skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed, the live interactivity of Ruby is it's strongest asset, and the best part of it's Smalltalk legacy. I think it's the thing non-Ruby devs understand the least. For instance in good Rails apps, your models don't just serve as the business layer of your web forms, background jobs and rake tasks-- they serve as the interface for developers and operations folks too. The ability to get directly into the machinery to inspect and command the state of your systems is super powerful, and as a result, very little work is put into higher level ops tooling like it might be in more opaque systems.

This is true in the dev space too. In dev, you can just set breakpoints by inserting a pry/byebug call and the debugger is just part of the application at runtime. Can you do it in a sufficient Ruby IDE too? Of course. In my experience this isn't super common though, and isn't going to give you the best debugging experience, because it's separating you from that hands on direct inspection context.

And IDEs like Rubymine like to think that the excellent deterministic automatic refactorings of languages like Java are actually feasible in a Ruby codebase, but I have seen that first hand go horribly wrong with a developer who trusted them.
Your analogue is probably true to a certain extent, but in reality maintaining your current form in any domain of expertise is easier than achieving that form in the first place.

I only really have video games as an easily quantifiable example, but playing in top 1% of League of Legends doesn't really require anything more than a couple games a week to maintain that level. I have the knowledge, I know what to do, and I can execute on that. Perhaps this would be harder in a domain that leans more on physical or mental condition which tend to decrease over time, but probably not so much in Chess and the like.
I just wanna say I've been a fan of Qt and its contribution to native UI, KDE is awesome and all. I just wish there were good qml supporting easy to use libraries in modern languages that wrapped it because I can't do C++ unless someome is paying me good money and full time for it. Not fun for side projects.
> I wonder if there is a generally accepted quantifiable definition of programming language expressiveness. Here the author seems to equate it to closeness to natural languages.

I was going to make a similar comment -- it seems there might not be well agreed definitions of "expressiveness" here. I write most of my own projects in Haskell, precisely because I find Haskell to be extremely expressive, but I mean something different to "reads like English" (for which I think AppleScript is the closest example I can think of): to me, the expressiveness of the language is "how accurately can I describe my problem domain to the computer in a way that lets me naturally reason about it in code". I think this is mostly a function of the type system, not the particular syntax (e.g. allowing "?" in a method).

I am really interested in what other people consider "expressiveness" to mean, however.
And the sell orders will move in a matter of microseconds, right? It's not just automated trading, it's automated high frequency trading, where trading firms employ armies of excellent low-level programmers to shave off clock cycles from the trading algorithms to be the first company to react to market changes.
Yeah, finishing personal projects is not impossible. I'm slowly building a set of tools for myself, and the servers I manage, and they're going well.

One of them can be considered finished, the other one is almost done. The first one may get improved, but that's a later exercise.
Is this the case though? From what I understood in the article:

- Find My Device wasn’t enabled on the mac and it was stolen.

- somebody reset it and tied it tot their account

- then the same person passed it to another party and bricked it by reporting it stolen.

- somehow the original owner managed to recover it

Would the original owner been able to avoid all this has they actually enabled this security feature in the first place?
I think you have to be very good at football/boxing to make a living off it.

A subpar 3rd division football player is a better athlete than anyone you have ever met in your day-to-day life.

Chess supports maybe 30 full time competitors, whereas football supports a few thousand. However millions more people try to be footballers. Your odds of success are probably better with chess.

All three of those sports destroy your body. With chess it’s the hours sitting still and being stressed. With boxing and football it’s the concussions, tough training regimes and accumulated injuries that never fully heal.

Elite sport is bad for you.
That's so different from my work. I work in a team of about 30 people on 1 feature of a very popular app. None of us are working on the same thing at any given time. Most projects have 1 person that works on it or knows how it works. It's sad and isolating. And the company forces this culture by virtue of how promo works.
Maybe not, but at least they got a star out of it.

Github sets up social network gamification incentives, wins social network gamification prizes…
I have starred plenty of projects that lack features that I would have liked or needed them to have.

They were still of use to me, and in cases did implement those features later on.
As I said, while this is usefull for others, I have zero need for any of this. Settings? I know where to find those. Setting alerts? Use the standard calendar and timer apps. Internet search? Type it.

I make a point to not share my search history with anyobe, or any other data as much as possible. And I wont start doing so to enable some AI gadget I am more than happy to live without.
Is that due to Ruby the language or the developers and/or their culture?

I mean I personally believe maintainability is a combination of the language itself and the culture around it; Go is a great example of a language and culture aimed for readability and maintainability, eschewing cleverness. That is, the language is limited in how much cleverness you can write, and the culture is opposed to people trying.
Unfortunately you can only look back 12 hours on youtube so we can't see this anymore
The biggest issue for people updating could be the switch from iptables to nftables, which may break many firewall scripts.

There is a documentation update pending merging in the official documentation that covers how to do use the Firewall in 4.2.

https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-doc/blob/86a6f12e2a882dfffb...
Despite absolutely loving chess as a child, I never studied it professionally, and I did not even play a single game after primary school.
A couple of years ago I stumbled upon a chess video recommendation here on Hacker News. It was the 27th entry of ChessNetwork's Beginner to Chess Master series and it rekindled my love for the game. I have been playing chess casually ever since.
I cannot recommend ChessNetwork's videos enough: I found them to be insightful, well-made, and very respectful of both the game and the audience.
We threw more money at the industrial-military complex and at banks after the banking crisis 2008.
Take the following scenarios:

1) solar storm destroys your country. It would wipe the traditional finance sector. Servers. Backups. Records. All destroyed. How do we restore everyone’s wealth to what is was?

2) solar storm destroys your country. You hold bitcoin so you either wait for electricity to be restored. Or migrate to another country.
I mean its public information that they were chopping down a historic and old growth forest for fuel and calling it green energy.
>Nothing comparable happened for experiences.

it kind of did. Fast food sacrificed the experience for the core consumption. Then you have chain restaurants like Denny's that exist to give the bare minimum "experience" without throwing it all away like modern drive-thrus.

Did they cut down enough to eliminate fine dining? Doesn't look like it. But I haven't done a deep dive into the ecnonomics of that. Just general wisdom that food as a business has always operated on razor thin margins.
> there's only one model (or company with models) that's actually worth paying for.

Yes. Perhaps. That said "the model currently worth paying for" isn't the only possible business model or approach to "winning AI." It was a pretty incidental business model that unexpectedly got big.

I'm not convinced this is the final state.

AI models need users. There's having the most users. But, there's also having the right users. This isn't a linear race. Image generation. Language generation. Those work now. They'll get better... but it's still not clear what better enables. Best way to find out is by finding out what current models enable.

IMO, there's a lot more room here for bravery and creativity than beating OpenAI at whatever the race appear to be at this particular moment. The budget necessary to build applications is nothing compared to the scale of strategic investment being made.

Make the LLM chat/email client. Make the LLM project management software. CRM. tech support. All the cheap, obvious stuff.

Once upon a time, Google had a let 1000 flowers bloom approach. They did succeed in launching lots of pretty good products. They did not succeed in turning that tactical success into a strategic business success. That said, the tactic worked.

Why take the risk/effort/etc of winning the race to cloud services? Google have already lost one cloud race to google and amazon. Just build the apps yourselves. Find a framework. Do it. Don't want to run them forever? Then sell them off. Shut them down and leave the space open for startups.

Why futz around?
Sincerely, your ONLY option is to figure out how to make your life easier.

Building is hard. Building something incorporated in a different country could be harder.

You can always incorporate where you can easily raise your money and that newXo can own your current company.

But unless you have a product ready to ship, customers, and a need to.raime money right now... just try to make your like easier.
Personally, I'm against anti-poaching when Apple does it and I'm against anti-poaching when other people do it.
Craven is definitely one of the words I'm groping for to express just what is wrong with this.

I really don't understand the "seems fair" comments.

I (stupidly I see now) treat the stars as feature just for me, like a bookmark in my own browser. There for my use, not anyone else's.

Obviously that was silly since they are public and anything that is public is someone somewhere's currency, and anything that is currency will expose the lowest of the low human behavior.

And this IS automated. The automation is in the form of a policy rather than a scripting language, but it's still a mechanistic rule where a star is produced by application of an if-this-then-that, and by a transaction, purchased exactly like with money. By at least those TWO different means this is not an honest reflection of a users regard or admiration or expression of value.

Github surely would see that as devaluing stars and harming a feature of their site. Surely github does not want stars to become like amazon reviews.
Ask HN: Are phones with Apps necessary to a full, fun, enjoyable techy life?
> b. The lack of an ability to seal objects, classes, and modules from further modification is a problem.

"freeze" has been there from the very start". You can freeze objects, or individual classes and modules (because, hey, they're objects) just fine. I'm all for freezing more stuff, and the migration towards freezing string literals was good, and you can freeze very aggressively in your own code, including system classes.

> c. Ruby 3 should've broken compatibility by adding gradual typing.

If they had, it would've split the community. Some of us would've forked it. Any degree of gradual typing in Ruby will need to be extremely cautiously approached and/or mostly optional, as it strikes at the heart of what makes Ruby what it is. There are places it would work and be fine, and there are places where it would massively hamper productivity.

> For type-safer things that look like Ruby, Crystal is an almost viable, interesting alternative.

Crystal has a fraction of the community and too many pointless differences to Ruby for many of us to consider.

> The world mostly uses js and python. One can either be a hipster with obscure tools or get things done with the lowest TCO/highest ROI.

Funny. My career has spanned multiple "the world mostly uses $language" phases, and it's never affected my TCO/ROI whether what I've happened to use matches the current $language. What has mattered is picking a language the right libraries are available for and that I'm comfortable in. Sometimes I only get one of those, and sometimes that means picking a different language the Ruby, but writing composable tools means it's quite rare, and each time makes it rarer.
Well yes?

As I understand it the owner chose to not enable the security feature. The thief however did.

How else would you suggest this choice be implemented? Apple selling different models with or without the feature? Because then nobody would just buy the less “secure” option and Apple would rightfully soon discontinue it
Nice, congrats to your successful projects :)

Good point about being happy with the results! I think this could be added to the definition of success.

Some results can not be improved, like sewed clothes, but there can be a review to learn something (why are you not happy with the result?) and a feedback loop, for the next project to turn out better.
Is this idea of automatically generating documents has potential?
The whole situation is like this,

Our team had some accumulations in requirement management, and AI, and then, following the trend of AI, we wanted to create something.

We developed a service at supadoc.ai

This service uses AI to automatically generate documents for users. Currently implemented features include:

Marketing plan
Software system design
Product design
Business plan
Product test cases

Would you please please help to take a look and let us know if you have any need for this?

It's been nearly half a month since launch, and after my tireless promotion on Twitter, we've got around 700 visitors to the website and around 50 of users, but no paying ones.

Initially, our plan was to cater to roles like product managers, project managers, and testers. However, after some time in practice, we've found that these types of users don't necessarily have valid use cases.

Therefore, we are now shifting our focus towards people who need to prepare formatted Word documents. This type of Word document doesn't require high precision, but it often takes several steps to generate the document they need, which can be quite time-consuming.

Our tool's main initial goal is to "improve efficiency", and we are also exploring how to provide "added value" to our users in the later stages.

So now we are wondering whether this really has a future. Would you use this tool?

If you could provide your thoughts, we would be very grateful. It would be a ray of light in our darkness~
Ah this is great, just spent 30 mins playing this on the London underground as it works offline too
They explain elsewhere that they use an external editor, though they do sometimes use pry's builtin shortcuts and EDITOR convention integration to perform quick edits.
Except we can't bc YouTube only stores 12 hours of live stream for scrubbing
Phone? I'd always leave my status as do not disturb then. I don't know when I'm about to enter a state of productivity. Only once in a blue moon do I spin around in my chair quietly asking someone to come bug me because I'm bored/don't have anything fun to work on.
They must be a user of a language that needs === meaning "real equal not imaginary equal"

Also I wish you could still buy cars that were not computers.
Because Masimo doesn't offer a patent license:

> “If they don’t want to use our chip, I’ll work with them to make their product good,” Mr. Kiani said. “Once it’s good enough, I’m happy to give them a license.”
They are asking the maintainers to take the time to evaluate and possibly shepherd a patch into the mainline. It may or may not work out in the end. Everything has a cost, not the least, opportunity cost.

“Libre” is not “gratis” and all that.
You also can't hide the fact that you're browsed or even cloned the repository from GitHub, since it's on their servers.
everyone in this thread agrees google problem is all management and product and that buying a company is just a palliative way of acquihiring a still ungoogled management team. which don't last long, obviously.

you're all just telling each other exactly this in hundreds of different ways.
>If inflation is higher than what you can earn from a saving account, then how is it rational to "save" anything?

general security? You don't need to (nor should you) hoard 10% of your finances for all 40+ years of your career into a low interest savings account. But you do want to keep a decent amount in case of various downturns. a high CoL city where you pay not much more for "things" can help with that.

Can also help pay for an financial advisor who will happily play with the monopoly money for you. Delegation is a great "experience" to consider when comparing costs of living.
The quality of these tools is still lagging behind but frankly, for smaller tasks, it's always better to start with something rather than with a blank screen.
Car had more than one speedometer. There was a mechanical speedo and tach on either side of the screen, with a digital speed display in the middle.
You can do that. E.g. pry has an "edit [methodname]" command that will spawn $EDITOR. But I usually keep my editor in a different window and just call a "reload" method at the pry prompt where I've wrapped up the logic to reload the running code.

Occasionally I may restart, if e.g. object state has changed enough, but this means that if I've set up a bunch of test data for example, and run into a bug, I can fix the bug, "reload", and the state of the running objects remain the same but the method will have updated and I can retry the same method call with the exact same object state.
It's not obvious since it's false, you've just ignored the core point "if all projects simply demand more stars and get them" that pointed to the flaw in your logic. Also no, people are not binary state machines with either "means nothing" or "means everything" states
Well, it would probably be 2-3 layers deep in a concern, really. Concerns are just fancy modules, and modules are just reusable parts of a class. In Rails basically everything is a concern. To a concerning degree actually, as a professional Rails developer of many years, I think they went way overboard with it. My team and I also curse it's single minded design when we have to drill down there. Thankfully that's a pretty rare thing to have to do.

As for the abstraction, Rails does take it pretty far, but you also have to take into account that it's a framework that supports numerous pluggable strategies and disparate backends, and extensibility. I think most mature frameworks are pretty complex-- the goal of the framework is that it's all encapsulated away from you for the vast majority of tasks, and in Rails, that is extremely true.
Money printing didnt stop all the small businesses from closing down, its very easy to see the upward transfer of wealth that occured during the pandemic, it was the largest in history.
Cool that you are seeing your progress!

Improvements are an important aspect. They are simply changes to goals and the scope.

In terms of finishing projects, it is crucial to define them and possibly define milestones in advance.
People building and renting out home studios is actually quite popular and I know more than one person who does it, though I have doubts they're actually making much money.
Thanks for responding. It is interesting that you work for the armed forces yet are aware of people who are hiding from conscription. Having experienced war I am aware how senseless it can become. People do not realize how terrible war can be, regardless of whose side you are on. Conscription is also a tool that is often used to get rid of undesireable people (ethnic minorities, opposition, etc). In my opinion forced conscription should be a war crime.
The Tetris-like nature of life is also what keeps physics classical at our scale: the constant incoming stream of pieces/particles may have energies so minuscule their interactions may be classically neglected, but they all carry a non-negligible phase, and so promote decoherence.
> The second reason is that, with each boom-and-bust cycle, it becomes clearer crypto is not a bubble like tulip mania in the 1630s or the craze for Beanie Babies in the 1990s. Although bitcoin is a volatile asset, its price history looks more like a mountain range than a single peak, and appears closely correlated with tech stocks. Yet it is only moderately correlated with the broader market. An asset that swings up and down, and not in parallel with other things people might have in a portfolio, can be a useful diversifier.

> That bitcoin has established itself as a serious asset seems to be the source of the latest surge.

If this doesn't sound like some naysayers finally turning around in order to not look too stupid later in retrospect, then what?
Anecdotally, in my area it's been the exact opposite. iPhones (back when they were cheaper!) used to be much less locked down, and thieves would target people specifically to steal their iPhone. Now, as the phones are locked down, and even using them for parts is much harder with the serialization of parts, it seems that the targeted theft of iPhones is much, much lower.
"Oximeter, but on the wrist" doesn't sound like something which ought to be patentable, even if it was novel. Sounds a lot like those "this old thing, but on a computer" patents.
Well there's varying degrees of interest - it isn't binary.

There are certainly projects for which I've opened issues that I wouldn't star, because I use stars as a way to get project updates on my github feed.
I use Taskfile, fd (a 'find' alternative) and "entr" to get around any need to manually call 'templ generate'.

'fd . 'assets/view' | entr templ generate' - couple it with 'air' and developing is a lot easier. Looking forward to when Goland has better support for templ.
Yes and no - they use different systems, but even if they used same system ratings would be different.

This is since ratings only measure player's performance relative to other players in the same poll. A lot more people (and a lot more begineers) play online than in FIDE rated tournaments. So playing poll in tournaments is stronger than online playing poll, so even if we assume same rating system in all cases, players will have lower ratings in tournament play than online.

What complicates matters further is that playing polls aren't totally unified - in FIDE Elo ratings it's possible to see regional differences (indians for example are in general underrated), since playing poll is segmented by distance (due to travel costs not a lot of players play internationally). Additionally COVID19 made a total mess of ratings, since there was not enough events last few years, so majority of younglings are underrated due to not playing enough rated games, while improving as fast as the previous generation.

FIDE is currently deciding on rating reform, which will be implemented in january, trying to handle this situation.

What complicates matters even more is that FIDE Elo algorithm is not optimized for accuracy, but for calculations by hand (try calculating glicko2 rating change without computer!), so glicko2 more accurately predicts player performance.

And finally, time controls differ a lot between online and tournament play. Online even 5minutes feels slow, while in tournaments 90min+30sec/move is one of shorter time controls. Performance between slow and fast play is in general correlated, but this correlation is weaker at higher ratings (since both sides of the game have some non-transferable skills, so blitz specialists for example exists).