skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Going down the rabbit hole, it seems Mozilla now have a hidden/closed issuetracker where you probably can find more information and reasoning for this change.

The issue "[Meta] Toolbar redesign" (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1889863)
points to this https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/FXDROID-1756
Brazil and Latin America share culture, genes, language, history, religion, laws and much more with Europe. It's nonsensical to say that Brazil and Latin America aren't Western. What's your criteria? Income per capita? Your worldview is very much biased.
Ask HN: How did you adjust to working remote?
I’m a software engineer relocating to another country, which means I’ll be working fully remote instead of fully in office.

I love working from the office - getting coworkers attention easily, hallway conversations, socialization, more information I overhear and can use.

What are some strategies I can use to deal with the drawbacks of remote work? How did you do it?
The post doesn't claim that AI is useless. It just makes the point that sometimes there are much simpler (faster, cheaper) solutions that are just as effective if not more so.
Apple discontinued Bootcamp. But it's not the only feature they made that saw little use. Automator comes to mind.
> given you presumably need an SDR to do this tracking.

SDRs and the software to make good use of them are cheap and readily available. Using them is well within the ability of almost everybody. All you need is the desire.
I want a boss like that. Say no more.
The only tourist in Moldova
It all depends on the requirements and quality attributes.

For example, a plain string template will not help with selective DOM updates; that’s why we end with a tree DSL like JSX.

For many different reasons, you’ll like to have lazy component rendering. That’s why using `Component(props)` is not the same as `factory(Component, props)`.

I’m not saying that the author is wrong or right. If you only want a server-side template or one-off template for a simple page, then using JS/TS string templates is better than relying on a DSL like Handlebars or Pug. The client-side story is a bit different, and that’s why there are so many frameworks for it.
https://archive.is/kQ4lp
Google Near $23B Deal for Cybersecurity Startup Wiz
You are cherry-picking data.
Need a dialect without using bracket.
Has similar research happened against AlphaZero or other pure-NN Chess engines?

Curious to see what chess exploits would look like.
Testing in JavaScript with Jest
It’s also subtly inhibited by Apple after installation. For example when I pull down on the Home Screen to get Siri Suggestions it will refuse to show me any PWAs even though they are the most used apps on my device.
I'm way more irked by (2) following (a). It's (a), (b), (c), or (1), (2), (3), or (а), (б), (в), but for chrissake, don't mix the styles.
For security, who are you going to switch to? TMobile?

Telcos are a weird industry, and you’re not gonna find much differentiation.
Lots of interventions mentioned in the article, except (conspicuously) masks. It seems sensible to attack the problem at its source instead of band-aid the symptoms afterward with drugs, drugs, and more drugs.
Its really the fault of the process decided by upper management, a junior dev shouldnt have that much access. Least access privilege wasnt done correctly here
This ^. This switch from managed to in house is a good example of only building when necessary.
Didn't Stockhausen create a notation for electronic music? I was surprised TFA didn't mention it.
good article. the point would have been more salient if the jimniels/html micro dependency had been inlined.
Career Advice from the Outer Rim
Okey I realised I went a little too hard on this. I agree on the B2C versus B2B split and your analysis
Those are often the solutions that AI is particularly well-suited to employing.
> Look it up, there are tons of videos on YouTube of people doing component level repairs. Leaked schematics make a huge difference here.

I've watched these videos — and the people you're referencing doing this are rarely using any kind of schematics at all to repair modern digital-logic boards. And not for lack of accessibility!

Modern logic-board designs consist of a few proprietary ICs, plus generic labelled support components (e.g. VRM caps, surface-mount resistors and diodes, etc.)

You can repair these boards, but these repairs fall into three categories:

1. bad solder joints or broken traces — which mostly just requires looking at the board carefully to notice these.

2. bad generic support components — which in theory you can determine the need for by testing with various multimeter modes across the individual component's legs; but more often you just notice that what the component is in line with isn't working, and "swap out to see if that fixes it." And which where such a swap-out can be done by just looking the part to figure out what it identifies itself as; then de-soldering it and soldering on a replacement.

3. bad proprietary ICs — which you determine by tapping the signal lines leading from/to the IC on an oscilloscope; and which you "fix" by buying other for-parts copies of the board, de-soldering those ICs off of the sacrificial parts boards, and soldering them onto the "almost good" board.

In none of these cases would referencing a schematic help! They're all effectively "context free" repairs — see, probe, think, do.

(A schematic can in theory help you to find test points to differentially diagnose 1 vs 2 vs 3 in the case where a board is failing mysteriously... but once you have some experience in board repair, you can get 80% of the same information by just staring at the board for a minute.)

---

Of course, if you're repairing a power supply, or an audio receiver, or some still-half-analogue electronic appliance from the 1970s — then yeah, schematics help. But these types of systems do still come with those schematics! (You just need to buy the thing directly. You aren't getting a schematic for an "embedded" PSU with a computer; but you do get the schematic if you buy that same PSU at retail at a Shenzhen parts-mall. And you get forwarded that same schematic [and more] if you make an industrial order of 10000 of them, too.)
(author) Thanks! Yeah, it annoyed me how it kept freezing until I noticed it was always during an error state, and from there it was a quick trip to narrowing it down to the beeper. I think this is part of the DUART emulation and that is acknowledged to be incomplete still.
Anecdotally I can confirm there's been a few 40% years in the past decade, but it really is a gamble, and because of survivorship bias it's easy to only hear about the ones that gained and not the ones that lost.
Probably hyper threading related or energy throttling related.
Thoughts:

> 2-UANs operate according to either computational principles or magic.

Given that quantum effects do exist, does this mean that the result of quantum activity is still just another physical input into the UAN and does not change the analysis of what the UAN computes? It seems difficult to think that what a UAN computes is not impacted by those lower level details (meaning specifically quantum effects, I'm not thinking of just alternate implementations).

> 4-A UANs critical topology, and its implied gating logic, dictate its function, not the implementation details.

Dynamic/short term networks in brain:

Neurons in the brain are dynamically inhibited+excited due to various factors including brain waves, which seems like they are dynamically shifting between different networks on the fly. I assume when you say topology, you're not really thinking in terms of static physical topology, but more of the current logical topology that may be layered on top of the physical?

Accounting for Analog:

A neurons function is heavily influenced by current analog state, how is that accounted for in the formula for the UAN?

For example, activation at the same synapse can either trigger an excitatory post synaptic action potential or an inhibitory post synaptic action potential depending on the concentration of permeant ions inside and outside the cell at that moment.

I'm assuming a couple possible responses might be:

1-Even though our brain has analog activity that influence the operation of cells, there is still an equivalent UAN that does not make use of analog.

or

2-Analog activity is just a lower level UAN (e.g. atom/molecule level)

I don't think either of those are strong responses. The first triggers the question: "How do you know and how do you find that UAN?". The second one seems to push the problem down to just needing to simulate physics within +/- some error.
Sounds like you can make a fortune by hitting this untapped market.
I honestly have no clue what people expect ai to "obsolete". The world doesn't work like that.
Which is fair, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor
Show HN: Integrating the Ruff Language Server
I wanted to learn how to create a code editor with linting support so I made one and added the code here on github: https://github.com/jackhodkinson/lsp-editor

In the process I learned quite a lot about how the Language Server Protocol works and wrote a blog post about it (see the post link). I hope other people find this interesting.

Although I don't go into it in the blog post, I found it quite challenging to synchronize the state of the code editor between the frontend, backend, and language server. I would be interested to know if anyone has suggestions for a more robust approach to synchonization the state of a code/text editor.
>monetising a 175-million user base is not dependent on growth

Sure but engagement of that userbase will eventually start to drop because there are so many social networks out there and Threads is not that much different than your average XY network. Zuckerberg's chain of thought was "Twitter is a mess, we can do it better and we have the power of Facebook's and Instagram's distribution", but is that enough? What special and hot features Threads has? And just look at Google; how many products they shut down because of slow user growth and low engagement? killedbygoogle.com is the testemony....so many good products killed, just because they weren't cost-effective for Google.
http://archive.today/C9iCz
> I force my companies to clearly show prepaid revenue on their balance sheet and treat it as debt. Any discounts provided to win the pre-payment also have to be recorded as a financing cost - not a “sales discount” or buried in lower ARR

“Unearned revenue” is a common account on any company’s balance sheet and is standard best practice.

You sign a 12 month deal, and it immediately hits your books as a liability because the revenue isn’t “earned” until your company provides the service, so each month 1/12 of the contract moves from the “unearned” revenue account to an income account.

But the 2nd idea of treating sales discounts as a financing charge sounds like some questionable financial engineering to me. If your sales guy offers a “10% end of quarter discount if you sign in the next week” you shouldn’t be booking that discounted 10% as financing income because, simply, that’s money you’ll never receive.

I’ve never heard of “non-discounted revenue” as a serious SaaS metric. Sure it will inflate your revenue (as will booking discounts as revenue) but those practices won’t pass the sniff test when any outside VC or auditor looks at your books.

But 100% agree with the first part of your comment: from an accounting perspective, prepaid contracts are typically booked as a liability or debt on your balance sheet, and gradually moved over into your Income/Earned Revenue account in 1/12 increments (or equivalent) over the upcoming year.
not on every browser, but it is Linux. perhaps Meta doesn't show ads to browsers with Linux user agent strings as they assume all are bots.
Alright, how much of this is hard science and how much is just survivorship bias?
This guy accounts! Thanks for the insightful analysis.
If there is no such significant buildup, then I don't need it anyway.
This made me think of thr differences FPGAs and microprocessors - with "more laters" being equivalent to "more gates"
>And that `git push` doesn't need to be literally to the one and only repository

I believe github already has their own implementation of a git server, so any commands submitted to it are abstracted away. They probably don't have a literal .git directory sitting on a server.
The trick is knowing which of these two solutions to apply at the time.
It's the worst system, except for all the others.
This is a short book. My apologies.

You don't really have a choice with current gen CGM as to "all day". These devices are designed to be inserted and used on either a 10 day cycle (Dexcom) or 14 day cycle (Abbott).

Also, be sure "kinda interested" can handle "wrong most of the time" or "better chance of survival" as in T1D or T2D. There's no question that the data are aligning around glycemia as an influencer of everything from mental and physical health to the brain's default mode network. We used to talk about DMN as if it were much more immutable than it is. The deeper the neuro-imaging goes, the less true that seems.

LSS: glycemia is a significant influencer of behavior, not the only influencer, where the direction and slope of the glycemic curve determines the influence and that slope is more exaggerated with metabolic disorders like diabetes because insulin may not be a pill, but it's side effects are far more dramatic than most when taken exogenously without broad and deep knowledge of the pharmacokinetics and their impact, which are not well-understood outside the MD-PhD realm.

But I digress.

Once the device is inserted, it begins working after a warmup period, enforced by the software, of either an hour (Abbott) or 20 minutes (Dexcom). It's worth noting that I've seen data veracity and device reliability change with the same generation of devices, but software updates more frequent. I suspect this is due to changes in the software since nothing else has changed in the devices or the environment in which they operate.

My recommendation is to WAIT as long as possible prior to engaging with current CGM.

Why?

Because the last 5-10 years were the "ship the prototype" phase common in big tech.

Given the history, I'd expect the 2025-2030 3rd or 5th generation devices to be amazing, though their dependence on the smartphone ecosystem should be duly noted as good marketing, but perhaps an "embrace and extend" in which realtime blood glucose cannot be known without not just the phone, but the 4G or 5G network behind it at significant cost to the consumer.

This is why Dexcom's "innovation" of fixing the design mistake of routing local data through cloud and back to the display device is significant. Until other manufacturers follow suit, it is the only device I own that can do this direct BT device -> watch data exchange WITHOUT a costly smartphone ecosystem playing cloud proxy in the middle.
There may be others.

The significance here cannot be overstated precisely because it enables things like running or biking with a non-cell enabled watch without carrying the phone as cloud proxy via crappy wireless networks. Prior to this, that would have worked if and only if the watch had direct cell capability above and beyond BT or WiFi, assuming some things about the software which I'm not sure are correct.

I just wanted to be clear that the BT -> watch in this wearable health data sensor paradigm is only possible with Dexcom presently to my knowledge. Shipments may invalidate that statement tomorrow so one can only hope.

In the meantime:

Caveat emptor.
Can you be more specific? I’m familiar with Shannon’s work, obviously, but what societal changes happened as a result of engineering the Bell system specifically?
That sounds a bit like the patch cards for the EMS VCS3; you puhed pins into the square patchboard to connect-up the modules. If you mounted a piece of card over the patchboard and pushed the pins through that, the card became a record of your patch.

Of course, you couldn't "read" the card and guess what it souned like; the patchcard didn't record the settings of the knobs either.
Poor Gerard.
He was created on a local early stable diffusion on 22'
It was the best we could get at that time.
This is about selling solutions vs solving problems.

There's an excellent quote about this common phenomenon from Lant Pritchett (Prof @ Harvard Kennedy School) that has stuck with me for years, and helped improve how I begin a working relationship with my clients:

"A lot of the time when we first interact with people and ask them to come up with problems that they want to solve they often name a solution because they have a preset idea of the solution and hence they never really have thought through to the problem to which this that was a solution"

Here is a great quick explanation of this from him and how he addresses it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--ewJatFeZU
Sure these are often things AI is capable of doing. However, if using AI provides a worse product, building it takes longer and costs more, and the product is error prone, slower, and or more expensive to use then AI is simply a poor solution. The only argument has nothing to do with the product it’s about padding a resume etc.
well to steal a quote, "Neural networks are second best at almost everything"
This is the feature, I want.
It's a great question, and top of mind (as I considered applying for the open Deputy Director role running Login.gov that recently opened up, and prepared accordingly).

Privacy must always be a first class citizen as it relates to digital identity solutions, and any compromise must be as minimal as possible. Trust alone is not enough, the stakes are too high, and the history of breaches and data loss (both public and private) speak for themselves. I would argue that Login.gov, GSA, and the federal government aren't attempting to control state business, but are acting in service of it. They are a vendor, and if states and local govermnet choose to implement in a manner that allows for pluggability (in order to prevent vendor lock in to Login.gov), that would be reasonable (encouraged even). Login.gov should be chosen because it is the best solution, not the default solution because of .gov. If states and local governments wish to fallback or opt to other solution providers who meet digital identity regulations, they should be able to do so. It is above all, a partnership, not a power hierarchy.

I would also say that governance and transparency are non negotiable, and should be enumerated both contractually and in statute. What Login.gov stores, how long it stores it, how data privacy and security are addressed should be documented and attested to. And most importantly, Login.gov should not have the ability to deny service once onboarded without exceptional cause (codified in statute). It should be treated like a utility: inexpensive, reliable, trustworthy, to the point you forget it even exists. It should Just Work.
It sounds like they're simply critically evaluating the claims of beating the market.

If you can't beat the market with your own money, you shouldn't be trying to do it with someone else's.

If you can beat the market with your own money, why are you so worried about the downside? There should be little risk for someone who claims to be able to beat the market.

If they say that's too much risk, they likely don't think they can consistently beat the market.
So those that buy drills are constantly living in fear that they have to drill a hole in a wall? Maybe they buy because: 1- they want to prepared to an eventuality; 2- it's a cool tool to have.
Is working with GitLab as nice as it sounds? Every time I read the employee documentation I get the feeling working there would be a great experience.
That "probably" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. That said, whether they sell it or not, it's all that data that is their primary value store at the moment. They will either go public or sell, eventually. If they go public, it'll likely be similar to Dropbox; a single fairly successful product, but failing attempts to diversify.
> I want JS projects that don't break 6 months after the last build. The way you get that is by not adding more dependencies and not chasing the latest craze.

I've settled on ``document.createElement()``: it's a bit rough visually, but that's pretty much the only downside (I've found the time gained with templates to be negligible in front of the overall development time).

A big bonus of dealing with genuine objects is that there's room to extend them to e.g. store additional state/data/handlers/etc., which might otherwise be cumbersome to be set via attributes & cie.
I didn't realize, thanks for explaining.
> so your single point of failure is now just ONE password, the consequences of which would be that an attacker would have access to all of your passwords.

Most managers have 2FA, or an offline key, to prevent this issue, and encrypt your passwords at rest so that without that key (and the password) the database is useless.
> I want JS projects that don't break 6 months after the last build

I was somewhat recently trying to get a 3 year old JS project working. I felt like I was alone in an Egyptian pyramid wondering if I had missed the funeral.
Where do they say they sell it? Citation needed; that's a legal and reputational minefield that I don't think they would admit to, like you said.
Sure. But most people add “111111” or “123456” to the end. That’s why it’s on top of every password list.
I listened to the whole series with Dyson some time in the past year. It was well worth it. I also listened to the series with Murray Gell-Mann [1] and Hans Bethe [2]. All time well worth spending, and I've been thinking of downloading all the bits, concatenating them into audio files, and putting them on my phone for listening to when out on walks (I'm pretty sure the videos do not add anything essential: it's just a video of the interviewee talking - no visual aids).

[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVV0r6CmEsFxKFx-0lsQD...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvgLyzTEmJk&list=PLVV0r6CmEs...
My company was already mainly remote when covid hit. Like everyone else we tried a few things online, as well as meeting up occasionally to work together outside eg in a pub or cafe. One thing that helped us work better with a key supplier was a scheduled ~1h or so watercooler session on Fridays with no agenda or anything, though if work items did come up we were allowed to talk about them!
> If I think about it, if there are two otherwise equal toilet brushes, I will pick the one that has AI too.

Really? Will you, or do you believe other people will? (I realize toilet brush is a metaphor).
Can SoftBank Be an AI Supercomputer Player? Will Arm Lend a Hand?
This thread itself is now a good source to try all the suggested nav options!!!
> Sorry for the rant

No problem here. I deleted a rant turning into a screed about blog articles superimposing "The Book of Dragon" and "The Dragon Book", but after some consideration found this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_D...

With respect to "refuting the central point", if in the OP it is "Performance engineering should be about knowledge and science, not superstition and myth. (Godbolt not Godwin?)", then I agree. See:

https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/6-172-performance-engineering-of...

[I think Graham's hierarchy of disagreement ought to be used to color down votes, especially here.]
Yes some people might do it by chance. Some other people, they do it by knowledge.
My guess is that this will extend to knowing not to open weird attachments from strangers.

I've got bad news for ya, 2005... :P
Maybe ask Francois of he remembers what he optimized a little bit too much?