skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fintechs partner with banks like evolve to do the actual banking.

So when you open an account with mercury, under the hood they’re opening an bank account with a bank and sending transactions through it.

There’s a lot of kyc/kyb regulation around financial services. Eg banks can’t provide services to certain people. So the underlying bank needs to know who you are.

> Why not partner with a major bank, or Column?

Column didn’t exist when mercury was founded. And it’s not that easy to secure a banking partner. Its not like signing up for a free checking account.
i think this depends on what the alternative career/job would be compared to grad school.

if you had the option of getting into a well-payed, cushy tech job grad school would result in less personal/financial freedom.

if (like me) you didn't have that option out of undergrad, grad school was comparatively a period of great freedom.
* i made enough on research/TA stipends that i lived a slightly-fancier-than-my-undergrad lifestyle that wasn't too far behind what my classmates that became teachers were living.
* TONS of freedom with respect to how I wanted to work and having full control of my schedule

I feel like grad school gave me a pretty idealistic way to spend my mid 20s. And (luckily) in that time I was able to develop enough skills that I could jump into one of those high-paying, cushy tech jobs when it came time to realize that academica sucks and I wanted to leave.
Although I only looked at the code briefly I suspect it will very hard to get good performance from the API as provided[1].

It looks like you have to do a function call for every high level assembly instruction which in turn does quite a bit of work. See `emit_x86_instruction`[2], most of which is redundant and most of which can be done ahead of time. To JIT quickly you want to work with templates if at all possible. Precompile those templates for the relevant architecture. Then at runtime you just patch the precompiled machine code with the correct addresses and registers. This extra speed really matters because if JITing code is cheap you can compile functions multiple times, inline aggressively and do many other optimizations that wouldn't be economical otherwise.

[1] https://github.com/zherczeg/sljit/blob/master/test_src/sljit...

[2]: https://github.com/zherczeg/sljit/blob/master/sljit_src/slji...
It's wild to me that in Europe "National Parks" will have people living in them, forestry plantations and even clearcutting. In North America National Parks are entirely kept as wilderness with no use or development of the land allowed except for tourist infrastructure built and managed by the park administrations themselves.
Ask HN: Why do interviewers hate anti-TypeScript opinions?
Hello HN,

I'm an experienced web dev and I've recently been interviewing for new fullstack role.

# background

Previous role I used TS everyday for all types of developement: api development and frontend via React.

In my current role I inherited an non-typed codebase and I decided to use JSDocs vs Typescript.

I made that decision because I knew that our older monolith framework and setup would cause compilation issues with TS and I wanted my future self and new developers to focus their skills on other problems with higher ROI: building features, refactoring code.

JSDocs didn't mean we were cowboys: we implemented tests, we implemented JSDoc docs and type annotations, we implemented object schema validation.

We cared about the same things that TS cares about. We only said no to the compulation step and all the problems that may arrise from that sub-system.

# views

I don't believe that TS should be tech that is blindly implented for all types of apps.

I also can wager that most people don't need type safety enough to face some of the random issues caused by the compilation step of TS.

The reality is that TS adds type safety into a language ecosystem that is not built for it. We've made serious serious strides towards full support, but not enough to make it clean sailing.

Type-safety in Haskell or Rust is an entirely different story.

Weirdly I'm not alone in this view with big profile pundits like Rich Harris (SvelteJS) prefering JSDocs over TS because there's less friction when using a non-standard language.

For the tin hat owners out there there's also problem of TS being largely driven by a corporate sponsor, and like React, this setup produces a roadmap that can be at odds with the needs of smaller companies that use the project (breaking changes, fast major version api changes, deprecation of features, adding of new features that increase compilation, hurt performance etc)

# recent job hunting experience

Each time I've mentioned these views in recent interviews I've been labeled as not technical enough to work on TS projects.

It seems to me like there might be some dogmatic views at play here:
- a) if you dont use/support TS you hate type safety
- b) if you dont favour TS you dont understand TS enough to work with it

I'm very confused by how these events have played out and I wanted to share that with others.

I welcome any and all pro/cons comments on this.

As for me going forward? I'm going to keep my TS views to myself because I'd rather get a job than be right.
This result is explainable by Danish tandem q theory.
Can't believe you didn't bother to read the site rules.
Ouch, that one's bad: https://github.com/g0tmi1k/debian-ssh#the-bug

>These lines were removed because they caused the Valgrind and Purify tools to produce warnings about the use of uninitialized data in any code that was linked to OpenSSL. Removing this code has the side effect of crippling the seeding process for the OpenSSL PRNG. Instead of mixing in random data for the initial seed, the only "random" value that was used was the current process ID. On the Linux platform, the default maximum process ID is 32,768, resulting in a very small number of seed values being used for all PRNG operations.
Objective-C. Swift.
Very cool! Good to see the shoutout to Dennis' Holograph.so work as well. I played around with that one to make some fun things:

A game of cat and mouse: https://x.com/blixt/status/1797384954172625302

An analog clock: https://x.com/blixt/status/1798393279194824952

I think tools like these, with better UX and more guard rails for the code, can really help people understand logic and systems in a much more visually intuitive way. In some aspects, these propagators work similar to Excel, which I think a lot of people already have some intuition for.
Latest trends on stupid corporate jargon are legitimate news. I have a subscription, so some of what you miss:

> The phrase is “innovative,” says Beth DelGiacco, a vice president of corporate communications at biotech company Argenx, who praises its efficiency.

> “It’s only a few syllables. Everyone knows what you mean when you say it,” says DelGiacco, who regularly trots it out with peers.

The same is true of "drill down." It's not explored why "double-click" (3 syllables) is better than "drill down" (2).

> Tech-inflected buzzwords are especially apt to gain traction—think “network,” “bandwidth” or “take offline”—because they can sound smart or cutting-edge, says Doug Guilbeault, an assistant professor at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business who has studied corporate jargon.

> The inventor of the literal double-click, former Apple designer Bill Atkinson, isn’t convinced. Reached while boating on a recent weekday, Atkinson, now retired, says he’s never heard anyone use double-click as a metaphor and would steer clear of such usage himself, preferring more straightforward language.
> titanium out of the scrap bin. (Yes, I know that it will be nearly impossibly to cut off in an emergency,

Most commercial grades of Titanium can be cut with common tools. The tools will dull faster, but it's not impossible.

I suspect a lot of the stories about Ti rings being impossible to cut are coming from people who confuse Titanium with Tungsten. People get exotic metals mixed up all the time.

On the other hand, if you pulled it from the scrap bin you may have gotten some extreme aerospace grade of Titanium that really is difficult to cut.
I'm going to step back to a meta level and make a couple points:

- Several times in the context of this discussion you've made negative assumptions about someone or their motives replying to you (e.g. "I wanted to give a seriously reply, but clearly there is no point" and "What a stunning revelation, genuinely brilliant insight from you"); I don't think this fosters good discussion (and I also don't think it's particularly good for mental health)

- You seem particularly aggrieved by someone not automatically assuming you know something. Yes, we all understand now that you know the Mesopotamians predated the Greeks with regard to the mathematical notions we're discussing here. But you know what? There's nothing wrong with NOT knowing. And some people reading the discussion might not have known.

Now back to the main topic at hand.

> Even if they did and even if the Greeks were extremely influenced by them, their concept of a geometrical zero was still radically different to the Mesopotamians notion, so it is totally irrelevant who was first

Now I finally feel as though I understand the main thrust of your argument. Let me restate your hypothesis to see if I've got it: even though the Babylonians had the concept of zero, it was sufficiently lacking compared to the Greek concept as to be incomparable; the Greeks fundamentally independently invented the concept of a zero more mathematically powerful than the Babylonians rather than took the existing Babylonian concept of nought and developed it further. Is that right?
The upvote system should naturally solve this problem. Articles that people can't read won't get updoots. Because nobody would vote on something before at least reading the article, right? Right?
Yes. When I was in college, HTML5 was the new thing and the possibilities seemed endless. Applications which previously required flash or had to run on the desktop could now run in the browser. The creative landscape was very wide.

Today, new technology is not exciting to me. Crypto was a big flop, and most AI applications I see are just pinging API requests to OpenAI so there's really nothing innovative in the technology behind such applications. I've spent my career in adtech and it seems like 90% of the money in this industry goes to data applications focused on advertising. By my estimate, consumer information technology peaked in usefulness around 2008 or 2009 and it's just been downhill and degrading user experience from there.
...due to asphalt absorbing heat from unobstructed sun.

160'F is hot enough to boil an egg in under a couple of minutes.

My reaction: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Edvard_M...
This is true, but I also think software technology corporations play a huge role in accelerating the destruction of society. I'm having a hard time being convinced this boring dystopia we're in right now is all that much better than when we didn't have huge software companies destroying society (mostly Facebook and Google).

I'm a software engineer (of course) but the way corporate software is going is bleak. FOSS sometimes feels like the only light we have. Social media destroyed society, made everyone confused and neutered.

Sorry, slightly off topic rant. But day by day I get increasingly frustrated with where the software industry is going.
”covered countless times in textbooks”

What’s your favourite textbook on the subject?
Things like logs are just generally ignored in gitignore so they can just be there or whatever. In practice this hasn't been a huge problem for me.

Hacks/workarounds/etc are actually pretty easy to handle and there are a couple strategies. The one I use is to use a merge commit. Let's say you have a patch P that you want to keep private (it hardcodes some build settings you like to use or whatever) and a patch A you want to work on. The base these changes are based off is B which is the upstream branch "main".

Then, you create a merge between A and P, creating commit M, and your working copy (called @ or "at") sits on top:

--> P -->
/ \
B (main) M --> @
\ /
--> A -->

And now, both `P` and `A` exist in your repository at the same time. Now, you can just use the `jj squash` command to take changes from `@` and put them inside either A or P, as you do your work, thus moving them "through" the merge commit M. These kinds of techniques where you move changes between commits are very common in Jujutsu so this is pretty natural once you get used to it.

Note that you can also have `M = @`, i.e. the merge commit is the working copy itself. I prefer to keep the commit M separate and work "on top" of it like in the above graph, because you may solve a conflict between P and A, and M would be the correct place to put it, and you would want to keep it separate from everything else.

A neat feature of this trick is that you can create a branch for change `A` and if you are sitting on top of `M`, and you run `jj git push`, then only `A` will be pushed and `P` will be ignored and left alone. In fact `P` will never be pushed unless you explicitly ask for it by creating the branch pointing to it. Nor is the merge commit ever pushed anywhere; it only exists so that you can have both changes available locally.

I do this all the time these days in various forms, and in practice, the day-to-day stuff isn't terribly different than it is when you just leave things out of the staging area inside your working copy.
It really was an own-goal how the green movement in Europe has been shutting down nuclear power plants.
Most of the stuff I said in the sibling threads apply across operating systems (and even mobile). Specifically:

* Bluetooth full duplex (talk and listen on the same device) is terrible and should be avoided at all costs. This is a limitation of the Bluetooth protocols, regardless of operating system. It's most obvious if you have music playing over the headphones when you switch to headset mode (which uses a different protocol). The audio quality will severely degrade. As far as I know, this is the case no matter what headphones or operating system or Bluetooth stack you use.

* To make other people sound better, get better speakers or listen-only headphones (or just don't use the mic on the headphones, as above)

* To make yourself sound better, get a better external mic and put it as close to your mouth as you can, like a wearable lapel mic or a traditional mic on a boom. At least get a unidirectional / cardioid pattern one if nothing else, and try to put it out of line of sound from your keyboard.

* Software noise cancelation can be pretty effective, depending on who implements it. If I remember right, Zoom has this built in, as does Discord. Can't remember about Teams and Meet. Steam does not. There are sometimes third party apps (like Krisp.ai) but not sure about Linux versions.

* If you can hide your own speakers from your mic (ie wear headphones when conferencing) you will usually get better results.

* Remember to switch audio inputs and outputs manually so they use the correct devices. Some apps will inherit OS settings while others will try to pick one on their own, and usually be wrong. Always double check and do a test before the meeting starts.

* Some laptops (MacBooks) have good microphones and speakers built-in. These will typically work well enough in quiet environments but not in crowded rooms (only a mic very close to your mouth can deal with that effectively). Other laptops typically have crap for both, no matter the Dolby etc stickers they may have. It's just empty marketing.

* TLDR just get a good standalone mic and a good pair of headphones and use them for their intended purpose. If you must use Bluetooth, don't use it for audio playback and recording simultaneously. Probably USB mic + Bluetooth headphones is the sensible desktop setup.
Space station startup Gravitics lands $125M order from Axiom
I was joking as you brought it up. I don't believe anyone needs to eat less meat.
Yes and no.

They are arguing that the current copyright laws do not forbid training. And they are arguing that they need to train on copyrighted data in order to be able to make an effective tool (and make money).

That second part of the argument is there because, so far as I know, nobody has ruled (in any country) on the legality of using copyrighted material as training for LLMs that will then produce commercially-available output. So the first part is a claim, but it's not a ruled-upon claim. It's not a claim that OpenAI can count on a court agreeing with. So they add the second argument, which amounts to "please interpret copyright law that way, and if the courts don't, please change copyright law that way, or else we can't sell what we make (and therefore can't make any money)".

I take no position on the first claim. All I'm saying is that the appropriate response to the second claim is, "So what? The world doesn't owe you a living."
> in the part of the kernel that handled ttys

Yes, that's what I meant.

OPOST Enable implementation-defined output processing.

That gets set in a termios structure that gets passed to the kernel's terminal subsystem via ioctl.

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/a...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/a...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/a...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/uapi/a...

> Linux only recently have moved this functionality out into the user-land layer.

That's certainly news to me. Numerous functions in this file allude to OPOST processing:

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/tty/n_...

If it's not here, where did it move to?
So they rediscovered Stern-Brocot Trees in a less effective way.

Dirichlet's theorem...Ford circles...etc
Humane execs leave company to found AI fact-checking startup
The term is too long. This changes it from a fixed term, to a use-it-or-lose-it oriented policy.
Well, according to Bill Gates trees don't matter.
It would cause argument names to become part of the function signature, which would be a significant change to the language, and its ABI.
Growth stalls at Elon Musk's X
[dupe]

Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40915141
I would recommend another article instead:

https://www.themuse.com/advice/10-annoying-buzzwords-the-who...

It's not paywalled, straight to the point, lists several annoyances and offers some suggestions on what terms use instead.
Why was your first instinct to abuse or degrade functionality for a service you didn't want to pay for?
I was reading this and thinking why would someone need a custom fit toy car..
I haven’t had to deal with nearly as much bullshit from Microsoft since I switched to AtlasOS, which is a trimmed down version of Windows.

Then again, I know better than fully trusting a third-party patch for an operating system, of all things… so I only use that for games and absolutely nothing else. My main daily os at the moment is Manjaro.
I'm not quitting my job but I did decide to go back to college to learn some kind of higher applied math. I love coding but I feel like I keep writing the same code over and over
This is a great summarize, I'd emphasize that as a result of the items mentioned here, both input (through external MIDI controllers) and output (through VST instruments) are actually cross-DAW, that consistency makes switching DAWs far easier, and makes what any one DAW is best at much narrower.
Official post: https://community.etsy.com/t5/Announcements/A-Message-from-E...
Other research from Meta FAIR actually suggests that you should prune deeper layers if you want to improve performance while maintaining accuracy [1]. So there must be a cutoff point for smaller networks where this approach still works, otherwise the results are contradictory. Or we could drastically improve these new models even further.

[1] https://arxiv.org/html/2403.17887v1
It’s a giant nothing burger. Nothing interesting or of substance in it. Which is too bad because it would be interesting to know how corporate jargon trends get started. I’d be interested in research on something like jargon use over time compared with innovation.
Etsy loses its 'handmade' and 'vintage' labels as it takes on Temu and Amazon
I wonder if there are any AI tools that do web scraping for you without having to write any code?
> Zero is important because it is the first abstraction

I’m not sure what this even means, but Sumerians had abstract mathematics, in addition to art and literature which are abstract by their nature. They were using numbers in the abstract sense before the number zero was named, and so while it seems like a logical and tempting narrative that naming zero is what abstracted numbers, history doesn’t seem to support this particular post-facto rationalization. Naming zero is very important in the history of math, it just isn’t the first abstraction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer#Mathematics
> optimization tricks like fat LTO, PGO, or even the standardized hinting attributes ([[likely]], [[unlikely]]) for optimizing icache layout

If you do PGO, aren't hinting attributes counter-productive?

In fact, the common wisdom I mostly see compiler people express is that most of the time they're counter-productive even without PGO, and modern compilers trust their own analysis passes more than they trust these hints and will usually ignore them.

FWIW, the only times I've seen these hints in the wild were in places where the compiler could easily insert them, eg the null check after a malloc call.
I'm a Tesla-owning parent whose first child will be receiving their license in a few months. And... this is cute, but I think most of its value is in marketing via press hits like this (which push "High Tech Gadget-filled Supercar" narrative). Actual driving safety is a boring and fairly well-understood problem. And if a kid can get in trouble in the family minivan or crossover (and they absolutely can) they can in a settings-crippled Model S too.

As far as real policy goes: he'll be driving the 12-year-old minivan primarily for the first year or so. Not because of genuine safety concerns (he's actually a pretty cautious kid) but just because new drivers get in a lot of wrecks and we'd rather that happen in the car that's cheaper to fix and easier to replace.
Just a small correction noting that Disney is not involved with the Minion movies