skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This isn't exaggeration either [1], 300+ jets to a climate meeting discussing how they will restrictively control our lives to reduce emissions. The people proposing these rules are unwilling to change their lifestyle to help the environment, meanwhile your neighbour Joe Bloggs drives his car because he has to get to work to pay for all of these green taxes, which he gets more tax for because he can't afford an electric car.

[1] https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2023/dec/opinion-why-are-people-s...
The ObJC runtime C API has functions to convert strings to selectors, which you can do once upfront instead of each time objc_msgSend() is called. AFAIK the ObjC compiler can do this step even during compilation so that no method string names are included in the binary, but I'm not sure.

But I think it's no longer quite correct to describe ObjC as plain syntax sugar over the ObjC runtime C API (same as it is no longer correct to say that C++ is simply a preprocessor for C - AFAIK both ObjC and C++ started as such preprocessors), especially when it comes to features like ARC where the compiler does static lifetime tracking on ObjC object references. I don't think this can be replicated in plain C (and in C++ only less efficiently, since smart pointers are a stdlib feature and oblivious to the compiler).

PS: I actually do like the ObjC syntax. One great feature is that ObjC leaves the C syntax and semantics alone, which means that ObjC automatically supports the latest C standard. C++ would be a much better option today if it went the same route, but instead the 'C subset' in C++ is stuck somewhere ca 1995.
You have to advance your career. Just being employed will not get you more money.
For larger enterprises with complex org charts, I consider an agenda one of two invaluable tools for meetings, the other being post-meeting minutes including a RACI chart.

If someone can't think up a few bullet points for a meeting in advance, that person has not prepared for their meeting, and will waste some of the participant's time.

Not creating (one-line) minutes that most importantly include decisions that have been made in the meeting is also the perfect set-up for wasting other people's time.

I see this similar to the effort of writing a good commit message.
The Article is about remote work, which dodges this issue.
It's not a problem if you don't go to the parts of the web that have ads. I spend my time online on places like GitHub that operate as ad-free commission-free gift economies. Environments that have ads, have nothing that I want. I don't care about what happens in them any more than I care about what happens in shantytowns. Why do you care? What pulls you into those dark Internet spaces?
I mean if you dig into any of these "non-profits"/NGOs the behavior seems entirely par for the course and it's more expected that they be filled with people like that.
If you consider the per seat cost compared to commercial, I don’t think making it a bit more expensive will move the needle.
The dev who worked on the lld and mold linkers turned the dial to 11...

LLD (part of LLVM):
https://llvm.org/devmtg/2017-10/slides/Ueyama-lld.pdf

MOLD linker:
https://github.com/rui314/mold/blob/main/docs/design.md

Apple released a new linker that's in the same ballpark as mold - see following link for previous discussion - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36218330
I prefer drinking straight from a cup.

Straws are the answer to drinking through a lid, which is the real necessity for takeout restaurants. Costco figured this out with a self-sealing flap on the lid you can sip from.

That said, it's all window dressing. As a kid I drank from paper cups with plastic straws. An iced coffee from some restaurants is now a massive plastic cup with a paper straw.
Privacy-Preserving Attribution: Testing for a New Era of Privacy in Advertising
Seattle is a beautiful city. Why not just move there?
Optimize the rate, not the money itself. With Remote work, automation, now I can work only around 20 hours a month with a full month salary.
Google accounts require a phone number. How do you reliably fake that internationally without risking your money on some shady service?
> Nobody's gonna read & apply any special rules of communnicating with you, especially written by yourself (sic!)

On the other hand, you don't have to reply to those random "quick call" messages as well as videocalls without an agenda.
I’m amazed these titans of productivity have time to write blog posts about productivity.
Incidentally this was published just now! https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2024/08/22/ppa-update/

He also linked to this technical explainer, though I don't think that's necessarily written for a broader audience: https://github.com/mozilla/explainers/tree/main/ppa-experime...
My gut says otherwise, given the apparent decentralised structure and international range, making them difficult for a secret hand to guide while also being more prone to any one local group having their own Leeroy Jenkins.

That said, I've seen the inside of the American Green Party, and what I saw had vibes of someone deliberately following the CIA guide to organisational sabotage — though even then, also a lot of amateurs with no idea how small and irrelevant they are and thus obliviously attempting to directly change the whole world rather than focus on what they actually have the power to influence, and I suspect that was where the majority of their mistakes came from.

(Also a few genuine experts who were busy trying to sort out the internal issues, but "busy" tends to also mean "quiet").
The good thing about these global chains is that you see the logo anywhere in the world and you know exactly what to expect inside. Other that that, yes, Starbucks (and Stars Coffee it became here in Russia) is just a massively overpriced coffee shop. There always are cheaper and better ones.
I am curious why this name was chosen. Is there any connection between Isaiah and whales? Feels somewhat TempleOS-y.
these things annoy me too but it's never going to stop, linking somebody to something like this is just going to result in everybody disliking you and then asking you for a quick call anyway when they want something.
How well are HDR and raytracing features supported on Linux?
Researchers are in a unique position to get paid to discover things. Its a lottery in that what they publish could potentially be worth tremendous money in industry, but its a safe gamble because if everything else goes wrong they are still employable with a higher than average salary doing work that is less boring than average.
The comment you reply to does a good job describing one goal of this usage.

You can see virtue signaling in this behavior, and there may be a part of it, but that is not the only reason it is used and it's dicey to jump to the conclusion that virtue signaling can only be the main goal. The fact that you don't see these others goals or refuse to believe that they may be the main reason does not change the reality of the existence of these goals.

It's like people who are saying "if you say you prefer Linux over Windows, it's only because you are jealous of Windows popularity and want to feel different". Maybe it is, maybe it is not. But they just refuse to even consider that maybe the other person is not acting by jealousy.

> I have NEVER met someone using alternative language like "differently abled" who actually did something substiantial for the community or for a particular person. Almost all cases have a touch of patronisation.

That sentence sounds very strange to me: why on earth someone using alternative language like "differently abled" would suddenly be required to do something that you don't even blink an eye for people who don't use that language?

It feels like the virtue signaling resides in your eyes only: you are seeing someone saying X, you _invent_ that it is because they want to be seen as a knight helping the disabled people, and then you show that there is an incompatibility because they don't really act like a knight helping the disabled people.

But what if people using this language don't do it to be seen as a knight helping the disabled people. Then there is absolutely no incompatibility at all.

The fact that this incompatibility exists is even a clue that maybe this behavior has nothing to do with virtue signaling.

> And as a disabled person, I can tell you, I need nothing of it.

I think that the goal as described by the previous comment has nothing to do with you. The goal is to reshape the way of thinking "there is a hierarchy of 'good situation' with abled people on top" into "there are differences, with sometimes good situation and sometimes bad situation, but it's more complicated than that and simplifying the picture as a simple hierarchy is incorrect". The goal is not to please you, the goal is to avoid having a way of thinking that does not correspond to the reality.

It's the same reason why some people stop saying buzzwords like "artificial intelligence" when referring to a smartish complex algorithm composed of if conditions and no machine learning at all. They are not doing that to be fair to algorithm, they do that because there is a gain for them and for the society to not maintain misconceptions.
Small talk is fine, but when someone isn't willfully trying to engage in small talk and just is walking through a ritual to ask me a question, it seems better to skip the ritual and get to the point. Instead of "Hi [name]", them waiting for me to reply, me waiting for them to reply, and them sending their question, they could write "Hi [name], [question]" in their initial message. There are no disadvantages to this and plenty of advantages.
It seems reasonable to me. I tell my reports to decline meeting requests unless the invitations include an agenda and a clear goal.

If you're asking for 30 minutes or an hour of someone's time, it is only common courtesy to tell them why.

If you send someone a message, don't just say "Hi". This is incredibly bad manners in the context of asynchronous communication. Give the recipient an opportunity to prioritize your message. You don't know what they are doing. They could be fire fighting. They could be tied up in a face-to-face conversation. They could be in deep flow. They might have three or four other messages to prioritize alongside yours.

If you don't give someone the information to make an appropriate prioritization decision, all you are doing is inducing anxiety.

This is all a matter of being kind and accommodating to your colleagues, enabling them to work with you effectively, and making it easier for them to help you.

Purposefully making your colleagues' lives more difficult is a recipe for an unpleasant working environment.
This is a phenomenal general rule and can be expanded well beyond engineering and social norms:

At a certain point it just doesn't make sense to over-optimize for productivity, when the sacrifice {insert impact} isn't worth the gain {insert output}.
It doesn't, chat and mails actually become way more socially important in remote.
On the Desktop the navigation is painful too.
I believe the author means "quick call"s. They are not against scheduled calls.
I get the point. You want a quick answer, then ask the question directly.

I dont think the rule can be applied universally.

1) Cultural norms - This may not work in all environments

2) You have an issue which requires cross function help. Hard to frame a precise question when you dont know which features are the most significant.
I can empathize, but am also wondering if some of these are feature requests in disguise. For “how to call api” docs, sample code, and even client libraries can be generated from your OpenAPI specs. Link to the docs in every reply. The more complex asks could be translated “build this endpoint and charge me for it”. If all else fails, set up partnership with devs who want to fix/build customers crap and figure out some copy to direct the more complex asks to them.
Well, we'll see.

I really like the fundamental ideas of SwiftUI, and want it to work, but have found that it doesn't allow me to write the kinds of apps that I like to release, so I still use UIKit/AppKit for my shipping apps.

The documentation for SwiftUI (and most new Apple SDKs) is awful. It's clear that they are relying almost entirely on inline code docs. They used to have a legendary documentation team.

Inline code docs can actually work quite well (I do it, myself[0]), but it requires serious discipline. If you cloc my codebases, it usually comes up 50/50 between docs and executable.

[0] https://littlegreenviper.com/miscellany/leaving-a-legacy/
What about ambulances, police cars and firetrucks, would you prevent them from speeding as well ?
Yes. Of course it is. Whether the item is luxury or not is a property of the product itself.
Same here- I used to have all my domains on Namecheap until their CEO came on HN to announce that anybody who forced their parents to give birth to them in Russia has exactly 1 week to transfer all their domains away somewhere else.

I don't fall into that category, but this was so ignorant and insulting that I transferred away all my domains to Cloudflare and never looked back.
Would you please publish an analysis that supports your first statement about bad design, that would be helpful and interesting!

Also please consider writing some articles about typical packaging problems in Python that you come across your work.

Please also consider setting up some way of sending you money to support this interesting work!
> Often this takes the form of trying to access an endpoint that does not exist, or read a property off the API response that does not exist. After probing a bit more, my suspicions are usually confirmed — ChatGPT hallucinated that endpoint or property

This is an opportunity. Add another tier to your pricing structure that provides an AI that assists with coding the API connection. Really simple Llama 3.1 that RAGs your docs. Or perhaps your docs fit in the context already if the API is as simple as it sounds.
Open a jira ticket for every meeting you attend. (And close it). When asked about productivity treat meetings as the most productive use of your time. "I had a fantastic day yesterday, attended 5 meetings and closed 5+n tickets. I'm so productive I deserve a raise."

Managers treat meetings as the most important thing you do. (Its the most important thing they do.) The disconnect is that we don't see them the same.

Once you start taking credit for all the meetings you attend, you'd be surprised how many fewer you get invited to.
No! Markdown is made to be simple. Don’t use it for complex projects. Use properly thought out markup languages for that, like Asciidoc.
In the 19th century you had the same job for life. If you were a
blacksmith you stayed a blacksmith and died a blacksmith in the
village where you were born. Your surname was synonymous with your
skill. Wheeler. Smith. Potter. Even in the mid 20th century people
worked for the same company for life. The "corporate" (body) world
meant something very different than today. The corporation took care
of you. It paid for your health and holidays. If you were unhappy in
work, it helped sort that out so you would stay. As late as the 1960s,
and still for some people who work in government, and still a culture
in Japan, you can get a "job for life".

"Career" means to move haphazardly. It replaced the more stable
notions of "vocation" and "calling". Today you might spend a year in
hospitality, a few years in sales, then do a diploma in programming,
move to California, get into media design, and then open a juice bar
on the beach... Everyone is at the mercy of ever swirling markets and
the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, layoffs and takeovers,
new trends. Who here didn't "get into AI" in the last 2 years?

In a way that's a richer better life. It's more challenging. It is
also shallower. There are less places to put down roots and grow
anything worthwhile. People with active minds and a lust for life
naturally outgrow scenes, groups and institutions. Moving on should be
an exciting joy. What I see of America and UK now (at least here on
HN) is that people are held in place by fear. We've regressed to 19th
century ideas about work and life, minus the positive 'belonging'.

What I think people sometimes "grieve" is the sunk-cost spiritual
investment in what they thought an institution represented. Or they
found themselves in an career that is in decline. or in institutions
that have decayed - and it's painful to move on. Those reasons may be
emotionally noble; loyalty, fidelity to values etc. You can let go of
values and of a dream. Or you can take them with you, by realising
that they never belonged to any "institution" in the first
place. They're yours.

Academia is definitely that place in 2024. The reality of academic
life is the antithesis of human values we traditionally associate it
with. If the institutions we inhabit are inflexible, ineffectual, and
less than our ambitions then it's time to move on. The problem is not
so much that people identify with what they "do", but where and with
whom they do it. It's a strong and valuable kind of person who keeps
their calling/purpose separate from their employment identity.
https://archive.ph/g8jEa
I'm not a gamedev, but I do a lot of numerical work. GPUs are great, but they're no replacement for SIMD.

For example, I just made a little example on my desktop where I summed up 256 random Float32 numbers, and doing it in serial takes around 152 nanoseconds, whereas doing it with SIMD took just 10 nanoseconds. Doing the exact same thing with my GPU took 20 microseconds, so 2000x slower:

julia> using CUDA, SIMD, BenchmarkTools

julia> function vsum(::Type{Vec{N, T}}, v::Vector{T}) where {N, T}
s = Vec{N, T}(0)
lane = VecRange{N}(0)
for i ∈ 1:N:length(v)
s += v[lane + i]
end
sum(s)
end;

julia> let L = 256
print("Serial benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{1, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("SIMD benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{16, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("GPU benchmark: "); @btime sum(v) setup=(v=CUDA.rand($L))
end;
Serial benchmark: 152.239 ns (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
SIMD benchmark: 10.359 ns (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
GPU benchmark: 19.917 μs (56 allocations: 1.47 KiB)

The reason for that is simply that it just takes that long to send data back and forth to the GPU and launch a kernel. Almost none of that time was actually spent doing the computation. E.g. here's what that benchmark looks like if instead I have 256^2 numbers:

julia> let L = 256^2
print("Serial benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{1, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("SIMD benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{16, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("GPU benchmark: "); @btime sum(v) setup=(v=CUDA.rand($L))
end;
Serial benchmark: 42.370 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
SIMD benchmark: 2.669 μs (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
GPU benchmark: 27.592 μs (112 allocations: 2.97 KiB)

so we're now at the point where the GPU is faster than serial, but still slower than SIMD. If we go up to 256^3 numbers, now we're able to see a convincing advantage for the GPU:

julia> let L = 256^3
print("Serial benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{1, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("SIMD benchmark: "); @btime vsum(Vec{16, Float32}, v) setup=(v=rand(Float32, $L))
print("GPU benchmark: "); @btime sum(v) setup=(v=CUDA.rand($L))
end;
Serial benchmark: 11.024 ms (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
SIMD benchmark: 2.061 ms (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
GPU benchmark: 353.119 μs (113 allocations: 2.98 KiB)

So the lesson here is that GPUs are only worth it if you actually have enough data to saturate the GPU, but otherwise you're way better off using SIMD.

GPUs are also just generally a lot more limiting than SIMD in many other ways.
>RACI chart

Today I learned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matr...
this looks very nice though it also is close to typst. a comparison would be interesting.
I think what you're missing is that this isn't just this person's preferences. These are things that bother many, many engineers and don't provide any value compared to the alternative.

Good etiquette isn't common sense, and that's why there are books written about it for centuries.
This is similar situation with Copilot. it does not suggest more modern web and JS APIs for me.
On Linux Mint 21.1 Mate, I was not able to launch or use the Appimage file. Then I installed the flatpak version and it worked. Though I prefer the former.

Anyway, it looks good on the first try. Will give it a good try for a month or so before committing to it.

Does it have "profiles" feature like Vivaldi?
I always run everything through virustotal first. (I should probably add that this is step two in my process: step one is to be very cautious and not download most things in the first place.)
Assuming I am looking at the right comment, you didn't really expand/explain all that much.

If I am correct, your argument boils down to blocking happening outside the direct control of the user. This technically is true, as you don't have an icon in your browser like you would have with an extension.

At the same time, it being outside the control of the user is not really true if the user is also the person in control of the blocking solution. I don't know how it works with AdGuard, although I assume it is the same. Pi Hole offers extensive insights in what requests are being blocked, from which client and when.

This can even be adjusted on a per client level. Making that argument a more theoretical rather than a practical one.
>internal Facebook research has shown negative mental health implications for teenage girls on instagram for example — this is known as part of some whistleblowing efforts

This is one of the reasons why I have difficulty taking this rewatch seriously, because that is not what the internal research at Facebook said. That was a media headline that misrepresented the results.

They measured 12 different indicators problematic use of Instagram, body image issues, sadness etc. For teen girls 32% of respondents said that IG made their body image issues worse, what the media didn't say however, is that 45% thought Instagram had no impact and 22% said it made their body image issues better.

And that was basically the worst indicator out of all 12 of them. For example, the same research said that on the question of loneliness 12% of teen girls said that IG made it worse, 36% said it had no impact and 51% said that IG made it better.

On every issue Instagram eat mainly either neutral or positive. And that's the internal research that places like WSJ used to say Facebook causes negative mental health effects in teen girls.

>Content filters have come a long way, this isn't what anyone is suggesting.

No they haven't. It's still the same garbage it always was just dressed up in fancier words. You can look at AI and see how well censoring it works. It's crude and ultimately doesn't work, just makes for a worse experience.
Sorry but if any one of my coworkers behaved or responded like this, I’m not sure we’d be working together anymore.
Can I ask what you mean with "pretty common"? Do you think more than half of all STEM graduate students had a similar experience as she did? Do you have actual data to support this?

I am asking this because HN neems to be so much more negative of academia than what I am seeing around me.

More generally I think it is worth stressing that any site like this can be a terrible echo chamber at times. Generally there are smart people here, but on some topics I suspect that the consensus could be completely misguided.
>> Can you explain why this struck you as disingenuous

Certainly! In essence because shifting euphemisms are a drop in the bucket of learning a language, the challenge is already present because words are always shifting in meaning (do you remember when 'figuratively' and 'literally' swapped?) and in my experience people give a lot of grace to non-native speakers. This made it feel like concern trolling to me.

As for your other point I believe I understood you, but in the absence of a specific example of language policing to analyze I think I should let it drop.