skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Funny enough, you already don't have access to low level radio so building a "Bluetooth thing" is just about dealing with some libraries and API.

Bugs happen but its not that different from any other type of bugs. Also, you end up learning about Bluetooth as bugs and other unexpected behavior happen. The great thing about LLMs is that they are interactive, so for example when collecting Bluetooth packets for analysis I ended up learning that the communication with Bluetooth is a bit like talking through a middleman and some packet types are only about giving instructions to the Bluetooth chip and others are actually about communicating with a connected device.

Using LLM for coding something you don't understand is much different than Googling something, then copy+paste a snippet from Stackoverflow because you can ask for instant explanation and modifications for testing edge cases and other ideas.
Microsoft Launches Ad-Supported Version of Office Apps for Windows
Agreed.

Some other heuristics:

* Every if statement is a chance of a bug because the code has two or more paths to follow. Keep the choice making at the business/requirements level of the code, not hidden inside lower level decomposition.

* A switch statement that is not exhaustive (ie covers all possible values) is a change of a bug, especially if there is no default case.

Modern languages with better type systems make the second point less relevant because they require exhaustive pattern matching.
No, that is not the PCC, just some research artifacts.
FWIW I'm not cooking books or shifting between energy sources. I changed habits and use much less energy total.
They are both mostly right but the devil is in the details and to try to not get too dogmatic about things. For example function length is one of those things that you can obsess about and debate endlessly.

What's the value of extracting a function that is used only once or twice. It's probably very limited. It's debatable whether that even should be a public function and whether you should encourage more use. And then we can look at the function declaration as well. Does it have a lot of parameters? Is there any complexity to its implementation? Does it have tests? Are there going to be lot of uses of the function? If the answer to all those questions is no, you could probably inline it without losing much. But the flip side is that you wouldn't gain much by doing so. A small function that is used a lot is probably somewhat valuable.

And there's a third thing that needs to be considered: does a function increase the API surface of your module. Having lots of private functions makes your module hard to understand. Having lots of public functions, makes the API less cohesive.

So, there's a grey area here. Languages like Kotlin give you a additional options: make it a nested function, make it an extension function, put it in a Companion object, etc. You can put functions in functions and those can help readability. The whole point of doing that is preventing usage outside the context of the outer function. Nested functions should probably be very short. And their only goal should be to make the outer function logic more readable/understandable. It's not something I use a lot but I've found a few uses for this. There's no point to using nested functions other than for readability.

And speaking of Kotlin, it's standard library is full of very small extension functions. Most of them are one or two lines. They are clearly valuable because people use them all the time. You get such gems as fun List.isNullOrEmpty(): Boolean which helps make your if statements a lot more readable and less flaky. Also works on Java lists. Stuff like that is a big part of why I like Kotlin.

I tend to dumb down a lot of advice like both are debating here to cohesiveness and coupling. In the context of functions, you get coupling via parameters and side effects (e.g. modifying state via parameters) instead of return values. And you lose cohesiveness if a single function starts doing too many not so related things. High coupling and low cohesiveness usually means poor testability. You'll find yourself mocking parameters just to be able to test a function. Improving testability is a valid reason for extracting smaller, easier to test functions.
still working on octatools ... CLI for doing "stuff" with Elektron Octatrack binary data files.

* reversed engineered 90% of the data files

* finally got copying banks between projects working (a 10-ish year old feature request no-one has implemented yet)

* now tidying it up before I publish it on basically every public forum octatrack people hang out on and hoping I don't completely bork people's stuff in the process.
> For another example, take the frequent neofascist argument that the federal agencies are "unaccountable" without being under the direct command of the President

It’s not “neofascist” lol, it’s just what the constitution says. The first sentence of article II: “ The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”

It’s not Congress’s job to hold executive branch employees accountable any more than it’s Congress’s job to hold judicial law clerks in the courts accountable. It’s the President’s job, in whom the executive power is vested.

That’s also reflected in the appointments clause. Anyone with discretionary authority must be either appointed by the president, or report to someone who is: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-1434_ancf.pdf. The whole point is to make the executive branch highly responsive to Presidenfial elections.
Can someone point to where i can read some context?
Boeing coffee was MIL SPEC.
Well, I sort of agree with you and sort of disagree.

from random import randrange

def list_swap(lst, i, j):
temp = lst[i]
lst[i] = lst[j]
lst[j] = temp

def icbicsort(lst):
swap_count = 0
n = len(lst)
for i in range(n):
for j in range(n):
if lst[i] < lst[j]:
swap_count += 1
list_swap(lst, i, j)
return swap_count

def bubble(lst):
swap_count = 0
n = len(lst)
# preprocess
# this is intentionally identical to icbicsort with i = 0
for j in range(n):
if lst[0] < lst[j]:
swap_count += 1
list_swap(lst, 0, j)
# go forward, bubbling backward
for i in range(1, n):
for j in range(i, 0, -1):
if lst[j] < lst[j-1]:
swap_count += 1
list_swap(lst, j-1, j)
return swap_count

def cmp(n=100):
alst = []
blst = []
for t in range(n):
value = randrange(65536)
alst.append(value)
blst.append(value)
icb_swaps = icbicsort(alst)
bubble_swaps = bubble(blst)
print(f"icb: {icb_swaps} swaps; bubble: {bubble_swaps} swaps")

# just for completeness
def bubble_classic(lst):
n = len(lst)
sorted = False
while not sorted:
sorted = True
for i in range(n-1):
if lst[i] > lst[i+1]:
sorted = False
list_swap(lst, i, i+1)
return

26 calls to cmp() produced identical swap counts in 24 cases and slight discrepancies (of 2 and 3 swaps, both favoring icbsort) in two cases. (For statistical purposes, this was a manual inspection where I stopped after getting the second discrepancy.)

If you're regularly seeing discrepancies, something is weird. If you're seeing them occasionally, I still think something is weird, but I'm prepared to believe that it's a bug in the code.

I will note, in support of the paper's actual thesis, that I wrote icbicsort() correctly on the first try, and I had to work many bugs out of bubble(). Maybe it's still bugged.
As I understand it, the way certificate authorities are removed from the trust store is progressive: they will announce a date after which new certificates from a given CA will no longer be trusted. I think this can be made even more progressive, by limiting the validity period of new certificates that will be trusted. DigiCert will have little recourse other than to let their customers know, and/or start providing certificates issued by another CA that follows the web PKI procedures and remains trusted. (They can still do that, of course, it's just that their own certificates issued by them directly won't be trusted anymore.)

On the flip side, for user impact, it will play out like this: Some bank or other important entity could possibly, for whatever reason, continue using a (presumably expired? unless DigiCert continues issuing anyways; note that most likely, they will not.) DigiCert certificate after the cut off date, which will lead to users receiving errors. Some of them will have HSTS setup, which will lead to an emergency situation where they have to issue a new certificate ASAP, as it will basically halt their business until they do. For places where there is no HSTS, users may be instructed to simply bypass the certificate warning temporarily, and support lines will be absolutely swamped until they actually fix the problem.

The WordPress situation is quite different. You don't have to use WordPress. Users don't even know what the Web PKI is to find an alternative to it, not that there is one or will be one.
US personnel office walks back email ultimatum from Musk to workers
* You've spent so much time critiquing nil values in Lua tables that you could have rewritten the entire language by now. Maybe in 2025?

* Your perfect tech stack exists only in your comments - a beautiful utopia where everything is type-safe, reliable, and nobody is ever on-call.

* You evaluate programming languages the way wine critics evaluate vintages: 'Ah yes, Effect-ts 2023, a sophisticated choice with notes of functional purity and a robust type system, though I detect a hint of API churn in the finish.'

ROFL :-)
As if on cue, two days later: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/24/elon-musk-fe...
Many places on California are more or less lawless, not just the freeways...
OpenAyyyyI swear babe I’m gonna open it up any day. Yeah for that grated good or whatever it is you keep yappin about.
Grok 3 System Prompt leaked
1) While Article II says....it also depends on a checks and balance system with the other two branches of government. We've already seen where the congressional branch is laying down for the executive, and we've also seen where the judicial branch has granted immunity essentially giving carte blanche to the executive. Without equal branches providing checks and balances, you've just ceded power the Constitution requires. Any of the lower courts trying to hold on to any semblance of checks and balance will eventually be reversed once it reaches SCOTUS.
How would you propose rewriting it that wouldn’t just mean “less democracy” and “more control by credentialed elites?”
If everyone is a programmer / coder since they have an AI software engineer on hand, I'm hoping that they would be comfortable with long term maintenance.

As entropy marches on with more AI generated lines of code in the codebase and software, APIs, tooling have breaking changes, will these new class of "vibe coder" / "creator coder" have the means and time to maintain their massive codebase?

I think AI is good for MVP's but if we're talking 10-30M lines of code then it might not be the best tool for this.
Maybe it’s because of where I sit on the spectrum but there are a handful of games I’ve not stopped playing since release, and yes despite this, I manage to hold down a career, friendships, family etc. (no kids though to be fair, I give that side of myself to my nieces/nephews)

Doom, Duke3d, half life (and mods) and blood. Half life and its expansions get at least a yearly play through in 2D or VR and I play a lot of custom maps.

Getting the opportunity to play them all in VR was a huge high for me. To “walk” through those same worlds from a new perspective, it was just something else.

I’m aware I’m wasting my limited time on earth etc but…I’m ok with it.
> I have to give the CATO institute credit for not being co-opted

That is because it is doing the coopting. It's why it was founded, and why it keeps being funded. "Charity" is cheaper than paying taxes, after all.
I think you missed the part where have to pay the minmum spend value up front when they book the reservation, and use that as a credit when they arrive for the reservation for dinner.
We're only one skipped election away from democratic death.
Hubris is laziness. They know better but are too lazy to put in the hard work to do better. It's much easier just to help yourself and screw everyone else. It's hard for anyone else to stop them.

A lesson I had to learn when I was first in charge: when deciding a course of action, ask myself, 'would I accept that from a subordinate?' If you report to no one, it's hard to hold yourself to the same or, if you are doing it right, higher standards. That is the corruption of power.

If you really want to see a person's character, give them power.
I’m working on Hypership (https://hypership.dev) – a platform that lets you deploy full-stack React and Next.js apps with auth, user management, events, and analytics in minutes. We’ve built first-class support for Next.js, handling SSR, static exports, and edge deployments seamlessly.

We’re also building our own CDN to optimise asset delivery and improve performance across deployments. But beyond infra, we’re betting on something bigger: developers want everything they need to ship an app in one place—not just UI kits, but fully hooked-up components that handle state, auth flows, and analytics automatically.

That means forms, a help desk, user management, and more—all tightly integrated so you can focus on building rather than stitching services together.

Would love to hear from anyone who’s been frustrated by piecing together third-party tools just to get a product off the ground!
GibberLink [AI-AI Communication]
can't wait AI to discover tons of Ramanujan style math inventions.
> If you ask me he’s got a substance abuse issue.

I think it's deeper than that. I remember he saying that he is not happy or something like that in a podcast with Lex. Him getting deep into the nasty side of politics and all the hatred has taken a toll on him. Based on his twitter he is too insecure and gets too involved when people are despising him and his gaming saga proves it.
Neither point is accurate. The executive power doesn't include the ability to create a fake department (DOGE), with a fake head (Elon Musk), lie that he isnt running it in court, and then run roughshod over the regulations and laws congress passed around employment regulations.

You know what the constitution does require, advise and consent. Not a single thing elon musk is doing is legal and yet their are seizing the power to remake departments created and funded by congress. If you want to eliminate USAID or any other department have CONGRESS pass a law to make the change, anything else is a constitutional seizure of power.

The executive power doesn't include a concept such as impoundment, yet the trump administration seized $80mil of FEMA funds from the the city of new york bank account.
He clearly won, but a narrow victory is not a mandate.

1984 Reagan's victory was a mandate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_United_States_president...
Actually most countries did not choose freedom of religion. Protestant countries kicked the Catholics out and vice versa.

The Netherlands was for a long time the only place in Europe that considered religion to be a personal affair- Amsterdam famously was the only city with a synagogue.
However even the Dutch occasionally had to execute or banish religious extremists.
Musk (in business and government), Zuckerberg, Trump, much of the cryptocurrency industry, ... it's everywhere.
> mainly Google, Microsoft and Mozilla

They don't have free rein to do whatever they want. If they chose to remove them, they are going to have to be ready to defend themselves in court.
What Marxist policies was Harris promoting?

Elon Musk's parents and grandparents were adovactes and beneficiaries of a violent, racist apartheid South Africa. His dad had children with his step-daughter.

Fred Trump was arrested for participating in a KKK rally and prosecuted for racist discriminatiory housing practices.

How do you land on Trump and Musk being far from violent ugly racism?
That is a lot of mumbo-jumbo but what it boils down to is that you cannot run the PCC on your own hardware; you can download some "components" whose hash matches the supposed "transparency log" they publish (and some demo models) but since I can't go into my iPhone to say "set PCC server ip: 192.168.1.42" and see it work, I don't trust it (and it cannot be trusted).
Much of the hype around DeepSeek is due to their extraordinarily low training and inference costs. They achieved this by optimizing their training code, apparently using PTX in addition to CUDA. PTX is kind of an intermediate assembly language for NVIDIA GPUs and people are eager to see how it was used.
Potatoes are not a good counter example because they are indeed stupidly easy to grow and scale. You can easily grow hundreds of pounds of potatoes per year indoors with fairly small potato boxes going through a few harvests per year. The main limiting factor is energy costs - you'll end up paying more per kg of potato than you would if you just bought them at the grocery store.

But there's a very good reason potatoes will be one of the early staples for fresh food on Mars. It's really hard to go wrong with them. It's also the reason it was chosen as the first food to ever be grown in space, back in 1995!
DDD is a good way to extract the business logic from the implementation.

By modelling the business you raise the business logic up to a 1st class element.

By implementing the business objects you encapsulate their functionality in the business.

The words "Account" or "Outstanding Balance" have business meanings. Modelling them allows you to express the business logic explicitly.

It also allows you to create tests that are related to that business logic, not the implementation.

You can still "build what you need and deal with the consequences of inevitable change later".

Model what you need to build, the business is going to have to make changes to that model to implement their changes, IT systems are a detail.

Change by extending and changing the DDD models.

To reverse the question, how do you write code that "does what you need" without understanding the domain?
will you guys allow remote work ever for engineers?
Someone should start a real CA business, complete with all the proper audits and everything to get it into the browser trust stores… and call it “Honest Achmed’s Used Cars and Certificates” (have it buy some random used car dealership in the middle of nowhere so the name is not a lie)

Where’s a billionaire troll when you need one? (And a form of billionaire trolling that would upset a lot less people than Musk’s version of it.)

Would be even funnier if the billionaire’s name actually was Achmed
The data layer most grain farmers rely upon is often ground based radar showing rain bearing clouds ..

eg, this: http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR581.loop.shtml#skip

is a "composite radar loop" that stitches together several ground based radars tuned to detect water.

Grain farmers in the wheat belt here, and elsewhere, can generally get by fine w/out sat data as long as they can have their cloud data.

What most (large) farmers heavily rely on today though is GPS - sat based positioning. That'll often be projected onto high res local imagery .. which can often come from an air photo survey or sat photography AND | OR high res vector data showing fence lines and boundaries but no actual image data (they can see out the window of the tractor after all).
In a modern nation, it’s not tenable to flush the federal government down the toilet every four years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jxb-Szj8jVU 22:00 onwards, and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D0kkEi9JI4 25:00 onwards.

tl;dw he found a 1992 recording of an art auction involving a series of paintings of humanoid rats being intimate, and he really wanted the person who bought one of the paintings to sell it to him.
That is such a weird thing to say. People should just give up?

You've got that famous quote from Edison about failing at make a light bulb.

Or you think everyone who studies cancer and doesn't cure it should think of themselves as failures?

God forbid you have a kid who wants to get better at something and you tell them to not bother because they're already a loser.
I'm working on two things right now that kind of go hand in hand:

- A webassembly bindings library for go, with "namespaced" / subpackaged adapters for Web APIs, so the final wasm binary won't be bloated

- A git management tool for my repositories, implemented in pure go (and using said wasm library) to find out what I need to build a small little app with it

[1] https://github.com/cookiengineer/gooey

[2] https://github.com/cookiengineer/git-evac
> The most influential decision maker on the Brown faculty was a computer science professor named Andy van Dam. I was one his teaching assistants during my senior year, so I got to know him pretty well. He was high strung and hard driving, and a little bit like Steve in his tendency to think that the universe revolved around him. I thought that it would be interesting to see how they interacted.

I didn't have that impression of him. Many people will say he has high standards, and can seem intense or maybe grumpy on occasion, but AFAIK, many of the countless people he's helped will also say that he has a heart of gold. (I personally knew two undergrads who said they'd gone through rough spots, and he above-and-beyond helped them.)

Also, at times it seemed that Andy knows everyone. My own small experience with this... Years after I'd graduated, a non-tech friend mentioned they'd love to work at this super-cool tech company, but friend did qualitative research, not code. So I email Andy (who I might never have even spoken 1-on-1 with), out of the blue: long shot, but does he happen to know how someone would approach that company, when they probably don't know why they might want this skill they've never heard of. He replied back: sure, the head of engineering there had been his student, and here's how to reach him, with a referral from Andy.

(I want to call him Prof. van Dam, out of respect, but reportedly he finds that "stuffy and undemocratic": https://www.browndailyherald.com/article/2010/11/call-him-an... )
Congress is supposed to hold both employees and departments accountable. Employees are held accountable via the advise and consent power so that the leadership of departments isn't beholden to the executive. Departments are held accountable by the budget process, don't do a good job, don't get appropriations. The executive power is merely administrative and logistical.
I am biased ( a former coworker was an Uncle Bob fan, and was bent on doing everything by the book, with layers of abstraction, patterns, hexagonal architecture, lots of unit tests, no cutting corners, even as we did not know what exactly we want to build and needed an MVP ASAP) but I'll just say this: Ousterhout wrote TCL - widely considered one of the best C codebases - besides being a professor at Standford and having other software achievements under their belt, while Robert Martin is more like a software technology evangelist. The former good at actual deliverables the latter good at selling.

Also Ousterhout's book on design is very easy to read and I guess I liked it because I mostly just nodded in approval while reading and there were very few things that made me stop.
Future? Hmmm... Would it really be so different from what we've been doing for several decades?

A great many once-manual tasks have already been delegated to a bajillion logic gates and libraries, and a rather large part of the job is managing them to play together.
So what's happened in the ... two months and a bit since the dates mentioned for the letters that this is apparently in reference to?
My drafts usually live for days, weeks, or even months before I publish them. (And sometimes I throw them away after having worked on them for many hours.)

My advice is to "chill": focus on the process instead of the result and let the posta take the time they take.
And four was panned by many for taking itself too seriously and grim dark. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Can’t please everyone.