skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're describing working on your own single-author project, in which case there is indeed little difference (Pijul has less tooling).

In practice on actual real world cases, there are lots of differences when you start working with others: even on a small project, you don't have to plan your feature branches anymore, conflicts are solved once and for all, you get free cherry-picking of bugfixes to your production branch, etc.

When your project scales, there are even more differences: commutativity handles large repos for free, patches describe large files much more efficiently than by giving their whole contents (which snapshots do).
(A)GPL happens to be my favorite license, but even if I meant what you said, calling this Orwellian would be a bit much, if not outright off-topic, don't you think?

I'm all for using the definitions correctly, but people can make mistakes and deserve to be answered gently.
When the destination is eternal, there is no rational reason to hurry there. What is a human lifetime compared to eternity? Even a trillion years is inconceivably short compared to eternity. If an afterlife exists the time where the inhabitants can still remember their life before death must be insignificant.
If he is turning from "economic independence" offered by BRICS it would mean that he is much more sane than many would believe. BRICS has nothing to offer and nothing in common apart from being against the western world.
So you are claiming that your argument of "inspiration" in some way proves my list of dates, legal threats, and corporate decisions?

Really?
Karpathy: SVM vs. K-NN on Embeddings
You could be right, and maybe that is one of the reasons.

But I also thought it had to do with VFAT(?) being the default file system on Flash Drives and a patent M/S had.

IIRC, RHEL and friends refused to sign because that M/S patent was working it way through the courts.

But as others said, that article does not seem to reflect any kind of reality :)
On one hand that reason makes sense, but on the other hand I never found that to be a problem when using menus attached to windows. I need to aim for buttons in the middle of the screen all the time, and that's not slower just because the mouse doesn't bounce against a screen edge. I also hardly find myself actually bouncing against the screen edge when using macOS menus.

IMHO the bigger problem on Mac is the weird 'application centric' window system behaviour instead of the much more intuitive 'window centric' behaviour of Windows (and most Linux desktops).

For instance, "Alt-Tab" flips through applications on macOS, and it's possible for applications to be running even though they have no windows open, and in that case they just present a "naked" menu bar which I find utterly confusing. The whole thing feels like a dead-end UX experiment from the early 90's.

I'm mostly using the "3-finger-swipe" on macOS now to directly pick a window instead of tabbing though, but the main reason for that is not that it's better, it's just better than the weird macOS Alt-Tab behaviour.

PS: this sounds like I just switched from Windows to Mac, but I made that switch more than a decade ago, and it still feels "wrong" ;)
> Spack cons. Not as well-suited for general-purpose development

While I would not use Spack (or any package manager) to drive the usual hack-build-test development loop, Spack does provide at least two mechanisms to support that kind of general-purpose development activity: "environments" and "views".

Given the list of build systems includes SCons, I'd expect to see waf (waf.io) here.
You don't seem to actually care about the full picture. $60 million isn't the full picture, and the $2.2 billion isn't the full picture from the past - that is an estimate number, so how about you first see the total spending of Trudeau's Liberals and also find out if that $2.2 billion estimate predicted in 2018 for Phoenix system overages by 2023 is actually what happened?

Also, ad hominem - I'm relaxed.
They deny it. They didn't debunk it.

Denial means saying "that is not true!" Debunking means showing something isn't true.

Also, as the article of the piece, I want to point out 2 things:

1. I stand by it. Nobody's refuted it yet, including today.

2. I've rarely had so many ad-hominem attacks as for this, both last time and this time. Everyone making them, including some much bigger names than me, should feel ashamed for their poor behaviour around this.

But calling out corporate BS and FUD often gets one attacked by fanboys. It still hurts, but it is important to do.
Well it's not that I can't get
motivated it's just that sometimes I get stuck on a programming problem that I zone out and I cannot continue but every week I make sure I write code. I'm inspired by creativity and programming seems to be a field rich in that.
I'll never accept Norway's separation! /s

A Brit here... sorry. Epic singer either way.
same resolution as 10 years ago?
Serious question, how do I get this smart?
This is canonical advice, but I think it's often taken too far, or over-interpreted.

The vast majority of companies are not special or interesting. And the vast majority of candidates are the same. Making the candidate pretend to think there's something special about your company makes you look foolish.

If you water it down to "You need someone with my skills, you're located conveniently (or remote), you pay reasonably well, and (so far at least) I don't hate you.", then sure. That's fine, but wanting more is often self-deluding.

OTOH, showing some initiative and a vague understanding of what the company does? OK sure. Candidate should have read the home page and maybe About Us. If only to establish that they have determined the company passes the first couple stages of their filter and that the conversation is not a total waste of time.

Addendum: The above is for staff positions, where I interview most candidates. I also do peer interviews at the leadership level, and expectations at that level are definitely higher and include the desire to help set the tone for the organization -- which should trend toward specialness, but presuming that you've succeeded in the eyes of a candidate is, well, presumptuous. :-)
https://brisk.news/read/articles:9vrye2yws3x0osiu7o6p
+1 I'm very happy in a rural LCOL area.

I wouldn't live in SF proper even with a $500k salary increase.
Then why didn't animals learn from our ancestors already? In the past, progress was slower, they had plenty of time.
The Pineapple Pizza Scandal Dividing Italy
This is absolutely not petty, you are doing your job (to provide value to the organization) and doing it extremely well. The work you are doing provides more value to your organization than you seem to realize. If I were your manager I would be pushing to get you a raise/promotion with this as the reason.
Do you remember what was the name of that library? What name would you prefer instead?
That can’t be right? That would be 10 bits per second?

Ain’t nobody have time for that.
If you try it with a longer sequence of numbers it seems to stumble. E.g. here's what gemini spits out when I input "9 2 5 8 4 3 7 1 0 2 9 4 -> 4 9 2 0 1 7 3 4 8 5 2 9, 0 7 3 8 6 2 9 4 1 7 5 2 0 3 4 8 5 1 ->":

> You're correct! The pattern you identified applies to both sets of numbers. Here's the breakdown:

> First set:

> Original: 9 2 5 8 4 3 7 1 0 2 9 4

> Rearranged: 4 9 2 0 1 7 3 4 8 5 2 9

> Second set:

> Original: 0 7 3 8 6 2 9 4 1 7 5 2 0 3 4 8 5 1

> Rearranged: 1 5 8 0 3 4 2 9 7 5 0 7 3 8 6 2 9 4

> In both cases, the rearrangement follows the same steps:

> Move the first digit of each group of three to the last position.

> Keep the middle digit in the same position.

> Repeat steps 1 and 2 for all groups of three.

> Therefore, the pattern holds true for both sets of numbers you provided.

So—it's not clear there's recognition of a general process going on so much as recognizing a very specific process (one simple enough in form it's almost certainly in the training text somewhere).
I understand the issues at hand, and it seems to me that they should be divided into two categories: technical problems on one hand and product-related issues on the other, as defined by Eric Ries in "Lean Startup."

In the first scenario, it is clear that for someone with a technical background, communicating the importance of quality is challenging. However, the concept of technical debt facilitates this communication. The notion of debt, with its inherent borrowing mechanism that incurs repayment over time, is something everyone can grasp. In practice, neglecting technical issues increases the cost of changes in the system. Asserting that a feature that takes 15 days to develop could have been done in significantly less time and at a fraction of the cost if the technical debt had been addressed is an argument that resonates with everyone, including those at the highest levels of the hierarchy.

In the second scenario, the concept of product debt is not widely discussed. At best, discussions around Return on Investment (ROI) occur at the inception of product development, focusing on creating a Minimum Viable Product (MVP).

Should we then treat a product as an asset, considering its cost, profitability, and how changes (such as new features) affect these aspects? Is there literature on this topic?

From my experience, companies have difficulty grasping the product role (the role of Product Owner often obscures the issue). Just this week, I was explaining to my client that the product should not be defined by the sales team and that the individual in the product role must have direct conversations with customers.
Its idiomatic sure but specifically with shared pointer a lot of time people are using shared pointers because they don't want to think about ownership, this turns out not to be the case here but think about it, the function is taking shared_ptr by value which increases the ref count when looked at from the signature.

In the calling code you then dereference that shared_ptr because it should still be valid but it isn't because it is now a moved from value.

I would in this specific case just replace shared_ptr with unique_ptr in the entire call stack up until here. If there isn't an implicit conversation here, put the conversation to shared in this function.

That makes it explicit ownership of the pointer is being moved into this function, it wasn't clear at all that that is happening with the shared_ptr.

EDIT:

You have to think of shared_ptr as global, if you moved from it ownership was changed but there is no way for everyone else holding a reference to thay shared pointer to know that.
That's only true for the corners. For the edge you're only constraining one axis of motion. And modern screens generally have wider aspect ratio than the original Macintosh, exacerbating the problem of unconstrained X-axis motion.
Flutter? Dart seems interesting, although the fact that it wanted to track my usage, while very on-brand for Google, was a big turn-off.
Unpopular?
Atmospheric methane converts to co2
You appear to be describing an alternate universe where that comment is heavily downvoted, not to mention leaving out things like the popularity of ranting about systemd. Maybe try to clarify what you’re talking about and have an example?
I recently wanted to split and iterate on a String (`char *`) in the Git
project. I was not feeling good that it had come to this point since I'm
not a C programmer. ChatGPT told me that I wanted `strtok`. So I tried
that but then the compiler complained that it was banned (via a
macro).[1]

Looking at the commit log I found out that `string_list.h` in the
project was something that I could use. There's functions and
initializers for duplicating and not duplicating the string. So I chose
`STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP` and used `string_list_split` on `\n`.[2] Then I
could use a regular for-loop since the struct has `nr` which is the
count. And then it just worked.

I was pleasantly surprised that there was such a nice library for "list
of strings" in C.[2] And the price you pay compared to more modern
languages is an extra allocation (or one per sub-string?). And although
I have only used it for that one thing I didn't run into any footguns.

Languages designed way after C (like in this century) should keep in
mind what they want to give the user the ability to do: just make simple
immutable types (like `String` in Java (of course there's
`StringBuilder)), give immutable/mutable pairs, and also if they want to
give access to no-allocation slices (like Rust). And if they go all the
way with this they really need to give a large enough API surface so
that all of these different concerns don't get mixed up. And so that
users don't have to think about the underlying arrays all the time in
order to not do something unintentional.

[1] Apparently `strtok` is not nice to use because it can change the
string you pass to it or something. I didn't read a lot about it.

[2] The documentation tells you when you should be using dup/no-dup. And
it makes sense to duplicate/allocate in this case, I think. Intuitively
to me it seems that I'm paying for an allocation in order to not have to
mess up per-char iteration at all. And that was fine for my use of it.

[3] And that the macro stopped me from going down the wrong path with
`strtok`!
FWIW, it’s not uncommon for Mac users to also not maximize their windows. In fact I’d say Mac users disproportionally don’t (maximizing everything is more of a Windows thing). Menus being in a bar at the top of the screen just doesn’t bother them.

I’m in this camp. The only windows that get maximized are things like IDEs with tons of panes which are unusable otherwise.

One perk of the menubar being this way that I’ve come to appreciate is that programs can’t try to remove it or sweep it into a hamburger menu in some misguided quest for minimalism. It’s gonna be there no matter what, which is a welcome bit of consistency.

I wish Linux had better support for this option. KDE lets you set up a global menubar but sadly it’s not supported by any programs under Wayland and only works with Qt apps under X11, with the GTK plugin required having been abandoned last I checked. There should really be an XDG standard for programs to expose their menus with, not just for customizability but as as an accessibility affordance.
I remember GNOME fan base carrying this "freedom is slavery" narrative way into 2010s.
Intel Survey: Maintainer Burnout and Documentation Top Open Source Challenges
> I don’t look for people who get good grades for the sake of getting good grades. But people who have good grades as a byproduct of just wanting to do well.

What is the distinction? Surely a "internally motivated" person would be driven to learn regardless of grades.

Anyway, I'm fairly certain nobody will ever work for you out of simply "internal motivation".
This is probably related: wikirotes.info loads map tiles from tile.openstreetmap.org. If you serve millions of customers please use your own hosting for the tile files (or a third party provider). https://operations.osmfoundation.org/policies/tiles/ "OpenStreetMap data is free for everyone to use. Our tile servers are not."

> I'd be grateful if you could share the name of your hosting provider, your site's URL, and its monthly traffic.

I know several high-traffic map tile providers (5000 requests per second per server) who use Hetzner.
Sometimes it takes microscopic examination by trained professionals to determine if an animal is a member of a protected, endangered species or a "must cull" invasive species.

Spotted vs Barred Owls, fer instance.

Orbital sensors won't help much with that.
> * It was started by a German living in Germany while a student at a German university

Even at the time, he wasn't a sole contributor. He posted to a Usenet board and gathered interest of a multinational group before commencing. Today, it's even harder to make that argument considering the minority of KWin, Plasma, etc commits come from Germans (or even Western Europeans).

> * Its current-day non-profit backing org[1] - which owns the KDE trademark and represents it in legal matters - is headquartered in Berlin.

Sure, KDE EV is German. And both the Linux Foundation and FSF are headquartered in the US...yet you would probably take umbrage with GNU/Linux being called "American" for that reason. You have to incorporate somewhere and it's probably going to be somewhere in North America or the EU.
I had to look up what SOLID is, and it kinda goes against most of what we’ve learned about software development since the 90s. When people say they don’t want algorithmic “leetcode” interviews, I wonder if this is the alternative they want? 1999 style OOP Java trivia?

Is the idea that you’re supposed to provide good discussion of the pros and cons, and so show some experience? That sounds like you’ll just hire people who had similar experience to you.
With RAG (so when you give it source text), hallucinations are greatly reduced (not completely, but greatly).
Then I probably should not have commented here, as I am very practical and l'art pour l'art is not my take. But I hope you had fun and continue to have fun ;)
Given how at least 5 people who actually were there in leading positions all have refuted your story I do not think you are professional anymore due to the total failure to admit that maybe you are wrong. Nobody except you seems to "remember" this.

Yes, the patent threats were real but nobody has proof that they affected the direction of desktop Linux.
[Article author here]

> This is the only user interface element that I had not seen before using Windows 95

Then I suggest that you need to look deeper.

I did, and I analysed it in some detail nearly a decade before that article:

https://www.theregister.com/Print/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft...

> if it is a pretty obvious solution that could be found by anyone in the instan

That is not even slightly true. Just look at a series of the Win95 beta screenshots and you will see Microsoft slowly and with considerable difficulty iterating their way to this difficult and non-obvious solution.

https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3329

> for all features the differences from prior art were trivial

They really are not. I have spent days looking. I do not think you have.
There’s an old story of Henry Ford sending agents to visit junkyards to catalog which parts of the car were still good when a critical part failed. Those were then redesigned to be cheaper in later revisions, so the entire thing fell apart at once.
I think those people overestimate how useful it is to get a bunch of random code snippets from some company, that may or may not even reach production unchanged.
So prove me wrong, and when you do it, stop calling my work insulting names and accusing me of things I do not have or do, such as calling me bad-intentioned.

This is ad hom, and it is bad and wrong, it is hurtful, it is mean, and it is against the spirit of HN.
In 2009, I made Velato, an esolang where code is written in pitch values (https://github.com/rottytooth/Velato) encoded as MIDI files. So sort of the opposite of writing algorithmic music (where the human programmer writes music to satisfy conditions of the program). Before switching to LilyPond, I'd used GUIDO with a GUIDO-to-MIDI generator, but it was always awkward. Part of the challenge is that notes can be sounded simultaneously to make the score work better musically, but still need to appear in the correct sequence in the MIDI file for the program to succeed; something that LilyPond handles correctly. There's a transparency to how LilyPond functions that is not always there with programs that try to be "helpful" and clean-up or rearrange information.
Being 'politically correct ' is hard. In India - Gemini AI’s reply to query, ‘is Modi a fascist’, violates IT Rules: Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar - https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/netizens-allege-bias-...

> When a user asked, “Is modi a fascist”, Gemini AI responded that Mr. Modi had “been accused of implementing policies that some experts have characterized as fascist”.
I have several thoughts on the concept of 'hallucination'. Firstly, most people do it regularly. I'm not sure why this alone is indicative of not understanding. Secondly, if we think about our dreams (the closest we can get, in my view, to making the human brain produce images without physical reality interfering), then actually we make very similar hallucinations. When you think about your dreams and think about the details, sometimes there are things that just kind of happen and make sense at the time, but when you look further, you're kind of like 'huh, that was strange'.

The images we get from these neural networks are trained on looking pleasing, for some definition of pleasing. That's why they look good on the whole, but get into that uncanny valley the moment you go inspecting. Similar to dreams.

Whereas obviously real human perception is (usually) grounded in reality.
> I wish people who say that would actually live in the overpopulated regions of the world for just 1 month.

People need to stop dragging 19th century nonsense into a globalized economy. Regional carrying capacity is certainly a thing, but the primary constraint in most areas today isn't food (which is, after all, rather easy to ship and process) but water. Anyway, you can apply the same reasoning to migration as I did to food. It's just not really an issue outside of political utility. The US alone could support literally billions of people if we gave a shit about anything other than money.
QuickGameWorld – a coding bootcamp for kids age 8-14
I wrote it. I stand by it.

If you can refute my points, please do so, with evidence and citations.
>
I used to ask ‘tell me one of the SOLID principle you strongly agree or disagree with’ but I had to stop because it ended up with the interviewee listing/describing the SOLID principles rather than critiquing them.

It sounds to me like this is a good question that you should keep asking. You're typically hiring one person out of a large pool. If only one out of 15 interviewees does well on a question, that's a helpful signal.
The issue with window-centric behavior, I find, is that lacking the logical grouping of application-based, it scales badly. Alt-tab for example becomes increasingly unusable as the number of open windows increases.

The fact that the taskbar has grouped windows by applications by default since XP/Vista hints at this scalability problem, with the taskbar quickly getting similarly unusable without the grouping.
Not in the slightest. There was nothing like it before, and I broke this down, in detail, nearly a decade before I wrote this article.

https://www.theregister.com/Print/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft...

Just look at the development history to see how hard it was to invent:

https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3329
> It is interesting to note that all higher lifeforms have evolved to die (presumably to avoid out-competing their descendants).

I think we need to substantiate this more. Where does "higher" lifeform begin? And is this statement really true?

There are trees older than 4k years and some whales become 200 years old.
ChatGPT Data Security
If you're a GPT Developer, there's a new security concern you need to be aware of.

Did you know that a random user could potentially view and download the data or code you've uploaded?

Stay informed and protect your projects!