skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> a lot is common sense

Probably the best compliment one can make of such a book.

Common sense tends to be lacking when it comes to coding practices, and books about it don't really help. Instead, they tend to go with practices that are completely detached from reality. Also, things that require unreasonable effort, so that if you don't do it because you are too neurotypical for that, then "you are doing it wrong" and if it doesn't work then it is not the author's fault.

And even if it common sense in that that's what every experienced programmer is already doing, then, still great. First because not every programmer is an experienced programmer, obviously. And even if you are, seeing it writing helps with consolidation.

So really, you are getting me very interested right now.
University student prefers music study despite mapping China's military bases
It doesn't duplicate, it wraps. `sl-checkbox` is ultimately a `input type="checkbox"`, but wrapped in containers and exporting uniform props. For example `sl-checkbox` is a container with both a checkbox and a label container in it. And it exports a prop `size` which takes the values "small", "medium", "large", which is uniformly provided across Shoelace input components.

It's a combo of (a) HTML lacks the features/ergonomics and (b) need to provide a clean-syntax API that extends HTML.
I'm not an engineer, but...Twitter doesn't seem to be doing all that well.
These all look the same. Are there any designers out there who do not follow the "current thing" and can actually think for themselves?

I want an opinionated component system which do not look like the others.
Yes that's exactly why their value dropped. Because value isn't the present value of the business. It's the future competitiveness and innovation they bring to the table. Twitter has none of that anymore. There's no hope for growth, a new product, etc.
Author decided to ignore the fact that Israel and Hamas are fighting a war and so isn’t grappling with what is actually happening in Gaza. Instead making it seem as if Israel woke up one morning and decided to bomb a bunch of people for no reason.
If your organization isn't accomplishing its goals, it's not due to a lack of nagging the programmers.
And that's absolutely his fault, but for crossing the news media and pissing off his advertisers, not cutting engineers. The site is still running fine. If he had just made the engineering cuts and kept his mouth shut he would be making a pile of money on the acquisition right now.
Then buy a large fire safe, bolt it to your floor inside a closet, and fill it with 10 lb barbell plates until it requires a forklift to move.

If your threat model includes someone inside your home with power tools and you can’t trust a bank… you might want to consider moving.
I think you misunderstand what your opponents argue using the crop deaths example.

They're not making some utilitarian moral calculus argument that harvesting and eating plants causes more animal suffering than factory farming: that cannot be true, since farming large scale crop cultivation is a prerequisite of factory farming.

No, the argument is popular because if you ask why vegan advocates don't campaign for eliminating agriculture entirely, it puts them in a complete double bind:

1. They can argue that they don't care about the sort of animal suffering that crop death entails, thereby reducing opposition to factory farming into a mere aesthetic preference for them, analogous to the sort of argument that goes "Mongolians shouldn't eat horse meat because it offends American sensibilities", which is rightfully not taken seriously by most people.

2. Or they can bite the bullet, say that they care about all animal suffering, and admit that they will campaign against eating plant matter as well once the lower hanging fruit of factory farming is taken care of. Since all possible ways of human sustinence will involve some animal suffering at some point, this makes it seem like they're eager to ride down on a slippery slope to voluntary human extinction, which is, again, rightfully not taken seriously by most people.

Keep in mind that I'm not saying these anti-vegan arguments are right: in fact I think they're not, and I'm not here to argue them.

All I'm telling you is that this is how the usual crop death counterarguments come across to many onlookers, with either answer making vegan advocacy seem ridiculous to the general public. E.g. your counterargument here matches type 2: people will wonder, if they go along with the plan and abandon eating animals, will you start advocating against planting crops next?

Anti-vegan people will keep bringing the crop death issue up not because they're concerned about animal deaths (indeed, most of them will admit that they're not really concerned, and tell you that you shouldn't be either; at the time of writing, one of the responses to your very post already did this) but because responding to the crop death argument in any of the usual ways predictably makes vegan advocates look ridiculous and hypocritical.
Via YouTube Shorts, of all things, changing "github" in the URL to "github1s" opens up the repo in something that looks like VSCode. gitlab1s.com and npmjs1s.com work in the same fashion.

It's provided by https://github.com/conwnet who appears to work for Tencent, so be advised. More about this at https://github1s.com/
Or better yet: realize you have more in common with factory workers than silicon valley billionaires, and organize for better labor rights.
When I look at the chart, I actually see a down trend long BEFORE COVID. It seems the current situation is a continuation of this trend from pre-pandemic.
> All policies which affect the wealth distribution do so by moderating the gini coef, ie., the specific shape of the power-law -- they do not make it normal, uniform, etc. or however the ideologue would wish it to be.

Again, you are assuming your conclusion, and you do not even do us the favour of stating premises, which is hardly conducive to a productive discussion (or, any, really). On the other hand, it is quite fundamental to welfare economics that under a few assumptions, some unrealistic and some less so (namely: perfect information, fully internalised externalities, absence of market power, local nonsatiation and convexity of preferences and production) it is possible to reach any point on the Pareto frontier. The policies required to reach a desired point in such a toy model is left as an exercise for the reader. Now, the actual juicy questions here are how things like market power, externalities and imperfect information affect this? Is the model still a good approximation? To what extent are we able to correct things, and do we even want to? If we do, how best to do it?

> The "natural mechanism" of "fair procedures" in the case of systems wherein parts attach to other parts based on their current size

Again, you assert that it's "natural" and "fair" as if the result is a foregone conclusion. If it is inevitable that dx be a f(x) ~ x then yes, that's an exponential. Why would it be unnatural or unfair for dx to be instead a function of y, some other factor that has no proportionality to x? You are stating as a conclusion and premise that financial wealth experiences preferential attachment unconditionally, that is in essence, circular reasoning. What is the actual mechanism, the force, and how irresistible is it really? Would resisting it simply divert its effects to something else, for example, concentration of political rather than economic power?

Quite frankly, the dismissal of everything outside of a frankly ridiculously narrow space, where your model with an unspecified mechanism (which does achieve the results that you say it does) clearly must be an accurate reflection of the real world in all circumstances... Well, it gets old quite fast. If you really must use that model, describe and justify the accuracy of your proposed mechanism at least, if you please.
One doesn't.
That's off chain and should be nearly free
I agree with you completely. This blog post could be useful and informative, but its writing is weirdly aggressive and annoying that it becomes way harder to read rather than just roll my eyes at and move on with my life.

It's this kind of writing that is unfortunately endemic in the "internet rationalist" space, which doubly unfortunately has a lot of crossover with users on hn. Hence why you're being dogpiled by the most annoying people online.

More importantly though, writing like this is self-defeating, for the author, for wirecutter, and for everyone else who has to inflict it upon themselves just so the author can get to the point.

There are much better ways to communicate about issues, about anything, if you're actually interested in helping an organization do better ("Wirecutter, let me help you.") or even just want to inform people that wirecutter might not be the most reliable source for product recommendations.

This kind of writing though is about the same tier of bad as the loud and annoying youtube takedown videos where they put somebody "on blast". It doesn't surprise me at all that such writing is equally popular on hn. Outrage drives engagement, no matter how far up their own asses your audience is. (Example one: me and my comment).

> I am not the subject of this ridicule yet I am somehow the recipient of it.

This line though is really what I wanted to write a comment about. I love this. Some weirdos will try to twist this feeling into being "personally offended by reading" but no, your feelings are valid. This kind of writing is exhausting. It's a waste of my time. The author clearly has a point to make, and everyone would be better served if they would just make it and leave the shitflinging out. Could you imagine having to be around someone who communicated this way irl?

All that to say, thanks for sharing. I'll take my beating now.
> However, I will still challenge you on your build time/object size claim. (...)

Nothing in your example suggests long compilation times are a hard requirement. Just move your components into submodules and remove template code from interfaces. Your build only needs to recompile what you tell it to recompile.

> Also, I have to (sadly) point out that explicit template instantiation declarations only take you so far.

It takes you as far as you need to go. You instantiate what you need, you move your template code into submodules and out of interface headers, and you're set. This is not sourcery. It's common sense.

I recommend you read "large scale C++,vol1 - process and architecture" to get acquainted with basic C++ techniques to structure your project so that builds don't waste time chewing through code they don't need to touch.
Well, that's sort of the problem here right; yes at AWS retail you are paying $20 million a month for traffic, but the cost to AWS isn't anywhere near that, in fact how AWS charges for traffic doesn't match to how it incurs costs at all. And in general having desirable services like Twitch and of course being ginormously huge means people want to peer with you and you have more leverage in those peerings, making them cheaper.
Having lived and driven in Thailand for the last decade I'm gonna have to disagree with you here.

Drivers here are notoriously unaware of their surroundings, often have no concept of who has right of way, largely seem oblivious to the concept of a blind spot, and in general just ignore any road rules that are inconvenient to them.

- "why are you stopping here?" (At a red light)

- "why is he turning his head can't he see the mirrors?"

- "what are they honking at me for, what's your hurry?" (After pulling out and cutting off traffic

All things my mother in law said while driving or when I/my wife was driving her somewhere.... and she actually has a licence. Now think about all the people here who don't have one or paid someone to take the test for them.
The problem is that this can "carry over" structures which are in a unsound state. Especially if abort was done due to runtime sanity/soundness checks failing. Or a segfault due to unsound structures etc.

As far as I can tell you should only use it for "splatted" data, maybe allowing gaps.

E.g. using it to not needing to load again some kind of multiple 1GiB bit mask which are just a 1GiB blob of bits each would probably work grate. Using it on structs which do not contain any pointer (i.e. no Strings, no Vecs, no &str etc.) would work okay. But the moment any pointers are stored in data carried over that way things become a huge mess and are basically fundamentally unsafe as they can easily become unsound.
The plane is a lemon. Boeing would do well to admit this and build a next-gen plane so good it would take business from Airbus. Just wait till the next iteration of the Chinese airliner.
To further elaborate on this, it’s something like a few tenths of total GDP over that period.

Now, depending on how you look at it, you can consider that either a huge number or eminently affordable - I think both are true - but I think it’s a reasonable price for the roles the aircraft is designed to fill over that period.
That and hodl it, hoping it'll someday be worth more.
I'm skeptical this is really a huge factor; most bad driving is a matter of choice, not incompetence. And the bad driving that results from incompetence often tends to not be too dangerous. And in countries with strict driving license tests people just try 3, 4, 5, or more times until they get "lucky".
Agreed, but Gen AI already has a lot of use cases, the challenges are with “taming” the technology - Rare hallucinations, RAG (or equivalent) figured out, more deterministic.

Assuming some of these challenges are solved, integrations will follow.

Imagine the web before CSS, JS, AJAX. That’s where we are with Gen AI.
Yep, I honestly don’t get how people can seriously read this platform and claim in good faith that these are valid policy positions. The “evidence” they linked to support their claim ended up instead just supporting your original point that they were trying to refute. Agreed. Just completely mad.
Slightly Off-Topic.

I dont have Hey email so I cant test their Calendar. But I am wondering if it is built just the same using Turbo, without being a full SPA.
Continued....

Here is a comprehensive list of what data was impacted. Only data after November 1st, 2023 was accessed.

Emails Sent

Accessed: Recipient address, sender address, sent date, subject, bcc, cc, reply to, and last event.

Not Accessed: No email content body which includes the HTML and plain text.

Domains

Accessed: Domain names, verification status, region, and DKIM public keys.

Not Accessed: No unencrypted DKIM private keys.

API Keys

Accessed: Names, permission roles, and encrypted tokens.

Not Accessed: No unencrypted tokens.

Logs

Accessed: HTTP Response data such as status code, and HTTP Request data such as method, and endpoint.

Not Accessed: No HTTP Response JSON body, and Request JSON body, or headers.

Contacts

Accessed: Email addresses and names.

Users

Accessed: Resend user email addresses.

Not Accessed: No Resend user names or passwords.

Actions and remediations
These are the preventative measures that we have already taken:

Removed database API environment variable from the client-side of the Resend Dashboard.

Rotated database API access keys.

Enforced MFA across all systems touching the database.

Conducted org-wide password reset across all systems touching the database.

These are the preventative measures that we will be taking immediately:

Improving monitoring and alerting for database API access.

Partnering with a third-party cybersecurity company, Oneleet, to conduct an exhaustive investigation.

Please reach out to us at security@resend.com if you have any questions.

Conclusion
We sincerely apologize to everyone affected by this incident, and we appreciate your understanding as we learn to navigate this challenging period.

This has been an unfortunate and trying moment for us, but solidified the determination and commitment of each and every team member at Resend.

Your trust is what has built us, and we remain deeply committed to ensuring your sending is safe.
> Hi, can you please integrate your self into my business and increase my revenue by 20% and cut cost of workforce by 30%.

That's not how computers work...
Thanks, these are great. Wish itjobswatch.co.uk had data for the US as well, but assuming trueup is using their own listing data it seems to be pretty globally diverse.

A tangent but I'm curious due to the language on this site: Is SWEng generally considered part of "IT" in the UK? Here in the states it seems most orgs consider IT strictly infra and "Dev"/"Engineering" is a separate thing. Some do place it within IT, but in my (limited) experience those orgs which do tend to have a running conflict with SWE fighting to get out of IT because of onerous policies which were perceived as not well-suited to their workflow.
Actually it’s worse. We still hire in house It to work with all the vendors. They get paid the same as before.
Oh, wow, it has a brand new interaction method? Like the Touch Bar? Or like 3D Touch? Apple would never consider silently abandoning those.
You can prove presence of assets, you can't prove absence of liabilities, and you can't audit the balance sheet without seeing both sides.
+1000 if in the morning I dread leaving the car and walking in the office it's time to go. I shouldn't be excited like a dumbass all the time about the work I do but I should at a minimum not dread going into the office.
What amuses me is that articles like this are endlessly breathless but don't mention that Facebook has a competing device in the form of the Meta Quest 3.

It might not be an entirely fair comparison, but it's a broadly similar platform. If you think the Apple Vision Pro is a good idea that is too expensive, for instance, the MQ3 is less expensive. Practically there is a lot in common in different "XR" platforms in that they all support WebXR, people develop apps in Unity, etc.
Oh, I tried.
The days of feeling like you were tossing a life raft into a chasm when you lost your valuable bitcoins are long gone. A light of hope amid the dark waters of Bitcoin recovery emerges in the form of MUYERN TRUST HACKER. My tale attests to their skill in finding misplaced bitcoins and is one of hopelessness turned delightfully virtual vindication. It began with a rookie mistake. A fresh-faced investor, I succumbed to the siren song of a flashy exchange, lured by promises of astronomical returns. Little did I know, the platform was a meticulously crafted mirage, designed to fleece unsuspecting victims like myself. In a blink, my entire Bitcoin portfolio vanished, leaving a gnawing emptiness and a heart heavy with regret. Days bled into weeks, each sunrise a stark reminder of my folly. I scoured the internet, desperately clutching at straws, only to be met with a chorus of despairing voices and predatory "recovery" scams. Then, amidst the digital wasteland, I stumbled upon MUYERN TRUST HACKER. (https://muyerntrusthack.solutions/) Their website, a beacon of professionalism in the chaos, promised a glimmer of hope. Hesitantly, I contacted their support team. What followed was a series of in-depth consultations, each one a meticulous excavation of my digital footprints. The MUYERN TRUST HACKER team, a symphony of expertise and empathy, treated my case seriously. They listened patiently to my tale, dissected the fraudulent exchange's tactics, and formulated a recovery plan that felt both audacious and meticulously crafted. Days turned into weeks, each email updating a fluttering pulse of anticipation. Then, one glorious morning, it arrived. A simple email, devoid of fanfare, yet pregnant with the weight of a thousand suns: "Your bitcoins have been recovered. Tears welled up as I logged into my wallet. The numbers, once mockingly absent, now shimmered with the brilliance of a thousand reclaimed dreams. The impossible had been achieved. MUYERN TRUST HACKER had not only retrieved my stolen bitcoins, but they had also restored my faith in the very fabric of the cryptocurrency world. My experience is not singular. The unflinching dedication of the MUYERN TRUST HACKER team to rectifying the injustices of the digital frontier is demonstrated by their tireless efforts. They are digital Sherpas crossing the perilous terrain of lost bitcoins; they are more than just recovery experts. They are custodians of trust.
( Mail them at: muyerntrusted@mail-me.com )
( Telegram for fast communication (@)muyerntrusthacker )
Supernal's 120-MPH Flying Car Is as Quiet as a Dishwasher
It does feel that way. Also feels unjust that the first to be replaced by AI is us (software engineers), that may be playing into it?

We had it good for so long. I really enjoyed it. Thanks for all the bugs.
I guarantee you that is how 99.9% of managers believe AI works, and how 90% of the services selling them on AI tell them it works.
Article starts off a bit poorly as if it is about to suggest that it's all the pandemic's fault because it made everyone crazy, but fortunately it doesn't quite go that far. Of course it would be ridiculous to suggest this. Do we not think that the pandemic wasn't a terrible psychological event for folks in France and Canada too?

The difference must lie with the things that we know are systemically different between the United States and Europe and Canada and other places. We know that the infrastructure is worse, we know that there are less transportation options, we know that the cars are bigger and heavier. It's these differences between the United States and other places that is the core of the problem.

If the problem was that the pandemic made people a bit batty, well it's the infrastructure and cars that made things worse in the United States but not as significant of a problem in other jurisdictions.

Good news is that systemic infrastructure problems are fixable. This quote about France shows that things can be fixed:

A country like France is proof. In 2003, the French government began installing a network of speed cameras on its roads and ratcheted up fines. As a result, rates of speeding steadily dropped in the first decade of implementation, as did the number of severe injuries and fatalities.

I feel like this quote should be appealing to the engineering oriented folks that read this site:

“A good systems design has to account for people making mistakes and prevent those mistakes from being lethal,” he said.

The core problems America has is that the terrible infrastructure has made it incredibly easy to make mistakes, and as cars have become bigger and heavier the cost of those mistakes is getting worse and worse.

If the pandemic is at all at fault is that the stress from it was exacerbated by the terribleness of the restrictive automobile oriented infrastructure in the United States which in so many places is the only option.
Neat. How did you ask it to make that? Do you mind sharing the transcript?
It's in the public domain now, and yes the entire book is uploaded. I discovered there's another "Think and Grow Rich" GPT as well.
We may be zipping down the highway, trapped in our own steel bubbles, but we’re influenced by the behavior of the residents of the bubbles next to ours.

The "steel bubble" comment here is so important. The design of American (and Canadian!) cities and towns being reliant on automobiles for everything is fundamentally socially distancing. If you were going for a walk you wouldn't be frustrated and an asshole to other walkers because they're right there next to you and it would be incredibly impolite. In a car it's distancing, and so people in those other cars become non-persons, cars, not persons, and so one has free reign to not treat those car drivers as who they really are, your neighbours that live in your town along with you.
This is extremely concerning if true.