skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This was rather disappointing to me. I had really expected better because my colleagues in general were typically pro open source. I'm not using Django anymore, and I'm not inclined to put any personal time into it to keep the project alive.

Why would your colleagues want to maintain your pet project instead of making their own? Most open source projects live or die with their main contributors, if you expected the company to spend money maintaining your project then that’s the wrong expectation in my opinion.
> Daminik is a simple & scalable Digital Asset Manager with a build in Content Delivery Network.

Very minor thing, but that should be “built-in”.
Over here (austria) the unions, which are pretty powerful, argue on behalf of ALL employees in that field. They basically set the minimum pay/benefits across the country for the kinds of jobs they represent by negotiating with the industrial association. By law, the result of those negotiations are the baseline for everyone. And everyone can still negotiate for better terms with their employer.

One benefit the union members have over the non-union ones, though, is that you get insurance for legal counsel, for example. Other than that, union members don't have that many benefits, tbh. I still chose to be a member, because IMO it's the right thing to do.
> Some of those frequencies we detect with our eyes, and the frequency determines its color

This is common misconception. It's not singular frequency of light that determines color, but the entire distribution of intensity over visible light spectrum.

And it is not one to one mapping from spectra to color either. In theory there are almost infinite spectra for each color.

So mixing red and green lasers might produce something appearing yellow(ish) despite the spectrum not containing any light corresponding to spectral pure yellow wavelengths.

As for the "art primaries", afaik it's not so wrong of a color model; it just is a reflection of common paints/pigments operate. Painters can not get nice spectrally pure pigments for primaries, not now and even less so historically, and so the color space of paints is significantly smaller than the entire human vision color space.
Living with Linux and Android after two decades of Apple
I would gladly pay more for longer lasting but environmentally sustainable ones! Another case where government intervention seems necessary and there is no real "corrective" force with only capital oriented companies.
> In its early days, the web was markup. The browser was to meant to display text with some basic formatting and hyperlinks. At some point in the later evolution, JavaScript was created, allowing websites to dynamically change their content on the device. What happened in the meantime? A mess.

This is as good a summary as ever I have seen.-

> And I do wish all the best to Servo and Ladybird. But this is just the engines.

Interesting times, these ...

> The web is, by now, Chromium-shaped.

Ending in this conclusion.-
The difference between employment relationships and marriage is rather large.
"How would you change the system" is an above human level question. Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. The same for capitalism. It is an illusion that it is easy to change a system in which millions of people participate.

The economic forces as painted here are very real but cruelty is optional. It is not very expensive to give an employee the time to say goodbye to colleagues.
A company can remain operational for quite a while if the business owner walks out.

A company has to shut down pretty much entirely if all the workers walk out.

As both a worker and a business owner (and formerly an employer) I can tell you that this will always hold true. Sure, in most companies the business owner will also be the general manager or CEO of the company and actively steer the long-term trajectory and development of the company as well as manage day-to-day regulatory compliance and other concerns of "business as usual" but all of this is literally just work and owning the company is neither necessary nor sufficient for doing this work (except when it comes to legally representing the company but that too can be delegated to a person who doesn't have to be the owner).

What a business owner brings to the table, like a landlord, is capital. It doesn't matter if this capital was accumulated through hard work, exploitative business practices, bank loans, inheritance or anything else. At the end of the day the difference is a business owner has capital, a worker only has their own labor to sell.

I'm not sure why you're blaming employees for treating companies like "adult daycare" when you're even saying it's something you observed the development of. If you did, you surely know the origins, most prominently Google and all of its cultural copycats. Startups having foosball tables was a cliché over the past decades for a good reason. In a market where experienced and skilled developers were rare and job openings for them were plenty, companies tried to attract and retain them at any cost.

Laundry services, on-site gyms and three warm meals at work meant less private life and more reliance on the company for everyday necessities, it also meant overtime was less visible because you're "living in the office" anyway. The "adult daycare" phenomenon existed as much to pamper high-value employees as to lock them in (psychologically at least) and to trick them into fully identifying with the company they work for (and give up their private life for it). It's functionally equivalent to any run of the mill cult. The crux here is that the companies didn't want to make sure the employee's family was living a good life, they wanted to make sure the employee didn't get distracted. Heck, companies like Google have sponsored freezing their employees' eggs to incentivize them delaying their family planning. There's a reason former Google employees still call themselves "Xooglers" because having worked at Google is still ingrained into their identity.

Also, conveniently, all these benefits and affordances ensure employees don't think they need a union or can be told that unions would actually get in the way by asking inconvient questions or demanding separation of work time and private time or fair treatment of individuals who don't want to or can't participate in "the lifestyle".
It is also very demoralising for everyone if the company does not retrain or remove people from roles in which they are chronically underperforming.
It’s probably not an all or nothing prospect. Raise the costs enough/mitigate the threat in atleast some of them etc
Both China and Russia are building alternatives to Boeing/Airbus commercial airliners. But are in two completely different situations.

COMAC relies on international suppliers, probably hoping that will make it easier for them to be allowed to fly outside China and then over time they can use more and more domestic suppliers. Whereas the Russians are completely cut off from international suppliers and travel, and have to resurrect their airliner projects which have been more or less dormant since the Soviet times.

I think both will be succesful over time; they have huge internal markets that can sponsor quite a bit of development cost.
Show HN: Swerve – A framework for establishing integrity guarantees in web apps
Swerve is a framework with one goal: make E2EE viable in web applications.

Think of messaging applications like WhatsApp, or password managers like KeeWeb, or email clients like ProtonMail. These all implement E2EE, but nothing in their web versions prevents the server from serving malicious client-side code that reads all your messages.

So far there haven't been many attempts to solve this issue. Swerve aims to demonstrate one approach.
>Certainly not true for the company where I work.

I'm old enough to have heard this about a very large number of companies and it's always wrong in the long term.
Enums in Go are not good. Code generation just makes it worse. Both because code generation has a bad smell and because nobody can agree on how to do enums in Go so we just end up with lots of diverging solutions.

Go 2 needs to have more usable enums. And while I'm not a big fan of "adding more stuff" to languages, it wouldn't hurt Go to learn a couple of things from Rust.
Who would want to be married with their company? You are finding dysfunction where there is none. Imagine expecting the employee or company to have the other party for better or for worse, till death do them apart. Talk about dysfunction!
Choice of terms in "human resources" tell enough on those people's perspective
100% this. Even when executives aren't the owners, they still have a very different position of power than even upper management. The industrial era black-and-white model of worker vs capitalist may not be a good fit for the way large companies are structured but executives are very much the true labor aristocracy, acting more like the royal guard to keep the rabble in check than like a fellow worker who shares your fears and needs.
If so, it is natural that those businesses go under.
React extended JavaScript syntax with JSX to make it easier to create elements. Why not do the same for hooks?

It's clear that the existing rules are confusing: hooks look like functions but follow special rules, you need to manually manage hook dependencies with crutches like useCallback / useMemo, etc.

Just adding a few keywords like "hook" and "use" could make it clearer and allow the build tool to automatically generate some of the boilerplate like useCallback.

The example in the article might look something like this (leaving out the TypeScript annotations):

hook boolean(initialValue) {
use [value, setValue] from hook state(initialValue);
return [
value, {
setFalse: () => setValue(false),
setTrue: () => setValue(true),
toggle: () => setValue(!value)
}
];
}

Behind the scenes this would generate a useBoolean() hook that can be called directly from plain JS if needed, just like JSX generates createElement() calls.
> where employees are actually valued beyond mere numbers

Isn’t this the point of the article? That even when you feel this way that you are still disposable?
It's heartwarming to believe in the "family" narrative some companies promote, but it's important to remain pragmatic. This narrative is just a motivational tool to encourage employees to go above and beyond their compensated duties. It's not a binding contract though.

In reality, the power dynamic inherently favors the employer. Once an employee has invested their time and energy, the company holds all the leverage. There's little incentive for the company to uphold their end of this unspoken "deal."

Leadership changes, company priorities shift, and the "family" narrative can quickly fade when faced with financial realities or strategic decisions.
> modern civilization suffering catastrophic collapse

If it happens next potential civilizationable species will be fucked: we have extracted all the easy high density resource we could find. So no easy gas for them which may hamper any progress. Also no easy high nitrogen sources: food sources will have to not depend on this cycle if they want a huge population. And maybe a lack of helium if they're unlucky.
Linus Torvalds: RISC-V Repeating the Mistakes of Its Predecessors [video]
Photo relevant to this article (showing the "mixed" embassy's entrance): https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/09/27/ambassaden1-976c...
Indeed.

Anyone who is doing anything important or at scale would be at least renting those, or even using an abstracted service that is on top of another service.

Those cost savings allow people to train things for cheaper, causing those cost savings to benefit almost everyone doing important stuff in the space.
> As a mathematician with an applied bent, I once got drunk with another mathematician, a stack of coins, and a pair of pliers and some tape.
In theory yes. But practically there are always locations where we can't match every case, so we either have to live with a warning or add a catch-all arm. And as soon as a catch-all arm exists, we are in "not checked any more" state, but with a compiler that is supposed to check for exhaustiveness. Which is way worse if the catch-all arm isn't a `panic("Unhandled match branch!")`.

Yes, you can counter that with GADTs and match against exhaustive subsets. But to ergonomically handle these cases, you need something like Pattern Synonyms or you drown in boilerplate.
maybe true until MBAs take over the board. Then everyone becomes disposable.
Oh, the missing wonders of `[...]`: https://go.dev/play/p/GlVp_z3IOEe
Then use Neovim. I use both.
> But it's bold to generalize. Certainly not true for the company where I work.

I'd say this is true for all for-profit companies, by definition.

Perhaps there is extra cost that makes it not worth it - laws, contract rules, etc. All the more reason to have that in place.
A novel approach to in-suit waste management and water recovery in spacewalks
I’m so tired of this defeatist attitude. Every time there’s some bad law like this someone says “there’s no point, it will pass eventually”. Maybe it will, and if it does it will be in no small part because of you.

Please, either help or get out of the way. It’s your prerogative to give up on your rights, but stop trying to bring everybody down with you. That’s counterproductive even for yourself.

Delaying bad laws is worth it. It has happened again and again, and the more it happens and the more noise is made the more it gets watered down and occasionally even abandoned. Fighting them is worth it, giving up is worse than useless.
A Time Crystal Made of Giant Atoms
Generative Image as Action Models
Also: https://www.theguardian.com/science/article/2024/jul/12/scie...
The NSA stays at home. There are some diplomatic normal folks to do the consularic work (visa, lost passports), the rest is secret service (recruiting agents, influencing the press, police, "diplomatic" ie secret communication, contacts to other embassies and the host).
The same goes for all human relationships, you might as well include your parents or spouse. Or the government or your local grocery store that might close when you least expect it. I think it feels bad in a special way with the companies because you spend so much time with them which should trigger all kinds of tribal loyalties but the system simply isn't set up this way and there is no real tribe.
> Certainly not true for the company where I work

In the 2 decades I have worked as a Software Engineer, I met numerous people, in numerous different companies, that said those words, exactly.

All of them were eventually proven wrong. No exceptions.
In any unstable situation (war, sanctions, blockade, siege, whatever), cigarettes quickly turn into a currency. They're light as a feather, they don't spoil, and there's an ever-increasing demand for them. Two packs will get you more than a gold necklace in any such situation, worldwide.
a couple things:

1. smaller lighter, and higher flying reduce the sonic boom size

2. way fewer planes

3. the military gets some latitude to ignore the rules that everyone else has to follow
one thing I believe is in the near future - software will go towards small service firms i.e 1-3 people or at most 20 like law firms etc. given the prevalence of open source. second, being software is now a commodity with 0 price.

you can use a generic crm, erp etc .. but most the valuable workflows are 1 of 1. hence need to be bespoke. case in point SAP implementation consultants.

however, the huge obstacle is most "software" engineers don't think like engineers or businessmen but think like scientists and tend to be dogmatic.

the huge affinity for "dick" swinging sorry ladies .... i.e showing how smart you're and coming up with the most complex contraption e.g kubernetes, react means we will never get to that level. as most engineers won't be able to deliver things solo or with a small team and hence will rely on employment.

and please don't mention A.I -- humans can't make predictable userland software as is.
Signal downplays encryption key flaw, fixes it after X drama
> Blue and Yellow don't make Green

Many children were incorrectly taught that Red, Yellow and Blue were "primary" colours from which you could make any other colour: wrong. Fotunately we have better teaching now.

I like some of the comments here: https://nitaleland.blogspot.com/2005/10/urban-myth-blue-and-...
Note that Canva has acquired Affinity's developers about 3.5 months ago. [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39824191
Well, it kind of does.

Can you be more specific in your criticism?

Are you saying IQ isn't equal to smart, or even raw IQ type scores without the cohort based adjustments isn't equal to smart, or something else?

I'd kind of agree with both of those, but not sure if that's were you're going with this.

I was commenting in the context of "IQ has gone down for a growing subgroup over 8 decades" and suggesting that the Flynn effect means that any member of the modern subgroup teleported back in time would score on average about 25 points better, which reverses the factoid in the headline even before you talk about the group growing larger.
Cool that one can make native Linux versions using Amiga APIs. It's a bit like GNUStep I guess, only more complete, owing to that the original Commodore APIs were more or less frozen in time.
Most Ubuntu users don't know that Canonical only supports the main repository for free.

To my knowledge, only some comments hidden in /etc/apt/sources.list mention this, but the more honest approach would be to warn all users when they try to `apt install foo` some package from universe/multiverse. Or do it like RHEL with their EPEL repo and disable it by default.

But I guess they would have never gotten this popular if people saw that Ubuntu is only a few thousand packages compared to Debian's tens of thousands.
You couldn’t pay me to watch movies in 480p.
I have personal experience of a company keeping me employed WAY beyond where it was profitable for them, as they simply didn't have the need for me due to not enough contracts. They provided me with a lot of learning resources. I went almost half a year in total without any real work for me to do. They were aware of that.

They really tried hard to find a way to keep me on, so while I was disposable in the end, they truly did try to keep me on, and to me, that indicates them valuing me beyond the mere numbers.
As long as the set is limited (as enums usually are), you can always go with the middle ground between omitted case and catch all:

case FILE_NOT_FOUND:
/* This is normal, nothing to do. */
break;

This should still catch adding new value into the enum and not handling it.
> Your job as a business owner is not to provide jobs to your employees, it's to keep the business afloat and maintain your income.

Employee here. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I think it is healthy for both the employer and the employee to recognize this as a base of a good professional relationship.
I wouldn’t trust it. I got the same email as OP and checked it out. I suspect they somehow embed the user’s private key in the output “proof” so that they can then start pushing malicious code to all your GitHub repositories. I wasn’t able to confirm that this is what actually happens, but it is definitely fishy.

If they genuinely wanted proof of account ownership there are other ways to do it. OAuth, for example.
At this stage, I think it’s more likely that React will rely on its compiler to support a less annoying but still JavaScript syntax for hooks, signals etc…
I'm thinking majority owner CEO is the least disposable employee
The sausage making behind peer review
In the world we have built, the answer to "what purpose will this new technology serve?" is usually dispiriting.
This thing is beautiful. Makes me want to do something like this but I dont have the time or skill or a 3d printer
You don't have to add a catch-all arm, you can still explicitly match i.e

match value {
A => { do_stuff() },
B => { unreachable!("B is not applicable here because <reason>") },
}

now when you add C you still have to match it(given the enum is exhaustive).
A generation of Americans have no idea what the commons is.
You can take the judgement to a US court and it will be a simplied process. As long as it is a "normal" country like spain it shouldnt be a problem (if the court was say an Iranian court it might be more difficult).
Not really, code is a means to an end, we are paid to solve problems and sometimes it translates to writing or deleting code.
Sorry for the naive question: Back in my day they called it "Supersonic", why do we call it "Hypersonic" now? Are there trademark issues?
All assets in the EU now and for the next 1000 years.
I wonder how often average employee leaves company voluntary when they are not needed or produce value? I see some rockstars pursuing their own goals, but how many of your average employees would do it? And not do it for other reasons like wanting a career change or more opportunities. Purely just for good of the employer?
Moiré Error in Doom
And the Chinese have a modern engine under development that can be used in a commercial airliner:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACAE_CJ-1000A
To be fair to the OP, the implicitness in Python in general and the random seeding in particular is confusing, especially if 3rd party modules are involved.

In C++, if you use std::mt19937, everything from seeding to the explicit generator is crystal clear while being terse as well.
The list is missing the most important information: The OSS license.

Also important are number of active committers and if they actually accept outside PRs.
Panta rei.
Supersonic = +1 mach, hypersonic = +5 mach.
I should have added that this solution stops working as soon as you're handling 5 out of 50 cases. Lexical tokens are which always trigger the mentioned problems in my code - often you match against subsets, are there are _way_ too many of them to add them all explicitly.
I think many suggest that we shouldn’t define our work and identity by our employer or specific job role. Instead, focus on building your expertise in the field and career in general.

This approach allows you to avoid becoming overly dependent on a single company, unlike those who are focused solely on advancing their careers within one organization by relying on trust and loyalty. Those individuals often find themselves vulnerable, risking their positions over minor inconveniences or corporate decisions that are beyond their control.

By building your identity as an expert in the field, you create a more stable foundation for your career, regardless of the dynamics within any specific company.
Software Engineering and the Social Contract
Yes, I see, I should have mentioned that.

Same as above: this solution stops working as soon as you're handling 5 out of 50 cases (or, more realistically, 10 out of 200). Lexical tokens are which always trigger the mentioned problems in my code - often you match against subsets, as there are _way_ too many of them to add them all explicitly.
I faced this once in 25 years. I sued, won, and then the company declared bankruptcy.

I guess it depends on how big the client is— bigger clients are easier to pin down… and it also depends on how much they owe you (in my case, it was $25,000)… but my general suggestion is: walk away. Warn your community not to work with them. Be smarter next time.

Smarter how? Well, you could have withheld the final product until you got paid. This is really the only leverage an independent has.
Win-bash – Bash port for windows
Debian packages also work for Ubuntu, no?
Full video,

Linus Torvalds on security, AI, open source and trust- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPvRIWXNgaM