skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why are you in a worse position?

That depends on the changes to the library since, and how and where the library is used.

Suppose I regularly generate a CSV file, all ASCII, where all the rows are integers or fixed precision numbers. I have a ten year old CSV library that processes that file, and has worked without any problem for ten years.

I have no interest in updating the library. Updates can introduce downtime, but provide no improvement. In fact, they introduce a slight performance hit because of new features and that I don't need. There is also the risk that the updates will introduce bugs, and then I'll have to spend time diagnosing the bug, and coming up with a fix.

Now let me reverse this: suppose there are two libraries to do the same task, A and B. They don't have the same features, but for your use case, they are both easy to use and do exactly what you need.

A was first released in the 1980s and was last updated five years ago. It's still maintained and is available in most Linux distributions.

B was first released three years ago and has had 20 updates since, 18 of which included fixes for security issues that don't affect A. (The website for A is regularly updated to indicate that it has been tested and these issues do not affect t.)

Are you better off using A or B?
I don't think it's true that "changing time zones is something we already know how to do easily". At least not with the word "easily" in there. Time zones cause a lot of problems, which is why we don't change them constantly. And it would be nice to have a future in which time zones are changed even more infrequently rather than one in which they have to be changed to things like UTC-37:00 because they are specified in terms of a UTC that has become unmoored from the diurnal cycle of day and night.

But probably the main argument against getting rid of leap seconds from UTC is that we already have TAI for anyone who wants something like UTC but without the leap seconds. In fact we already have two things that are like UTC but without the leap seconds: there's TAI and there's also GPS time, offset from TAI by 19 seconds. If that's what you want, use TAI. Or use GPS. What's the points of adding a third kind of time that is just like those two but offset by yet another small constant offset?

I tend to think that there's a real use for something like UTC that stays in sync with the Earth's rotation (and thus with the diurnal cycle of day and night) and that if some coterie of bureaucrats turns UTC into another version of TAI/GPS then probably someone else will at some point have to invent another thing to replace UTC and then we'll be roughly back where we started just with extra confusing complexity.

Imagine you want to specify the date and time of an international online meeting. Today you'd probably use UTC for that. But if most of the world were more than 24 hours offset from UTC then using UTC would mean specifying the "wrong" date for the meeting. You probably wouldn't want to do that so instead you'd use whatever new thing has been invented to replace UTC, something that has leap seconds or leap minutes or leap hours (or leap days?) or some other way of staying in sync with the calendar. Leap seconds seems to me like the right granularity: they're small enough to be ignored for most everyday purposes, and frequent enough that programmers can't just pretend they don't happen.

(Sorry for the waffle ... I didn't intend to write that much. I should definitely care less about this seeing as whatever happens I'll be dead long before the shit hits the fan.)
>I have run into many people that work for companies, where vendor relationships are based on That Guy With the Really Good Coke at Burning Man

This is the cynical view, but you're right.

But why does this surprise developers? The more optimistic view is: people want to work with people they like. I want to work with people I like.

There's a trope in the tech world of the ornery IT guy that everyone tolerates because he's smart. Well, a lot of times these people aren't as smart as they think they are, and will be the first to be replaced when it's possible. Life is too short to work with these kinds of people.
This is a fantastic way to encourage churn and ensure developer job longevity.
Humans have only existed for about 300,000 years. Cows are about 10,000 years old.
OpenAI Is 'Exploring' How to Responsibly Generate AI Porn
>Most large companies aren't particularly well run.

What does it mean to be "well run" if our largest and most successful companies are not that?
Except for the executives of course. Your guaranteed 30% raises are coming in like always, as well as the ability to disappear for months on end and then show up to 1 visible meeting and then disappear again with no accountability for output or overall success of the company.
> I don't think anyone ever made a text terminal with built-in telnet and ethernet.

Maybe not, but there were terminal servers with 10 serials ports for the glass terminals and an Ethernet connector.
Some of the MBAs probably weren’t born when this specific plane was made. 737-300s stopped being built twenty four years ago.
I think the point there is vacation schedules can differ wildly from the seeming social norm depending on the occupation.

Some lines of work simply require you to be working when everyone else is on vacation.
you can find our Discord on our website : https://vortexpoker.app/
That's my understanding as well: more carbon dioxide -> more green.
This has different MBAs behind it because it’s a 30 year old airplane and the design is even older.

The first 737 Max flew in 2016 and most of them are even younger than that, so it’s we’re talking about very different management teams.
A tool like that won't replace auditing dependencies.

The total age of dependencies tell you nothing useful.
I was waiting for the article to acknowledge that Hillary was from New Zealand, but it's never mentioned.
Is that photo possibly the most unrepresentative stock photo of a working 737 aircraft that they could find that actually has a 737 in it?
If you think there are too many people, remember that you are people.
Some poor choices aren’t obvious at first without the right intuition or experience. I think these articles are attempting to describe that in other words.
> Surprisingly, we find such an objective is analogous to that of consistency models

This is why numerical methods should be part of the ML curriculum.
4. For myself, I was incompetent as a developer. Therefore I always landed in dysfunctional organizations. I was invested a lot, but in learning the wrong things.

Since I became competent (it was 2006, there were no Youtube tutorials for everything), I work with awesome people. It also means my managers at the time didn’t coach me properly (unsurprising for dysfunctional orgs). Life is much easier when you’re on top of things, and much harder when you’re unlucky. Unluckiness compounds.
L-1011
No, it would just require time zone changes, which already happen a few times a year which we already know how to deal with (the TZ db).
While I don't have a good way to articulate it, it does seem to me that the modern software development style which involves an explosion in complexity, either in terms of dependencies or infrastructure or both, in order to make developer time go a little further, and the ensuing explosion in expertise required to maintain, secure, and evolve the system... all of that does strike me as reminiscent of the rocket equation. When I find myself spending more time dealing with patching dependencies, or screws coming loose somewhere in the build system, or dealing with performance idiosyncracies of some hot new database, or the peculiarities of some middleware messaging system, or the automated tests needing maintenance, or dealing with transitioning off a now-unmaintained technology, when I find myself spending so much time doing such things that making any actual change in business logic takes orders of magnitude more effort than it should, I do very much feel like all the engineering effort is just fuel to lift fuel to lift fuel.

How to articulate that in a pithy way? I do feel that when you have a lot of technologies interacting on a project, even if they all worked well together initially, in five or ten years time the whole thing does have a very rocket equation like punishing curve for return on maintenance effort. Perhaps something like "Over time, maintenance effort approaches exponential scaling with the number of interacting technologies."

Ah! I got it. What's going on is that external dependencies are a source of chaos, as maintenance and security issues and expertise requirements flow from that project into yours. So...

"Dependencies cause multiplicative bit rot."
thanks a lot. We will add these to our idea board, definitely a lot more work to do and things to build
Absolutely! Will let you know.
Do you know what happened to Kythe/Grok? Is the project being shutdown or if there is a new team being spun up in another region?
Donald Trump's hotels and other businesses accepted more than $7.8m (£6.1m) from foreign governments during his presidency. This is not news.
I ran into this with Hetzner recently, but instead of ID, they also accepted a pre-payment of 20€ instead (will be used as credit for further purchases).
Show HN: Dialoqbase-Lite: ChatGPT Style WebUI and Side Panel Chrome Extension
I absolutely intend to expand the scope to include other designs.

I happen to be knitting a double-knitting blanket right now, my first double-knitted project, haha. I was actually thinking yesterday that it would be super neat if we could just feed it a black-and-white image and have it generate the rows. ... just haven gotten around to it.

But, yeah, if you look at the implementation, you'll see that everything is fairly generic, and the only parts specific to sophie scarfs are contained in a single file: https://github.com/alefore/knit/blob/main/scarf_pattern_fact...

That said, I expect the pattern class will need some improvements to be able to accomodate double-knitting (e.g., for visualization and such).
? If you're expecting to just copy/paste from ChatGPT without understanding what it generates, you're really doing it wrong.

Glad I'm not doing that, then. I understand what it is generating as soon as I try to run it - and get a "missing bracket" error. I've understood that what it has generated is crap. And that only good luck made that easily detectable.
That's the kind of inference that allows these claims to proliferate.

This article makes a lot of claims about I.Q. scores before and after holding breath (specifically underwater, for some reason), but there are no links to studies, no mention of who or how many people participated, etc.

This is the definition of a baseless claim.
The world doesn’t use TAI. If I’m making a train booking app and the train departs at 21:50 in Germany in the summer, it’s not departing at 21:50 TAI+2, it’s departing at 21:50 UTC+2. So you cannot avoid using UTC.

Programmers simply deal with the world as it exists. Every single country uses UTC therefore that is how time must be represented. It is easier to remove leap seconds from UTC than it is to make all countries adopt TAI at the same instant.

The concept of leap seconds can of course be preserved by defining a new time standard that isn’t called “UTC”.
Why Spotify is still fighting with Apple in Europe
Unsurprisingly, it's an old airframe (built 1994), operated by a state-owned African carrier: rarely a recipe for good maintenance. It's quite unlikely that Boeing is in any way to blame for this.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/387749
"Try to fix all the words in a sentence at once. Keep iterating until you don't think it needs fixing."
A yagi antenna is VERY directional and at these frequencies line-of-sight only.
You are aiming into the air.
I'd say it would be practically impossible to accidentally interfere with cell-phone communication.

This is a realistic counter-attack (and theoretically easy).
Definitely looks nicer and probably works better than my older attempt [1], but uses 8x more code and depends on the awesome but kinda scary Metalang9 macro toolkit. I think libsum is a good intro if you want to see how algebraic data types work underneath.

[1] https://github.com/naasking/libsum
We also have tried initially to build an SSR and get data from the server but when in the process we figured every time making an API call was slowing things down and adding up a lot of latency even if start adding complicated algorithms to the API call caching.

We think indexeddb also evolved in the recent years, but we will definitely keep an eye and keep improving with the available technologies.
These are all valid and well-known opinions, but that's my point: there is nothing even remotely close to a consensus on them (never mind that even results don't extrapolate well from one language to another), and different choices appeal to different people.

We put a lot of thought into which features we want to add to the Java platform and in what form, and also consider what other languages have done. Sometimes we choose to make different tradeoffs based on what we think are the right tradeoffs for most Java users (a tradeoff that's right for language X may be wrong for language Y [1]), and sometimes we disagree on aesthetics or technical merit. But the choices we've made have worked well for Java. We're well aware of differing opinions, but it seems that we're managing to align with the majority opinions (don't confuse "popular" with "majority"; something like Lombok is quite popular in absolute terms, but is still liked by a minority, i.e. it is less popular than not using it; Kotlin is also quite popular, but it is still more than ten times less popular than Java so does that mean we should follow its decisions?). At the adoption levels enjoyed by JS, Python, and Java, something could be hugely popular in absolute terms yet liked by a minority.

In our primary domain of serious server-side software, no other language has done better (or as well), and we and our users are happy, for the most part, with the choices we've made (except maybe for choices made very early on, but that's true for all languages). The mere fact that sometimes not everyone agrees with our choices (let's be honest, programmers rarely agree on anything) doesn't mean we should change them, especially as languages that go a different way don't seem to be doing as well. Still, different programmers will continue liking different things, and most will continue insisting that their preferences -- however popular -- are somehow "objectively" better with or without bottom-line metrics to support their beliefs.

In general, thinking about a programming language from the perspective of a programmer situated in specific circumstances can be quite different from thinking about a programming language from the perspective of the language maintainer, who needs to take into account different and often conflicting needs of many programmers situated in a variety of different circumstances. The wider the market you're targeting, the more aspects there are to consider and the closer attention needs to be paid to the distribution of programmer preferences.

[1]: E.g. the technical constraints that impact the design and performance of user-mode threads in Rust or C++ are fundamentally different from those that affect Java (re. e.g. the cost of allocating memory, and where pointers are allowed to point). The constraints around async/await in JS -- where a lot of code is already written under the assumption of no intervention -- are also very different from those in Java, where threads have existed from day one.
question for a book I'm writing: how easy would planes be to mess up in such a way no issues appear until plane takes off?
Council scraps apostrophes on street signs to avoid computer problems
It's like that old Joel Spolsky article[0] says:

> you only have to get one supergenius to write the hard code to run map and reduce on a global massively parallel array of computers, and all the old code that used to work fine when you just ran a loop still works only it’s a zillion times faster which means it can be used to tackle huge problems in an instant

If you can replace the thing that people use with a distributed version, then that can make it easy to write distributed code.

[0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/08/01/can-your-programmi...
What exactly is "juiced up" about "Boeing 737 crashes during take-off in Senegal"? I'd be hard put to craft a more neutral/factual/boring summary of what just happened.

Update: Apparently "crash" is misleading here since the plane was never airborne, it aborted takeoff but veered off the runway and likely hit something since the wing caught fire.
> some say AI will make war more humane

Really? Who said that? The sources cited don't actually say that.
Yep. My roommate and I were talking about this a year ago. You can also do something similar for LLM steering.
I see the overall point as not seeing every dependencies as things that need upgrade.

Any library that is effectively a dataset could fall into this as well: if you want to freeze your environment at a specific reference point and only update the actual moving parts, the libyear measurement won't be for you.

This reminds me of interface softwares that keep old version of some libraries to emulate the original behavior, butnin a controlled and isolated way.
Why always US only, so non US citizens are just screwed right ?
> It’s also constrained by how many examples it’s seen of a particular language

ChatGPT: "I've encountered numerous examples of Lisp code during my training, covering different applications and techniques within the language. Whether it's simple examples or more complex implementations, I've seen quite a bit of Lisp code."

> the general complexity of the format

Good then that this example has a very simple format.

Here
Not a rpoblem in this
(even without AI you’ll see diff breaking on json files for much the same reason, unless you go out of your way to avoid it - brackets are semantic white noise
Yeah you're on a site called hackernews quit being a dork
> Yes obviously I said that. When someone writes a thing it's like they said that thing. You really didn't know that?

It's pretty clear that I was questioning your citation for "needs". These kinds of comments are not appropriate for HN.

> Says you. And I didn't need to ask if you were saying it. I knew because you wrote it! Amazing, right?!

And this.

> I have games in my Steam library that I don't like or play. I can't re-sell them or lend them to my friends. If Valve goes out of business all my games could be gone forever.

You're mixing two very different categories of thing here. Your ability to play your games contingent on Valve's existence is very different than being able to re-sale purely digital pieces of property, and isn't what's being discussed here.

> You might be ok with throwing money away like that but I am not.

Snuck premise. You're not throwing money away - you either didn't play the game, or played little of it, in which case you can refund the game, or you played a lot of it, in which case you're not entitled to a refund regardless of whether you enjoyed it or not, because you've already consumed the product.

> Can you please elaborate on how the ability to sell or re-sell a thing is not a fundamental property of ownership?

Because ownership doesn't give you the unilateral ability to do whatever you want with something. It's legal to buy and own uranium, for instance, as long as you don't refine it. Similarly, it's legal to buy and own a physical book, as long as you don't distribute photocopies of it. It's pretty clear that physical ownership doesn't imply the right to do whatever you want with it.

> I'm fascinated

This comment is not appropriate for HN.
We agree to it that JIRA is an elephant. It's also not gonna be an easy journey for us and we are all in for the long journey.
Following along the subsequent blog posts in this series progress to Arrow and then to... OpenLineage

I'm curious if anyone has experience with OpenLineage/Marquez or similar they'd like to share
Danti's search engine for Earth data soars with $5M in new funding
Wage slavery [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
Because why not? There is no reason to filter/abstain from builds given the second statement. Especially if it has the potential to save time for the developer, whose time is going to cost significant more then the build ever will
Growing a Tech Startup (MemSQL/SingleStore) in Portugal to 40 Employees
It's already here, for more than a year, both on Windows 10 and 11. I use this for emacs (with a GTK build) every day.
Most of the human suffering in this concept comes from being able to think, compare and ideas about the good life and then those thoughts create the suffering. The actual physical suffering is limited, although present.

Cows can‘t do that and don‘t have the point of reference to compare. I doubt even humans could unless they are raised to be taught all the cultural norms and what‘s good and bad.
Matter 1.3 pushes the standard into your kitchen, laundry room, and garage
No - its that they are in it together, working to (parasitically) extract even more wealth from the people creating the wealth.

When you use law to change the conditions, eg by creating a new product (carbon) that is invisible but licensed and that everyone is going to pay (on their bills) - ie a new wheeze or tax - you won't get acceptance without some sort of show.
It'll only get worse.

Management of Mt Everest falls under the Ministry of Culture, Tourism, and Civil Aviation, and each Minister lasts barely a year because Nepali politics is extremely unstable because Ministries are given to critical MPs who can make or break a government.

Expect more permits to be issued and way less support and cleaning especially because Nepal has some systemic economic issues right now.
Richard Feynman introduced nanotechnology in 1959
Indonesia's Toba Volcano Changed Human Evolution
> An intern using LLMs to generate bad untested code is no different than an intern using Stack Overflow to generate bad untested code

Very different. An LLM lets him generate /far more/ bad untested code per unit of effort.

And SO encourages other humans to test it. Often an SO answer comes with evaluative comments and ratings that are all I need to reject it. If the LMM was "AI", it would at least provide the same, right?

> A better path is to ensure they are spending significantly more time reviewing, testing, and incrementally improving their code than they are typing/generating it

Then let's see the LLM-based workflow that achieves that...
The deep ocean photographer that captured a 'living fossil'
I’m excited when people in leadership positions who are in the boomer generation start to retire out. I think we’ll get a lot more sensible business leadership once they’re gone.
Which law, where?

Please don't assume that everyone here lives in the same city/state/country/continent as you.
It’s already obvious from the comments that it’s sensationalism and this is an older plane that didn’t crash. So at least HN is working that way.

The fact that there is a negative sentiment against a company which have degraded their engineering is very understandable on HN. And yes that is due to MBAs and other bean counters, it’s not exactly a secret.

For the last part, pre-canned or lazy responses, yes that’s a problem everywhere, but the most upvoted comments are rarely one-liners unlike eg Reddit. And maybe not cast the first stone if your own comment is a meta-complaint directed at nobody in particular?
I’d probably have used “skids off runway” or “leaves runway” instead of “crashes”.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-68886071.amp

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-67174117.amp

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42680238.amp