skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm glad that the author enjoys Ruby! As someone with limited Ruby exposure, these quotes stood out to me:

> The language is meant be joyful to use. [...] Everything else that Ruby is stems from this value.

This is important and underrated. I think many programmers have a bias that working on a difficult problem entails using a "real" programming language with sharp edges. I had some version of this bias for a long time until I started exploring the most recent generation of systems languages.

> Well written ruby code can often read like natural language.

I see where the author is coming from, but I find a healthy dollop of symbols to be very helpful for reading and understanding code at a glance.

> Feeling recognition in the language you’re programming is so powerful.

This is the feeling I had the first time I used Python, and later Rust. It's a wonderful feeling!

> [As] Kent Beck said at RailsConf in 2020, “Software design is an exercise in human relationships.”

Especially true given all of the components involved in supporting a language: compiler, docs, standard library, third-party libraries, package managers, frameworks, formatters, profilers, ...
I’m an ex-Adobe employee who worked on Adobe XD, which is basically Adobe's answer to Figma. when Adobe decided to buy Figma, my first reaction was pretty much "Wait, what?" I wrote down my initial thoughts about it[^1], it felt like a losing situation all around - for Adobe, Figma, and all the designers out there. The only folks who really seemed to win were Figma's investors.

Now, let's talk how bad the breakup deal is for Adobe. You've got Elon Musk buying Twitter for a massive 54 billion, with a breakup fee of 1 billion if it doesn't go through. But then, there's Adobe, buying Figma for 20 billion, and they also get slapped with a 1 billion breakup fee. Musk tried to back out of his deal, no real reason, and didn't want to pay the fee. But Adobe? Their deal gets killed by regulators, and they still have to pay the full 1 billion. Makes you really think about the decision-makers' negotiation at Adobe, do they work for Figma?

Before the deal was sealed, Figma didn't start integrating their tech with Adobe’s. However, Adobe put XD on the maintaince mode[^2], losing market share since then. Yes, XD wasn't as cool as Figma, but it had its sizable share of big corporate users. The data backs this up[^3].

The whole fallout from this? For the design community and Figma, it's kind of a win. The CEO of Figma is pretty well-respected for how he treats his team. That 1 billion from Adobe might help out the Figma folks who got left in the lurch. Morale over there is still pretty high. But Adobe stopping development on XD? I think that was a misstep. I suspect they might have done that to please the regulators. Now put the team back together and continue development? That takes time for big machine like Adobe, spoken from my past experience. But I am happy XD get to live on, at least hopefully.

Here are the references I mentioned:

[^1]. My initial thoughts on Adobe acquiring Figma: [Typogram](https://typogram.co/build/on-adobe-acquiring-figma/)

[^2]. Adobe XD Enters Maintenance Mode: [Typogram](https://build.typogram.co/p/adobe-xd-enters-maintenance-mode)

[^3]. Design Tool Survey Report: [Survey 2022](https://uxtools.co/survey/2022/toolkit), [Survey 2023](https://uxtools.co/survey/2023/toolkit)
the most important thing for me in his videos is how he strives to explain the topic from a first principles thinking perspective.

if i had someone explain linear algebra the way he does in his youtube channel, i would have enjoyed and absorbed it much better than I did during my classes. while the professors did a decent job in explaining linear albegra and its usefulness among various topics around us, they did a poor job at explaining how thinking about these topics from linear algebra perspective makes so much sense!

edit: link for those interested - https://www.3blue1brown.com/topics/linear-algebra
I’m not sure I agree with that.

1. The Aztec is midsize.
2. The first small crossovers were the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4, both of which were selling in volume before this or the Buick variant were introduced.
3. It was released at the same time as the Toyota Highlander, a competing mid-size crossover, which sold far better.

I don’t see how it was ahead of its time. Just another poorly executed GM product in my opinion.
Not really. 99% of the time you would register the start hook, and it's a good idea to register a stop hook as well. Keep in mind the CLI is completely optional so if you already use the built-in option parsing or Cobra or something else you can keep using that.

I guess if for example you were just using Huma to generate OpenAPI from some Go code and dump that to the terminal or a file you might skip the start hook.
Not to mention "export", which was in C++98 but only ever supported by Comeau C++.
Some cities have car-sharing schemes, where cars parked on the street (no particular place) are available to rent by the minute, hour or day. I use this in Copenhagen, though generally only a couple of times a year.

Green Mobility and Share-Now are the larger companies here.
Oh, right, forgot to put it there. If anything, it would make the Python version only slower, and the point bolder :)
It's not just "regulatory action" that the FTC under Khan is embarking on - it's outright hostility and refusal to even work with companies she personally doesn't like.

There is a difference between enforcing laws and then just trying to burn down everything you touch. Khan is embarking on the latter quest (see the way she tried to handle the Within Unlimited acquisition.)

It would be different if the FTC actually attempted to engage in good faith. As someone that has seen them in action recently, they do not.
Yes, totally agree. We just got a 2020 and it’s really nice to have physical controls.
- https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/clu...

- https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/kub...

Each of these has more peer pages that are pretty good too
> The main advantage is that cross-compilation to many targets is supported out of the box

For the readers who aren't familiar:

The code for running test and then cross-compiling (on one machine and OS) for different target platforms is:

https://github.com/jedisct1/libaegis/blob/main/.github/workf...

and the only zig file in the repo which drives the build process is:

https://github.com/jedisct1/libaegis/blob/main/build.zig
> OEMs that prioritize design will put the chief designer near the top of the corporate hierarchy …

Tangential, but I’ve been feeling similarly with startups and tech companies: design needs to be represented at the leadership alongside engineering and product, or it simply is not viewed as an equal strategic function. If there’s a Head of Engineering and a Head of Product, there needs to be a Head of Design to complete the triad.
> I wonder if there is a generally accepted quantifiable definition of programming language expressiveness

In my opinion, expressiveness is used as the catchall, je ne sais quoi whenever someone likes a language and needs another bullet point to put in the "Pros" column.
Same. I used to love Ruby because it just matched the way I thought, and the standard library was layed out in a way that was consistent and easy to remember (one reason I never got into Python was that, while batteries may be included, the naming conventions are all over the place and I found every step of using them surprising). I fell out of love with it when 1.9 broke all my string manipulation code. The Rails crowd pushed the 'magic' stuff way farther than I was every comfortable with. I rarely made use of reflection, but even so find my old programs buggy enough due to mishandling of edge cases that I just don't really trust it anymore. TypeScript/Deno has mostly taken its place for me, though I don't find it quite as ergonomic for little system admin tasks as Ruby was.
> You might want to rethink that.

You might want to rethink your claim.

First, while the upper atmosphere is much less dense than the lower, and the fluid approximation becomes less and less useful as you gain altitude, that still doesn't mean that "a bunch of particles in free-fall orbits" becomes a useful model. The average thermal velocity of a molecule in the upper atmosphere is still well short of orbital velocity at that altitude. Some molecules acquire sufficient velocity to escape, sure, but that doesn't mean the others are in orbit.

Second, the Earth's atmosphere is not a good analogy for what is happening at the heliopause anyway.
It's been a few years, but they definitely do support third party DECT phones. If I recall correctly, they even had to remove the "missed call" indicator on some brand of DECT phone (Siemens?) because they reverse engineered it and the manufacturer was (threatening? taking?) legal action.

Unfortunately, the DECT spec as implemented by many manufacturers isn't as broad as people seem to think it is. Most interoperability was done through DECT GAP last time I checked, and GAP lacks common features like "rich caller ID" and "address books".

I've seen other brands do address book support just fine, I think AVM tries to be compatible enough but just can't get the full feature set for every brand and model.

I've even seen Gigaset phones failing to support address books on more modern Gigaset basestations, DECT hardware is kind of a mess in that way.
Qualitative rigor isn’t rigor at all, it’s the opposite. Still useful in a good narrative, sometimes it’s the best thing you have to work as evidence in your paper.

Prior work is a mess in any field. The PC will over emphasize the value of their own work, of course, just because of human ego. I’ve been on way too many papers where my coauthors defensively cite work based on who could review the paper. I’m not versed enough about this area to know if prior work was really an issue or not, but I used to do a lot of paper doctoring in fields that I wasn’t very familiar with.
On the other hand, I find it extremely difficult to follow C# code. It's a lot of type gymnastics and dependency injection noise that makes it hard to understand where's the actual business logic.
A signed contract is certainly part of the process. I can't speak to outside the US but here the high-level steps are:

1. Engage the firm and reach a decision that they'd like to invest.

2. Negotiate and sign a term sheet. (The only part of this that's legally binding is that you won't continue shopping around while negotiating the full deal with them. That said, it's extraordinarily uncommon for things to fall apart after signing a term sheet.)

3. Negotiate and sign the full deal. (This goes beyond just a contract, e.g. you'll be amending your articles of incorporation to reflect changes in board composition and a million other things.)

Virtually all breakdowns are in steps 1-2. Maybe the firm doesn't want to invest, or they aren't offering a compelling valuation, or they aren't flexible on dilution, or they only lead and you want another firm to lead, etc.

Keep in mind these are VCs, not PE. VCs make their money from outlier companies, so the competent ones don't optimize for worst-case outcomes. You'll never see a dirty term sheet (e.g. liquidation preference > 1x) from Sequoia, for example, because they don't return 8x on a fund by squeezing pennies out of failed startups.
Apple to pause selling new versions of its watch after losing patent dispute
>The people actually being invaded think it's worth fighting and dying to keep their country. It's not for you to say it's not. I mean, you sound all humanitarian and everything, but it's also quite paternalistic.

They can fight and die all they want. Im not making any claims what they should or should do. Im making claims about what I want to support or be a part of.

>Compared to what? Compared to letting Russia roll over countries one by one, countries that want to be our friends, countries who would become hostile to us? Is that going to advance western security?

I think my ideal would be a demilitarized boarder countries, and a joint agreement against expansion or military funding for those countries.
The blog post (and Ruby's) emphasis on programmer happiness really resonates with me: other than Rust (which induces programmer happiness for fairly different reasons), I've seldom run into a programming language and ecosystem that tries so hard to make programming mirthful.

(Does that make Ruby a good programming language? That's unclear to me; what's clear is that I have fun writing it.)
And the fund managers do have some small discretion to deviate from the index they track
My latest comment I wrote was for Ruby legacy code. It was "This method's documentation says it returns a string. That is a lie, it can return an object of any type."

What's even better than comments, is a compiler that actually guarantees you're gonna be given something of the type you expect.
Except there are no reasonably sized iPhones anymore, just phablets. I miss when the Steve/Jony team recognized that your hands do in fact stop growing.
Deleting from a database is a sucker's bet. If you add to a record and mark it dead there are fewer semantic problems to deal with.

Partial indexes give you approximately the same speedup as deletes.
I meant more that a massive part of the experience is hazing used to filter for less obvious criteria, but that is also good info!
Oh, I do completely agree and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I have had experiences where reviewers have given me great ideas for new experiments or ways to present things. But the most useful ones usually are the "wtf?" type comments, or comments that suggest the reviewers completely misunderstood or misread the text. While those are initially infuriating, the reviewers are usually among the people in the field that are most familiar with the topic of the paper--if they don't understand it or misread it, 95% of the time it's because it could be written more clearly.
I love Ruby too. It's a great language, and as a language I like many things about Ruby a lot more than python. In particular, chains of functional operations like:

arr
.map{|o| ... }
.reject{|o| ...}
.reduce(init_acculm){|init_acculm, o| ...}

are super super clean and expressive. Very similar to what I like about Java streams.

And the library ecosystem is great, I like how it shares spiritual similarities with python where libraries are very "no nonsense" (you don't need extensive configuration and builders and researching a million configuration items etc etc... looking at you, Java) and you typically just import and go. Rails, of course.

I keep picking python over ruby though, for things I'm going to have to actually maintain. And I typically pick Java over python if I smell I'm going to care even an iota about performance. (Often I don't, though). But ruby vs python, I keep coming back to the divergent opinions they've taken on gradual typing. I like that python3 lets you include the types as part of the program, part of the grammar. Ruby relegates them to a separate file. I guess the intent is that it's more for libraries, like how js libs will ship typescript type files? But I don't like that, I want types for myself. Sorbet exists, of course, but I don't like that it's a) a gem and b) still not a first-class part of the grammar but is instead just operating "in-language". I know it works and e.g. Stripe uses it to great effect (I worked there) but I just don't like it, personally, and I find that python3 with its built-in type hinting tends to get typed more readily than ruby where it's a much further reach away.

But I really love ruby. I hope it improves its type-hinting story because I like most other things about it. But I was pretty unenthusiastic about python prior to it getting its type hinting built-in, so apparently this is a big deal for me.
I am, I signed up late though and got an email about it last night “ Access to our API is currently invitation-only, but we'll let you know when you can subscribe to get access to our best models.”
can you share on this? :)
You can do that in any C program today
Really cool! I'm working on something similar https://github.com/PostgREST/plmustache.
Oh, I would so love to see you succeed with the Amaran lights, which presumably would lead to all of the Aputure stuff being reverse engineered? I think if there was an open-source integration for them with say the Elgato Stream Deck or Home Assistant, it would be a major, major success story. For all those YouTube folks that do talking head at their desk this would be sooo much better than controlling them via an app on the phone.
I don't think it's pure magic and feelings. From what I gather the conclusions people like Yudkowsky draw are rather from our own history and simple natural order of the food chain.

> I'm always thinking, who in power would ever allow that power be given to anybody, or in this case, anything, else?

Those in power may share your skepticism towards agi and give up power involuntarily. I'm not saying I stand with Yudkowsky, because the weakness of his argument (or so I think) is the lack of falsification. Basically whatever you can think of he comes at you with "agi predicted that and counteracted." I do believe it is a serious topic and I'd hoped people didn't divide into two groups so quickly.
Here's a good video from Jason Cammisa about the new (at the time) mk8:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGbPHp6QfkQ

I had a mk7 and it is the best interior + UX I've seen in a car. Everything is as simple and ergonomic as possible. The volume adjustment is a knob, with soft rubber knurling and indents for feedback. It's not some awful feeling smooth afterthought that you see on certain Toyotas or Hondas. It's not a push button (beep beep beep beep) you find on old Pioneer stereos from the '90s. It's exactly what you want to adjust the volume. The AC is similar. Heated seats are a button with 3 LEDs indicating high/med/low. Everything just makes sense.

And then VW got cheap and greedy. The mk8 is almost the complete opposite of what the mk7 was.
Even though Ukraine isn't a NATO member, it's in NATO's interest to aid non-members. Article 5 is brittle - the smallest invasion of a member nation means calling a bluff on nuclear war. Ukraine stands between Russia and Article 5 - literally, in the case of Romania, Poland and Hungary. by making it extremely expensive for Russia to take Ukraine, it kept Russia from pressing its luck.

So yes, we have no formal obligation to help Ukraine, but they're our ally - informally - because our interests align for strategic reasons.
Yes, this part of the article seems like nonsense to me. If it didn't have a question mark, we would need a comment? But because the predicate name contains a question mark, that's the only reason why we don't need a comment? That's nonsense.

This only makes sense if we're in the school of thought that writes

i = i + 1 // increment i by one
Actually, you cannot perform keystroke timing attacks on the password sent during SSH user authentication. This is because SSH transmits the password in its entirety, not the individual keystrokes as it does during a shell session.

The possible downgrade is usually limited to downgrading SHA2 to SHA1 when using RSA keys for user authentication. We are currently not aware of any attacks that benefit from this.
You can turn off WiFi from the settings. Dunno it it’ll come back on again after updating.

The control panel only disables WiFi until the next day.
You're not an asshole. It's a lane. Use it.
A practical range calculator for your home or office.
I presume you mean the 1890s... In the 1990s it was rare for a house to have 0 screens. It was much more common to have several - a couple of TVs, a computer, maybe the kids would have a gameboy.

At least that's true of the US.
Having maintained both C++ and D for different compilers, it's way easier to do it in D since the front-end features are the same (modulo builtins) and the stdlib is 99% the same.
> "When I was younger, I looked at my great grandad's prisoner-of-war diaries and I just love everything about the period."

Is this some kind of understated British humor?
$133 billion in interest and fees. 46% carry balances. 20%+ apys. Something needs to change.
I thought the phone thing was dumb until I realized that everyone (who’s not made of money or trying to pretend they are) puts them in a case anyway, so designing it to fit in a case makes sense. Probably keeps the camera from being as shaded by the case itself, for thicker ones.

(“Well they should just build the case in then” eh, the customizability and the way the case can ablate damage and be replaced is pretty good UX)
> If I don't get the mathematically-sound safety net, why would I apply 1 type system to my code, let alone n?

I don't it is intended to imply that extrisic type systems wouldn't be sound.

As for why you'd want several type systems, one benefit I imagine is that different type systems could verify different aspects of your program, instead of forcing to cram everything into one type system.

Afaik just because type system is sound doesn't alone mean that it can be used practically to prove every interesting property of a program.
Did you actually read the article you linked? 10k per wafer is the cost in-production, at scale. The tapeout process for a 7nm chip is 10s of millions of dollars before you even get to paying per wafer.
> This is a subjective matter actually

I feel like this is subjective only if you want to sit around a cafe showing off your laptop, or make "day-in-the-life" videos for TikTok where you just show yourself eating at one of the FAANG cafes.

If you actually want to get work done, I don't think it's subjective at all. The butterfly keyboard is probably the best example of this bizarre obsession with design anorexia. Look, your laptop is .1 mm thinner. Except now you have basically no feedback when you type. Oh, and certain keys will randomly break every couple months if you get a tiny speck of dust on them.

It hasn't gone unnoticed that one of the biggest collective "Yes!!"es I heard from developers was a few years ago when Apple simply undid Ive's most recent design follies.

Plus, you can always get a MacBook Air (which now have relatively great power and performance) if you're a fellow design anorexic.
I've used something similar to Framery O, and it's good for short sessions but no way I'd want to work in it all day. It gets uncomfortable and there's not enough room to move around. Even that basic model appears to cost about $10K, for that kind of money there must be better alternatives?
Do you know the name of the head of Product or Hardware Engineering?

Maybe you personally do, but I doubt the average HN does. And neither do I.

I doubt that person had the internal clout to challenge any of the braindead design decisions from the later part of Ive's tenure.
I love Ruby and this is spot-on. Comments in any language should explain why and not what.
I can understand being disappointed if you want a really really thin computer. Maybe they should make the air "air" again?

But the previous computers were such dogs (over-heating-prone, loud, unreliable keyboards) that I think 99.9% of people think the current gen was a huge improvement.
It's the EC, not the EU.
They even boast about it on their Fediverse profile and how they're going to issue fines if they don't comply
I implemented cosine similarity too in the last week or two for something and the 1- threw me for a loop until I looked at the math for another 15 seconds, realized that it didn't make much sense for "Cat" and "Cat" to have 0 similarity haha
Dwarkesh Patel did an interview with him some time ago, Recommended.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDyviiN4NVo
My ridiculous claim? That people who are wrong can say their peace? I have no clue what you're responding to.

EDIT: Is your assertion that there does not exist a period where 'covid misinformation' got removed?