skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
the comments about "why is this necessary" can be handled with a decent PR template, and a comment.

What I tend to do is make the changes locally with different commits and then cherry pick the refactor into a PR branch and wait for that to be accepted. Then I rebase the FULL branch with "master" after the merge and create the PR.
My point was that running any kind of software should not come with a presumption of guilt. But in the eyes of the establishment, it often does; see: Aaron Swartz, or how pressing F12 might be illegal[0], or many other such cases. A "hacker" should not have any sympathy for this kind of draconian knee-jerking.

[0] https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/15/f12-isnt-hacking-missouri-...
My experience is that systemically squashing PRs enables a "fire and forget" style where you can add a bunch of small commits to your PR to address reviews and CI failures without worrying about making them fit a narrative of "these are the commits my PR is made of".

On a more concrete level, squashing PRs means every single commit is guaranteed to pass CI (assuming you also use merge queues) which is helpful when bisecting.
wow, it's really good and the rest of your site is even better
Speaking personally, it's because the company only supports Windows for everything else.
I used bash in college and then didn’t use it for around 5 years. And then I used powershell.

And bash is still a lot better as a shell language. Powershell commands are long and annoying. If you remember all the aliases (most of which are annoyingly bash commands but hardly behave that way) then the parameters are long and annoying.

Stringing commands together requires too much API digging because objects mean you need to run a variety of incantations on the results to know what members you need to pull out and what data format they have, etc. in Bash it’s always strings and if you know a couple of useful string manipulation commands such as cut, that you probably know anyways for other reasons, you can get by with stringing most commands fairly trivially.

Powershell OTOH is a lot better when I’m trying to write an actual reusable script. But at that point why wouldn’t I just use something like Python anyways (or if it will be associated with a front end repo I will often just use nodejs since it’s definitely installed). Python has much more usable comparison, control flow, etc operators, much bigger libraries, better multi OS compatibility etc.

The only advantage really is using powershell commands/applications, so sometimes I will write my scripts in Powershell.

But in Linux I will also sometimes write my scripts in bash for the same reason, so it’s not really an advantage inherent to powershell, but the fact that it’s the “standard” of the OS.

I do like Powershell, but the problem with it is that it tried to be both a great scripting language and a great shell language, but the things that make it a good scripting language, such as verbose naming, objects, etc make it a worse shell language than shell languages designed to be shell languages first, and the things that it does to make it a useable shell language, makes it a worse scripting language than other scripting languages.

On average it may be the best language across all environments and use cases. The problem is that for any specific environment and use case it’s rarely one of the better languages.
I was curious whether these claims were true or not, so I looked it up.

https://images.samsung.com/is/content/samsung/assets/pl/memo...

Damn. 3 months for my SSD.
MariaDB Server is GPL and must always remain GPL, as it's a fork of MySQL which was also GPL.

Also the MariaDB Foundation is separate from the commercial/enterprise entity MariaDB plc. This article is about the latter being taken private.
An email can be filtered, doing that with a subpoena would be... silly.

> a really stupid waste of time and resources

Subpoenas are used all the time in cases where they're not expected to be inherently useful for acquiring information. If law enforcement is going to take 10x as long to find the perp because you hid them, I don't see a problem with them sharing that burden with you a bit—there are externalities here that should be internalized.
Could it not be that you don't want such emails exposed if you were hacked? Why does it have to be only law enforcement that you're hiding them from?
Ha ha, I guess I'm slow.
By that logic why not also seize and do forensics on all the ISP's routers too then, just in case? After all, the ISP could be secretly in on the criminal plot, and how could you know without imaging every hard-drive in the data center? It would be negligent not to.

The truth is that police investigations normally are restrained based on the disruption that they cause the public. Police deviate from standard operating procedure when it comes to TOR exit node operators because they want to punish and intimidate them.

They want to punish operators because the authorities are frustrated by the effectiveness of these technologies in countering the pervasive surveillance environment which the authorities take for granted.
Seift has great C, C++ and Rust interop.

And despite Swift for Tensorflow being killed, there’s still decent python interop.

Now, setting up a project for that is probably quite hard because the documentation is non-existent.
While that sounds true, the EU approved Ireland's 1% tax rate.

This is a retroactive ruling. This is playing favorites, the opposite game.
> But all of the above bend over backwards to help law enforcement.

We prefer they assist LEO operating under court order, instead.
Unless you're buying a meaningful fraction of tickets, the EV/ticket will be similar to uncorrelated tickets.

If you're buying all the tickets, well, the math is real easy. (and occasionally profitable, see 1992 in Virginia)
That's sick as hell, friend. Actually, I have a second part to this article discussing some of the history and politics of what brought me to these tools.

In about 2013, I migrated the Glasgow Haskell Compiler from "read .patch files on bug reporter" that I joked about, to using Phabricator. For a couple reasons, but at the time one of them was not stacked diffs. It was because GitHub was so bad for review it didn't even have side-by-side diffs! It was a total non-starter for me for those reasons among others.

But that actually wasn't the first time I migrated a team to a code review tool. My first job in 2009 was a very small tight knit team of engineers in a single room in Houston, and I remember thinking it would be really good to get reviews of my code from other people, and to read the things they wrote so I could better understand the codebase. So, the first thing I did in the first few months was pester my manager to set up... ReviewBoard! And we all really liked it.

So I guess this is a way of saying thanks for RB! I still think of it fondly from time to time. And because of it, Code Review has always just been a huge part of my career, almost since day one (and I could still do more of it.)
Agreed, updated at https://harrison.ai/harrison-rad-1/
Can you describe what you think is the difference between Ki and the syntax tree based selection expanding that's been available in emacs for probably a decade or more?
One problem is that the LLM's own knowledge, or lack of it, doesn't follow from any individual training sample(s). Even if there were a bunch of "I don't know X" samples in the training set, that ought to be trumped by one authoritative "X is ..." one.

The next problem is that the LLM doesn't know how reliable it's various training sources are (unlike a human who might trust personal experience > textbook > twitter comment), or even which samples come from which source so that it could learn that.
Little bobby tables they called him
> ...to fuel the narrative that media is inherently left-leaning?

Right around this time 8 years ago, the election was over... in the media. Clinton won, trump didn't, in like September of 2016. Like, the world was collectively shocked. Because, according to the media, trump was cooked.

How does that square?
If they don’t have firing / hiring power, they aren’t management according to US labor law.

Most tech “* manager” roles where the object of management is not a person or team likely qualify.
People listen to auto-generated readings of Reddit threads, so some will absolutely.
Good to know. It’s an old blog and I’ll be moving it away soon. This just makes that work more urgent for me.
With stacked commits, every commit is already passing CI though.

To us the mental model is minimum. All you need to do is to make sure each commit pass CI. You can ship any number of stacked commits together

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure why I can't reply in a technical discussion. I have to edit to answer your question @danparsonson

> if I'm working on a long series of changes across multiple days, and halfway through it the code doesn't build yet?

That's why you break them down into small commits. The early you push it to CI, the earlier you will know whether each commit builds. For example, push commit 1 2 3 to the CI when they are ready. When the CI is running, you are working on commit 4 5 6

> The code won't pass CI because I'm not finished, but I want to commit my progress

If your commit 1,2,3 are ready, just ship them. It doesn't stop you have a few commits in reviews and a few WIP commits. There is no down time
Rust addresses opaqueness and untestedness directly, by enforcing the language constraints at compile time. Rust addresses the privileged nature of the code and it's exposure directly by disallowing the most common bugs used to gain access to that privileged execution. Obscurity and diversity can both benefit from Rust's integration of Cargo and the resultant ease with which it allows for sharing common code.

In short, expressing this code in an appropriate language can absolutely address and even go some way toward correcting each of those issues.
From the article:

> At the time of writing, the rate of requests leaving pingora-origin (globally) is 35 million requests per second. Any code that has to be run per-request is in the hottest of hot paths...function consumes more than 1.7% of pingora-origin’s total cpu time. To put that in perspective, the total cpu time consumed by pingora-origin is 40,000 compute-seconds per second. You can think of this as 40,000 saturated CPU cores fully dedicated to running pingora-origin. Of those 40,000, 1.7% (680) are only dedicated to evaluating clear_internal_headers. The function’s heavy usage and simplicity make it seem like a great place to start optimizing.

Given how many requests are going out, and just how hot the function is, every single gain matters. If my read of the article is correct, this is the hottest part of the hot path, so every gain here is super important.
X years ago the manager of the cache team raised the lack of data plane and control plane separation as an issue and we came up with various plans to fix things, but I guess nothing has happened since
Any comparison with how much faster this is compared with the previous way of doing things on the CPU?
The recent price increase was directly because of demand to import PS5s from Japan to China after the release of the Wukong game. I'm not sure exactly why, but importing Japanese consoles was cheaper than buying whichever ones were left in China.
Or as simple as using the hardware accelerated CRC32 that we have in our x86 CPUs.

Last time I checked, CRC32 worked surprisingly well as a hash.
Show HN: Gauss-Engine v1 – Text-to-Human Motion Without Mujoco
We’re excited to introduce Gauss-Engine, a groundbreaking AI-native physics engine that allows creators to generate lifelike human motion from text prompts—without the need for Mujoco. Imagine designing complex interactions like walking, jumping, or even acrobatics, all while maintaining real-world physics accuracy.

Gauss-Engine leverages advanced techniques like hierarchical motion representation to capture fine details and ensure precise control over movements. By progressively refining motion at multiple levels, we can achieve high fidelity without sacrificing flexibility. Additionally, we employ context-aware generation, where models condition on previous motion data to maintain consistency and stability in long, complex sequences. This ensures that the generated motions are fluid and realistic, even across extended interactions.

Our approach enables creators to define detailed, environment-aware movements using just text, offering unprecedented control and flexibility in motion design. As AI-native physics engines evolve, the future holds vast potential for more immersive experiences in gaming, VR, and robotics—driven by precise, real-time motion simulations.

Ready to experience the future of motion generation? Check it out the demo video here:

https://youtu.be/04eCzUO14jg
Why on earth would you care about why other people wear Airpods?
That is not at all surprising. We all know they have the resources to find a solution to their massive data problems.
The feature exists, but it’s not so easy because there is a lack of documentation.
Having contemplated pan materials a bit, it seems to me that high thermal conductivity is nice, but one really wants is even heating, and that might be best accomplished by highly anisotropic thermal conductivity. Or maybe by having a good conductor sandwiched between poor conductors.
Unless I'm misunderstanding your comment, you are arguing in bad faith.

It is not a "pain" to set up logging. Most non-tor proxies implement logging. It would be a completely reasonable task for the tor project to implement logging by default.

No one would be any more "wary" to interact with your tor node. Trusting your node not to log would be foolish anyway. So whether you make known that you are logging, or whether you claim not to log (but might secretly do anyway) doesn't make much of a difference.

The storage space a log takes up is negligible (unless you keep logs for unreasonably long times) on anything but the smallest systems. And since running a tor node takes quite a bit of processing power, you won't be running your node on a system that can't handle a few megabytes of logs.
What? It overruled a previous ruling from a lower court (which I believe in turn overruled an initial rulin in the other direction!)
The SQL part as well, it should be pronounced "squeal".
This is both awesome and feels very dangerous to release publicly, no? Can’t this be used to discover novel bioweapons as easily as it can be used to discover new medicines?

Genuinely curious, would love to learn if that isn’t true / or is generally just not that big of a deal compared to other risks.
> Ross Douthat is still employed so your assertion falls flat on its face.

I have no idea who that is.

> Aside from that, right now I see an item claiming Harris has flip-flopped on progressive policies.

I have no idea if this is true. Has she? Who is the authority on that?
> should not come with a presumption of guilt

Where is the presumption of guilt? A threat of violence was traced to their IP and they were served a subpoena to provide information that might lead to finding the threat actor before they actually hurt anyone. No one even accused OP of a crime, much less presumed their guilt.
This only works if your commit in a green state. Sometimes we have to change when things are still "Yellow"..

I tend to add all my tests in one go and commit the RED. "tests are written" Then as I pass each test, I commit that.

This pattern works really well for me because if I mess up, then rolling back to the last yellow is easy. I can also WIP commit if I have to fix an urgent bug, and then get back to the WIP later.
swift-wasm exists
In that case, why is there such a thing as insider trading?
OK, we've de-RNG'd the title above.
You said "why must Linux have" a feature that can be useful to some and not useful to others. Taking that to its strongest conclusion[1], you're saying Linux shouldn't have something if it's not useful to "everyone" and asking for counter arguments; this is not unlike the "Do one thing and do it well." Unix ethos.

Clearly, as demonstrated by history, most people prefer that their computers can and will do the many things they need or want with minimal finagling. That is what having DirectX inside Windows means, and why Linux which makes that a finagling option at best and flat out refuses as heresy at worst flounders.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
From my interaction with the free part of GitHub, "diff soup" describes it very well. Does the paid version do anything better? What about GitLab, can this get near Gerrit? And then there are the external services which try to make GitHub less painful (and quite pricey, especially compared to a selfhosted Gerrit), by providing stacked diff support, did you look at these?
I don't think it'd be too difficult. Train a PLM to generate proteins, validate with AF3, and send them off to a lab. You might want to read the ESM-3 paper if you're interested in stuff like this (not affiliated in any way).
> Talk about huge databases!

Mind that they don't have one data base co training the data, but many many many small databases independent holding small chunks of the data.
Many have claimed to translate parts of it. What makes you find this one particularly convincing?
As others are pointing out, Ireland was offering that discount to great impact, essentially taking over the UK's traditional spot as the core exchange for US companies in the EU. They absolutely would prefer not to be charging that tax.
No need to simulate. It is generally straightforward to compute the odds directly from the rules.
I'm not entirely clear that going into a potentially rough storm is a great time to rock the boat? Curious if you have any studies that show this is a good time?

Agreed that getting a contract sooner than later has to be a good idea. I'm actually surprised they have gone as long as they have with no contract.
In the real world, there's a non-zero chance that someone purchased a ticket on your behalf without you knowing, so you're never quite at 0
It vexes me that almost no one uses the real minus sign. But you also can't blame them since it's never been made readily-available. So you really have to be pedantic and spend time going to get it if you want to use it.
> If you are so inclined, I suggest getting a cert & then hitting the shady indian outfits.

Large companies outsourced to Indian companies like TCS, WIPRO, Infosys, CTS, etc. The latter wants to fill some positions onsite; here, TCS, et al source resumes from these 'shady Indian outfits'.

Also another phenomenon I observed: companies want presence during the US day time, so they outsourced to companies in Brazil and other South American countries. A friend's been out of job for a year, and reached out to an ex-manager at a tech company owned by a PE firm. The manager is willing hire him through the outsourcing company but for South American wages: this company pays $60 per hour to the outsourcing partner, who takes 30% cut. So, that is about $42 per hour on 1099, without any benefits. And this contract gig may last for four months.

Welcome to the new world, where we see three classes of techies: (a) those who work for FAANG and other elite companies/firms (b) those who work for non-elite companies (c) contract work force, whose contracts last for three to six months.
If Spider engineers didn't even bothered to change any of the BSD userspace utilities what is the chance that they built the entire TCP/IP stack perfectly compatible with the outside world inside the kernel from scratch?
> Maria supports partitioning, Postgres (as of my last knowledge) does not.

PostgreSQL's manual indicates that partitioning is a thing[1]. Is the something different than what you're thinking of?

One of my projects has the need to drop millions of rows a month based on the time period, and I've been considering a switch to postgres because they also have a module that will do that automatically.

What am I missing?

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/ddl-partitioning.htm...
I ascribe to the notion that 'comments are apologies' (to my future self).

If a piece of code is weird, or slow, or you'd say "yeah, it's kinda janky" when describing to somebody, I usually write a comment about it. Especially if I've changed it before; to document some case that didn't work, or I fixed, or whatever.

When you operate on this basis, superfluous comments just melt away, and you typically end up documenting 'why' only when it's really necessary.

Try it out in your own codebase for a month and see how it feels :)
Not sure what you mean... When we ship a stack of commits, every commit has to pass everything in CI. You are not suppose to ship a commit that's not passing the ci bar. There is a escape hatch that you can bypass but it's rarely used.

You can make changes before you ship however you wanted as long as they pass ci. If you already shipped the code and want to make changes later, that means making new commit or reverting a bad commit. It's simple as that
I agree with what you are saying regarding luck and opportunity playing a bigger role in people's success than is often appreciated. But I think it's ok to enjoy and appreciate the existence of a person in the world that was in the right place and right time to solve the problem. The fact that the universe made that occur is just as enjoyable as the problem itself.
python3 -m pdfsyntax: error: argument command: invalid choice: 'inspect' (choose from 'browse', 'disasm', 'overview', 'text')
> Maria supports partitioning, Postgres (as of my last knowledge) does not.

Modern versions of postgres have all the partioning features you'd expect (except automatic ranged partion creation)
That second things is a typo.
It does heat food as evenly (possibly more evenly) than my other microwaves.
Not at all. Elon wastes much more money on his "fuck around and find out" method of engineering^H^H^H accretion. A million monkeys could do it better and more cheaply.
No, paying for GH doesn't make the code review experience any better. It's identical across public/cloud/enterprise GH.

I do not know if GitLab does anything different; I've never used it in anger. I'd bet $10 the answer is "no, it's basically just the same as GitHub", though.

If you want a service that adds stacking on top of GitHub, my conclusion after some research is that https://graphite.dev/ is the best option. We did consider it, but it couldn't work in my last job for "reasons" (see my other replies in this thread) but if you've got a shop of Git users and just want to throw money at the problem, I think it's the best choice.

GerritHub is also a possibility, they employ many of the Gerrit devs and know what they're doing, but holy shit the corporate options are expensive out of the gate. It's like $20k/yr minimum regardless of size or number of users.

Honestly, Graphite is cheap as hell considering how much more productive your engineers can be with a good review tool. Gerrit was basically night and day for us. It's not "oh, it pays for itself really quickly in a few days!" You'd probably pay off the monthly cost in less than an hour of actual code review. And you don't even have to opt most of your engineers in; you can trial it where 90% of them use GH and only a subset use graphite and pay.
Put too much and any food starts to taste like cool ranch doritos. Then you realize cool ranch flavor is pretty much pure MSG. Then you achieve enlightenment.
yep and the solution is sharded MySQL
C# is a faster Java.
I'm not convinced it is a problem, more like regulators doing their job.
Tiny magnetic robots could treat bleeds in the brain
We forgot about Dracula.
This is as unethical as that time JVC released VHS which allowed people to record videos but also pirate content!!1
Dev Drive (ReFS) for Performance Improvements in Visual Studio and Dev Boxes