skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have a personal policy against using languages/frameworks that host their own libraries. (Python, Node, etc.) Compared to pretty much any operating systems' package managers, they seem to host far more junk and they break compatibility far more often.
Until maybe 15-ish years ago, it was common for programmers to “bottom out” on the machine code level. In other words, they came to roughly understand the whole software stack in principle down to the software-hardware interface (the CPU executing machine code). The topic of this thread is that this has (allegedly) changed, developers at large don’t go down in their understanding until they hit hardware anymore.

Okay, you might argue that in earlier decades programmers also tended to have an understanding of hardware circuit design and how a CPU and memory etc. works in terms of logical gates and clocks. But arguably there is a harder abstraction boundary between hardware and software than at any given software-software abstraction boundary.
I have always tired to find teams/companies with engineers smarter/more experienced than I am. As long as I work with people I can learn from I have avoided stagnation. This can be true in "tech" or non tech companies. The real challenge is identifying engineers who are worth learning from. As soon as I am not learning and growing, I take it as a sign its time to move on.
Ah. So migrants should foment a revolution if they're serious about citizenship. Got it.
One challenge was that while I started working on the Xbox 360 about three years before it would ship, we knew that the custom CPU would not be available until early 2005 (first chips arrived in early February). And there was only supposed to be one hardware spin before final release.

So I had no real hardware to test any of the software I was writing, and no other chips (like the Apple G5 we used as alpha kits) had the custom security hardware or boot sequence like the custom chip would have. But I still needed to provide the first stage boot loader which is stored in ROM inside the CPU weeks before first manufacture.

I ended up writing a simulator of the CPU (instruction level), to make progress on writing the boot code. Obviously my boot code and hypervisor would run perfectly on my simulator since I wrote both!

But IBM had also had a hardware accelerated cycle-accurate simulator that I got to use. I was required to boot the entire Xbox 360 kernel in their simulator before I could release the boot ROM. What takes a few seconds on hardware to boot took over 3 hours in simulation. The POST codes would be displayed every so often to let me know that progress was still being made.

The first CPU arrived on a Friday, by Saturday the electrical engineers flew to Austin to help get the chip on the motherboard and make sure FSB and other busses were all working. I arrived on Monday evening with a laptop containing the source code to the kernel, on Tuesday I compiled and flashed various versions, working through the typical bring-up issues. By Wednesday afternoon the kernel was running Quake, including sound output and controller input.

Three years of preparation to make my contribution to hardware bring-up as short as possible, since I would bottleneck everyone else in the development team until the CPU booted the kernel.
I was going to complain about that, but then I looked at their bug bounty program: https://mcdelivery.co.in/bug-bounty

"The reward for a valid bug will be Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) in the form of coupons (applicable only in McDonald’s India West & South). Such coupons shall need to be used within the validity period mentioned therein and shall not be, encashable or transferable."

That's less than $30 per bug in non-transferable McDonald's coupons that only work in India, which is thousands of miles away from the bug reporter. Compared to what he thought he would get, a $240 Amazon gift card is a good deal.
Show HN: Animated Wallpaper – Reacts to Mouse
> A lot of existing code is already safe.

Again, I am not trying to argue either way. The point I was making was about how you can't define away all UB in the C standard without needing to modify the language in a breaking way.

> You can't prove all (or even most) existing code safe automatically.

No but rust provides a proper type system which goes a long way to being able to prove and enforce a lot more about program behavior at compile time.

> You could transform a lot of C code to be memory safe by adding annotations and do some light refactoring and maybe pushing some residual pieces to "unsafe" blocks. This would be very similar to Rust.

It would only be somewhat similar to super basic entry level rust which ignores all the opportunities for type checking.
I love my paper notebook to save everything automatically, I don't long for it to all disappear if I forget to press a button and give it a name.
Fair point. I could/should have been clearer on that.
I also recently switched from javascript to typescript and noticed a clear improvement on my speed to write code. Before i had to constantly switch between files to check what i exactly passed to a function.
But I knew C# before so a typed language is nothing new for me.
But when i started with javascript exactly this “untyped” language felt like something good, it felt much less of a burden to think about the code beforehand.
Now i look at dozens of projects which a have to be converted to typescript because I simply cannot deal with this typelessness anymore…
Not every roof allows for perfect southward angling (obviously).

And I'm obviously not saying that you should point panels north either. I'm disputing the parent commenter's claim that it would be beneficial to have all panels aimed directly due south. Because that way you get one strong peak at noon, which is the time of day when solar energy is most abundant but also least used.
What is happening to you when you think? Are there words in your head? What verb would you use for your interaction with those words?

In other topic, I would consider this as minor evidence of possibility of nonverbal thought “could you pass me that… thing… the thing that goes under the bolt?”. I.e. Exact name eludes me sometimes, but I do know exactly what I need and what I plan to do with it.
Thanks. I feel certain that I tried exactly this a long time ago, and it didn't work as expected, but I may be misremembering. I'll give this a shot the next time I'm in front of a keyboard -- if it works, it will be nothing short of healing.
Yet corn hybrid production, which requires strict controls on pollination, is made to work. Is there a difference with hemp pollen or is the problem on the regulatory side?
Define "best". Cheapest, theoretically? Cross platform. Cheapest, realistically? They're all about the same. Fastest to market, theoretically? Cross platform. Best performance? Native. Most features? Native. Best system integration? Native.

Cross platform is really only "best" if you can make the investment needed to make it truly universal. That means sanding over the inevitable platform differences even Flutter and RN still expose, debugging platform specific issues, and bridging new system features ahead of official release. Without such strict discipline, cross platform teams are just as large, and therefore expensive, as native teams.

I usually see cross platform in big corps which want to homogenize their development teams, for better or worse (hence why RN is still popular). It doesn't actually cost them any less or make them any faster (their bottlenecks are in planning and dependent features), but requires less thinking for planning and hiring.
TBH your response makes me realize there's possibly a decent use case for bicycles with the right diameter tubing.

> You can try a less reputable mechanic, but they're gonna be pissed when the cops come knocking asking about the stolen car sitting over there and you might not be going back there any time soon. So if you can't find and remove the air tag relatively quickly, what options do you have left? Probably makes more sense to abandon the vehicle and try another one with a lower risk of winding up in jail.

Depends on the skill of the chop-shop or it's folks and where you are.

A fun thought experience would be how much suspicion a flatbed tow truck with some form of faraday cage around the car, below a cover would get from LE.

Agree with your general 'deterrent' concept, I think the main challenge a lot of folks run into is getting lazy with placement. Glove/console boxes, the 'pockets' on the back of front seats, are all stupid easy. Technically anything in the interior, probably can be 'found' with sufficient detection capability.

No, you put that thing somewhere weird and ideally a PITA to get at.

This honestly gives me the idea of finding the right spot in my WRX front headlights to make it not visible; If the spot I'm thinking of will work, they'd literally have to pull off the front bumper to even get at it...
I'd pay good money for a local LLM with no "content safety" at all.
Aha! TIL.
> A lot of people, especially people from the same background, would benefit from branching out and learning some other programming languages/paradigms.

I completely agree. I started reading the article expecting to read something interesting or smart about functional programming,but it turns out the blogger is just very vocal at telling the world their excitement over reinventing the wheel and being completely obliovius to what actually represents very basic things in any intro to software engineering course.
A caring about B is a good point. If A thinks to themself, "Crap, I effed up. I should apologize. B will be mad, what can I do to make B feel better? I could buy them a coffee", that's pretty good. If A thinks, "Crap, I effed up. I should apologize and reconsider wrestling near people's desks", that's also pretty good. Ideally, both the reflection and the coffee would be nice. If I had to choose just one, I'm leaning towards the latter as owning the mistake more than B being made whole with coffee, but that's debateable (and might be where we differ).

If it's, "Oh, B will be mad, what can I do so that this doesn't take too long? I could apologize and buy them a coffee", it feels less right. It inches toward that phrase that goes something like "the fastest way to get someone to shut up is to agree with them." It might be true in a practical sense and yet it's woefully sociopathic.
How do you disable it again? You can't!

Once you pressed "Start using Copilot" the copilot menu shows up on all repositories within GitHub.com for careless or uninformed users to leak proprietary code to their training set.
On the other hand, as an Engish Lit major who taught himself programming from zero, and worked as a programmer for over a decade, all my experience writing software was practical, and I don't think that's the right way to go either. I wish I'd had any level of theoretical education that might have exposed me to fundamental concepts you (with yer fancy book-learnin') probably take for granted. If someone just learns on the job, or just learns as they go, they don't learn stuff until they need to. They learn it in a hurry, and on a deadline. That's not the best way to get a firm handle on tricky subjects, and maybe as a consequence, I always felt a couple steps behind my peers.
History of Residuals and a Word of Caution
Thanks for sharing. I use Firefox partly to support open source and/or degoogle a bit, but I'm also mostly pretty happy with the multi-device sync features. Any support for that stuff in nyxt? Or if not, do you use anything else for them?
https://united24media.com/latest-news/zelenskyy-reacts-to-pu...
PHP just released version 8.4.2 today, so if that's your ball of wax, and you're working on your own projects, have at it. I wrote some PHP earlier this year for this one project. React pulls together a bunch of language features so that writing full blown apps in html, css, and JavaScript is less of a multi-level, multi-language templated nightmare for the developer who's writing it. Facebook was built on PHP so it's possible to build a fully featured web app using PHP and JavaScript, but that's also that's where React came from. React isn't just change for changes sake. PHP and hand rolled JavaScript can take you where you want to go, but getting there with React is just a bit more comfortable because it isn't a pile of templates with two languages you have to keep in your head simultaneously, and you can more easily debug it. For the cost of learning new ways of doing things, there's inheritance and composability. it's far from perfect, but, imo, it got popular because of how much easier it is to wrap your head around a pile of react components than it is a pile of php templates and its attached pile of JavaScript.
talk about judging a book by its cover...
> but being real sex is the thing that most often differentiates romantic partnerships from other close relationships

I don't actually agree. I think "willingness and continued intention to follow this person and live with them ever still, including the sacrifices that come along with it" tends to be something that connects more with relationships traditionally seen as romantic.

It's something that would separate a very close friendship from, for example, a "Queer Platonic Relationship", which could very arguably be romantic.
It isn't an emotional attachment, I just clearly see that lots of technologies lean on one another and you can't easily pick an choose which ones to abandon and the clock simply does not roll backwards. Every material good that isn't made of material near at hand relies on trade and specialized skills. The humble pencil is shockingly complicated to produce, as you can see in the 1958 essay "I, Pencil". If you want something truly useful to a life above meager dirt-bound poverty like say antibiotics you need big supply chains, complicated machinery, and packaging that in and of itself requires its own inputs and machinery. It's all related.

Your anti-humanist rants are frankly disgusting and morally revolting. Also, who goes around calling themselves doctor? Skimming you substack, I'm really impressed by the inability of a mathematician to string together logical arguments, "Five myths about technology" might be the most sophomoric and poorly argued blog post I've ever read arguing against technology.

For example, your claims that "Technology, in other words, grows and feeds on the medium of global humanity" is totally unsupported by your argument and fails in its basic understanding of peoples' revealed preferences. You argue by simple example, but fail to come up with anything more convincing than whatsapp usage in Brazil or cars in general. It's lazy writing and lazy thinking. Waving away cures and treatments for rare diseases by saying "such people are in difficult situations due to modern technology" is beyond foolish. You could name dozens of genetic hereditary diseases that have laways existed that were a death sentence two generations ago. Type 1 diabetes comes to mind.

I could go on, but you disgust me.
I've seen some truly insane TS types. Ones that validate SQL queries and stuff.

The problem with complex TS types is that there's no debug tooling. You can't set a breakpoint, you can't step through the type propagation. If there's an issue you have to just do trial and error, which can be very tedious.

Here's a super complex type I ran into in the wild that has a bug that is extremely difficult to fix unless you burn hours on trial and error: https://github.com/openapi-ts/openapi-typescript/blob/main/p...

(the bug in question, still unfixed): https://github.com/openapi-ts/openapi-typescript/issues/1769

It was so hard to fix this bug that I found it easier to just rewrite the entirety of the library but using code generation instead of ultra complex TS types to accomplish the same outcome.
> Imagine what such a tool could do in the hands of a subject matter expert

Nothing. Because LLMs can’t spit out anything more than the corpus of information they’ve consumed. LLMs aren’t AGI.
I think it might also be because "Swinging" is a word from a previous era and some/many of the young LGBTQ+ people are against learning from their elders.

Swinging is a very clear example of ENM.
Do you have some examples for that?

Most cases I've seen with more complex interfaces is due to the fact that it is what the interface truly expects. Usually making it simpler tends to mean it's actually wrong or incomplete.
Definitely not the only language. Other long-lived languages like C++ get this treatment too.
Technically it’s also two cameras in one and would allow for various option if it would be programmable. Like taking video and stills at the same time. Normal fps and slow mo. With attachments one could record two different angles. Macro attachment. Record 8k while streaming HD.
But they never offer you a programmable camera system.
> This brings back memories of the time I almost shortened "thousand kilometres" to "kkm".

SI is such a senseless system. Unit prefixes were not a good idea. Did you move the decimal point or just switch to "Mm?"
Let me analogize. This is a blog post that claims that racism isn't real. As proof, the author explains that none of the studies that show a reduction in racism when you remind people that Michael Jordan and Beyonce exist can be replicated. Well, okay, sure. And the guy who earned a doctorate with the thesis, "Does Playing Jackson 5 Make People Less Racist?" might want to turn this into, "Racism does not exist," as a way to distance himself from his own terrible scholarship. (Also, did you find his Marvel Cinematic Universe Easter Eggs?)

So, thus far, there is actually not enough evidence to throw the, "Racism exists," baby out with the, "Do these interventions affect racist belief?" bathwater. And since we're second-guessing biases, it's super weird that you're always in comment sections of (politically-charged) articles concerning fields you're not in.
A case like this demonstrates that principles are as soft as butter when they are tested.

Mozilla is all preachy about privacy but is in bed with the greatest private data hoarder in the world. They take the blood money and continue to enable the monopoly status quo.

Mozilla is in favor of more competition to combat Big Tech, but as soon as an actual measure is taken that does that but has negative second order effects for themselves, it's...wait, not like that.

Mozilla is looking out for all types of marginalized folks if you have to believe their activist blogs but in reality spent huge sums on leadership that failed to achieve any target at all for a decade in a row.

Mozilla is the definition of woke capitalism. Hypocritical to the bone.

This is an organization that ordinarily cannot exist. It is showered with money for doing nothing at all: just keep the search box pointed at Google. Half a billion to piss away at hobbies. There is zero accountability to any one or any thing.

The only true principle Mozilla has is that it likes to continue this toddler organization. Free money, no accountability. All the do-good talk is a cover for this.
You mean 1.07E16
You could try to get the police to do it, but that's going to take more time, during which the thief is even more likely to ditch the AirTag.

During the most recent American election I saw at least three news stories on television about campaign sign thieves being tracked down through the use of AirTags put in one of the signs. To my surprise, in each case the police were right there, and in two of the cases, the signs were still loaded in the thieves' cars. So it does seem to work.

Anyway, you're really swimming upstream trying to think of aigtags as an antitheft device.

They aren't anti-theft devices as in padlocks. But the more often that thieves start wondering if the thing they're taking might have an AirTag in it, they might start reconsidering some of the petty thefts.

It's like a surveillance camera. A camera, itself, can't stop a crime. But the possibility that someone's watching can act as a mild deterrent.
> Furthermore, there simply isn’t enough time in the day for poly to work. You sleep for eight hours, work for eight hours, and then have eight hours in your day left for everything else.

Not everyone (or even necessarily anyone in a family) works full time, and not everyone who works, full-time or otherwise, works in an institution at arm’s length from the family, so even at the basic premises your argument about constraints suffers from false generalization problems. Observing that polyamorous family structure is suboptimally suited for a dystopian proletarian life in some extreme capitalism assumptions is accurate, but note that that the same observation has been made by many about monogamous relationships.

> Even if you perfectly split your free eight between two people,

Why are you assuming splitting time? A person can interact with more than one other person at a time.

> god forbid you have a commute or a kid.

Seems that in many ways having kids in a poly family would be easier than a monogamous nuclear family. The only problem I see with commutes is that a poly family unit is going to be forced into more complicated commute-optimization trade-offs (OTOH, the probability of having viable commute-sharing with at least one other partner is also higher, so there’s plusses and minuses on that front, too.)
If I had to guess, they had easier access to a CNC or someone with CNC skills vs a shop that could get them rolled screws in the right size within their timeframe.

The 'nice' thing about CNC screws is that it's cheaper to do short runs. (which, on the military side, can help on some 'security by obscurity' lengths for revers engineering).

That said Rolled screws are almost always gonna be better unless the die is fucked.
MemryX MX3M.2 Module Nice AI Performance with Great Software Experience
If the studies are concerned with determining that stereotype threat exists, sure.
The Ghosts in the Machine – Spotify's plot against musicians
> More complicated and expensive

More durable for individuals in the face of large scale failures. You're paying for something real there.
I agree, and when I'm in person with someone, particularly someone I know, I will listen to them. Among several Donald voters I know, I talked to one who I've known for more than 20 years. We agree on many things in life, in morals, in politics. But he voted for Donald. I didn't agree with what I perceived to be his flawed reasoning, but I listened, didn't call him names, and I know he doesn't hate certain classes of people. (He's just wrong about some things).

It's harder to do that online, when I don't know if someone is even real, or if they have the ability to have a decent discussion. And my patience when typing is thinner than in person, so I don't have time to explain how Donald matches everything everyone should have learned to be wary of in history class.
As someone who has designed a customised camera with a CMOS sensor, I feel the urge to disagree: in my experience, the biggest issue for quality was that the sensor readout generates heat and that heat triggers random charges in the sensor. Using a sensor with larger pixels means the readout energy is spread over a larger area, thereby having a lower intensity. So in a way, a larger sensor works like a larger heatsink. This effect is also why astronomy photographers cool their equipment.

You're of course correct that the better lens helps. But a bigger sensor can also be better by itself.
Driverless cars, strong AI, and fusion power are always 20 years away. The first two are the most hyped, but my money is on the latter coming to fruition first.
Two other projects in the same vein:

https://github.com/YutaroHayakawa/ipftrace2

https://github.com/cilium/pwru
cries in 'I worked at a computer shop that started selling carbon-zinc batteries around 2002-2003'