skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personally, I just want better integration between my smart home devices and for their protocols to be open. I wish I could easily script behavior, and something like running HomeAssistant or Homebridge as a compatibility layer shouldn't be necessary. Right now, each platform essentially creates vendor lock-in. You need to stick with one platform or your devices are pretty much useless. This could end up being better with the adoption of Matter and Thread over Matter, but I'm already seeing issues. The article even mentions that manufacturers are even being slow to adopt Matter and that Amazon is removing standards for remote control like ADB.

If I make an announcement using Alexa with an Echo speaker, I want my Google Home speakers/hubs and other devices to also get the announcement. If someone rings my Nest Doorbell, I want to be able to access the video feed on my LG TV or Echo Hub. If I have some form of sensor that I want to use from a manufacturer, I shouldn't need their hub to talk to it. Whatever I'm using as my control system or hub should already be compatible, but even with Matter-supported sensors/devices, these are all still issues.
that is necessary, but not sufficient, for the program to be correct, aka “reliable“.
People with fake identities because they're working as a spy have real bank accounts. But more importantly, cheque-cashing places give a god-awful return but would still look more legitimate then just not ever cashing anything.

In short: the details of this story make no sense for the implied narrative (spy). They make a lot of sense for "not mentally well person" or "guy who suddenly had to disappear for other reasons". Combined with just "regular software developer things".

For example - I've cloned the entire git repository server of every place I've ever worked at. I have a script which does it for Github and Gitlab, because usually when you're exploring a codebase you wind up needing just "every repo" and it's easier to dump it all in a folder on my work machine ahead of time. I've run "find" on a network share because have you ever tried to figure out where a particular word document might be after looking through 10+ years of random SMB share naming systems and empty folders?

Read the stories of long-term agents from the Cold War - for both sides, but Russians in America is easier to find the stories of. Spies don't act secretive, spies blend by acting normal. They're an unremarkable next door neighbor who never draws any attention and works a respectable job. They're polite to their neighbors but keep to themselves, they do things on time and promptly, they have identities that check out and do normal things like "get paid from a regular job".

Whereas people absolutely can and do simply ghost jobs all the time. Like a simple explanation here for this guy would be "was actually an illegal immigrant and someone told him that going from contractor to full time employee might be too much exposure, got spooked and bailed". Probably was just an actual software developer. And if you here "illegal immigrant" and think "Mexican" you're also wrong - plenty of people overstay or exceed the bounds of their visas in the US.

P.S. "contributed a large number of commits to the project he was assigned to" - you know, as would be expected when you're hired to work on something? What was in those commits? Why is it omitted from the story?
i'd lean more to: most management does not understand how building software works
It’s even easier to do it the way described. The banks are printing and mailing and processing the checks, which they can do with high efficiency. From the payor’s pov, it’s easier not to worry about tracking account numbers and just using the address which they already know.

And the payee doesn’t need to share their bank info.
The problem is that all business incentives are based on short-term outcomes. Sometimes there is a culture of being deliberate about tech-debt but that culture eventually gets eroded by the MBA/bean counters, poor hiring, or scaling too fast. The end result is you end up pouring ever increasing amounts into engineering for smaller and smaller deltas of change. Eventually to the point it can become 'terminal' where you literally cannot change the system in one place without breaking it in another. At that point you just sell the company if you can to some PE firm that will load it up with debt, loot it, and dump the corpse to decompose in the nearest body of water.
Nor citizens of many other countries; passports are mainly for out-of-country travel purposes.
Maybe I'm a bit to naive since I don't know the US banking system, but at least in the EU you just need to tell someone your IBAN and Name and they can transfer money to your account. Is it that much harder in the US?
> many developers, me included, aren’t always the best at communicating the value investing in scoped improvements projects brings to the business

While that is true, I don’t think it could be a communication-from-developers problem. Tech debt impairs development speed and causes small irritations in the every-day use of the product.

In my experience, what works is extreme ownership. Someone with agency has to care.
Most of the details are out there but …

> in that he had apparently downloaded a copy of everything

… is a day in the office? I've done this, particularly at places that are "one repo == one project" organized (i.e., not monorepo): e.g., if I make a breaking change to a library, I'm going to update all the uses of that. Still to this day, the easiest way to do that is locally, with command line tooling.
Now that we know IFUNC can me misused like this, it would be pretty silly if we allow other, future exploits to use the same trick.
Tamara Broderick: 6.036 Introduction to Machine Learning, Fall 2020
Damn government, making things better for everyday people. How can honest corporations abuse their captive audiences when the government keeps restricting their abilities?
I do not believe that (although I could see how you would read it like that). I meant your insinuation that the well documented Zionist false flag was the equivalent of 9/11 conspiracy theories, but you admit that Israel did do the false flag.
This change was necessary and long overdue. Requiring domain owners who send significant volumes of email to properly sign their messages allows receivers to more clearly delineate good from bad based on domain reputation rather than IP address reputation.

As more domains send email through shared IP space on transactional and marketing services, having the ability to attach reputation reliably to the sender domain is incredibly helpful in reducing abuse.
Oh! That makes sense, thank you. https://www.marktechpost.com/2024/03/31/mistral-ai-releases-...
> VPNs, datacenters and Tor are pretty much blocked and API costs money

There are services which provide a service so that your bot can still scrape from sites like reddit which try to block bots.
My personal VM has just been placed in some RBL because the entire /24 address space was blacklisted.

Someone (allegedly) sent SPAM and now my machine that sends maybe 3 emails a week is blacklisted
The other week I saved my company a grand a year by reusing an existing service for some contractors rather than some new cloud service. Then promptly expensed a big chunk of that for repairs on my office chair :)
> Yes, in fact currently I am working in a team which has a disproportionate percentage of Iranians. They too like to hire Iranians. I wouldn’t have any problem with any of this if eg it was OK for Americans to prefer Americans too.

In the US, it is no more OK, legally, to discriminate in hiring on the basis of nationality for any nationality compared to any other.
I think the previous comment discusses events in a general sense.

Frameworks batch changes so that updates are efficient, and in many cases figures out the "correct" order of doing things. If you do all of those yourself in a large and complex UI, very likely you are updating the DOM less efficiently than what frameworks are doing, and very likely you introduced some subtle bugs. Speaking of that from my first-hand experience.
I think you're underestimating the popularity of that kind of content, if reality TV is anything to go by.

And personally, I think I may have seen a pimple popping video...once? And I just hit the "not interested in this" button and have never seen one again. Though, I've always made sure to keep my watch history tidy, so the vast majority of recommendations I see are spot-on
I'm in the same boat as you, and feel equally strongly about it, despite being in a bit of a relapse period at the moment.

"The medium is the message" never stops being relevant. The 'content' of social media is just the 'reward' mechanism for your engagement.

This is the fourth (?) time on HN I've recommended "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman. If you're a reader, I think you might enjoy it. It is both descriptive of its time in the age of Television, and incredibly prescient. It has aged flawlessly, you can draw a straight line from it to our modern, socially mediated world.
Look, nobody is going to perform as well on complicated programming talks using cobol as with python. But knowing everything you said, I was amazed at how good it was. Try it.

Also, nobody needs to do complicated coffee talks with cobol, it wasn't meant for it. What we do need a lot of is translating cobol to python or Java.
> but an email without SPF/DKIM, good luck having it hit any inbox

And that's a decent thing.

Someone that doesn't do that has no business sending email.

The problem is that even doing that and even sending only a couple of emails a day is still usually considered SPAM.
> I suppose "try to get users to be less mean, by doing our part by being less mean individually" is arguably one piece of strenghtening defenses to this kind of attack, I guess, ok.

Yes, by denying cover traffic.
The biggest problem with the term "technical debt" is that it's thrown about by too many people for too many reasons. Mostly well meaning reasons, but often highly personalized and with literally no intrinsic value or thought attached. More often than not it's used to express a personal preference, rather than a guiding principle.

I've seldom seen it used positively, to a point I don't actually believe it has any benefit as a term and given that I don't think it actually exists.

It's not an actionable term. Talk about and make cases for system performance, operability, functionality, security, cost, support knowledge and similar and you'll have much easier value based conversations that have a chance of having continued buy in long term from your organisation.
You can create a forged chipped passport, just have the chip not work. Won't work at the border, but would be fine everywhere else you show a passport. I've never had anyone (bars, hotels etc) read a chip.
This article is totally out to lunch. Ignoring the myriad of obvious problems with a wealth time limit (and the obvious problems with current copyright law), lets just look at the worldview underlying that. They claim the world's wealthy suck up the wealth of everyone else by causing lower wages, high house prices and a lack of jobs in certain areas. Then, instead of going into the mechanism of how that might happen they just decide the solution is copying the broken copyright regime and applying it to wealth.

This is lazy and/or stupid. The mechanism that allows the wealthy to do the subset of the claims that are plausible (as opposed to out to lunch) is market power. They own or control companies that can abuse market power to extract rents. The solution therefore, isn't some screwed up extra beaurocracy to add a broken copyright regime to wealth. The solution is break up the market power abusing companies! Bring antitrust back to near pre rehnquist supreme court levels and start breaking up the amazons, microsofts, exxons, bayers, facebooks, conde nasts, etc of the world.
There's some online tools out there, and an OSS project that'll scan DKIM reports for you - but this was all I could find. Beyond this, there's commercial tooling / services. I may implement something that keeps a tab on things if I come across any issues.
Most importantly: OP is right re: vanilla example is most legible. Reading the proposal, I have no idea what this "Signal" word adds other than complexity.

Less important: I really, really, really, really, am reluctant to consider that is something that needs standardizing.

Disclaimer: I don't have 100% context if this concept is _really_ the same across all these frameworks.

But frankly, I doubt it, if it was that similar, why are there at least a dozen frameworks with their own version?*

Also, I've lived through React, Redux, effects, and so on becoming Fundamentally Necessary, until they're not. Usually when it actually is fundamental you can smell it outside of JS as well. (ex. promises <=> futures). I've seen 1000 Rx frameworks come into style and go out of style, from JS to Objective-C to Kotlin to Dart. Let them live vibrant lives, don't tie them to the browser.

* I know that's begging the question, put more complex: if they are that similar and that set in stone that its at a good point to codify, why are there enough differences between them to enable a dozen different frameworks that are actively used?
Thanks for the kind words!

On 1. — this is definitely the most common piece of feedback so far, so we'll certainly look into it.

On 2. — the battles rules are the most complex part of the game, since they have evolved through the play testing and battle analogies. Our intuition has been that an invalid attacker "sabotages" the battle, and makes the whole attack fail (i.e. an ineffective army rushing a position will often lose in its entirety). And a short-but-valid word is a competent soldier who just isn't strong enough to win on their own :) Possibly something for us to explain more in one of the tutorial/lore/explanation areas.

On 3. — defenders aren't even evaluated if the attacker fails, so the attacking invalid word is removed.

Thanks again, great feedback :)
What does "for later use" mean?

One thing I've noticed recently is that pretty much no language has a good way to simultaneously define a nested structure and assign that structure a name "for later reuse".

For example -- suppose I'm dealing with some serialized data structure that come from some external system. Very likely the data model behind this value involves "nested values" which have themselves have some type of which might be reused in multiple places by that external system.

When the goal is to just solve problems -- the approach i like to take is to focus on the values i want to consume and produce -- which might themselves contain lots of nested types each with some amount of reuse ...

I'd really like a language feature that supports simultaneously defining a type where it's relevant within some other data structure _and also allows_ giving that embedded thing a name for independent reuse ...

I wonder if this postfix $ syntax is related to that use case at all ...

(... this comment a speculation based on names of things only without even reading the whole article ...)
It's not just anecdotes. Many planes were parked for 2 years and suffered unexpected issues as they were rushed back into service with minimal oversight, after many experienced personnel retired. This isn't even addressing the Boeing whistleblower who mysteriously "committed suicide" after telling his family that he wouldn't, or the spectacular accidents lately with wheels and doors literally falling off of aircraft.

You can google all the stats you want but in the current environment I don't trust any recent stats. They are at best cherry-picked, like making dubious claims about "deaths in 2023" vs. serious accidents which indicate systemic problems.
Sounds like our projects have a lot in common. I had my boards made in China but the yield was also not great (~80%). I had to repair a lot of them after they arrived, but from what I learned I think I could get close to a 100% yield if I do another run.

The sun sure is pervasive! My early enclosures were 3D printed too and had the same problem.

I've had the same thoughts about AI many times while making this camera... making anything today that doesn't involve AI feels a little crazy.
Yeah. No.1 PIA is a thin scrollbar on Serious Sam Mental difficulty.
I suppose it is often a combination of company culture, local culture and KPIs and then a bunch of smaller things.

I'm not up to speed on the latest and greatest research, but last time I went into that rabbit hole it boiled down to hiding problems or moving them around so the KPIs look good (be it KPIs in the company, or in the case of publicly traded companies, the 'virtual' KPIs of news and press releases), and the degree to which hierarchy forces everything down.

That directionality gets exponentially worse when you have a local culture of strong hierarchy, and a company culture of making leadership look good (or honour culture?). I've only seen that personally from a slight distance where it really looks like a kind of dictatorship where management comes up with an idea, and the subordinates have to make due with it, and only positive results may be shared or they get fired. The ideas are usually bad or really hard to execute so you see people use all available resources to present 'success' with not much left for the actual thing that needed doing.
If you walk into a job and cut their cost by 25 percent are you a hero or a snitch.

Candidly everyone in your leadership between you and the CFO/CEO is going to think you just made them look bad.

And you did.

It is easier to keep a bad decision hidden than it is to admit you fucked up, or worse that you burned a pile of money.
It's not a timing difference, one ECU controls the left engine and takes input from left weight-on-wheels sensor, the other controls the right engine and takes input from the right sensor. This is by design, it ensures redundant operation. It was just unfortunate timing that wheels on one side were up in the air while others were on the ground when go around was issued.

> the video even emphasises that it is not banned in Europe

No, what's strictly not demanded by EASA is that the manufacturers enable safe application of go-around thrust even if reversers have been deployed. Airbus implemented this nevertheless, but that was only tested with both wheels on the ground.
TIL about `git log -S` (and `git log -G`) from this article (list commits that increased or decreased the number of times a given identifier is found in the source code). Looking forward to needing to use it, that's a nice trick
You're right. This should be in my will.
Promises are, technically speaking, "abstracted crap".

So is abstracted crap only ok if it's already in the JS standard library?
Not from the US I guess?

They are still ubiquitous today, let alone in the early 2000s.
Surely a check takes longer, right? "Printing, mailing and processing" doesn't quite scream efficiency to me.
the JR pass is almost never a good deal. you need to do a significant amount of travel over a significant distance in a short amount of time and is a very inconvenient way to travel compared to just using an IC card plus adhoc shinkansen tickets.
I have no idea what you're talking about, sorry.
Ha, true.

They actually did have a way to invert the whole UI... but it also inverted photo images on the screen. poundAppleAttentionToDetail
At Oxide, it was there from the beginning, plus it's built into the hiring process (the application is mostly writing), so there's strong selection pressure toward people who are into it. So I'm sure it's tough without those things.
Value accounting?

Like cost per user for infra? operating cost per hour, by hour? like that...

You need an accountant embedded in your department to just watch and track spend and map it to something. Preferably they are in tech and told to hold product teams feet to the fire.
Another good fix is legacy companies getting replaced by newer, more nimble companies.

It's good for the economy for new startups to tackle old problems in new and novel ways, throwing out decades of legacy cruft and ossification.

It also puts more comp into the hands of the founders and frontier employees that pave the way rather than funneling it to institutional shareholders of an old business - pension funds, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf

Regarding the kidnapping scenario, my family isn't stupid enough to send money to anyone that sounds like me. Impersonating the gov't and sending letters would be a much better strategy since it's much harder to verify an organization's identity. Btw voice cloning is fairly mainstream and I've already used free voice cloning apps to humorous effect. Do you think people can't clone your voice today thanks to OpenAI holding back?
I agree. Moreover plenty of jobs where they measure just the time to completion. Even small code fix ups as you go will be treated like an afternoon slacking off on Reddit and punishment or firing accordingly. At most places of work.
Ambrosia salad is the forgotten holiday dish that deserves our attention
At least in Canada, the numbers provided for direct deposit are the same numbers used for direct/pre-authorized debit (i.e. withdrawals). So, while your employer likely wouldn’t abuse that information? People may be wary of giving out those numbers unless absolutely necessary, since someone could indeed drain their bank account. They’re also the same numbers that appear on cheques, so someone could easily forge a cheque in your name with those numbers.
I violently agree with this comment, but don’t believe the will exists to put people in a position of power or leadership in today’s corporations to set this culture at the top (which is needed to attract, retain, and cultivate talent who grows with the org and cares about their work and its contribution to the org’s success). Short term thinking will reign until forced out at great cost (Boeing, for example).

Great reference by the way.
Your own references make my point.
294.5 cts in the end.
LLM quality drops aren't disillusionment either - it's scale/cost optimization. And those are subscription models - Siri/Google assistant is bundled with device/services.
Startups are engines of new tech debt.
Over 20 years here.

You’ll never get a chance to refactor code if you ask for it. The business folks and users themselves don’t care what the code looks like. They don’t care if there are 11 different micro services and a hodgepodge of pudding holding it together. They never will.

Don’t waste time trying to write a better pitch. You won’t get to halt development to essentially deliver nothing as far as they’re concerned.

Write code that is meant to be deleted. Refactor mercilessly. If code looks like crap but had sufficient tests, rewrite the code. If the tests are crap write better tests. Then rewrite the code.

Don’t ship the first thing that works on your PR/MR. Take some time to compress that code down, get rid of any cruft, and make sure it’s easily replaceable. You never know what new requirements or changes in specs will bring you back to this code in the future. Make it easy to replace (in the worst case scenario) if you needed to.

Wrap code that isn’t under test in a good API. Make the API call into the bad code. Write good tests for the API. Replace the bad code paths as you go.

Part of our job is writing maintainable, stable, and reliable code.

But if they’re deliberately asking you to cut corners, start documenting things.

There’s a time and place for “good enough,” and then there’s straight up neglect. Avoid the latter.
In America they can and do also take money out of your account, to correct errors supposedly, but sometimes also in error. I still get paid on paper to this day because to me the terms of the direct deposit agreement are overbroad.