skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Right as I was starting to drive MapQuest was a thing. My dad had a 3rd-party GPS unit for his car but I only rarely got to use it. To save paper/ink I’d only print out the instructions to get to the place I was going and then reverse them to get home (many times I made the wrong turn and had to backtrack till I found something that was on my directions to reorient myself). I drove to a lot of random places while working for my parents (real estate agents, I took pictures, installed/collected lock boxes and signs, virtual tours, etc).

Nowadays I’m completely dependent on my GPS but I don’t see that as a bad thing really. I know some people do, but it’s not a skill I need, why would I bother learning the route? I’m good at quick math and especially at getting “close to” (calculating a sale price, tip, etc) the right answer but I haven’t honed my long division skills in decades (I assume I could still do it, I know the method) because I have a calculator in my pocket always. In the same vein I don’t know assembly, heck I found EE to be boring as hell, I don’t care about logic gates but I can write software without issue.

Every generation stands on the shoulders of the ones that came before and it seems like every older generation hates the younger for doing so. It’s honestly tiring and reeks of “If I had to put up with X then so do you”. This is not aimed at your comment, just a general observation.
No it isn't and this idea needs to die.

Sure, you can ignore security if all you're doing is processing local text files, granted. But things looking horrible to programmers isn't just about security bugs, it's about the whole span of correctness bugs. And scientists need to write code that is both correct and maintainable. The frequency with which they don't is partly why results so often can't be replicated, making the money spent on academia wasted.

The idea that science code doesn't need to be maintainable or that they have some magic way to do it that looks wrong, isn't right either. It's not uncommon to find model "codes" that scientists have been hacking on for decades. The results have become completely untrustworthy many years earlier, but they deny/obfuscate/ignore, attack or even sue people who point out concrete problems. Sadly, often with the acquiescence of the media who are supposed to be ferreting out coverups.

Scientists need to collectively get a grip on this situation. They will happily attack anyone outside their institutions as being non-expert conspiracy theorists, but when it comes to software they suddenly know everything and don't need to hire professionals. Paper-invalidating bugs are constantly being covered up and the only reason the problem hasn't reached criticality yet is that many people don't want to hear about it. But the unreliability of academic output is now becoming a political problem and a divisive culture war issue, when it really shouldn't be. A good first step to solving the replication crisis would be for scientists to stop pretending it's OK to quickly knock together a program themselves instead of assigning a ticket to a trained full time SWE. Yes it would cost more (a lot more), and that's OK. Generate fewer papers but get them right!
> I think the goal is to make if more accessible, so that more people with less knowledge can produce more crap with it.

If so, it fails at even this: for my A-levels[0], my teacher only knew VisualBasic[1], which was very easy to work with: drag and drop widgets onto a form, (double?)-click on a widget to get right into the code block that happens when a user users the widget.

Back when JS was new and there were no extra layers of abstraction, yes the language sucks, but you could get to work with it using only what you found in a £4.99 book from WHSmith[2] and a text editor, you didn't need to `install npm` and then some library and then…

> People don't learn the basics, they want to write a comment in Copilot and have it assemble code that roughly does what they want.

Agree. Heck, I do that, and I started learning the basics when I was about 5. :)

> People don't learn the basics, they want to write a comment in Copilot and have it assemble code that roughly does what they want. I believe that people who got into software in the 60s actually liked computers. People who get into software today just want to produce stuff, they don't care about their computer.

My dad probably got into computers some time in the 60s, a one or two day corporate training program about "this new thing called 'software'". The way he talked about them, it was clear he didn't really understand them, and just wanted to get stuff done.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-level

[1] It turned out that the copy of REALbasic I had on my Mac at home was almost copy-paste compatible, the only exception I ran into was that `Dim foo, bar As Integer` has `foo` and `bar` being `Integer` in REALbasic while our version of VB had `foo` being `Integer` and `bar` being `VarType`

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHSmith
Most teams at CERN don't have a professional programmer available either. In a few of larger projects (those with a few hundred active contributors) there might be one or two more tech savvy people who profile the code regularly and fix the memory leaks. But few (if any) are professional programmers: most contributors are graduate students with no background in programming.
The A320neo is such a comfortable plane to fly on.
A380 was great too.
Grounding is a heavy measure. They're more likely to just inspect other planes with similar doors to see if there's anything obviously wrong with them.

Planes are complicated machines and the processes for inspecting them are highly detailed. Once they figure out what happened, the fix might be simply to include some simple check for whatever happened. Just another line item for a routine inspection. And probably the list of things to check for doors is quite long already.

In any case, flailing your arms and panicking is not part of the process. This incident seems completely unrelated to previous incidents and it happened many years after the first max flew. Which suggests it's an isolated incident. It's quite possible that the door has not been redesigned for the max (quite likely even, because why would they?) in which case they might have to look at all 737s going back 50 or so years.
Hey, even Dijkstra agrees with us on this one:

> I remember how much more pleasant the predicate calculus became to work with after we had decided to give con- and disjunction the same binding power and thus to consider p ∧ q ∨ r an ill-formed formula.

https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ewd13xx/EWD1300.PDF (page 4-5)
https://archive.is/Tpf5Z
This is the best way in my opinion. Sacrifice a second of typing for clarity. I try to do this with expressions in general.
Worst code I have seen has been written by self taught bioinformaticians.

But, a lot of the time these scripts are used as one offs, to generate a result, then are done with, so quality doesn't need to be the same as with a server running 24/7.(Sadly the ones I had to fix were being run regularly).
I enjoy using clickhouse-local for parsing csv files. I generally hit situations where I need custom delimiter and custom parsing rules, I find it handles all of these edge cases very well. Recently I found that if my csv files are compressed, i don't even need to uncompress them, it auto-magically figures out the compression format and process it for me.
You need to use a merge queue (aka merge train). It should be completely standard at this point (though it unfortunately isn't). Doesn't help that it's a Gitlab Premium feature.
How will they keep the private keys secret?
ngrid is quite usable, stable, and sensible for streaming work: https://github.com/twosigma/ngrid
>You can type 84 words per minute

(After a few attempts)

I self learned to type using "Iankey"[0] (the manual[1]). In my opinion, it is one of the best training tools I tried - I should search around my old backups to see if I can still find it.

[0] https://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/68105/Iankey/
[1] https://www.habisoft.com/pcwwiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=apl...
737 MAX is no longer "brand new"

737 MAX was already grounded for fatal safety issues that should have prevented it from being deemed airworthy in the first place.

Boeing recently argued safety shouldn't be a concern for the 737 MAX

Boeing clearly appreciates shareholder value above safety and quality. Which you cannot have for systems this complex
... and I bet the top 1 engineer didn't actually add any bug to the code base, they just did a few repo-wide refactor.
> American Airlines replaced a chunk of their fleet with the A320 because the Dreamliner was literally killing about as many people as it managed to transport when it wasnt down for loose bolts or reboots due to battery issues.

From Wikipedia:

> The Boeing 787 has been involved in seven accidents and incidents as of November 2023, with zero fatalities and no hull losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787_Dreamliner#Accident...
Slightly off topic, but has anyone felt they've improved at identifying "AI" images?

My instagram feed is increasingly filled with "AI models", for some reason I can really easily identify these images whereas earlier on I really struggled a lot. Now I can more easily recogize these images, it actually turns me off using Instagram as I find it annoying / jarring.

A few months back, I'd be looking at the hands etc to try work out if the image was real or not. I'd always fail those "is this person real or not" quizzes where as now, I can smash those things pretty easily and almost always know when an IG post is faked.
The question asks about "after independence", so Pakistan and Bangladesh had already been separated from India.

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/stories/india-independence-d...
> The interoperability benefit is limited since you typically won't want to operate both Shinkanzens and local trains on the same rail.

> Having different gauges provides no real benefit.

The only place it would be beneficial to have the same gauge would be at stations, to have fewer, more flexibile platforms and smaller train stations.
Probably similar token rates out of the box, although I havent done a straight comparison. Where they'll differ is in the sorts of questions they're good at. Llama2 was trained (broadly speaking) for knowledge, Phi-2 for reasoning. And bear in mind that you can quantise phi-2 down too. The starting point is f16.
This is the joke. Americans always use football fields for comparison, even when totally inappropriate.
They can't, ultimately, it's basically just DRM but in reverse.

I'm sure they can make it hard, with secure silicon etc., but they'll never make it impossible and that somewhat defeats the purpose.
Previously true on Intel MBPs. M* chip MBPs hardly ever throttle in any significant way.
Hey, but at least we have rounded corners now, which is nowhere to be seen in your 2010s <table>-heavy borgmaster summary /s
I would add sqlite as well.
I am not saying it's bad. I kinda understand the motivation behind atw style in general. Modern code is written like prose:

if (IsValidFile(fileName)) {
var rawRecords = ReadFileAsRawRecordIterator(PreprocessFile(fileName), config);
foreach (var rawRecord in rawRecords) {
var record = ParseRawRecord(rawRecord, config);
//and so on
}
}

But you have to trust the prose. At one point or another, you find a bug in some free software you haven't written yourself, open its source code and are met with ravioli code written in prose. And you cannot trust this prose because there is a bug in it. So you open this tiny method, the you open PreprocessFile, ReadFileAsRawRecordIterator, ParseRawRecord, the implementation of IRawRecordIterator, then a few more methods that these methods call themselves and try to thread the control flow through these methods, jumping from file to file. I can see how atw style code can help with that, especially after you retrain yourself to read it like math.
King Arthur unveils flour from regeneratively grown wheat (2023)
For the same reason I can’t operate an orbital rocketry program out of my backyard. Dangerous stuff in the sky is dangerous to everybody on the ground, too.
I bet a lot of that 16% is fertilizer.
This, combined with the recent news that Boeing wants to correct a design flaw on the engine nacelle anti-icing system by putting it on the pilots leads me to simply no longer trust this aircraft.

The first couple crashes were sobering, but I thought Boeing would recover and a single issue like that would get corrected and not happen again. The fact they are still trying to "blame" pilots for aircraft design flaws though is beyond the pale and shows they learned absolutely nothing.

I was trying to put my finger on it last night. I got on a MAX a few weeks ago and I absolutely noticed and felt mildly uncomfortable for a minute. I was chiding myself for feeling irrational fear.

The reason was in front of me the whole time. It's actually rational after all:

I simply do not trust the people who designed this aircraft.
Their approach is wrong. You don't say at a university level that you're going to teach C in a class. That's not what university level courses are about. If you're teaching programming applications and techniques then use a relevant language which supports those concepts. Learning a language should be a bi-product of the university course, not the fundamental reason for it. You learn C as part of any myriad of courses such as networking, but then it is simply a lecture or two then students need to get up to speed themselves.
I'll add that "code reuse" was pushed as an idea too heavily (at my university at least). I think that leads to a fair bit of the over engineering and unnecessary complexity.

I saw a comment later saying not to aim for "code reuse", but rather to "avoid code duplication" which made more sense.

I also agree that a lot of best practices are great if you are a massive company with unlimited resources, but they are just overkill and add complexity for smaller projects and teams.
If there was a book that had a transformative change on how I tackled legacy projects, "Working Effectively with Legacy Code" was it. I can't recommend it enough. The book is packed with pragmatic gems that help slowly and steadily turn any legacy software project into a modern codebase.
My reading is almost entirely history as well, for somewhat similar reasons to the article.

Another thing I like about reading historical non-fiction is that in the modern world it is almost alway possible to dig in deeper on anything you read. There are different more detailed books/articles on the subject, often internet accessible primary documents, etc. and this ability dig deeper and deeper on a subject just cannot exist for fictional worlds.
If you parse it, he is actually saying 2 things:

1: “very well”: methodology can help those without software design talent. You should stick to it if you know you can’t design software.

2: “don’t know”: Design can be learned but for the lazy there is methodology.
Perhaps being unaccepting of others is so endemic in once decent societies that it is actually considered decent. Not in my book.
In order to achieve what exactly?
When you say that its is normal for complex systems to suffer more faults when brand new can you share the stats that apply to airliners?

Also, what makes 737 Max a dynamic product ?
I think you're getting a bit confused. The delta compression of commits in packfiles is purely a storage optimisation. It has zero effect on the semantics of git. It's completely invisible to users and has nothing to do with diffs between commits and their parents.

Git doesn't use diffs at all, except ephemerally for some operations (e.g. displaying diffs between commits, or rebases). Diffs are never stored.
Some of these ferries still run for freight-only, e.g. link below. I'm not sure if they'd take a motorbike (or car) as freight though, except on a trailer.

https://www.dfds.com/en/freight-shipping/routes-and-schedule...
I became severely burnt out doing a job that had a lot of meaning, both to me and the people around me and the greater local community. The burn out came from the constant struggle / conflict in achieving the objectives.

My point being, I think burn out can come from a number of different sources.
The 737 max product line is not new. This individual aircraft is only two months out of certification. By large aircraft standards, that is showroom new.
Your option for a phone is either google or apple. A phone is an essential part of life.

No matter which phone is chosen you can call someone a hypocrite for thinking that both google and apple ceos are overpaid. The illusion of a free market is no defence.
As an American, I have never once in my life used a football field as a size comparison, nor have I heard it used as a size comparison for anything that wasn't roughly football field sized.

It might be used more commonly in some places, but I was baffled by the joke as well.
I just watched the embedded video, which actually shows a photographer using a digital camera to digitize and "authenticate" analog slides. The whole thing seems like a bit of a charade, to me.

I found a service selling 35mm slides of digital image files for £3.25 each.
As many others have pointed, the aircraft was too new for that door plug to have ever been inspected by maintenance.

There is no doubt that Boeing is guilty of either negligent assembly or of using wrong parts, such as inappropriate bolts.

The fact that any of these two has happened indicates bad procedures used during production at Boeing.

It could indicate a design problem, if for instance better bolts used in the past have been replaced with cheaper bolts.
Can’t wait to crack this. Looking at the specs, it’s hugely complicated for what it is and has an enormous attack surface.
These bad habits you mention should be taken care of by general programming concepts classes. If you're using a new language like C for OS development and you are thinking of goto and other frowned on methods then a person really didn't do the programming concepts class very well.
Male Arab and African population subcultures now firmly established in the Western hemisphere.
Student Pilots Will Try to Kill You
To get that shiny authentic signature on arbitrary image data.
Er, what? Jetstar at least seems to have nothing but A320s for domestic stuff.
> And we had a telephone connection between these two…so they could talk to each other. What happened is Charley typed the “L” and he asked, “You get the ‘L?’” And the answer was, “Got the ‘L.’” He typed the ‘O.’ “You get the ‘O?’” “Got the ‘O.’” He typed the ‘G.’ “You get the ‘G?’” Wacko! The system crashed. This machine [SRI’s] went down.

> So the very first message on the internet ever was “LO,” as in, “Lo and behold!” You couldn’t ask for a better, more effective message.

... except that they tried again, and succeeded, so the first three characters on the internet were LOL.

Not kidding.
I meant pr. timezone toggle! The current one is global if I am not mistaken?

So I could have my own local time in military time and the one(s) I am converting to, in AM/PM.
> Boeing is playing off its role as being so vital to national security that the government will keep it from suffering too much loss.

I don’t actually think this is true. Boeing has a terrible track record with defense contracts in recent years. They lost the KC-X tanker competition to Airbus before Boeing lobbied to overturn the decision, they lost the JSF competition to the Lockheed Martin F-35, and they (in partnership with Sikorsky) lost the Black Hawk replacement competition to Bell. Super Hornet production is ending next year and Osprey production could probably be turned over to Bell.

No, it’s less that Boeing is vital to national security and more that Boeing is a government jobs program. It’s the jobs—not Boeing’s importance to national security—that has influenced powerful senators like Patty Murray and Lindsay Graham to put their thumbs on the scale.
The title made me think of this scene from HBO’s John Adams, where John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin discuss this exact topic. It is I think a reference to this letter from Jefferson to Madison. It’s a bit odd that Jefferson wasn’t mentioned in the article, as this exact question was frequently on his mind. Doesn’t bode well for the author or the book.

JEFFERSON: I am increasingly persuaded that the earth belongs exclusively to the living, and that one generation has no more right to bind another to its laws and judgments than one independent nation has the right to command another.

ADAMS: But surely the Constitution, as it did with the ones we wrote for our own States, is meant to establish the stability and the long-term legality essential to the continuation of civilized society.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-12-02-024...

https://youtu.be/QcWaCsvpikQ?si=wUFLsImIXRAUepcJ

Personally, I think Jefferson’s viewpoint is a bit naive, and I tend to side with Adams and look at the constitution (and more broadly, customs and laws of past generations) as a kind of Chesterton’s Fence. The generation of founding fathers may not be up-to-date on contemporary trends, but I think I’d still take their dead opinions as a better starting point over whatever nonsense would come out of a constitutional convention held today.
Before this topic boils down to: SystemD gave me cancer/SystemD cured my aids as it always seems to. Please permit me get my opinion across (as it is more nuanced) before I continue.

I sincerely believe that systemd solved a problem that nobody was willing to solve, and it has every right to solve those problems any way it wants (when you ask for help you don't get to choose how you are helped after all) - my concerns boil down to the fact that the adoption it has seen has lead indirectly (or, directly) into a monoculture; and a monoculture that almost certainly will stifle innovation since a replacement will need to be bug-for-bug compatible. Prior init's were actually quite easy to replace and alternatives were often used, but these days most software assumes systemd and this situation gets worse every year.

That said; and with the knowledge that while I am afraid of systemd as monoculture (and a relatively opaque one); this line "systemd, as a service manager, is not actually a bad piece of software by itself. The fact it can act as both a service manager and an inetd(8) replacement is really cool."

Is something I vehemently disagree with.

For starters, (x)inetd is an anti-pattern, everything I understand about systems development indicates we should be seperating concerns as much as possible, having one super-server that launches everything under one daemon is directly opposed to this.

"But", I hear you thinking already: "systemd runs services as independent users, it solves that!", and I would agree with you, except now pid 0 is listening to the network instead.. That doesn't strike me as much better.

If there's a bug/backdoor in your binary distributed version of systemd then you are SOL and your whole system is owned as root, but at least a bug in your application might not expose your entire inetd user. :\

It's also a common issue that inetd's architecture can lend itself to getting DoS'd harder than other more-standard daemons, except now it's your pid 0 being DoS'd; not sure how you recover from that honestly.

EDIT: if you are going to downvote, please provide reasons. Sick of this holy war, lets just end it reasonably please.
The Revenge of the Ottoman Empire
Mmm, I try not to get too emotional when analyzing bubbles, so the string theory phenomenon is a fun one to analyze as it has quite obviously burst, plus it helps that I didn't buy. Feel somewhat sorry about those who did, though. My personal take is that decades later someone will unearth a gem hidden in the mountain of published string garbage that will spark the next revolution ... Or bubble
Hezbollah Strikes Israeli Surveillance Base
Perhaps we all are, but we see other things in ordinals.
FDA finds Chromium, a second metal contaminant, in applesauce pouches