skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I worked at Amazon.

Keep The Lights On effort was typically around 10% of total capacity. The rest of the effort was because the goal is not to maintain, it’s to drive improvements to the business.
I think we said "use a binary search to find the regression" or similar.
Except nobody attacked or even threatened Russia and Germany so it’s not really comparable to Pearl Harbor at all.

There was really nothing or almost nothing to gain and everything to lose for all the aides involved in WW1. So I’d say it was stupidity rather than weakness. Relatively to its scale it was probably the most pointless war in human history.

The things it achieved, end of monarchy in Central/Eastern Europe and the eventual collapse of global European empires are not something the people who started it ever wanted.
Keeping the lights on is typically around 10% of effort at Amazon. But there’s value in the ongoing development, which is why it’s done.
"I'm excited to work with the Philadelphia Police Department in our new partnership and am thankful they agreed to negotiate yet another meeting with the parole board after I helpfully divulge where I hid more of the remaining bodies."

You really do catch more flies with honey.
Just use the Kagi Summarizer on YouTube videos and you don’t have to waste time watching trash. It’s a great life hack.
I presume you're the one who downvoted my comment.

C++ leaves OS level resource handling to the user. It's not C++'s job to figure out if the user wanted to close this unused resource. It's the programmer's job to not leak resources. And that includes closing each file descriptor once, or deleting allocated memory exactly once.

Go came with a GC model. Yay! But file descriptors aren't pointers to memory. They're representations of physical objects on disk.

Again, it's the programmer's job to tell the compiler when they're done with the file, and not rely on the compiler to figure out when they're actually done with it.

Could go reference count file descriptors/handlers? Yes! But they also chose not to.
> Depends on how you define “digital”. Digital is typically defined as being based on logic gates, not necessarily anything to do with your representation of numbers.

This is 100% false. You are categorically wrong here. https://www.britannica.com/technology/digital-computer

It is not based off of logic gates. It is computing based off of discretized data and discretized steps. Given that computing is usually about numbers, the numbers and the steps to process those numbers in digital computing become discretized.

In analog computing nothing is discretized. The numbers and the processing of numbers is continuous.

You're very very much misinformed here.
There's a lot of 'That depends...' when it comes to fuse ratings; for instance, a tardy porcelain fuse of the kind used domestically in Scandinavian countries until fairly recently were rated to take 90% over rated load for 1hr before melting; they were basically only going to provide short circuit protection.

Depending on the category of fuse and the time it held at a lower current before ramping it up to 400%, it may have operated as intended.

(Squinting at the C type trip diagram in my fuse box, it appears the fuse will withstand 2x rated load for 6 seconds before tripping, 4x for 1.5 seconds or so.)
That article hits the nail on the head. The lack of concision in his writing style seems almost sadistic at times.
For copying disks, an even more powerful tool is ddrescue. It works exactly like dd but writes its progress into a map-file that can be used to pause and resume the operation any time. It can also skip certain sectors known to be broken.

Super useful if you have a big slow disk that you have to copy under unreliable conditions. Saved my ass several times with old partially broken hard drives.
> How do you know what the value of the art will be before it's created?

I don't know. Anyone funding the work is accepting a risk.

> Should they not have been paid after 1991?

They definitely should get paid for their shows and live performances. The band itself can't be copied. Artists are extremely scarce.

Their art, however, is not. Once created, the scarcity of their recordings is artificial and fundamentally time limited anyway. Even if I were extremely tolerant of copyright, I'd argue for a term of only 5-10 years maximum with absolutely no possibility of extension.

In other words, even if we accept copyright as legitimate, they sure as hell shouldn't still be getting paid for some late 80s album. They've already been adequately compensated for those creations. If they want more, they should have to keep making new stuff so that they can benefit from new copyrights which will also expire after a short time.

Creators are not supposed to be able to strike gold once and then enjoy eternal royalties. Copyright must have short time frames or it's in breach of the social contract. The reality is we're doing creators a favor by pretending that it's hard to copy their stuff so they can make some money. We do this because they assured us that eventually all of it would belong to us: works would the public domain.

The copyright industry isn't keeping up their end of the bargain. They continuously pull the rug out from under us by extending copyright to the point we'll be long dead before our culture is returned to us. It's offensive and we should all stop pretending. They need reminding that public domain is the natural and default state of all intellectual work.

> How would you predict that value before its creation (or even after)?

I'd look at the artist's past work. If there is no past work, then I don't know.

> If you're saying that only the labor has value

I'm not saying that at all. Creations are valuable. Creators are valuable. The labor of creation is valuable.

Value is assigned to stuff by humans. Obviously humans value art. The price however is given by supply and demand. The fact is that supply of intellectual works approach infinity after they are created and therefore their prices approach zero. So it makes perfect sense to assign prices to the labor of creation but zero sense to assign a price to the product of creation. Copyright is an exercise in denying reality.

> and all labor is valued equally

I definitely did not say that. All labor is different. I value some creators a lot more than others. Some creators I don't value at all.

> that sounds sort of like marxism

I must apologize if I gave that impression. I hate marxism.
> Further, goroutines' lack of their stack ancestry means they can't natively give out the nice stacktraces found in other languages,

There's GODEBUG=tracebackancestors=N since 2018.

https://pkg.go.dev/runtime

> 3. Goroutine b panics, crashing the program.
>
> 4. The database connection is then left open as a zombie TCP connection.
>
> [---] Because of this stack disconnection of parents and children, it really becomes impossible to have exceptions.

I don't follow this reasoning. If goroutine b panics, the process dies and the TCP connection is closed by the OS. If you handle the panic in b, there's no zombie connection, since both a and b are still alive to handle the connection.

Exceptions are just return statements with pattern matching on stack unwind. Nothing special. I can't figure out what the author sees in them that I don't. The Go defer statements are perfectly capable of handling lifetimes, and a common situation is that you create a goroutine just to manage a resource's lifetime, e.g. when you have multiple producers and you need to close the channel after all of them are done.

> In Go, only calls made by the offending goroutine can recover from a panic, while in Java, the parent caller/creator of the new thread can itself set a recovery mechanism.

And in Go, the caller can insert a stub function that handles recovery before calling the main goroutine function. This seems equivalent to me.

> He says the mainframers at his company hate UnixODBC for this reason, it tends to leave zombie connections behind. (Go uses UnixODBC

I don't know how his dad's mainframe handles terminated processes, but this needs clarification on why they're left: the OS really should take care of closing those connections.

> Consider the problem of a task scheduler cancel button. The program must schedule a task to be run on an agent. At any given time, however, the task must be able to be cancelled.

Fair enough, that requires extra adaptation to Go (what the author calls workarounds.) It will never be as nice as simply killing a preemptive thread.

> In Java, it is child's play to interrupt a running thread.

And now the application programmer has to handle far more cases of partially complete tasks instead. The number of strawman arguments in this post is astounding.
People don't appreciate what a total mindfuck it is to go through this.

- You aren't told you're being targeted to be managed out when it starts. Managers often do not tell you that you're beginning phase 1 of getting managed out, whatever it's called.

- You've always known this could happen to you or anyone else, so you are always guessing if that email from your boss is just a normal email or was it the beginning of a paper trail? You sense something different, but is that just in your head?

- You might think you'd realize you're being managed out, reading the room, but that assumes there's a rational foreseeable reason to PIP you. Often there is not. Management gets PIP targets and someone has to get PIPed. It can be you for political reasons above your head that you are oblivious to.

- You are subtlely being setup to fail, and even if you don't explicitly fail, finding a reason to frame your performance as deficient is always possible.

- There is always something you could have done better, and nothing ever goes 100% perfectly. Those things will be magnified 100x. Are they being over magnified? Or were you delusional to minimize them?

- To be on the receiving end of this is totally disorienting. It's basically gas lighting. Suddenly everything you do is somehow deficient in some way, even when you thought you were doing well. How could you have not realized this? Is this proof you can't trust your own judgment? That you're incompetent?

- Your paper trails are useless. You can always be criticized for subjective reasons, like your style of communication, some 20/20 hindsight way you arguably could have done things even better, you're "not showing enough leadership", yes you're doing your core job but at your level we also expect XYZ, etc.

- This can go on for months, working 60-80 hour weeks, on little sleep, with constant stress. You start to question your ability to assess reality. What else are you missing if you didnt realize you were screwing up so badly? Are you doing this outside of work too?

- You think, wait, this has never happened to me before, but maybe it was just luck until now. Was imposter syndrome not a syndrome this whole time? Was I actually an imposter and this is what it feels like to be found out?

At the end of this gas lighting psychological manipulation marathon, you have a hard time knowing up from down and you're fired.

Who do you talk to about this to get your bearings back? You are ashamed this happened, and yet you're also not because bullshit PIPing is famous. It's not your fault. Or is it? Anyway you probably should find a way to process this right? Or maybe it's best to shove it deep into your subconscious and move on.

Isn't this what therapists are for? Sure, go explain that your mind is vaguely screwed up from getting fired from a $300k/year job for...reasons? Did you screw up? Well no, but technically yes, but in reality no? Maybe? How the hell do you even articulate this without sounding like an incoherent spoiled brat?
Semantic Router
People obviously wanted a Segway, they just didn't want it at that price point.

People even obviously wanted a Segway in Europe, where the cities have impressive support for bikes.

If People hadn't wanted a Segway (but way cheaper) we wouldn't have the streets littered with cheap electric scooters everywhere you go.
> no snark here, but the subtitle was the start of my confusion: what does "user-friendly" mean in the context of grep, and why should I believe the claim?

Granted, it is far from a thing of beauty, but there is a large, captioned screenshot of the included text user interface just beneath. Then again, it is a website for a command line tool. "Many Bothans died to bring us this information."
>Storage and demand shaping infrastructure will catch up

Storage in particular could be MUCH cheaper. (And still be centralized to conserve public-utility oversight and dangers from all those saboteurs out there somewhere.)

Battery storage is VERY expensive and hard on the environment. I continue to see little attention being paid to merely simple gravity storage.

Yes, traditional large-scale pumped hydro exists (usually using expensive turbines to pump water uphill, like the plants used in the UK for decades to get past tea-time. There are many more in the U.S.) They're usually expensive (good for getting tax-payer dollars into constructor pockets) ... time-consuming as well ... and need a hill for a reservoir and a water-source. (Of course we have -all the time in the world- right?)

But on a large scale, electricity can also be stored much more simply and economically by moving VERY heavy weights uphill ... or lifting VERY heavy weights out of a hole. Already existing and proven steel cables can lift 'barrels' containing hundreds or thousands of tons of (very cheap) rocks. Construction times and $/MW cost savings over high-tech 'solutions'? might be 10-1000 times lower.
Oh, wow, thank you! I must try this.
What region? I get similarly bad results with international (and a quick check with region US also didn’t improve things) and uBo at only #5, and ytdl at #12. And I already have github on "raise" and a bunch of domains blocked (not many though)

For the transistor query, it’s a very "googly" way of writing a query, when I saw the results I instantly felt like rewriting it and the first try gave much better results with "Why keep cpu transistors getting smaller?". Caveat that the results look better and more topical, I don’t know what a good answer would be, also why I didn’t evaluate the tires or Vancouver weather (I tried a local search for my cities weather, and while the first result was unreleated, the 2nd was okay)

edit: This whole thread made me finally create a file for documenting bad searches on Kagi. The issue for me is usually that they drop very important search terms from the query and give me unrelated results. But switching to verbatim or "forced terms" also prevents any kind of error correction of the search. This used to be one of my main annoyances with DDG back then, and Kagi did not have that issue during the early days.
Wow, I really like this. It has a good balance with all the functionalities expected from the tailwind css design. Do you think it would be hard to add tailwind extensions, DaisyUi or similar things. Is it planned? Thanks.
The Problem with Your Manager
It's a good old XY problem. Funnily I've heard customers that doesn't wanna bother getting asked why, they just want someone who do what they're told. Some junior engineers too, just wants the answer of what is asked instead of "the real problem".
Ask HN: What has quantum computing achieved so far?
As a lowly web developer I struggle to understand what concrete progress has been made in quantum computing. I understand there are papers that have shown results that no classical computer could achieve but what has translated into practical applications?
this is slick! easily the best of these new grep tools. thanks for sharing. i’ll use this when grep(1) doesn’t quite cut it
Ah, an ancestor of Typescript!
Meta: Since the text on the page is so dense, I tried reading it in Chrome's reading mode. Which was fine until the Appendix. All the results are missing, leading to confusion.
> I just meant that even being aware this is a naive copy-and-patch JIT, my first impression was that the code was slightly worse than I expected.

> "there’s only so much one can do without touching the data model"

You probably want to look at the other link in that PR, which demonstrated how well copy-and-patch can do for another dynamic language (Lua): [1]

Of course, whether or not CPython could eventually make it to that point (or even further) is a different story: they are under a way tighter constraint than just developing something for academia. But copy-and-patch can do a lot even for dynamic languages :)

[1] https://sillycross.github.io/2023/05/12/2023-05-12/
They have absolutely no power in the relationship. It's do as legislated/court ordered, or pain.

If there is 0 control over things, it's not a partnership.
It can still be impressive by NASA standards even if it is an ESA mission (even though, I'm guessing it was an honest bit of confusion).
In fact I’d even say that people didn’t need cars but that cars created so much opportunities of extending human cities that once we got there, we made ourselves dependent of cars.

And in retrospection, it was hardly a good direction to take for our future.

So, well, it seems plausible that what people really needed was just better bikes and trains but that they all bought into the car "freedom" marketing.
> Russia has an alliance with Serbia. Not mobilising would have had significant international repercussions

Russia was in no state to fight a war. They lost a war to a second tier global power and not so long and barely survived a major revolution (which was hardly over). Negotiating with Austria/Germany and forcing Serbia to give up the people responsible for the assassination would’ve been the only reasonable choice.

Instead the tsar being the incompetent idiot (understatement that man was truly special…) that he was decided to sacrifice his entire family and million of Russians (not that he cared) and destroy the Russian state itself.

Same might be said about the kaiser Wilhelm, but:
1. Germany actually stood a chance
2. Wasn’t on the brink of a complete political/social collapse like Russia at the time
Here is an recent example from a slightly different area:

> Exam invalidated over... Facetime emojis???
> https://www.reddit.com/r/AWSCertifications/comments/18p8uub/...
I remember being a dev lead for a small internal product. I think 80% of the requests were "add custom behavior guarded by a checkbox".

Fortunately we could just walk over to the (internal) customers, discuss the requirements and avoid creating a single huge function with logic determined by 37 checkboxes.
Great post. I think most who followed the link to YouTube forgot to come back here to leave a comment.
Made an account to post this.

I stuck it out in a very junior research group and it set me back massively. I was too naive to realize the consequences at the time, and the PI was very kind and generous with their time, so I did not give it much thought and persisted with the project. Problems that resulted from this:

* Ultimately the research direction/guidance proved to be misguided, it was a deep learning project that only got good results with scale (as proved by competing teams from Nvidia and Microsoft) but the PI did not want me to explore that direction and insisted on me operating at small scale, where the model was too crude and the results nowhere near SOTA, I managed to replicate the toy models by the then SOTA publications but that was it.

* Because the PI has no repute, I had no good references for Ph.d applications. At the time I was not aware this was going to be such a problem.

* Because I dedicated all my time to this research, I did not do any internships or work placements or even prepare for job interviews or apply for jobs.

* I very likely would have been able to do research in a better lab if only I tried switching. I had good grades and technical know how. But I did not bother because I was too comfortable and the problem was technically enticing.

Result of all of this, is that I have accumulated some decent theoretical and technical know how, but besides saying that I did some research during my masters, I cannot prove it. It's not good enough for many Ph.d applications (no good references), not good enough for any industry lab (neither good publications, nor enough expertise for MLE/MLOps type jobs) and not good enough for big companies (not senior enough). Worth noting that I live outside of the US, where the landscape for juniors is not as forgiving.

It also did not help that I spent many months blaming myself for not getting amazing results with misguided constraints. And my persistence, which usually pays off, only made things worse. Lesson learned.

My moonshot was getting into a reputable Ph.d program. Currently unemployed.
IPOs are way way down since Sarbanes Oxley.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/43303857
I also was overwhelmed by the amount of data. I came back here to find the cliff notes :)
Great video.

> Pay $15 for a 15 track CD than $1 for the on good song on it that you really wanted

No surprise a capitalist company with a history of abusing the authors wants your' $15 instead of $1. They spent way less than $1 producing and shipping a CD and received $14+ from each, why they would bother with receiving only less than $1 (while spending $0)?
Nobody is "dismissing" you as anything. You have self-identified.
> Here’s a classic example of trying to give the customers what they want, from Intuit [...]

CUSTOMERS: We just want to minimize the pain of tax return filing.

INTUIT: [lobbies government to keep that pain going strong]
So it has also become one of the glitterati. That didn't take long.
> People even obviously wanted a Segway in Europe, where the cities have impressive support for bikes.

Maybe impressive by US standards but don’t underestimate us, we managed to transform perfectly walkable / cyclable cities and dense rail networks into car centric cities and highways everywhere in less than a century.
Some of their tools are definitely interesting to poke at, but many are locked to internal Apple use by requiring resources only available on their internal VPN. Some more recent samples are available here: https://archive.org/details/apple-home-diagnostic-pkg
Works fine IMO

https://chat.openai.com/share/7dfd22d2-975c-4e6d-ba4b-c6b99e...

https://chat.openai.com/share/90fae0dc-f8fd-4603-835c-5f3a57...
Python/C++ has finally: blocks as well.

They're not nearly as good as the `with` statement (or context handler) in python.
looks like the aim is to replace IrDA not current usage of wifi
The proxy was in Yemen has been going on for almost 10 years. US just doesn’t want to be a direct part of that mess and the Saudis don’t want to damage their rapprochement with Iran.

I’m not sure though if a Saudi-Iran-Russia axis would be in anyone’s interest. So maybe bombing the Houthis and trying to drag SA back into the war wouldn’t be the worst idea ever (if everyone just ignores the civilian suffering which is generally quite easy).
Well I know exactly what the NYT has - a very strong case. I think this case OUGHT to upend copyright law - it's terribly broken and has been for years.

Essentially, if you don't have a massive corp behind a copyright it doesn't mean anything, if a corp is behind something it can be locked forever, regardless of any limits said copyrights are supposed to have.

The NYT list nothing from OpenAI using old news - they still lose nothing if openai can reproduce those articles verbatim.

If the NYT wins - we lose lots. I think it's time revisit copyright, we can do that you know, it's rather dated, could use an update regardless.
It's worse than that: The US intentionally provoked the incident with sabotage and hit and runs, and then "faked" the second incident (they had bad data, fired on nothing, and then used skewed intelligence reports to back up a false claim of an attack) which was used as the final excuse (the latter was long suspected, but admitted to by McNamara in 2003, and by NSA records declassified in 2005).