skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The laws are more nuanced than you suggest. Here is a government website [1] that mentions dogs and says “Dogs must be under control at all times. Dogs can harass, stress, injure or kill wildlife; annoy fellow hikers and introduce disease. Some wilderness areas require dogs be leashed at all times.”

I have recently been in Mount Baker’s wilderness where dogs off leash away from trailheads are fine and also in Mount Shasta wilderness where pet dogs are not allowed even on leash. There is latitude for local tweaks to the rules in specific wilderness areas across the US. The US also has vast swaths of BLM and other lands where all kinds of fun recreation (hunting, dogs off leash, OHV’s, and all kinds of other things are allowed).

[1] https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/psicc/specialplaces/?cid=stel...
> most people don't share rides unless forced to.

That wasn't true in the past. My father used to carpool with other teachers for 20+ years. I remember a lot of carpooling through the 1980s and into the mid 1990s where it fizzled out.

I would suggest, however, that self-driving cars would be fine for carpooling. Most people would have no problem carpooling with a self-driving car if it always picked up the same bunch of people every day. If I can commute in 35 minutes or take a self-driving carpool for 45 because it stopped to pick up 3 other people from my department along the way, that would be fine.
Fuck the Pentagon and their lies. Instead of stopping U.S. aggression and oppression around the world and at home, people are fooled into UFO bullshit. Bleh.
You mean the trains that go by once every 15+ minutes, and are confined to a track with no way for the operator to do anything but brake or speed up, compared to every few seconds with the ability for the driver to take control at any moment?

But I guess this would work/be status quo for non-autos if we kept the signals so peds and bikes knew they could still cross and probably not get run over by someone who decided to switch back to manual control.
It sounds like I might be full of it, would you kindly link me to a source?
As one example, when a user describes a pain point, ask them what they’ve tried to solve it. Have they bought some other product that didn’t work out? Built internal tooling? If it’s merely annoying but not worth fixing today, that likely foreshadows a tough road ahead for a paid solution.

I like that question because it can avoid the trap of all the end users agreeing something is a problem, but not being interested in spending money on solutions. Quite a few developer SaaS tools fall into this category.
On Firefox on desktop, it just opens Google Maps webpage.
You misspelled oligopoly. My guess from your comment is that you don't have a handle on how academia works, which is perfectly fine. You don't have to. But then don't hold such strong opinions because what you wrote is not even wrong.
As I mentioned in a sibling comment, I now "pair program" all day. Instead of being the driver and navigator all day, I can mostly sit "one layer up" in the navigator seat.
The Narrative Clip (2014)
Everywhere I've worked, most users (including devs) are on Windows. Windows is the major OS in enterprise environments, it's a huge mistake to not support it imo.
Why lower quality? The money doesn't go to authors, editors or peer-reviewers.
Are you saying they are recording what viewers are saying? That would be an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary proof.

Other than that, why wouldn’t they know what’s being said in a video they host?
Ah, I see. That's really just another reason why a 500k vehicles/day problem shouldn't be approximated as a problem of moving 500k people only during rush hour.
I didn't miss that point, I'm arguing that that point doesn't prove anything about the merits of a toast.

Their examples are all arguments of where local information should have been displayed. I agree with them in general. I just think that a toast should also be displayed in each of the situations they identify.

What seems to have happened is that they correctly identified a problem with lack of local information and blamed it on the presence of non-local information, which is fallacious. You can have both, and I believe that a UI with both is generally more usable.
> if you're a vendor just reselling Alibaba

There's an entire ocean between Alibaba flippers and strongly branded products sold first-party by mega-corps.

Consider the physical space and walk into a Target or Walmart - how many products on the shelf are Alibaba flips, and how many are sold by the manufacturer? Target has house brands, but Dawn Dish Soap is not one of them. You can get Dawn Dish Soap from most stores - if one day Target was randomly closed are you going to sit out front and wait for them to open, or are you going to another store?

Back in the digital space - let's pick golf... how many websites do you think sell Callaway golf clubs? How many of those websites are the actual manufacturer/brand? One? A google search for "buy golf clubs online" yields probably close to 50 websites just on the first page alone... of which 80% appear to be small businesses.

You start clicking through the search results looking for deals - and some of the pages don't load.

You're telling me you're going to go to archive.org and lookup the history of these random websites, then wait for them to come back online just to see if you want to buy something?

I don't buy this argument at all...

> That's exclusive products, support/warranty, niche product, etc beyond just "fulfillment"

People really don't consider or understand supply chain logistics, distribution and it's relation with retail... people really like to casually wave their hands and assert resellers/distributors have no space in the world, yet they buy products from resellers/distributors every single day without a moment's thought (Target & Walmart!). The "value add" is making desirable products accessible to regular people.

Regular people aren't going to pony up a $75,000 Purchase Order, fill a shipping container, and wait 6-8 months transit just so they can have a new cell phone case or new bookshelf. That's where distribution networks come in handy. We buy the $75,000 container so that you can buy just one item.

I guess we can't really blame people for not understanding this - people rarely understand how their beef and carrots got to the grocery store either.
I also don't want to mandate anything but as an industry we have to find some way to do better on security. Free SSO and 2FA with very strong nudges seems like a good path.
Yeah but if your cheese keeps sliding off your pizza, you can add some glue like elmer's glue to thicken it up.

Or so google's AI responses pulled from Reddit. If you give enough people a hot microphone to a large enough audience, some people are going to say some obscene, untrue, and funny stuff. Maybe that's 1 in 10. Maybe that's 1 in a 100,000. Reddit karma is cheap.
If people want to live in rural areas, that's fine by me. They don't particularly contribute to the problems with car-centric infrastructure in the US. The main complaints are how most cities in the US are designed in ways that are hostile to anybody who doesn't have a car, such as:

- making it difficult to get around safely by bike

- zoning restrictions that force development to be clumped in certain areas

- underdeveloped public transport with infrequent stops and limited range

- parking space requirements that limit development

- food deserts where people have to drive long distances to get groceries

There are many places in the world that have solved these problems. I don't get why it's so inconceivable to solve them in the US.
Interesting that livestock is the primary concern—I'd imagine interactions with other dogs (which can be highly stressful, though this varies a lot from dog to dog) would be the primary issue these days.
have they? as other comments mention this is the same attack surface as a regular phishing attack.
I really don't know what else. I believe this is how dotnet implements them under the hood as well.

I don't need the Optional to be "not an enum", I need it to function in certain ways. And syntactic sugar is 0 calorie. Add as much as you want. I don't care that "return x ?? y;" expands to "if (x == null) { return y; } else { return x; }" That's what it does.

Math itself is essentially syntactic sugar for language to express manipulation of numbers.
That's a great conversation. I anthropomorphically feel bad for Gemini, in that it actually got a hard question right, and then it was gaslit into believing it was wrong.
how many pedestrians and bikes are directly crossing busy train tracks at grade? traffic lights signal cycle every minute or so.

the issue is that unlike trains, roads are so numerous that they are hard to avoid, and it is financially unrealistic to bridge or tunnel for non-motorized users across every road, particularly if you want that crossing to be accessible.
Totally normal in the country, in the US. No fence or anything, either, if you’ve got enough land.
Cloudflare calls for regulatory harmonization amid rising internet challenges
That's a very common term in stock trading as well! Prices are crashing, and you try to make use of that opportunity to buy stock and make a profit when the stock rebounds. Then the price crashes further, the rebound is not gonna happen in the near future, and your fingers are a bloody mess on the ground...

Another panic reaction is selling off everything at the first sign of trouble. And some people hold on to doomed stocks for way longer than what makes sense (look up "Intel guy" on /r/wallstreetbets)

Day trading requires due diligence and nerves like steel, else you are just making somebody else a little bit richer.
all grade separated highways eventually exit onto not-grade separated roads, and often tailbacks are the result of delays happening off the highway system.
I'm willing to bet the actual reason the transition went so smoothly and the library doesn't pay that much in per-article fees is because everybody just used sci-hub.
On a lot of issues (passwords, SQL injection, automated deployments), buyers originally didn't care much about security, but the security community slowly but surely managed to shift norms and get doing the right thing to become normalized. I think that could happen on SSO too, if not for the fact that it's so effective as a price discriminator, which in turn I think makes it less likely to happen absent some kind of regulation. (Developers at small companies might not care, or they might want to do the right thing but be unable to justify it to the boss; meanwhile, SSO is usually a non-negotiable requirement for enterprises. I think that's a bigger factor than apathy or "price sensitivity" (enterprises are often extremely price-sensitive) in why it's such a good discriminator.)

I favor regulation on this, even though it's probably not necessary in every case, simply because I don't see any other way to break this equilibrium.
RIP Onivim 2, it was so close to this niche.
My job involves working with customers to test out products - has for years, and for several jobs. None of my products have ever charged extra for SSO, and most require it, so I get to deal with it all the time.

For the past 5+ years, the part of configuration that takes the longest - by far - is always SSO. I cannot imagine the amount of added support calls, time, and frustration brought about by it, so I can completely understand why some companies gate it behind more expensive tiers.
ITA used Common Lisp. The game company you mentioned is probably Naughty Dog who created "Game Oriented Assembly Language" for their games. GOAL was created in Common Lisp but was Scheme-like. They switched away after being acquired by Sony and needing to fit in better, they brought it back later on though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp
The opening starts off with back of back winges:

1. Gratuitous overkill about how useless it was to try to make a kid-engaged laptop / OS / learning platform

2. Their first read on Digital Gardens was that it was it "feels too shallow to me, and it feels backward-looking."

Woof. First, yes olpc failed but trying to make a cohesive os that was observable, that could describe itself to kids, was neat, and DBus was a pretty good tool for doing that.

There is a backwards-ism, a literal "back to the land" ism about digital gardens; I'd allow that.

But rarely do I see people with strong sense of owning a property in computing, in information spaces, and I think that's missing. We have very little developed sense of ownership around computing, and that's a notable missing element that Digital Gardens address.

> We copy the idea that "everything is a file", but we apply that to the problems we actually encounter today (tab management, media management).

Sign me up for this 9p utopia that's replicated itself everywhere.
And vast majority of them are due to drunk drivers, so if you used technology to detect a drunk person behind the wheel you'd cut this number in half if not more, but somehow this has less political support than mandating all cars to have expensive and complicated systems which don't do anything about the main problem of drunk driving.
Ask HN: How IO Works?
I want to learn how I/O works in a reasonable detail.

For instance, when I want to do something with a disk, IIRC, things that get involved are

- Kernel / OS calls (maybe we can skip this)
- File System
- MBR / GPT
- Random v/ Sequential calls

I want to understand what happens in each level. Is there anything I can read to gain understanding of all of these areas?
It's kind of a fizzbuzz-ish weed-out question: If they can do it, sure, you haven't learned that much, but if they cannot, then you know with pretty high certainty that they're not going to add to the team.
MIT is "tiny" by international standards. According their own site they have less than 12,000 students.

The largest universities are distance learning organisations and large groups of affilianted colleges or university systems.

E.g. Indira Gandhi National Open University has an enrollment of 7.1 million students (distance learning) and National University of Bangladesh about 2 million (affiliate colleges). Iran's Islamic Azad university system has ~1m.

The US also has a long list of much bigger universities/university systems. E.g. SUNY, Cal State, University of Phoenix, UC, UNC all have more than 200k students each.

So I'd imagine MIT makes up far less than 1/2000th of the student and staff population.
It isn’t about this requiring “deep analysis work”. It is the difference between some analysis and no analysis. That increase from 0 to 1 is always the biggest hurdle to clear when it comes to any corporate behavior like this.

This feature is like walking into your kitchen one day to find a dead cockroach. I’m saying that is an indication of a cockroach problem while you’re effectively responding with “it’s fine, the one cockroach is dead and there is no reason to believe there are any others.”
Reading this I realised I've kind of drifted away from the idea of refactoring for the point of it.

The example with the for-loop vs. map/filter in particular - it's such a micro-function that whichever the original author chose is probably fine. (And I would be suspicious of a developer who claimed that one is 'objectively' better than the other in a codebase that doesn't have an established style one way or the other).

Refactor when you need to when adding new features if you can reuse other work, and when doing so try to make minimal changes! Otherwise it kind of seems more like a matter of your taste at the time.

There's a limit of course, but it's usually when it's extremely obvious - e.g. looong functions and functions with too many parameters are obvious candidates. Even then I'd say only touch it when you're adding new features - it should have been caught in code review in the first place, and proactively refactoring seems like a potential waste of time if the code isn't touched again.

The (over) consolidation of duplicated code example was probably the most appealing refactor for me.
> which are generally highly concentrated.

Not in the slightest in DFW. That High 5 is going to service people coming from many dozens of square miles of suburbs to many dozens of square miles of offices. People are going to be coming from Plano, McKinney, Princeton, Wylie, Garland, Richardson, Sachse, Rowlett and heading to Addison, Northwest Dallas, Carrolton, Irving, Coppell, and Grapevine. That's just the traffic from the Northeast going to West.

It's not like most of these people in the suburbs of Dallas work in Dallas. They mostly don't, they live and work all over the Metroplex. And given its expensive to sell and buy land, people will often buy a house once and stay there even though their jobs might bounce all over the Metroplex.
It happens to me all the time. I can’t explain it either, but my hypothesis is me interpreting the highlighted “like” button as the encouraged action out of the two?
Some technical design elements can enable this style of non-programmer usage that most databases engines do not currently support.

First, treat each column separately in the physical engine (column store). Users ought to never need to worry about column count limits, row byte limits, or sparsity. Similarly, schema operators such as adding, removing, or reordering columns ought to always be instant atomic changes.

Imagine how much faster it would be possible to explore the schema design space if changes were instant and didn’t require “migration scripts” or data copies from an old table to a new one. It would make the database feel more like a spreadsheet!

Next, there ought to be Git-style forking and merging so that creating a test environment should also be a lightweight operation just like creating a local branch in a Git repo. Merging changes can be either schema only or schema+data -- the latter to support slowly-changing “master data” editing workflows. Currently, few if any database support the equivalent of a pull request with reviews to merge data. Hence the excessively complex access controls that could all be replaced with a single "peer review" operation.

I’ve seen a fancy category-theoretic approach where forks of the database can receive live data updates from production. This would allow UAT and similar environments to be evergreen with zero infrastructure code such as nightly ETL sync jobs.

Many operational tasks can be eliminated by tying live environments of both the code and data to Git branches of a single (mono) repo. Now the code and data schema can’t go out of sync! Literally impossible. No need for scaffolding, or ORMs, or any of those layers of overcomplicted abstractions! The schema is just “there”, in the repo, always representing reality.

Sprinkle on a Microsoft Access style form designer but with HTML5 and guest user support and you have a billion dollar product.
Yup. I wonder if there is a single place documenting all the ways the compiler uses explicit knowledge of Optional? E.g. this uses no sugar, but it wouldn't work for any other wrapper type:

func foo(string: Optional<String>) { . . . }
let string: String = "just a string"
foo(string: string)
Subscriptions are only okay for me if it's done like Jetbrains does it, where you can keep the old versions permanently. Partly because it implies what has to be true for monthly payments to make sense: that the software keeps getting better and keeps getting support for various tech advances that happen and tools and databases. If I'm paying monthly for something that doesn't cost them anything then that feels illogical on my side. This should become a thing with online services too, at least let me keep some kind of upgraded version of your service after I stop paying. Something please, anything to make me feel less like a chump for having paid and then ending up with nothing in the end.
By _your_ definition. If you apply it, a lot of effort is needed for little gain. The best refactors i've seen improved behavior while making code more concise.
> So it is like an office space charging double for swipe cards instead of a number lock.

If the landlord had to hire a bunch of extra support people, with expertise outside their normal domain, just to support swipe cards then this would make sense, no?

I can imagine a lot of products where accompany literally could not afford to provide support for SSO issues to a basic tier customer with 100 employees
someone should build a very precise "lut" with mems and this tech. would be pretty hard tho
Ahhhh yes they did it. They delivered workspaces and editable dependencies, which is literally all I needed.

I can't wait to set this up, I'm very confident they'll iron out any remaining bugs or gotchas (e.g. CUDA) quickly.
you don't even need range loops.

you have forEach:

list.forEach((item, index) => doSomething());

you also have for/of, though that doesn't have an index if you need that

for (const item of list) { doSomething() };

which just obviates the need for index incrementing in the most common case, where you are incrementing by one until you hit the end of the list.
The system will not be used for efficiency in the wider sense, merely in the car centric sense of increased throughput.

As another commenter has pointed out such a system makes life for other road users: cyclists, pedestrians, horses, most uncomfortable (to put it it exceedingly mildly).
You've overlooked that automatic transcription also includes the filtering of certain words based on match lists as well.
No worries! The comment was fine, I was simply gone so I couldn't reply.

TBH, I haven't written anything impressive, just toy examples that are formally verified.

I imagine making it practical for larger systems would require a lot more work.
These blog posts are from 2023, but they go over the experience with a Mac Studio:

https://jasoneckert.github.io/myblog/ultimate-linux-arm64-wo...

https://jasoneckert.github.io/myblog/fedora-asahi-remix/
I see so many people hyping Claude Sonnet + Cursor on Twitter/X, yet in real world usage, I find it no better than GitHub Copilot (presumably GPT 4o) + VScode.

Cursor offers some super marginal UX improvements over the latter (being that it’s a fork of VScode), since it allows you to switch models. But Claude and GPT have been interchangeable at least for my workflows, so I’m not sure the hype is really deserved.

I can only imagine the excitement comes from the fact that cursor has a full-fat free trial, and maybe most people have never bothered paying for copilot?
You need the increased space, which means you have the traffic waves.

You need the space because of variations in cars; some have better brakes than others, some may be heavier so need more time to slow down, others may be on wetter patch of road, etc.

And one car may not even get the signal, so only slows down when it observes the vehicle ahead of it doing, an observation that needs time.

Or a car starts accelerating as the one in front just stalls.

It may all be better than human reaction times, but for robustness, which is really very necessary, you're going to get the same dynamics.

And this all assumes only good actors; somewhat optimistic in my view.
> The "homes" part is distributed, true, but guess what, once you have a good rail network, it provides decent coverage for that (which you can complement via walkability/bikeability/scooterability :-p, which makes for more liveable environments).

This is incorrect due to the size of land parcels that Americans aspire to. The typical 0.1+ acre size lot makes it so people are so spread out, no public transit will ever make sense.
Open my mind to what? Not autoplaying songs? You're just the current times temperance movement. It didn't work then and it'll never work.