they were unhappy with? Turnover means people are happier with their jobs?

Or take this: 35% of people say "that opportunities abound for them to do 'more of what they do best.'" so the other 65% of people don't matter? Maybe it's unchanged since 2013 but is that a good benchmark? Are people thinking of other opportunities?

Another elephant in the room is whether the happiest are happier, and the unhappy are less happy. This might or might not be the case, but talking about these survey respondents like they're a large homogenous group is problematic. It may be that there are areas of the economy that have in fact gotten much worse for large segments, even as they have gotten better for other segments. Focusing on the happy doesn't talk about the unhappiness of the unhappy, which is in fact what Thompson is trying to rebut.

Finally, I've grown distrustful of these surveys in general. It's not clear to me that what people say in response to a pollster reflects anything meaningful about their actual behavior and emotional state in the way people want them to mean. I do not want to be dismissive because people should pay attention to them, but I'm not sure I've seen convincing evidence that aggregate survey responses track with societal trends in a way that suggests their unbounded validity. Even the figure tracking job satisfaction since 1987 — which I give credit to Thompson for posting — hides a lot. Sure, you can see the Great Recession in that figure, but if you didn't know about it, what would you make of it? What about the drug epidemic and declines in life expectancy? Should we be incorporating birth rate declines into the conversation? Are people unhappy with their jobs, or with some things about society in general?

I bring that up not to say "life sucks for members of society right now" but rather, it's not always clear to me how you should use measures of things like "societal happiness" or what that even means. In some place as heterogeneous as the US, given all the problems we've had as a country, is it insensitive to have these kinds of discussions at all until we're more attentive to the worst off?
I think what is specifically American is that people are not content with that situation.

In many countries, people don't really expect fulfillment from their jobs, they just expect to get paid so that they can find fulfillment elsewhere.
To your aside, I am one of the only people on my very social block that doesnt work from home. The block is its own social structure and people find it kind of odd I have regular contact with people in other parts of the city and go into work every day. So extroverts in dense areas can still thrive in wfh.

Until we eliminate scarcity or come close, not everyone can be at the self actualization section of the hierarchy of needs. And fighting automation doesn't get there faster. We need to take care of people independently from employment. We also need people who were in those jobs to at least try to pitch in on the stuff we haven't automated yet including automating things. If that isn't possible due to ability mismatch, then idelness is a mental health issue, so some help engaing on tasks that are in the self actualization realm would be great. This is all a naive pipe dream with human nature being what it is, but a nice one.
Sr. Director; team is entirely remote. Company is half remote with 1 day per week required for non-remote employees.

My team is highly technical and generally requires deep thinking and little interruptions to make progress. The single best thing that remote work has done is stop the endless interruptions via shoulder tap at the desk.
> there may be a perception of them being less likely to remain out of any sense of loyalty or obligation.

Well, technically that would be a market inefficiency, so we should be encouraging employees to view their employers as fungible and switch jobs as soon as it's advantageous to them. If your employer is trying to keep you around through social ties instead of competitive compensation you're being taken advantage of.
I've mentored someone remotely and it seems to have gone pretty well. Doesn't hurt that they person is very good. And, yes, chat is invaluable.

I still feel you're losing something without in-person (including social) interaction. I know for me personally, I would say I have much weaker connections to many people I've never met in person. That said, there are a bunch of other factors involved with building new connections as well that aren't purely about being virtual.
Yeah, I know. It makes perfect sense too, since "rated" is basically like "combined mileage". But I rarely supercharge in situations where I will be doing 55 mph.
The Chimp-Pig Hypothesis
Is it normal to have to paste a private API key into a random website to use it?
Banjo players of HN, represent! I’m the banjo player for “You, Me, Everybody” < https://youmeeverybody.bandcamp.com/album/you-me-everybody >. Our song “Stranger” was featured in S02E04 of Netflix’s “Sweet Tooth”, and that’s us (in make up!) playing it at the start of the episode.

My dubious claim to fame is that I believe I was the first person to put banjo tablature on the web, possibly the net as a whole. I used EMACS (eight megabytes and continuously swapping, indeed) in 92 or 93 to make ASCII art of tab:

+———0—————
+————————-
+-0—————0—
+————————-
+—————0———

We’re living in a real golden age of banjo today. There are technical virtuosos in all areas, prominent banjo players who don’t use it for yuks, and it’s a sound people recognise but don’t pull back from.

The article author alludes to the terrible times after “Deliverance” was released. For 20 years that movie dominated perceptions of banjo and banjo players. Every banjo player today still gets asked for Duelling Banjos but, in my experience at least, no more “squeal like a pig” comments or associations with inbreeding. Mumford and Sons, “O Brother Where Art Thou”, and Taylor Swift have all done their part to normalise the sound of the banjo.

I love it. It’s hard to be sad when you’re playing the banjo. (Insert obligatory comment about how it’s easier to be sad when someone else is playing the banjo. And yes, I’ve heard all the banjo jokes. And seen the Gary Larson cartoon. And the Thunderstruck video. And the one with the band walking down the train tracks. Every banjo player gets those sent to them on a regular basis, it’s part of the job)
> more humans than wild mammals

by biomass, but even just rats + mice outnumber humans
I guess I messed up in thinking that the comment was a response to my mention of the tiny orbits of these planets then. Because if it was, it was not a good response, since I still don't even know if the system mentioned is in actually similar to the one in TFA. So I guess it was just an offhand comment about something unrelated and I should have ignored it.
Taking a step back, as a long time remote work believer it’s actually just incredible how much COVID changed the expectations. The fact that almost all jobs now offer at least “hybrid” is a huge win in the long march of time. Just 5 years ago that would’ve been ludicrous
Spending $100k to defeat a $500 drone. Asymmetric warfare is brutal.
A cow is a legged vegetable but sometimes it short-circuits and sends you flying just for passing by.
WoW Rise of the Triad?? Time to start my 9front dell asap!! Thanks for the hint!
Loyalty is a funny thing, because companies are not loyal, yet they want their employees to be loyal, without reciprocating in any manner.

I don't recommend holding loyalty to any company. Maybe to co-workers(s) or a direct boss (IE, if they leave, maybe you leave too. I've seen this happen) but certainly not to the employer, since it will never be reciprocated
Differences in verb-subject-object word order will always add latency. If you want to translate from German, with the verb at the end, to Welsh, where the verb goes at the start, you'll have to wait for the complete sentence before you can begin.
Just one data point, but I love my job now that I can work from home. The work is interesting and challenging, and I don’t have to deal with all of the office bullshit. Pretty simple equation.
I didn’t realize that with Pandas 2.0, Pandas-to-Polars conversions can be zero copy if you use Arrow as the data frame format.
I think the strong version is probably impossible to beat, because even if the machine has all the same capabilities as the human, it will probably give away its nature one inconsequential way or another, just like a foreign person usually gives away their foreign nature with some slightly unusual manner of speech.
My wife was training to be a professional voice actor to do dubbing in several languages when we met.

I told her then that the industry would be disrupted by AI before she retired.

Glad she pivoted. Really impressive results.
Not only but also.

On the demand side:

There was no web in 1980 (that was 1989), the non-web internet was barely getting started and home use of it was science fiction (even home computers themselves were only few years old, 3 years if you take the 1977 release of the Apple 2 given the 1 didn't have a case). Mobile phones had been car phones and experimental devices until just the previous year, they wouldn't become commonplace for about two more decades, and even then wouldn't be significantly bandwidth hogs with video calls and streaming until smartphones three decades after the article.

On the satellite side:

Satellites are mostly powered by PV, which itself was expensive in 1980 (I'm not certain, but guessing from the size of the Starlink satellites and the exponential growth curve for PV production and total installation having been only 105 MW globally in 1992, Starlink might have exceeded worldwide 1980 PV production all by itself). Packet switching comes with computational costs, and the computers in the satellites themselves were expensive (both in dollars and watts) and low performance. Phased array antennas were really hard, computational beam forming moreso. Ion drives existed in various forms, but Hall effect thrusters wouldn't be introduced to the west for another 12 years (1992, after the fall of the Soviet Union). Laser communication was being researched, but the first successful laser intersatellite link was 2001.
Why would universities sue them? They are benefactors of research funding, not the ones paying them.

NIH and other funders would be the ones that would like their money back (although they don't probably care either).
> Finally, researchers would take a look under the hoods of the machines to determine whether the neural networks are built to simulate human cognition.

This doesn’t make any sense. We don’t inspect boats to see if they simulate human swimming patterns.
Not according to china.
New honeypots deployed across Israel to catch hackers
That's what I thought must be necessary, thank you.
This is firmly cemented in my mind as completely impossible. I won't listen to reason.
Gen pop wants ultimate freedom from obligation and endless externalization of responsibility too

Turns out human meat suits are just driven by biology to survive and not egalitarian human philosophy and psychology
Nobody has any numbers on what is translating to the bottom line. There aren't any facts and even then the variables will be highly dependent on person, company, situation.
> "I don't really listen to music" == "I don't breathe much".

Could you elaborate?

I definitely used to be a person who just didn't listen to music - I found it quite boring, really. I've since found genres that I like that I listen to on occasion, but definitely still not as frequently as the average person.
And do what with them exactly? ; )
Why would you do that?

This is such a weirdly common attitude to US competitors in a western bubble, but I can't figure what motivates so many people to act like such sore losers.

No wonder things like BRICS start popping out. People on the receiving end will justly recognize this attitude as evil.
Maybe put some code directly before bag deployment code that disarms the system. So even if the execution reaches it directly through the branches, nothing will happen
In my collaboration you get to be an author on every paper (around 100 a year) just by doing any work in the experiment. I'm an author on around 1000 papers that I haven't even downloaded, much less read.
Agreed. Games like TIS-100 just feel unrewarding to me because I'd rather be solving my own problems.
I can't support this with data, but I expect the percent is a bit higher among potential GitHub users
I found the problems straightforward to code in Haskell. The first part ran correctly right after I got it to compile. The second initially gave bogus results. Turns out I needed to invert a test and then it ran correctly too.
15 lines of code including 3 imports and 3 type declarations;
1 line to comment out to do the easier problem.
While not many didn't touch it, many for sure didn't consider it for AoC: SQL.

You can go for one query solution or use views/tables for multiple steps.

It's an acquired taste for sure, but I kinda like it!
I'd love to try this for a magazine I publish in PDF (designed with Adobe Indesign), but I couldn't make the repo work on my local. Any chance anyone could make a guide to try it on the cloud? It would be appreciated :)
How does this compare to whisper-large-v3 on STT?
It’s like Apple and TSMC. At this scale, both benefit if a large customer helps funding its critical supplier’s technology and infrastructure developments. It’s a symbiotic relationship, both suffer if one has serious issues.

On one hand it’s anti-competitive because it makes it more difficult for the customer’s competitors to use leading edge technologies; on the other those leading edge technologies would be much harder and take longer to develop without the customer’s contribution.
Good for them, every country should have effective arsenal of nuclear weapons to use in defence.
Same here. I don't see the finesse in macOS. Half the time I have to fight the window manager to get what I want, the other half I have to use 3rd party tools. It doesn't even have very basic stuff like a volume mixer.
I don't really see how the third party can manipulate stuff...

The third party is told "please mix up these tubes randomly and don't tell me how you mixed them".

Both the third party and the scientists would need to be dishonest for the scheme to break down.
Neat.

Now, on to that actual engagement with the problem that I asked you to do...?

How do you guarantee the same value we get out of IP, without IP? OR, how do you propose we get along without the value that we get out of IP? What does that world look like, in a practical sense.

You can whinge about your pet libertarianism all you want but it doesn't actually get you any closer to being relevant. No matter how much you think anybody "should" care.
Remote collaboration fuses fewer breakthrough ideas? Probably not
Ask HN: Looking for a diagram that shows various data engineering solutions
I'm trying to find a diagram that I remember seeing in a HN post sometime in the last year.

The post was broadly about data engineering. The diagram listed various tools that were used for different stages in the data engineering process.

The diagram was shaped like a period. The wideness of the period was used to indicate the volume of data at various stages of the data-engineering process (i.e., at the wide base of the period, there were solutions suitable for handling terabytes of data, and at the narrow top of the period, there were solutions suitable for handling data volumes in the kilobytes to megabyte range).

Example solutions at the base of the period were distributed storage/compute solutions (like Apache Spark).

Example solutions at the middle of the period were things like a single SQL server instance.

Example solutions at the top of the period were highly interactive, low latency solutions (like excel).

If anyone recalls such a topic passing on HN, or knows of a similiar diagram, could you please share it with me?
It's different when you're just doing it for fun, and as a social event that a bunch of people are participating in together
It is a useful imaginary construct. It captures the idea that your users, if you are doing something useful, have an interest in you continuing to be able to do it.

IMO the reason the article had bring up this obscure !>< operator is because it treated this particular set of user interests as somehow separate from the users. The reason it is hard to rank business vs user interest is because business \in user.
We browse through Wayback and it seems so long ago...

I met your children -- what did you tell them?
I'm in complete agreement with you. What job category has more employees than software engineering coupled with better pay and working conditions?

That doesn't mean we can't be miserable (and I've gone through a few bouts myself) but it's a great field right now.
My guess is the latter. Some of the things that ASML makes are extremely challenging to manufacture, even if you know how to do it (certain pieces of the EUV systems), as well as things that come from other companies like the mirrors from Zeiss. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if China has some stolen IP, but I don’t think it would be that helpful given the above.
Seems to me that people made part 2 harder than it us. Just define an array containing the digits: "one", "two", and so forth. Then check for substring matches, position by position. Maybe not elegant, but effective.
Performative, and a waste of taxpayer money.
I been saying for years that Teams is worse than Slack -- glad I'm not the only one.

> The lack of basic normal-ass chat rooms in a “team” pushes everything into 1-1 chats and chats attached to meetings

Exactly.

The big killer is being able to pop into a team's room and say "hey tell me about VLAN X" and get an answer from someone. or even just figure out who to ask. with teams that's much harder, you have to play the "find the right person to ask" game, and the visibility is poor.

> (that Teams horse-shit isn’t better for in-office workers, either)

Teams is fine if you need a IM client for people who are in cubes on the other side of the office and integrates with the Office suite. but for distributed team use it's garbage.
Most EVs don’t carry a spare tire anymore due to weight and space
There's one thing I don't understand.

Whenever TP or Delphi get brought up, people wax nostalgic about how amazing they were, and that they are actually unmatched to this day in certain aspects.

I know the adoption of both got hurt by Borland's and Embarcadero's corporate shenanigans. However, FreePascal and Lazarus are reportedly just as good as Borland's products, but without the business issues. Despite that, they seem to barely get used. Why?
I just created a list of string-value pairs and found first index of and last index of for each of them keeping track of the best first and best last. C# is pretty freaking amazing like that.
Can't wait for someone to roll a language tutor out with this tech.

Everyone gets a personal tutor for hours a day.

I would absolutely love a VR game where I just need to work in China or Mexico all day and pick up the language that way.
From the OP:

> When I say “run” I don’t just mean executing a program; I mean operating it in production, with all that it entails: deploying, upgrading, observing, auditing, monitoring, fixing, decommissioning, etc. As Dan McKinley puts it: "It is basically always the case that the long-term costs of keeping a system working reliably vastly exceed any inconveniences you encounter while building it."

One of the things separating a great developer from a good one, IMO, is the ability to treat the documented API boundary of an open-source library as something that isn't sacrosanct and impenetrable.

How comfortable are you with command-clicking into, or outright cloning and reading, a library's source to understand the nuance that the documentation may not convey (or situation where the documentation is outright wrong)? Depending on your language's support for it, have you monkey-patched issues, or forked a library (and ideally submitted patches upstream) to add extension points you might need? Are you used to setting breakpoints inside of libraries, not just your own code, so you can understand how data is represented internally when debugging?

And when you're evaluating whether to use a library in the first place, do you just look at the API and examples, or do you read the source to understand whether the underlying code prioritized maintainability, extensibility, and test coverage? Do you read changelogs and think about whether the library maintainers prioritize your ability to upgrade without breaking even your patched/forked code?

The brilliance of open source is that we can do this. We're not just fitting gears together - we're able to fabricate iterations on those gears as we need to.
If you want to equate "emergence" with "making something up", then fine, I guess. I'm just not sure what what you can possibly conclude from that equivalence.
Perishing here means losing your career and the sustinence its salary gives. So its very much about money, just not getting wealthy type money.
I've never seen this used, it's obscure and seems to be disliked/avoided by most people who do know of it. Flat out against the style guides of a lot of ruby codebases.
Beautifully persuasive