skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It sounds like the crux of your question is, "How do I work less and still support my family?" I've not read the type of books you described. I also don't work 4 hours a week. I work a 9-5 with a 1 hour lunch, 5 days a week, building APIs for a small-to-medium sized credit union. So although I don't have an answer to your question, I do have some thoughts to share.

I've slowly become comfortable with the idea that as a backend web developer, I'm really just one of many. So no wonder I haven't landed that cushy remote job yet. There are many others who can do what I do, and at my current career level, most have more experience than I do. (Of course that will change over time).

So how do I get the dream job that I want? Obviously I can't get there by following this trajectory. I've been telling myself that I need to stand out from the crowd in some substantial way. The only way I can imagine doing that is to develop a niche skillset that is more sought after than the one I currently have. A lot of people can build APIs. So I need to make myself more valuable to bigger companies if I'm going to ever get the sweet remote position that I dream of having.

On an unrelated note, one of my best friends has almost the exact job you described. He's not a software engineer. He works in quality assurance, helping companies self-audit themselves so they're prepared if the FDA shows up to audit them. He makes over 6 figures, works from home for 2-3 hours in the morning. As long as he's available to answer emails and teams messages, he does whatever he wants on most days. Anytime I've asked him for his advice, he always tells me that he just "followed the money."

One more thought. I think as developers we get obsessed with building our technical skills. When in the longterm I think it's the people skills that matter. Also, there are a lot of jobs in tech and for big companies that don't involve traditional software development. Maybe the solution is to look elsewhere for opportunities. I'm saying this to myself as much as I am to you.
This is well said - this is exactly how I understood your comment as well and you put it very succinctly and in an understandable way and has been something that I've been pondering for a while now. Thanks.
It's pretty crazy how quickly it happened/happens. The Deppenapostroph is maybe less problematic; I see it more as a simplification just like the dative replacing the genitive. But Denglish really just makes everything harder to understand; even if you are fluent in both English and German the "switching" is tiresome. Still, maybe we should get rid of "handy" and "beamer" first...

Ironically, even British English has the issue of Americanisms sneaking in, see e.g. the IT Crowd episode: "How hard is it to remember 911?" "You mean 999? That's the American one".
Taxes are not and never will be because no two people have the same priorities. Even if my favorite charity is only 10% as efficient as the government in doing what I want, a donation to that charity does what the charity does. A donation to the government goes to military, welfare (social security, medicare...), roads, scientific research, and a long long list. If I want to put extra money into say Lymphoma research $10,000 to a really bad lymphoma charity will get $3000 to research (finding a lymphoma research charity that bad is left as an exercise for the reader - the ones I'm aware of are considerably better). The same $10000 to the government will add nothing to lymphoma research since the share of the budget going to that is a rounding error.
> Again, everything in your comment this seems like Apple made an arguably better offering in an existing market. That's not a first mover advantage.

I never claimed Apple had a first mover advantage. They made a smartphone much more aligned to consumer desires than any of the competition. Palm, Microsoft, RIM, and Nokia all approached smartphones from the angle of business/enterprise users.

You can call Apple's approach being late to the party but that presumes that them entering some market is a forgone conclusion. Apple has rarely if ever been truly first to market with a product.
Yeah, there's a reason we keep having trouble with that one.
HBO doc Money Electric says Peter Todd is Satoshi Nakamoto, a claim Todd denies
This makes sense as we probably subconsciously dislike the idea that our perceptions are belittled by people who we imagine as beautiful and successful. We value those traits and when we're told they're not valuable we understand the person isn't being genuine.
It adds something sparkly reminiscent of life giving sun. Just some moderation like jewelry.. too much and it's monkey puke
Deno 2
I have no clue what you are talking about. There were only 40,000 or so awards to slave owners, and I suspect most of them were not young men.

Nor were the British slaves only young men.
Show HN: AI plugin for Crisp that turn your chat to an automated support system
Just this morning I came across a guy called Mr Techpedia on YouTube and I was really surprised because I heard a lot of English phrases but also phrases that are in a different language or a dialect of English I’m not familiar with. It was actually really cool. It also reminds me of a time when I heard someone codeswitch from US Midwestern English to Malaysian English - there was a clear difference in word choice and pronunciation. Global/Internet English as a concept is really cool as well. I often (accidentally) adopt grammatical constructions from Global English that I believe come from that particular speaker’s native tongue.

Anyway, yeah, I love this sort of mixing of languages and I’m glad a lot of cultures are more open about mixing in English.
This is what extreme FOMO looks like.
> I'm usually very good at hitting the ground running, but I am just as much bad at "keeping the pace", i.e. diving deep into stuff

At a beginner level, rustlings[1] is an excellent resource for following along with any book/tutorial and do relevant exercise to apply the concepts from the learning material.

On a more higher level, I guess (re)implementing some tool that you use daily is another way to deep dive into rust. I suspect it's one of the reasons why we see an unusual number of "rewrite of x in rust" projects.

[1]. https://github.com/rust-lang/rustlings
Or bug for bug lockin of existing players in an increasingly more static space.
your thoughts seem to align closely with René Girard's theories on mimetic desire and scapegoating.
[redacted for accuracy]
As someone living here for the last 20 years, and also nowadays understands a bit of dialects and related slag, it is kind of curious the amount of Denglish words among the youth.

For example, "Hast Du das geprüft?" quickly turns into "Hast du das gecheckt?".
Pretty cool, I hadn't heard of Renarde and it looks promising. Around 8 years ago, I really wanted Aurelia to win the SPA wars but they're still pretty niche even though they've been growing lately. But honestly, after playing with everything over all these years, I still believe a server-side framework with minimal amounts of JS is ideal for most projects, especially all those internal corporate web apps but also for B2B stuff and even the average consumer-facing app. People say consumers are more demanding now, but how many developers are really working on something that caters to the most demanding consumers? Unless you need the most snazzy UX ever, just don't.

And honestly, using Rails or other server-side frameworks, you can get very far with way less effort than those expensive front-end teams by simply using Hotwire:

https://hotwired.dev

Sending down rendered HTML using Hotwire Turbo requires far less time, and HTML over the wire is in reality no heavier than sending down JSON. If you absolutely need a bit more interactivity on the front-end while avoiding a server roundtrip, it's easy to drop in little Stimulus JS controllers as-needed. From my journeys to and fro in the real world, I've seen most projects do not need more than that, and are arguably wasting budget trying to use heavier tools than that! For most sizeable projects, you can do more in Rails & Hotwire with fewer developers than a 6-person team using their favorite server side language and React. I'm not saying you have to use Ruby on Rails. I'm saying I wish the dev world would embrace this paradigm in whatever their favorite language/frameworks are.
It depends on the intended use case: compiling source code isn't the intended use case of neither of those platforms. It doesn't make them "bad".
I'm sure it happens at small companies, but at large companies I've never seen it. It wouldn't be allowed to stay that way if it did happen. The number of times I've seen it happen with Chinese and Indians teams, relative to how rare it is for white-only teams to exist, seems highly improbable. White people are the plurality if not majority at most big American tech companies, so if it's all just statistical noise it should happen more with white people and that just isn't what happens.
I've spent a lot of time fixing/explaining python exceptions over the years, and I get pretty annoyed when I encounter bare exceptions. Exceptions themselves are so often misunderstood, it seems most people just take them at face value. However, do we really need to dull all the sharp edges and add guardrails to every fucking thing? In a corporate environment, sure, you can implement all the protections you like _without attempting to force your constraints on all users_.

If you care about types, safety, etc. there are plenty of fantastic projects that share your priorities, but they don't need to bleed into everything under the sun.

Sharing and adopting new ideas is healthy, but homogenization kills creativity.

Maybe I'm just grumpy today.
This is a real pro-tip. Being able to quickly verify path definitely speeds up my troubleshooting.
I don’t think search monopoly is an important issue. The main issue Google is a monopoly for multiple levels of the stack.

A good internet search engine would deprioritize low quality stuff like ad-infested clones of Wikipedia, stackoverflow, and similar SEO generated or AI generated web sites. Google won’t do that because it would affect their income from online ads. Ever wondered why google’s search quality is declining over the years? https://mashable.com/article/google-search-low-quality-resea...

They have a similar conflict of interest for web browsers. I use Samsung web browser on my phone which asked me “would you like to enable the ad blocker?” on the first launch. Google won’t do that in Chrome despite end users would love the feature.
You might want to pick a backup domain name -- it seems possible .io could disappear in the next several years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41729526
How about abbreviating the 12 most common things in the codebase, but everything else is long?

That's a nice compromise where you need to learn a few core concepts, but the code itself is easier to scan for bugs in a lot of places.
Some confusions must be cleared up here.

The first thing to note is that evolution does not necessary contradict telos. The metaphysical position called evolutionism does by definition, but evolution as biological subject matter does not.

Second, the question about the stability or reality of human nature is separate from the question of telos. Even if we suppose that there is no such thing as human nature, we would still need to admit kinds, each with some telos, but more importantly, the very notion of efficient causality already presupposes telos. Without telos, you cannot explain the regularity of the effects of efficient causes. The effects of efficient causes are not arbitrary, or else science would be impossible. And biology, per my observations, is showing signs of slowly moving toward open acknowledgement of telos. The notion of "function" is teleological, after all!

Third, it is odd to speak of human nature changing. For if there is such a thing, then it is predicable, and predicates do not change. You seem to be making a nominalist sort of claim, i.e., the collection of beings, over time, that we have, for whatever reason, classified as "human" do not actually share the same nature. I cannot make heads or tails of nominalism, nobody can, because I cannot determine why the label "human" was used in the first place and why a mislabeling should be regarded as something significant, as something more than a mislabeling. Nominalism renders the word unintelligible. You might say "Oh, well, we have adaptation!", and I would agree, that human beings have adapted and continue to adapt, but the nature of a thing concerns what is essential or substantial about something. Everything else is either a proper consequence of that (speech), or an accidental adaptation or variation (eye color). As a metaphysician would say, intelligent beings on other planets are, ontologically speaking, also human by virtue of their intellects, even if phylogenetically there is a difference. So, the nominalist claim doesn't even rise to the level of being wrong. I claim that there were humans thousands of years ago, and there are human beings today, and because both instantiate the same human nature.

In any case, Etienne Gilson has written a book[0] on this subject. I wouldn't call it a magisterial or exhaustive philosophical work on the subject (others have produced better [1] if you want more heft), but as an introduction to some basic ideas, IIRC, it isn't bad.

[0] https://a.co/d/iugLuek

[1] https://a.co/d/eGMDJ61
Lunar gravity measurements hint at a partially molten mantle layer
I believe it's morally wrong to make software that makes people wait needlessly. If your software makes me wait, it better have something to do with the speed of light.
A writing system being phonetic would be impractical, because most languages have tons of little phonetic alterations of individual sounds depending on position in the word/syllable, regional variation, etc.

What you usually want is that the writing system be phonemic, i.e. that there is a 1:1 correspondence between phonemes (meaningfully distinctive sound units) and characters. Unfortunately, languages evolve, so even if your writing systems starts out as more or less phonemic, over time the sounds of the language will drift and inertia will usually keep the writing system not fully in sync with these changes. This is particularly bad in the case of English, where there's never been a proper spelling reform accounting for the corresponding sound changes.
Because it can still result in compile times I find excessive.
For example breaking up a function that takes 5 seconds to compile into a bunch of functions that take 1 to 2 seconds in total.
Escalate this to your account manager (who sold/renewed your licenses last time) and they can get Google CEs to review. If you're buying from a Workspace reseller, they can also loop in the right people.
The Destructo Test
Most upper class work. They work different jobs, but they are generally not sitting around retired. They might or might not get a paycheck, but they are working. (if you own a restaurant you will probably pay yourself minimum wage when you do work - dishwashers start at double that - talk to your accountant but this is often the best legal way to handle your hours that are trackable) Steve Job's was famous for taking a salary of $1/year - he clearly was working and upper class.
Well of course component state is what you reach for first, which is why it is the first four sections of those docs about state management I linked:

https://react.dev/learn/managing-state

I was linking this later section about extracting state logic into a reducer, because you suggested that you would need "something for state management", I assumed you were talking about something like redux.

But of course you can get pretty far with a single useState and prop drilling as well. Not sure how it supports your point that 'plain react is useless', it sounds like you are arguing against yourself with that comment?
See also HN discussion on Bloomberg's coverage (most comments here):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41783503

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-10-09/hbo-docum...
I often Bang on about “software is a new form of literacy”. And this I feel is a classic example - software is a form of literacy that not only can be executed by a CPU but also at the same time is a way to transmit concepts from one humans head to another (just like writing)

And so asking “will AI generated code help” is like asking “will AI generated blog spam help”?

No - companies with GitHub copilot are basically asking how do I self-spam my codebase

It’s great to get from zero to something in some new JS framework but for your core competancy - it’s like outsourcing your thinking - always comes a cropper

(Book still being written)
The beauty of English is that it is controlled by the speakers and not by some pompous authority. It's even flexible enough to allow for regional differences, which allows my fellow Americans and I to spell words correctly like color and theater.
Of course but it doesn't have to be. There are tons of fruits that make great tasting marmalades. After watching the Mexican episode of British Bake Off I don't care about their opinions on food authenticity.
The art is based upon Theseus as mentioned in the email:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

which is probably due to this:

https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article;sid=20240824114631
Ideally, you've just moved the unit boundary to where it logically should be instead of many small implementation details that should not be exposed.
> In the few months before I resigned, I was working maybe two hours a day. Yet, those two hours were terrible. I was forcing myself to accept them because they were enabling a lot of good things for myself and for the people around me.

Imagine saying that to anyone born a generation prior and expecting sympathy.
This makes me really curious how quickly German has actually evolved over time.

My assumptions would be entirely informed from extrapolating from historical context and not knowing anything about German.

So there was probably a lot of linguistic diversity before unification in 1870, then there would have been a standardization effort started by Bismarck (favoring the dialect predominantly spoken in Prussia) which would carry through WW1, would be relaxed during the Weimar republic, would intensify (or turn into something bizarre and Orwellian) in the Nazi era, and then a slight divergence between East and West Germany in the Cold War.

Under this, my rough hypothesis would be that German has actually changed a lot less in the post-WW2 era, especially since the 90s, than it would have in the period before.

Is this roughly how things shook out? I'd be really interested where this is completely wrong.
My opinion is that Bell Labs created great technology, but had no real incentive to make products and bring them to the public. The Baby Bells needed to compete however, and so they did.
> Linux much faster than windows mainly due to the file system being more performant (e.g. the builds run noticeably faster)

It's not the file system. It is the file system filter. NTFS is a high performance FS.

Microsoft is working around this via a feature called DevDrive. It uses ReFS instead of NTFS as ReFS leverages copy-on-write.
You might need a horizontal tank.

Liquid Propane requires surface space to “gasify”, and more space the lower the temp. That’s (one reason) why propane “pigs” are horizontal cylinders.

Unfortunately, there aren’t many small horizontal tanks.
Timeshift (included with Mint, but I don't think it's exclusive to it?) is a much more conventional solution—I believe it uses rsync under the hood—but it works very well for exactly this kind of experimentation. It can revert config changes, package installs, and even OS major version upgrades.
This is very interesting, of all the trash I bave been talking about the lie you all tell yourself (that we are alone in our own mind, and only the “mentally ill” hear the voices) this post got me the most negative karma.

I want to respond to the criticism regarding the sex confirmation surgery of children being described as “crazy” for normal people.

I am a free will occultist, and would not condemn what comes of well informed consent, though I do think children are the “property” of their parents whose human right to not be interfered with by others is the concern of the state (lawful domain).

I have used my “challenge” (that we are not alone in our own minds and thought control is really screwing with us) to reflect upon truth, morality and “lawfulness.”

Thought control exists, messes with our sexuality, and that is wrong.

If a sex transitioned navy seal discussed his regrets, I think we can say children undergoing sex augmentation is imprudent. If a [mob] third party disembodied Power can influence our minds (for fun or for profit) it is a down right crime against our humanity.

Whatever your outlook on morality and free will, we are not alone in our own mind and disembodied others are manipulating our sexuality (children and all.)
> Of course, as your company continues to appreciate, you will be forced to continue reducing your ownership stake

Why?
In an hypothetical world where getting a loan on an asset is impossible (or taxed the same as realizing the gains), you still don't get taxed on unrealized gains.
You can leave your stock alone and you aren't forced to sell anything.

Of course if you decide that now that you are worth a billion you must live like a billionaire, then yes, you will have to sell stock, reduce your influence in the company and pay tax on the gains.

I don't see any problem with this? It offers a way for the stock owner to choose if they want to use the stock as power (don't touch it) or as cash (sell it), only taxing you when you opt for the later.

edit: I realised I might have misread your post as defending the system allowing one to use unrealized gains to back a loan, hence enabling the buy/borrow/die loophole, when you are in fact defending against taxing unrealized gains. To me the obvious fix is to prevent those loans as discussed above: force people to choose how they want to use their assets, if they choose to use them to live like kings then they must pay tax.
For others stumbling across this, the idea was considered in PEP 722 (https://peps.python.org/pep-0722/) and is supported today by uv (https://docs.astral.sh/uv/guides/scripts/#declaring-script-d...).
No you can't. For example I use a script to compress scanned PDFs by combining individually processed JBIG2 images and that script hasn't been updated for more than a decade: https://github.com/agl/jbig2enc/blob/master/pdf.py It works and generates perfectly good PDFs. No it doesn't work with Python 3 because it mixes bytes and strings copiously. I could spend half an hour upgrading it to work with Python 3 but there's no reason to.

Don't forget the whole reason why Python 3 exists is because it broke compatibility with Python 2. Plenty of old unmaintained scripts were forever stuck in Python 2. Not to mention an old version of Python 3 actually performs worse than Python 2.
Wouldn't that essentially mandate the discontinuation of AOSP? That seems like a massive loss to humanity, and certainly to the open source world.

I suppose it's possible that GAPPS would become licensed but the OS for free, though I could see the bean counters having a big problem with that.
Fine, but using a ` or ‘ instead of a ' or ’ should be an arrestable offense.