skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is the best take I've read yet.

I don't disagree with Paul's choice to focus on entrepreneurship and getting rich here. If you're looking to excite people, tell an exciting story. Captivate imagination. No one gets pumped up (especially at that age) at the mediocre story.

What I find great about his advice is that it is by no means limited to entrepreneurship. Working on passion projects, doing well in school, and learning how to build relationships is valuable even if you're working for someone else.

There's a big space in tech jobs between the "grinding away at code/help desk" and "startup bro" that I feel doesn't get described enough. And that's one thing I'd tack on to Paul's advice, notwithstanding the need to sell the message above. That advice he espouses can also lead to being a really standout contributor at a tech firm, and probably with a higher rate of success than getting a startup to stick. One doesn't have to form a startup to contribute ideas, and there's good money to be made in that space.

I think your choice of wording above is important to call out: The advice "maximizes" the chance of success; but it doesn't guarantee it.

Overall, completely agreed. =)
I wonder how is he doing lately. Not much update from his blog https://www.joelonsoftware.com/author/joelonsoftware/
If anything, the interview that this was based on is from 2009 and was a much more interesting read for myself:

https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1594206
If you call a customer service number and the person on the other side isn’t sufficiently helpful, you can ask to escalate or close the chat and return later to get someone else.

But if it is a bot which isn’t helpful, you’re stuck and need to find another avenue of contact.

Additionally, if the service representative on the other end looks helpful but confidently gives you wrong information that you later rely on, you may not have as much recourse.
When Paul Graham is saying this is a talk he gives to 14 and 15 year olds, let's think of who those kids are exactly. There is zero chance he is giving this advice to a general audience at some arbitrary high school, much less students from even a modestly disadvantaged background. People at those places don't know or, even if they did know, wouldn't care who Paul Graham is. No, he's at the school his kids go to. The students are all in the same affluent circles as he is.

This is a pep talk for trust fund kids who can afford to mess around with start ups. It's probably lousy advice for most people outside the affluenza bubble.
Wow. This is surprising. Not even an acquihire. I’m very curious about what happened internally to lead to this.
> The article breezes past that the median retirement saving is actually $164,000, which makes sense as the median salary is ~$60,000.

Anyone who tells you that the middle class should expect a meager retirement is an ignoramus who should be ignored at all costs.

The median household income is ~75K/year. If this household started saving (from zero!) at age 35, saved 10% per year and got a 6% return for 30 years, they would have ~$600K saved for retirement by 65.

The simple truth is almost everyone can retire in reasonable comfort and with peace of mind if they follow a few simple rules:
- Avoid high-interest debt like the plague.
- Get in the habit of saving 10% as early as possible
- Have an emergency fund in cash, but don't keep more than ~3 months expenses in cash. Invest!
- Use tax-advantaged vehicles like 401K/IRA
- Invest in broad-based funds with low fees (ex: VO, VOO)
- Don't pick individual company stocks. If you must, never invest more than 5% of your portfolio. If you do, know that you're not "investing", you're gambling!
- Don't try to time the market. Dollar cost average. Buy and hold.
- When you hit 100K, meet with a financial advisor who is a fiduciary and who charges by the hour. Not a stock salesman, not a portfolio manager, an advisor. Heed their advice. Check in every 5 years.
> better code

I'm not disputing that Rust has its advantages; the issues I talk above are mostly problems with the community than the language per se. (On the other hand, we are yet to see how the "import antigravity" attitude will play out once the bits had enough time to rot - it does matter whether your ten-liner test program is only using libc because it was too much work to get a nice pretty-printing library, or whether you imported a pretty-printing library because you could, resulting in 2GB of transitive dependencies of which some have 10 users and 0 active maintainers. And then there's the supply chain security issues)

> maintenance

Surely depends on how fast-moving your field is - I have reused diagram code from late-'90s category theory papers, and recompiled more from source just to get the benefits of the pdflatex pipeline over the latex-dvips-ps2pdf one (selectable text, proper font rendering, hyperref). Repositories like arXiv also may need the ability to recompile old submissions automatically.
I think this is an odd comment considering not even a week ago you posted "I'm hoping when I hit 80( mid 30s now), I'll be able to have my brain hooked up to the matrix or something. Would be awesome to effectively "live" for 500 years with options to pilot androids every now and then."

You want your brain connected directly to, effectively, the FaceBook MetaVerse/Googleverse but are afraid of Reddit knowing enough about you to show you adverts. See also: Tom Scott, "Life, the singularity ruined by lawyers": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFe9wiDfb0E (3 minute video).
It's luck in the same way that poker is luck.
I've been using their new model for a few days and it works surprisingly well, it's also free and works in the EU.

I don't know how I feel about Microsoft's involvement here.
One line into the cli and you can have your gnu tools installed. Its no harder to manage software environments in mac than it is in linux because you can use the same tools. I use conda on mac and the linux server that does the compute. I could use docker too if i wanted.
You can fix most problems by inverting the field polarity ;)
Yeah, integration work never ends but having a few popular ones built in + api and docs goes a long way. I've honestly never seen anyone in mid/big companies consider Zapier, but it's been a few years since I was in that space, so could have changed. Getting into those bigger companies, you're basically going to need everything, or hope for a small team within the company to like your CRM.

Those small teams/companies basically want a simple Hubspot, not salesforce, but a lot of times, they don't really know the difference. Something that can take Apollo leads, build some "simple" email campaigns [1], some landing pages [2], track one-off emails and report on all that for cheaper than the $25k/yr or whatever hubspot charges would be a great tool. I know, not exactly a CRM, but people call it that.

I don't think it matters if you integrate other providers or build it in, but having an easy setup where users don't have to go sign up, manage and integrate with a bunch of other services could help you get the small/startup space.

[1] Lots of things to deal with if you're taking on the email sending & tracking part, automated clicks, safari privacy, etc.
[2] This is a can of worms, but being able to build simple landing pages for people to click on from an email is pretty important.
Nah, that's the UK.
"Why didn't you finish high school?" is a fine question. Expecting someone to be "equivalent to the top 5% of your peers at 16" is not, and neither is banging on about it for someone with over a decade of experience. No one reasonable does that because, again, what you were at 16 says very little about who you are at 36.

And no one has ever asked me my high school certificate in the EU, for any job, including software dev.
These three "levels" are the minimum that would work in the Web PKI and thus usual (for public services).

The reasoning goes like this. Roots represent entities you trust (or in most cases, which are trusted on your behalf by some entity that's thought about what constitutes trustworthiness e.g. your browser vendor, OS vendor, or maybe your workplace). Accordingly the root "certificates" aren't really certifying anything, the X.509 certificate format is a convenient structure to put this data in, but unlike most certificates they don't represent a certification of anything by anybody, in human terms these documents tend to say e.g. "We, ISRG claim that we are ISRG and we're a Certificate Authority and we're signing this document to say so". OK, but anybody could make such a self-signed document, there's no way to "authenticate" them, you must have decided to trust some of these claims (or as I said, your vendor probably did for you)

The private key corresponding to a root is therefore very precious, billions of people trust signatures made with this key so it's a huge deal if it's stolen/ compromised. As a result we require that these keys aren't online, they're typically manifested as a small physical object (a "hardware security module") locked in a safe, the idea is that the key itself cannot easily leave the object, so by locking it in a safe we've protected the key.

But since these roots can't be online, we can't make certificate with them online, so a simple system of the sort you might build at work, with a CA root that directly issues certificates, isn't possible. This is where the Intermediates come in.

A ceremony is conducted, with third party auditors and senior personnel from the CA to watch as the Root is used to sign one or (as here for ISRG) a handful of Intermediate certificates. These documents can usefully be verified because they were signed with the Root's keys, if we trust a Root we can check that indeed it has signed this Intermediate. The CA is also required to have a technology so that it can (in a reasonable amount of time) revoke an intermediate if for example it was compromised or stolen.

Unlike a root, the Intermediates can then be kept online (at ISRG only some are used this way, others are just backups against the unexpected) and used to sign End Entity (what you've called Server) certificates in real time shortly after they are ordered, once the appropriate checks have been carried out. HSMs are used again, but in this case they're attached to a server where the issuance software is running rather than locked in a safe.

This post is about ISRG using new Intermediates.
I feel like adding an argument to the decorator that labels the "version" of the function would make deliberate cache invalidation more straightforward for cache users.
People who can understand the IS-LM model, but won't.

Maybe one of these days I should do an easily understandable simulation web toy that people can fiddle with.
should be close to 3.12

$
norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \
&<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \
&<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1)
$
> 3. A pro-alien group uses lasers to cut up ships at the Panama canal or whatever.

So much for an accurate summary.
Northrop Grumman to Develop Concept for Lunar Railroad
Pinning the site cert (or its key) is not great because it makes it very hard to rotate your certificate or key.

And you've got to be able to do that, in case your key is disclosed or possibly disclosed.

Pinning intermediates doesn't make a lot of sense; unless you have a deep relationship with the CA, they can and do change intermediates, and may not be able to issue from the old intermediate after the change. But, I've been involved in cert pinning where we had to pin intermediates, because that's the only viable information the client API returned we could use for pinning (and really, it was pinning based on the name of the intermediate --- any system trusted Root CA could have made an intermediate specifically to bypass our pinning, but it was the best we could do on that platform; of course, this was also the platform where we ended up with a wrong pin in our final build (platform owner shut down their app signing CA), which meant some ugly workarounds).

Pinning roots makes sense, but you need to pin more than one. And roots from more than one organization. And you need a succession plan. You can't use a new root on an existing hostname until all of the deployed clients with pins that could use that hostname have become irrelevant. If your all your trusted CAs stop issuing, you're pretty screwed.

You can sometimes use an in-house root, which makes continuity easier, but not if you need to share hostnames with browsers. You can't get an entity cert signed by two issuers, so there's no way to present a cert that is trusted by browsers and also signed by your root. You can present alternate paths for the issuers of your cert (and any intermediates) and if the x.509 libraries do the right thing, any valid path is accepted; but not all libraries do the right thing, and again, that doesn't apply to the entity cert.
> I would disagree about "no frontiers"

I don't see Woit saying that there are no frontiers. I see him saying that pushing the energy scale of our experiments higher, which is a frontier, is getting harder and harder, and leads to fewer and fewer discoveries--all the LHC has really done is confirm the Higgs and show zero evidence of supersymmetry.

> The standard model is not complete

I don't see Woit saying that the Standard Model is complete. He says it's "extremely successful", which is perfectly true. He also says there are "no hints from experiment about how to improve it", which is also perfectly true. Your statements about missing pieces of the Standard Model are also perfectly true, but the question is, what experiments do we do to figure them out? The LHC is not going to help us do that. Where else do we look? That's what Woit is talking about with "no hints from experiment".
(I'm one of the cofounders of Okapi)

You're 100% right.

We're missing a bunch of stuff simply because we're early :)

Regarding custom objects and fields, I agree this is not very interesting when compared against Salesforce, but these things actually aren't common in the products we can currently compete with! These are typically low-end, self-service products designed for simplicity and don't afford their users much freedom.

In this sense, we've been able to offer some of our early customers the flexibility of a SFDC product without all the other stuff. A decent chunk of people want exactly that.

A few things on the roadmap include:

* Reporting

* Custom views

* Open API

* Built-in automations (right now we piggyback on Zapier)

All this stuff will take a long time to get right
Had to use Figma on a previous job and... yeah, there was a Hackernews story about Figma's "eng crits" and what a wonderful development tool those were, but I couldn't help but think that eng crits didn't prevent Figma from being steaming hot garbage. Clunky UI that made my (Intel) Mac's fan roar, and that was before they paywalled Dev Mode, which threw the whole team into a tizzy when it happened because corporate licensing was not prepared for that.

God I hate software.
Satellites are transported in very specialized containers that will often be purged with dry nitrogen. Then after encapsulation in the faring, conditioned air of whatever sort is pumped into the faring from rollout to launch. [Example air conditioning duct attached to a Thor-Agena](https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/39440/why-use-an-a...)
Making the __dict__ opt-in makes it a lot more user-friendly at the expense of a little verbosity. That makes sense.

These tips make sense, we often use named args in our function calls (not using them has caused so many bugs), but we don't really enforce the order. Copilot doesn't always get it right either.

By moving inspect.getsource out of the wrapper, do you mean initializing it when the module is imported? I'm curious how that improves performance.
No traction, was probably clear they didn't have a shot at growing the consumer side.
Consider a wax apple that looks and feels real. Does it matter if there's no actual fruit when you bite into it?

Low-level interactions might be inconsequential, right up until the moment you need to probe a little deeper and find the task impossible or dangerous.
use the knowledge that your plans may not succeed despite your best efforts to set expectations so that you are not emotionally devastated if this happens, and so that you are prepared in other ways as well.

take the shot, but have a back-up plan, basically.
Tape drives are a viable option. 6TB LTO-7M8 cartidge can be has for $50.

The drive is expensive, at $4k, but it’s still the perfect solution for long-term archival, because the cartridges weigh and cost damn near nothing.

Yes, there’s large upfront cost, but after that the cost per MB will slowly approach the rock bottom price of how much the cartridge costs.
Neither of those are against the bittorrent protocol itself. Lots of software like Ubuntu is legally available on bittorrent, and I've never seen anything done to restrict that.
Am surprised PG gave this talk at a UK school without mentioning an important assumption that they will need to migrate to the US in his opening paragraph.

All the examples he mentioned Google, himself and the Irish Stripe founders had to do the same for their startups.

Sadly in the UK all the current unicorn "startups" are a bit iffy: XTX (high frequency hedgefund), betfair (betting company), tripledot studios (Zynga like company).

Unfortunately mega success in startups doing soemthing innovative is non-existent in Europe and UK in particular. Mistral stands out to how exceptional it is to the rule, and the closest other one I can think of is BioNtech.

Sadly the highest expected route to fortune in the UK remains quant trading in finance. Including starting your own hedge fund.
For real estates, but not for other assets classes. Unless you tax the ownership of every asset.

That begs the question, is even more regulation really the best solution?
Learn how to manage bets. Some people have the resources to fail many times and keep going. Others do not. Knowing that a huge portion of starting a business is luck, you can better weigh your options and hopefully select different opportunities depending on your situation.

And, in the unfortunately common case, recognize when you cannot take any bets and instead focus on getting yourself to a place where you can, rather than betting everything and losing everything.
No, but there might still be basis for a lawsuit. For example, if a worker can prove that they need to be remote due to a medical condition, that might make this discrimination on that medical condition.
For anyone looking for a good way to clear their reddit history before the company goes public, Redact will let you edit your comment then delete it, preventing it from being resurrected when you delete your account. https://redact.dev/
Everyone in my office is back to working in the building. Working from home is only granted to exceptional employees for exceptional reasons. I only Know of one person still working from home and she’s five months pregnant. We may say that this is a bad thing for Dell because they’re not going to be able to attract top talent, but I think this is the direction most companies are going. Either work from the office, or you don’t work. Maybe the highflyers will still be able to demand certain things, but for 95% of us, there will come a point when we simply don’t have a choice.. Companies are like governments, they rarely back down or admit they were wrong.
It appears that Inflection AI made no sense to begin with and Pi was quite frankly a performative research demo and didn't generate enough money for the VCs to justify another fundraising round. How is Inflection AI worth $4BN?

What can Pi do that is unique over the best of cloud LLMs and the hundreds of $0 free LLMs out there?

It appears that it is a vehicle for VCs to quickly run this company to the ground for a quick exit, knowing that this company is extremely overvalued.

Probably after this acqui-hire, the value of Inflection AI is now down to its real value of $200M at most.
New Walkable City Proposal in California
Dropping an additional reason why you are incredibly incorrect: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39755278. Single player levels were very inspired (I never played MP).
My initial response is of course to agree with you. But then I reflect on how impossible it would have been for SpaceX to succeed without the support of NASA (and other agencies). NASA is a political organization consisting of its headquarters in Washington, D.C. together with 10 field centers [1]. While this unnecessary scattering and distribution of effort is itself a reflection of pork barrel spending, it has been what has been necessary to galvanize the support of constituent American representatives to approve the relatively meager NASA budget.

Similarly the Artemis program is the very compromise those ever-changing representatives and administrations can agree on, together with its cost plus method of budgeting, to keep jobs in districts and re-election coffers full. I remind myself I need to embrace that rather than be cynical about it. Democracy is hard.

I'm at a point now where I realize how essential the Artemis program is to the ongoing support for SpaceX by NASA. The program will change a LOT more based on both every success SpaceX has with Starship and any further ongoing failure of Boeing (please no!). IMO I feel we need to wish NASA, SpaceX (and Blue Origin) and yes even Boeing the very best or something even better. I am awed at the political deftness with which NASA is transitioning away from cost plus and has engaged the private sector.

[1] https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/hq/nasa-center-a...
Good observation about stack traces and abstractions.
Re. your question, the pattern itself is no different than, say, Rack middleware, so you'd see similar cost and benefits. In essence you're running one callable object after the other.

A pipeline is essentially this

steps = [
->(r) { r },
->(r) { r },
->(r) { r },
]

Wrap initial data in a common Value object

initial = Result.new(some_data)

Run the Result through the steps, in order

result = steps.reduce(initial) { |r, step| step.call(r) }

That's the pattern, really. A reduce operation.

Re. stack trace, it can add noise because you're iterating over steps instead of calling them procedurally one by one, and you may want to decorate steps (put steps inside steps) for encapsulation, caching, etc. but again no different than Rack.
happy to discuss it!
this is pretty great
Okay, but we're not talking about OpenJDK but about Java, a specification -- not an implementation like the OpenJDK JDK -- that Android has never conformed to and from which it is only growing further apart. I.e. the OpenJDK JDK is an implementation of Java; Android is not (there certainly may be some Java code that happens to behave the same way on Android, but it is not, and has never been, the case for Java code generally). The relationship between Java and Android is similar to that between Linux and Unix -- lots of intended similarities, but there shouldn't be an expectation that a new Linux feature appears in, say, AIX or vice-versa.
It's true that 1990s pirated videos where someone snuck a handheld camera into the cinema were often very low quality.

But did you know large portions of The Mandalorian were produced with the actors acting in front of an enormous, high-resolution LED screen [1] instead of building a set, or using greenscreen?

It turns out pointing a camera at a screen can actually be pretty realistic, if you know what you're doing.

And I suspect the pr agencies interested in flooding the internet with images of Politician A kicking a puppy and Politician B rescuing flood victims do, in fact, know what they're doing.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/20/how-the-mandalorian-and-il...