skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I had to clean up the code a bit and move it to a public GitHub repository.

https://github.com/leejoramo/macOS-plus-AHK

As others have mentioned it is probably worth looking at Kinto to add macOS keyboard shortcuts to Windows. I started this project years before I learned about Kinto, plus I have most of my other system customizations in here.

Currently my main workstation is KDE/Ubuntu where I use Toshy for the macOS shortcuts, and have customized the rest via KDE shortcut management and my hardware keyboard.
If either of you two enjoy reading the works of the mediaeval scholars and share some of my post-1945 abstract nonsensical mathematical context, a thought that was too orthogonal for HN's taste might could be of interest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41258636
Before the beginning, there was logic
DDG user here, worth the switch?
roflcopter may I add.
The team you are working with has very little experience so a lot of what they will be doing is learning, you need to give time for this but ideally you find ways to point them to standard ways of doing things and have them read rather than needing to reinvent the wheel. Where I work we do a loose form of agile which has lots of resources you can point people to. Below are my answers to your questions.

1. Daily

2. Every other week for an hour along with meeting when things come up.

3. Daily stand ups, every other week planning, retros.

4. Anything people work on that needs to be documented is done as part of their work. Changes to the system assume changes to documentation. Systems that others need to use more require more documentation but we don't put to much pressure on all of this because too much documentation can also be a pain.

5. Some people block off afternoon from meetings, I prefer to do this work in waves, when there is lots to talk about make sure these conversations happen, when everyone understands what needs to be done they are heads down working on it and I do my best to do the same.

6. Higher level meetings with leadership to align on goals get converted into team goals which are then converted into stories by engineering leads, in weekly planning we go over these tickets to make sure everyone is on the same page, sometimes new tickets need to be made for missing work but we try to make sure that everyone has enough work for the next chunk of time. You can check in on the status in standup and if something is off adjust something by adding more people to one ticket or breaking it up.

Another key thing to take into account is how to enable feedback from the people doing the work back up. You must enable the team to influence the goals and the work they are doing, sometimes they see a better way and it is important that they feel heard even if the path isn't changed.
Yes, in theory. Tracking someone's health can help doctors diagnose issues. If you search for "nosebleed" and then "back pain", that can provide valuable information, particularly if you might forget to mention symptoms. Tracking what you search for and click on could be used to suggest news stories you'd be interested in, and not just funnel you towards sensationalism. Et cetera. However, good uses are pretty niche, and certainly not what most data is used for.
Holy shit that's slick. Wow.

You have to verify though that the Hamiltonian cycle exists. An induction proof seems to do the job.
Maybe just sending the confirmation without the actual message. World is transforming and sending to people who filled out the form may open the gates to spammers. What do you think?
And if I had wheels, I would be a car. Theres no equal access without regulation.
As a full-time staff member there are obviously limits to what I can say.

Yes, it has been toned down a little. This is intentional, and there are good reasons. For example...

* El Reg has more writers in the USA than the UK these days. As a rule, Americans do not react well to British sarcasm and cynicism. Many take it at face value and find it offensive.

* A great many readers these days are not native English speakers and struggle with wordplay and so on. So, we reduce that.

It's all a bit more international. OTOH it's alive and thriving. That is a good thing.
Low quality received, poor accuracy out.
Thanks! Yes when we asked people what they used to prototype, we got the weirdest answers. Replit seems very heavyweight, and isn't local (always feels worse).

For non-npm things, we heard that a lot of people open up a browser console to use it as a REPL. I think we can do better, hoping Srcbook can cover these use cases well.

The Markdown is a really neat idea borrowed from Livebook. It allows for really good diffing if you want to version control them, and makes reviewing diffs easier. As a bonus a lot of things can read markdown and render it nicely for you.
I didn't know this had a name. I highly recommend it, btw.

I usually do 1-2 years of intensive work, followed by 2-4 years of "chill".

If you manage to make those work years enjoyable (I haven't) you're pretty much on perpetual vacation.
> I think the actual issue is that Google makes bad UX often, and not toasts in general.

Yeah, its wild because they were the ones who introduced the pattern to the general audience. And it was so successful that others started integrating it in non-material contexts. Toast and toast + action are here to stay, and for good reason, but I think google has individuals willy-nilly making design decisions and not quite being fully aware of how these elements should be used.
To try to succinctly respond to both points, I think the most clear way to describe the conflict is that you have different fundamental values than these authors do. Which of course I'm sure you understand.

I think you'd agree with the statement: "things that do not advance humanity are trivial". And that's totally fine, plenty of people feel that way. But not everyone does.

Furthermore that also assumes that "advancing humanity" is a clearly definable thing. I know plenty of people who'd argue that helping people understand the relationships in their life as advancing humanity.

But of course none of that really matters. I fully agree that there should be a multitude of awards which exist to promote diversity of thought and topic in literature.

My main point though is that these discussions suffer and don't go as far if they turn into a discussion about the value of the content as opposed to simply discussing the type of content we're looking to promote.
I think there are 2 situations:
- 1 client is not technical at all - so you manage on your acc
- client is ok with having their own acc, then it is much better option
denotational semantics = the meaning of a program is a mathematical object

If programs, such as video games, are mathematical objects, then the world is one too. But, of course, they are not. They are physical objects distributed in space and in time -- hence why people play them.

ED's discrete mathematics idealism here is the windmill he's tilting against. This is the origin of the very confusions he's annoyed with.

No, programs are not abstractions, and that is why almost every programmer bothers to write one.
Microsoft employee proposes user delete almost all of their registry keys
https://archive.ph/20240820140244/https://www.wsj.com/tech/e...
We definitely have different definitions. "can't use your device" is obnoxious but not invasive. "we control what you can and can't do with your device", no matter what mechanism it uses, is invasive. Think "invasive" in terms of "invades the boundaries of".

If the TSA seizes my (still-encrypted-and-locked) device, that's obnoxious and wrong, but not invasive. If they try to get me to unlock it so they can see what's on it, that's invasive (and will get a "no", followed by them deciding if they want to escalate to seizing it or not).
Not a problem we have in British English, 'preserving' the a from æ in spelling it paed~ ;)
> In addition to the reasons listed in your article, in some countries electricity grid is under control of unions that see cost of electricity as a form of tax, and they won't let it slip out of their hands.

Can you share which countries? I am genuinely curious.
Dijkstra was advocating for using formal methods...

Do the people agreeing with the article agree with its actual point? Especially whether it was wise before AI (maybe) improved the practicality of such an undertaking?
> As a backend developer this stuff is mind-boggling, just call it "notification widget", or a "confirmation widget" etc.

How would you call a hamburger menu? "menu widget with three-or-sometimes-a-different-number-of little horizontal lines"?

As a backend developer you also have some jargon but you’re too used to it to notice it.
Whenever I play Factorio, I play with the Biters turned off. For me, it's about managing the throughput and the aesthetics of the factory I'm building.

I still run out of resources, but typically by that point I have enough stuff that creating mining outposts is trivial, and in fact significantly better - I get trains full of raw ore, iron plates, and steel instead of having a big chunk of my primary factory devoted to processing that stuff.
Exactly: once you choose to use it for your business, you have ownership of the results. The challenge here will be if companies try to convince judges or lawmakers that there’s something magical about LLMs which mean they shouldn’t be liable for their business decisions.
Nah; an IDE / editor needs to be a solid, pluggable and performant core first and foremost, so that any addons like AI shenanigans are opt-in and swappable. While AI isn't new, AI-powered code assist is and with that in mind we're only at the beginning.

Consider LSP, where language developers can now publish a single tool for language specific utilities, where before every editor needed to add support for languages separately. Again, pluggability.
The reports feature of Visual DB seems to have most of what you are looking for: https://visualdb.com/

It has sophisticated filters and you can share reports with your team (as opposed to exporting CSVs).
That's a good point. I use Linux where file names are Case Sensitive and the sync to Windows has problems when the files are copied over to an NTFS partition or to my Android phone. However, the rest of the files are updated even though some files have issues syncing.

There is no alert etc generated just a message in the interface that sync is not complete.
WFH is fast food.

It's more convenient and cheaper but worse for you.
Probably that just skews it worse though. Most people aren't cf customers but many of the big targets seek protection
I'm not really a hardware person, although at this point I've done a couple of guitar-pedal projects. My favourite is to write OS-independent C++ DSP classes, and work with a team/client who handles the gnarly build/signatures/UI/embedded stuff.
Always underestimate exponentials: none exist in nature, they're just an early phase of an S curve (sigmoid, if you want the $10 word)
Excellent blog! Love the fact that a great amount of background information is added to the article. Can be read as an "introduction to embedded programming" chapter but not as boring as you find in textbooks.
Repeating the clause can be useful, but I don’t think it should be used as a general rule. Avoiding ambiguity does not mean forcing repetition and making dull prose. Example:

> The foo program is running on the bar server. Who is in charge of the latter?

Though in general that¹ is still weak. Depending on the surrounding context (which isn’t present in your comment) and the main idea, a possibly better example:

> Who is in charge of the bar server running the foo program?

Without a real use case, we could spend days discussing what is “better”.

Though yes, removing “that” can improve the text, thought that² doesn’t mean you need to replace it with anything. Let’s take the first paragraph in the article:

> Writing a technical document is surprisingly hard. That is not because of the skill to tell a story. It’s because writing forces a level of clarity that is easy to gloss over while thinking through a topic.

An alternative without any “that”:

> Writing a technical document is surprisingly hard. Not because of the skill required to tell a story, but because writing forces a level of clarity otherwise easy to gloss over while thinking through a topic.

¹ I don’t think there’s any ambiguity the “that” is referring to the previous sentence.

² I don’t think there’s any ambiguity the “that” is referring to improving the text.
> with the growing popularity of brain-monitoring neurotechnology which is already used in mining, finance and other industries.

... and if this is actually true, our transition to a full-blown dystopian world is nearly complete. This may be the most outrageous and unacceptable thing I've heard in years.

Personally, there's no way I'd ever accept this. I'd rather die cold and hungry on the street.
Privacy isn't about keeping secrets from everyone, it is about the selective control of personal information.

The people who use dating apps want to share their information with some people, and not others.
Taking youtube as an example is like taking a dead horse to a race. Youtube is an utter garbage ux-wise, both in bugs and features. Even fringe porn tubes are 10x more competent than youtube ui team.

Their latest “addition” was rewinding a video after a long pause. You watch a video, pause it at t=1:24:57 and go to sleep. Next day you start the video again and it goes for a while from t to t+n (depends on the buffered data), until it jumps back to t-20s.

Someone thought it’s a good idea to -20s after a long pause, and it might be good, if they assigned a proper developer to the task. Instead someone pushed an obviously idiotic change, without anyone checking. It’s not even an issue, it’s clearly “job done” by someone who couldn’t give a lesser fuck due to ieee754 limitations.

You cannot avoid that behavior. If you go forward/back or manually jump elsewhere, it still resets you to t-20s shortly after. You might think you just reload the page, but reliably saving the current position is not in their competence either.

That and a dozen other stupid bugs they fiddle with constantly but can never fix. Literally on a site with a sidebar and a grid of equally-sized elements. Their thumbnail card alone takes 7.5 pages (17KB) of html.
This is going to come off as tangential at first, but I am beginning to think that the next great human progress will not be engineering, or science, but philosophy.

We discovered nuclear fission in the 40s. We can fix atmospheric nitrogen into industrial fertilizer. We communicate at the speed of light. We can manufacture things so absurdly complicated and with such small tolerances that we can do everything from microelectronics to spaceflight. We can and do literally farm in deserts and we do alchemy as a power source!

So how is it that our primary means of collaboration dates to antiquity and potentially into prehistory? Here I specifically mean the mechanism of prices and currency exchange.

We refined it somewhat at various points - we layered powerful abstractions onto it with the invention of the corporation and securitized ownership thereof; we gave it a macro structure with capitalism and free markets, to socialize the concepts we wanted people to engage with. But at the end of the day, the system works because it is the most accepting of reality - it is a system that reinforces itself when people are driven to try to exploit it, instead of falling apart. Indeed, it reinforces almost too well - most of our intervention into it takes the form of "nudging" local minima - breaking up monopolies, enforcing minimum qualities, etc.

So, we have this system that has been fundamentally the same. And to my perception, we have two ways out: we either Star Trek our way to complete abundance, to where the cost of everything is ~0 so everyone might as well be given enough. Or - we decide that even though it is not free, it is time that everyone has enough. And given we've managed to literally perform alchemy and actual biblical miracles of agriculture, and we're still not really much closer, I hesitate to say that anything but the conversion of energy to highly-structured matter - a la Star Trek replicators - will make notable progress here.

So I think that the next big step forward will be philosophical. We need to take this urge that the article mentions - where people see the 90 year old working in the street, say "this is wrong", and correct it - and we need to make it so that people believe and live it axiomatically. We need to say - even though I cannot see them, and they may not look like me or think like me, they should have enough.
On the richness of the data- When you were a child every time you looked at any wall, how many wikipedia articles would it have taken to describe that entire experience?
The model needs to discover what is “noise” by rereading something as sparse as Wikipedia over and over. Think of it as understanding films purely from the script. Or learning what sand is and how it behaves physically from Wikipedia rather than picking it up and having it run through your fingers.

The experience of breathing and staring at a wall has an incredible amount of data that has to be learned before it is noise and is boring, and I’d argue it would take many Wikipedia articles to describe it fully.

And on the novelty function- SGD does update things based on a loss and how unexpected things were to the model. But that’s very crude compared to what humans are doing, where everything gets the same learning rate multiple, and we feed nearly random data to the model. There is a lot of evidence that if you pick your training set carefully you can train a lot faster, and I think humans are picking their own training set.
You can draw a big "C" shape that goes around 3 edges of the board and then fill in the middle with wiggles. This works for any rectangular board where one of the edge lengths is even. You already need one of the side lengths to be even to solve the problem because if both sides are odd then the number of squares is odd, and good luck covering an odd number of squares with dominoes.
If you love Kinto, you need to really look at the Toshy project. It is a fork of Kinto for Linux. The developer of Toshy is super active and responsive, and has moved the Kinto code to more modern technology. They have refactored the scripts to be much easier to customize and while allowing upgrade to new versions of Toshy.

https://github.com/RedBearAK/toshy
For anyone interested in the topic, I would recommend reading this article:

https://www.americanscientist.org/blog/the-long-view/the-sci...
I somehow didn't know about https://github.com/typst/typst. This is a really cool project, going to dig in further.

At first glance, this seems particularly useful for scientific-style notebooks, which aren't our primary focus. If the demand is there though, I don't see why we couldn't integrate.
This is 16 year old case that didn't file for Supreme Court review so it is strange the parent comment would use it as an example of "The simplest way to figure out the current court...".
Time management. Cooking. How to distinguish false information from true with a reasonable degree of accuracy. How to explain things to people. Formal logic - most computing languages are basically just logic with a quick coat of paint on top. How to figure out people and what to say and what to do and what all the weird contradictory social rules are. How to make a good impression. How to mask, if you're neurodivergent and assuming you haven't already learned it - in which case, how to stop masking.
Hacker news seems to follow redirects to the main site, but here's the original URL: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/msoffice/forum/all/micro...

And the archived page: https://web.archive.org/web/20240820143915/https://answers.m...
We use so many tools from Andrew Kane in our production repo. His packages make it possible to build an AI application using Rails.
This looks really awesome. It could easily replace a dozen AHK scripts on my system...

And, despite its obvious usefulness, this can also be used as base for a device to mess with coworkers. Change the firmware so that it rotates the mouse "north" by an arbitrary value between -30° and +30°, slowly changing over time. Or randomly remap keyboard keys to other neighboring keys but only once every n seconds/minutes. Just enough to evade suspicion. So many possibilities :-D
Yes, these are all great points that I didn't mention, thanks for completing my answer.
I think for more boilerplate-esque code-monkey type code it can be a boon.

I think the unfortunate reality is that this makes up a shockingly large amount of software engineering. Take this object and put it into this other object, map this data to that data, create these records and move them into this object when then goes into that other object.
No it's just barely literate idiot thugs. They're not pronounced or spelt any more similarly than in AmE or anything. It's just 'oh paediatrician that's what paedo is short for innit'.

Some examples:

https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/a-tale-told-too-much-the-pae...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4719364.stm

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/vigilante...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1353904/Paediatricia...

(there might be some overlap there, I haven't actually read more than necessary to check they're not cases of the paediatrician actually being a paedophile too, there is some of that unfortunately)
> For me the worse aspect is that they disappear (too quickly), and that they sometimes unnecessarily draw attention to themselves for success messages where you would trivially assume the action to succeed. The combination of the two is particularly vexing: Your attention gets unnecessarily diverted, but you don’t know if it wasn’t actually important because it disappeared too fast. Conversely, there’s also a variation where it stays on screen too long, obscuring a part of the UI you just wanted to see/use in that moment.

Agreed; a better solution would be to assume success and show these messages only if an error occured.
This really feels like the powdered wigs and huge complicated dresses before the French Revolution changed all that.
I always felt when learning about this stuff that people - pedagogically - make fixed point seem more complicated than it is.

Since this article is talking about more precisely positioning sprites in a 2D world, it could practically be a one-liner: "instead of tracking positions/velocities in pixels, track them in half pixels". Everything falls out of that intuition.
Back in college, I recall a professor saying that German students of philosophy would learn English to be able to read Nietzsche in translation rather than as it was written. (Upon reflection, it might have been Kant - https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/a/28743 )

My latin was too rusty to be able to read Meditations on First Philosophy as it was written. ( https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23306 ).

A translation from Latin to English ( https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Meditations_on_First_Philosop... ) necessarily changes those intents/concepts/ideas into those that the reader is more familiar with.

A translation from English of 1000 AD to 2000 AD has the same necessary changes http://www.hieronymus.us.com/latinweb/Mediaevum/Beowulf.htm

Is it ok to read Liu Cixin's work 三体 as Ken Liu's translation known to the English speaking word as The Three-Body Problem? Or should I learn Chinese and immerse myself in the culture of China in order to read it with those intents / concepts / ideas as things frozen on paper?

There are two problems - the book captured at its time may not be accessible anymore. Secondly, even if you can read the words it may be that the words those concepts map to in today's language are not the concepts that the author intended.

So... how short of a time frame is not not acceptable to read the work in translation?

I hold that a translation across time is not really any different than a translation of a modern work across languages and cultures.