skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I read Clean Code when I started out my career and I think it was helpful for a time when I worked on a small team and we didn't really have any standards or care about maintainability but were getting to the point where it started mattering.

Sure, dogmatism is never perfect, but when you have nothing, a dogmatic teacher can put you in a good place to start from. I admired that he stuck to his guns and proved that the rules he laid out in clean code worked to make code more readable in lots of situations.

I don't know anything about him as a person. I never read his other books, but I got a lot out of that book. You can get a lot out of something without becoming a devotee to it.

EDIT: I think even UB will agree with me that his dogmatism was meant as an attitude, something strong to hit back against a strong lack of rigidity or care about readable code, vs a literal prescription that must be followed. See his comment here:

> Back in 2008 my concern was breaking the habit of the very large functions that were common in those early days of the web. I have been more balanced in the 2d ed.

And maybe I was lucky, but my coding life lined up pretty neatly with the time I read Clean Code. It was an aha moment for me and many others. For people who had already read about writing readable code, I'm sure this book didn't do much for them.
I was rather surprised that Apple kowtowed to the UK. Quite a shift from the rigid stance that they had with San Bernardino. I understand the situation is not exactly apples-to-apples (ha!), but it is similar enough.

This stance is even more confusing considering the company has spent the better part of the last decade advertising to customers that they are on their side for privacy and security juxtaposing themselves against Meta and Microsoft.
I always think of this as the programmer version of "No one got fired for choosing IBM." that was a common phrase about executives back in the day. Do the thing that you can just point to "experts" and blame them.
>We have plenty of cases where people have in fact been allowed to fool investors without repercussions. Most famously was the recent collapse of we work. There is in general quite a bit of leeway in the private markets to get creative about how you market your financial products.

WeWork is a strange case because it relied on creating a market for office space, or else taking market share away from other modes of using office space. You can't look at it on the surface and say it's a terrible business model. That means, any claim against them would need to be quantitative in nature. Also, this deception is forward-looking: you can only claim it was wrong after some time has passed. If they falsified their tenancy numbers (past observables) then that would be more damning.

>I don't think it makes sense for a public entity to audit things that the public can't buy. Private financial institutions are (or at least should be) competent to audit their own investments.

Private investors should audit their own investments, but auditing is not going to succeed when records and research are deliberately falsified. There is no way to put the blame on investors for having been fooled by deliberate deception.

>The general public are not competent to audit their own investments, and even if they were it would be extremely inefficient, so we should probably have some government entity for that.

The general public generally entrusts its investment funds to people who are supposed to do the due diligence required. This due diligence is undermined by deception. As for the government getting involved, I agree it might need to be involved if the public can directly buy something (although there are some negative outcomes that come with it, such as regulatory capture and suppression of new stuff). The need for oversight applies even more when public money is used to fund research.
I think it’s based on the tools you’re using. If I’m using Cline I don't have to try very hard to hit limits. I’m on the second tier.
This is inline with “take down anything that shows expertise and competence” approach by this administration. Following the pattern of extremely biased and subservient to the president appointees, I am not sure what it looks like for this specific organization, may be they are fired and that’s it
The PTX instructions they talked about in the tech report should be pointing to the code here?
Proofreading is one place that AI can actually be a friend rather than a foe. If you give Claude your draft and tell it explicitly to call out misspellings and grammatical errors only, it does a really good job.
I'm never going to look at ratings. The only use there is photos of menus, food, and the restaurant itself.
Heck, I'm living in a vastly worse tyranny. Not like Trump will cut my taxes. I'm not even a millionaire.
>"Laundry to do..." is a trauma dump

This used to be called a whinge. It wasn't celebrated. I wrote out a longer reply but ... idk, I'm astonished at the idea that that "poem" is "presented in a thoughtful way" instead of being "explosive word vomit" when "explosive word vomit" is, as yet, the most accurate three-word description of it I have seen so far. And the idea that the "daily routine" is "Everyone holding it in" is just mad. I can see why people say we exist in a post-fact world where people are speaking past one another. From my perspective nobody has held it in less than people today, over matters so trivial and misunderstood. People cry on Twitter over someone not wearing a mask on public transport, yet people went to the trenches and saw 90% of the male inhabitants of their village killed in front of them and held it together for King and country, went back home and lived normal lives. And the ones that wrote poetry about it wrote actual poetry, good poetry. Not this tat.

>And, I don't need rigid structure, impressive vocab or flowery images to appreciate a message. I'm good with it just putting me in a moment

That doesn't make it a poem!
Here's one way to intuitively think about this algorithm:

ICan’tBelieveItCanSort(A[1..n])
for i = 1 to n do
for j = 1 to n do
if A[i] < A[j] then
swap A[i] and A[j]

Example:

3412 // i=1
4312 // i=1 -> i=2
3412 // i=2 -> i=3
1432 // i=3
1342 // i=3 -> i=4
1243 // i=4
1234 // i=4

1) After an outer loop of i is finished, the first i elements are in ascending order. (For example, in the fifth line above after i=3 is finished, the first 3 elements are "124")

2) At some point, the outer loop will point to "1", and "1" will be compared to the 1st position. Then, "1" will be placed in the 1st position and remain there forever. (For example, this happens in the 3rd line above)

3) After the outer loop points to "1", at some point it will point to "2" which will be compared to the 2nd position. (Proof: when the outer loop pointed to "1", if "2" was on the right of "1", then the statement is obvious; if "2" was on the left of "1", then it would be in the 1st position by (1), so again the statement holds.) Then, "2" will be placed in the 2nd position and remain there forever.

4) After the outer loop points to "2", at some point it will point to "3" which will be compared to the 3rd position...
Mint and chocolate is a classic combination. You have weird taste buds.
I agree. But one exception, a lot of good Syrian restaurants aren't named for a region in Syria, or the country, but some greater region that includes Syria (usually "Shaam").
4 Trillion in tax cuts, actually.
The roasts are hilarious (as has been documented extensively), but the summary was actually really nice and made me feel a little better after a rather aimless day!
Nvidia's H20 chip orders jump as Chinese firms adopt DeepSeek's AI models
You can’t compare the two
Hm. Not in the case described.
https://archive.ph/jQ3TO
What the hell are people blogging about that is so generic that an AI could write it?

The important part of any journalism is to introduce new facts and findings that aren't anywhere else to be found. An AI cannot do that.
Regardless of the levity with which you intended it, is it not still an assertion that I haven't done the work to understand the viewpoints I am arguing against?
Coffee is Ethiopia, came with the Ottomans to Europe, tea came from Chine with the British or the Silk Road. Either of them post dates the Romans.
Much like (say) MS Word does? In real time.
Calm down there Ivan.
It’s funny because I also have found myself doing this exact with R1+Sonnet 3.5 recently. Windsurf allows you to do a chat mode exchange with one model and then switch to another to implement. The reasoning models all seem pretty poorly implemented for the agentic workflows, but work well when paired with Claude.
That is a shallow take and I disagree — at least in my case, I make a conscious effort to avoid being a Blub programmer and regularly try different languages and look at different ecosystems. The choice of Clojure and ClojureScript for this application was not accidental, and it wasn't the thing I was most familiar with at the time.

There are good reasons why I said it was only possible with Clojure and ClojureScript. Conciseness, expressiveness, long-term stability, the ability to share business logic code between the client and server, same language used for data serialization (e.g. no JSON), good async code support (core.async), transducers for code reuse and performance, and more.
Not sure what you meant by replying with the (otherwise relevant) article about violating subsidy conditions (usually done by serial abusers like AT&T) to a comment about Empire Access. I don't know what Empire Access usually does, but in the case mentioned in TFA, Empire Access will operate on municipal open-access fiber infrastructure, which the Oswego County (not Empire Access) will use subsidies to build.
Yes I read the same post. What I said remains true. "Talky free verse" and "prose poetry" are misnomers. They aren't poetry.

It has nothing to do with what I "studied in class". Words have definitions and "poetry" is meaningless if it means "anything written down at all".
Maybe the Supreme Court stacked with his allies will declare RtR is unconstitutional. We lost abortion and gay marriage is on the chopping block. The system is being gamed very hard right now, and they've been lying to you for years.
This is one of those titles that really needs an [opinion piece] label in the title. Saw this was from the NYT and knew that even they wouldn’t report this as “news” but rather it must be an opinion essay.

Other readers, especially from outside of the US, might not realize the distinction and think, “Wow, the NYT is a big national newspaper, this is important news!”. No, this just an opinion/advocacy piece from a left-leaning newspaper, and as such has few if any expectations of objectivity, completeness or accuracy, although there may be a point or two that’s worth taking away.

It’s also probably worthy of flagging as at the outer edge of HN relevance, although issues of actual governance, especially when someone is “moving fast and breaking things” like Trump, are always of general interest.
That might be the strongest argument against it.

I would really like total control of my car's ECU, but I know the most popular use of such a power would be to circumvent emissions controls and maximize MPG or HP.
I pay for a number from voip.ms and use sms forwarding. Its very cheap and it works on telegram as well which seemed fairly strict at detecting most voips.
The federal govt can’t be the majority of technological innovation.
If we’re lucky this vacuum will be filled by an even larger private sector innovation hub like Xerox park and bell labs.
Internet Made In-Store Shopping Miserable
Here's mostly from what I wrote down after reading it. Indeed, the "reasonableness" is part of the problem.

What's agreeable is mostly only so because it's such a straightforward platitude. "Things that are not important should be hidden, and the more of them the better. But when something is important, it must be exposed." Ok? Anyone want to argue to the contrary? This is not teaching or learning anything new or of value, it's not even inviting argument like CC makes it easy to do. I was also hoping that with the book being so short it would be concise, but alas, it's full of this sort of stuff. The single page summary of design principles at the end is similar. A few of them you could quibble about, but arguments would likely just be in fully understanding the meaning of the terminology and what background contexts are assumed. Much advice is dependent on context! Context is something not really called out much in this book. As one example there was only a very slight hint that the author is aware that writing for the code reader means a reader from a particular audience, often your co-workers, and that gives you certain affordances you wouldn't have for say random blogger.

Elsewhere, not in the book, the author once wrote "The strong typing of object-oriented languages encourages narrowly defined packages that are hard to reuse. Each package requires objects of a specific type; if two packages are to work together, conversion code must be written to translate between the types required by the packages." This is actually a nuanced point and is good to discuss. The context of whether you have static types or dynamic types or a half-baked OOP system or a full-baked OOP system is very important context. But it seems a completely absent point of consideration from his "philosophy", even when you'd think it'd be appropriate to go over in the final chapter where he highlights OOP as a "trend".

A lot of the author's rants seem to be snipes at Java. Fine, whatever, though Java has answers to the complaints. (Especially modern Java.)

Lastly, and originally my first complaint because it's about the very beginning of the book (including the cover art), he's on shaky foundations with its definition of simplicity/complexity by conflating it with the subjective easy/hard. I was hoping for a post-Hickey (of Clojure/"Simple Made Easy" talk fame for anyone unaware) understanding that complexity is objective, but alas. It's not like Hickey invented that understanding, but in current year, I think it's quite questionable to disagree. So, the book: "For the purposes of this book ... complexity is anything related to the structure of a software system that makes it hard to understand and modify the system." Sorry, that's not a useful definition of complexity, and now the whole book is harder to read/easier to misinterpret because of the custom definition. Well, at least it's explicit that it's custom.
Don't worry about it Elon hired 19 year old criminals to run the agency's description through grok and it turned out that isn't important.
I have business continuity plans. And my point still stands: in practice, within a 5-year time horizon, you are much more likely to see a VC-funded or corporate-owned service shut down, than see a sustainable single-founder business disappear.
Is that really a problem most people have in business communication? I can't recall a time sending a professionally appropriate email was actually hard.. Also, consider the email's recipient. How would you feel if you had to wade through paragraph upon paragraph of vacuous bullshit that boils down to "Hey [name], I think the thing we're doing could be done a little differently and that would make it a lot less expensive, would you like to discuss?"
You seem to be oblivious to the fact that you can type that comment in a web browser and post it on the internet is due in large part to decades of people funded by the NSF and then making the knowledge they discovered freely available.
I must admit I still don't understand continual compounding
I only read articles with headlines that describe informative content, not with headlines that sound funny or thought-provoking.
https://planetcalc.com/
This is getting HUGE exposure on Xwitter right now.

YC is backtracking on them and rightly so. I don't blame them, they probably pitched something relatively ok-ish; today's demo is just a disaster from every angle.

Incidentally, this also shows why 2020s YC is a different beast than 2010s YC, they don't really care about your startup, they don't even really know what is it about, its just a pure numbers game at this point.

Methaphorically, YC also optifye-d itself into what it is nowadays.
I didn’t realize that; this is a really good point
Actually... no. I would not really agree.

Obviously there are some exceptions. But not as appreciable as you'd think.

Like, someone could have loaded a cannon with grapeshot and blasted a crowd of people in the 1700's. (Or loaded up a wagon with several barrels of black powder and grape shot.) Or chained the door shut to the local church and set fire to the building by tipping over an oil lamp. Or set fire to a few fields of crops or grain stores after harvest before winter and essentially starved a whole town.

I don't think it's all that appreciably easier to kill a similar number of people today. If anything, similar attacks today might actually be quite a bit HARDER to execute due to technology, and society is both more fragile as a whole but more resilient at small scales than it was. Population density might make a bigger difference than anything as targets with a large number of people are perhaps more available.
Now add business day (BD #) for financial services… in the visitor's country.

Sounds easy, right? Just something like:

https://aakashkh.github.io/python/2019/05/30/Business-Days-C...

But then a wild Holiday appears:

https://fastercapital.com/content/Business-Day--Business-Day...
Lost decade for the US and the beginning of the Chinese century for others
Inflation causes interest rates to go up. Which increases our interest payments. Which blows a hole in our budget.
JavaScript become good when you create another language of top of it and use at least 2 different frameworks isn't a good sign
HN supports code format using spaces in front

int foo()
{
bar();
}
There's a wikipedia page addressing your exact concern: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy
Developed, sure. Successfully integrated and commercialized, no. Organizations in US and Europe has done a lot of the prerequisite tooling and research. But they haven't successfully integrated it into an operation capable of producing leading nodes, yet.
That's true, i guess I'm trying to say "the portrayal of Feynman versus the reality of him" which "he didn't write any books" doesn't represent well.

With some more thought, the fact that he wasn't the direct author of any books is interesting but not really that significant to his character, so i can't see much reason to point it out other than to discredit his achievements.

Though if the achievement being discredited is the number of books he's seemingly written then it makes sense to a degree.
not to get too political, but Emusk is reported to be on it, not sureyou go
The website makes it sounds like this is just...AI sweatshop monitoring software? What the heck?

https://www.optifye.ai/
I still don't like dataframes but oh my God Polars is so much better than pandas.

I was doing some time series calculations, simple equity price adjustments basically, in Polars and my two thoughts were:

- WTF, I can actually read the code and test it.

- it's running so fast it seems like it's broken.
My family members from Iran and Syria have said that people there cook beef extra because it's usually not very fresh, unless they're rich. So overcooked beef may be the more authentic way, depending on how you look at it. Lamb is more common anyway.
Eh. We've accepted adverse possession of real estate since the Code of Hammurabi. Continuous possession in good faith eventually conveys ownership.

If you steal my car, kill me, forge the title transfer, give it to your kid who believes they got it in good faith and century goes by, then their descendants get to keep it and mine are out of luck.
You think this NSF money was stolen? Where's your evidence of that?
As with every other Microsoft business product it's a name with no ideology. No sense of what and what not to do.
Seems like an anomaly. Most <10k towns have jobs at Walmart, auto repair, landscaping, construction, electricians, plumbers and barbers/hairdressers.
You can renounce your US citizenship and thus avoid the burden of US taxation.
This is correct. President Biden signed and Executive Order requiring the federal government to purchase EVs. The State Department was working towards that, including for armored vehicles. President Biden lost the election and that effort ended when President Trump rolled back Biden’s EOs. That’s the story.
this might help: https://x.com/main_horse/status/1894215779521794058/photo/1
Just like in healthcare, right? Where we are lucky the private industry has created...oh wait, most expensive healthcare system in the world, doesn't cover a third of the population, doesn't even crack the top ten in outcomes.
For the past few weeks, I've been annotating all the references I could find in the legendary Unix magic poster: https://unixmagic.net.

I'm happy to reach this first milestone, but I'm already envisioning future iterations. My goal is to transform this into a proper celebration of Unix – a system whose elegant simplicity and powerful design principles continue to inspire me. There's something deeply satisfying about connecting with this foundational piece of computing history.

Contributions are always welcome.

Special shout-out to @abetusk for all the support and enthusiasm with the project.
This is the real reason. Does the program produce money or help people? Or is it a black hole for funding to be dumped into?

People are so used to excessive waste they can’t even tell it apart from something that adds value.
Explained in a terrible way, it's integrals for interest if "compound daily/monthly/yearly" was an estimation using discrete intervals
Nobody gets "full access" to your "javascript object"—whatever that even means; pages from different origins will still run into exceptions when trying to diddle the opener. There is a small, well-known set of (safe) properties that are excluded from the restrictions—like location. But the noopener behavior, by making opener null, does stop other pages from setting even opener.location, which could ordinarily be used to programmatically send the user to another page.
We use Unity so it's cross-platform, including mobile. But we never implemented a server for cloud saves, so you need to sync the saves using other tools
sigh

See https://jepsen.io/analyses for how MongoDB has a tradition of incorrect claims and losing your data.

Distributed databases are not easy. Just saying "it is web scale" doesn't make it so.
> The world is a bigger market than USA and just about every other country has cheaper labor and no tariffs.

"no tariffs" -> "heavy tariffs".
It reminds me of the Gordian knot myth. All these sages had tried and failed to untie it. Alexander the Great, a true jock, sliced it in half with his sword.

Trump and Musk style themselves after Alexander. They see the complexities of geopolitics, security, culture and economics, and they have contempt for that complexity. They give simple, brutal solutions for hard problems: War in Europe? Force Ukraine to surrender! Slow to change government policy? Fire Federal workers and consolidate power! Too many illegal immigrants? Send them to Guantamo! And it feels active, it feels efficient, it's cathartic, and so their base cheers them on as they take swings at the load-bearing walls of our country. The fulminant narcissism, impulsive mania and willful ignorance are adaptive, to them.
but the spending was all set by democratic process where citizen's representatives set the spending in their constituents interests.

instead, now that value is being taken away from me without consent, and im goinf to be forced to spend more somewhere else in my life to make up for it, without the actual consent of it going through votes and discussion in congress
Yeah maybe that's the move. I don't really have a following though, lol