skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Following the Getting Started[0] section it seems like DBOS requires the configuration of a Postgres-compatible database[1] (NOTE: DBOS currently only supports Postgres-compatible databases.). Then, after decorating your application functions as workflow steps[2], you'll basically run those workflows by spawning a bunch of worker threads[3] next to your application process.

Isn't that a bit... unoptimized? The orchestrator domain doesn't seem to be demanding on compute, so why aren't they making proper use of asyncio here in the first place? And why aren't they outsourcing their runtime to an independent process?

EDIT:

So "To manage this complexity, we believe that any good solution to the orchestration problem should combine the orchestration and application tiers." (from the article) means that your application runtime will also become the orchestrator for its own workflow steps. Is that a good solution?

EDIT2:

Are they effectively just shifting any uptime responsibility (delivery guarantees included) to the application process?

[0]: https://github.com/dbos-inc/dbos-transact-py/tree/a3bb7cb6dd...

[1]: https://docs.dbos.dev/python/reference/configuration#databas...

[2]: https://github.com/dbos-inc/dbos-transact-py/blob/a3bb7cb6dd...

[3]: https://github.com/dbos-inc/dbos-transact-py/blob/a3bb7cb6dd...
Empty slots in arrays are weird.

>>> let xs = [,'foo']
<<< undefined
>>> xs
<<< Array [ <1 empty slot>, "foo" ]
>>> xs.map((x, index) => index)
<<< Array [ <1 empty slot>, 1 ]
>>> for (let x of xs) console.log(x);
undefined
foo
<<< undefined
>>> for (let x in xs) console.log(x);
1
<<< undefined
>>> xs.length
<<< 2
>>> delete xs[1]
<<< true
>>> xs.length
<<< 2
>>> xs
<<< Array [ <2 empty slots> ]

Empty slots are skipped in map() and for-in, but not in for-of and the new array from map() will have the same empty slots. delete will change a slot to empty, it won't change the length of the array.

Still, much saner than PHP arrays.
Ah, Fallout 4, the only game I ever got a Steam refund for. Bethesda writing is so bad it's hard to believe their writers are actually literate.
Sounds rational, but is it enforceable?

For context, a lot of mobile games use reloadable prepaid balance systems with made-up units for payments; golds, gems, latinum, whatever. Conversion ratios are artificially made ambiguous and obfuscated by discounts and gift credits. In addition to in-game merchandises purchasable only by in-game units, many games also offer items and subscriptions available only in out-of-game real currencies.

IIUC, these systems primarily exist to bypass computer-enforced Apple Laws regulating purchases made on the feudal Apple Land, such as laws requiring merchandises to be registered and approved before sales, or laws forbidding cross-platform balance mobility, than simply as anticonsumerist deception tactics.

Are they finally going after platformers fabricating and enforcing undemocratic yet strongly enforced laws on mobile app markets?
Oh yeah I wasn't accusing you of supporting him, just thought it was interesting how people treat him as if he hasn't lost his marbles. It's night and day to how he spoke ~15 years ago. His brain is mush.
That's a property of democracy with very small districts. With larger districts (and proportional elections or something similar), it's enough that a few percent of the voters support you. Carving yourself a niche and sticking to it then becomes a viable strategy for re-election.
I've used it against a frivolous parking charge. It's fairly well known in the UK and I've always enjoyed Private Eye
Banks, Bubbles, Profits
Cambridge Analytica/SCL/Meta are knowingly in the personalised propaganda business - political behaviour modification tailored to individual emotional triggers, sweetened with personally irresistible content that looks harmless but exists to hook users on the real payload.

"And here's some more content about your favourite band/movie/TV show/influencer. And now, some reels. Aren't those cats cute? But anyway. Here's a reel that looks unobjectionable but subtly makes a political point you should definitely think about. Would you like to know more?"

AI has the potential to make this much more effective.

Certain noteworthy historical figures from Germany would have been absolutely delighted.
At the size of Amazon that principle is meaningless. Not because people don't care, but because there are too many conflicting constituents anyway. Which one do you prioritize to obsess over?

Some might care about safety and recall notices, others just want things as cheap and fast as possible (as a sibling comment explains).

There are probably product categories that Amazon would rather not bother with (because of high return rates or low margin or what have you) but they keep it around in order to attract and retain customers who are overall more profitable.
Ah thanks. I missed that part. Will give it a try!
I am curious what causes these landers to fail in the bitter cold of night? Is it the batteries? It seems like circuitry should be fine.
5 years ago, I would have thought "well, this is just super funny, but it's an exaggeration of course".

But now this just hurts
Most docs are for experienced people to get valuable, exhaustive, and correct information when they need to. Learning about the same concepts is a different paradigm and you'd be better off with an actual book/tutorial. My most use information repositories are MDN and the likes, Devdocs|Dash, and sometimes library code when the documentation is lacking. But when I'm unfamiliar with a language/platform, I seek a book or a guide to get familiar with it.

LLMs can't help you if you want to skip the learning|training phase. They will present you something that you can't judge because you lack the qualification to do so. You don't learn how to play piano by only listening to it, or painting by viewing pictures.
Such a tool does exist, it's called shellcheck. If you give /bin/sh shebang for example it will tell you off using non-POSIX features regardless of whether they'll work with the sh on your system.

(Personally I typically use bash though, largely so I can `set -eEuo pipefail` next.)
You say this like it's some kind of zinger, but software engineers that actually negotiate their salaries generally earn more than those who don't.
Haha, in other words, you object to my tone. Got it.

See, you’ve proven my point perfectly. You’re incapable of making a technical argument so you focus on the tone - “evangelist”, “bad faith”, “insufferable”.

> I rather write in a supposedly suboptimal language than dealing with those like you.

To be clear, you can download the compiler for free and write all the programs you like while interacting with 0 people. You’re talking to me because you’re on HN, not because you’re writing Rust. Isn’t that obvious?
if you follow the doctrine of the trinity - sure.
I agree with you. In the United States, the Citizens United ruling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC) basically legalized the corporate takeover of government and buyout of elected government officials in the name of free speech.

"Elected officials do what they think the voters want (as affirmed by getting re-elected)."

should be:

"Elected officials do what corporate sponsors want and say that they are doing what voters want (as affirmed by getting campaign finance donations by corporate sponsors to help them get re-elected)."

> It's difficult to see how voters can compete with this, particularly while info about these routine arrangements rarely reaches voters.

Exactly. This puts elected government officials in the role of the Dungeons and Dragons Warlock class:

"Warlock patrons are powerful entities that grant mortals access to their power in exchange for a pact that binds the warlock to their patron's will." [1]

They serve at the pleasure of their patron which means they are not serving "we the people".

It is legalized corruption that puts profits and power above people and the good of the nation.

[1] https://www.thegamer.com/dungeons-and-dragons-dnd-roleplay-w...
Only if we reboost it soon. NASA shot down a proposal to do so with the Dragon capsule.

https://spacenews.com/hubble-goes-to-single-gyro-operating-m...
> However: Is it nice to manage an array of Particle objects with .x .y .vx and .vy, and some nifty methods to get and set those? Instead of writing that code to crunch through the same data on a flat 1-D array of all particles? Yeah. That's the point of OO.

You don’t need OO for that. Procedural languages have structures and procedures. Functional languages have records and functions.
haha give it a few years and you will want a non Earth hacker news :)

this planet is rotten to the core if someone figures out space travel try scarcity/hierarchy deconditioning for 1k generations and relocate and try elsewhere maybe?

but earth can't be fixed forget HN
New Free [ ] Trip Planner App
Happiness Planner - a web app I've been working on that helps you create, visualize, and share trip plans through an interactive map-calendar interface.

What it does:
- Create detailed trip itineraries visually through an interactive map + calendar integration
- Generate complete, detailed trip plans using natural language (just describe your ideal trip!)
- View your trip from multiple perspectives: calendar view, map view, timeline view, or events list
- Works offline and on mobile (built as a PWA)

The AI thing:
The feature lets you generate entire trips by simply describing what you want. For example, type "Plan me a 5-day food tour of Tokyo in April with some cultural activities" and it will create a structured trip with locations, events, times, and descriptions - all properly organized on the map and calendar.
1. if you wish, you absolutely can check for "extra constraints" on a passed type (or even an anytype parameter) using comptime reflection and the @comptimeError builtin.

2. if you want to restrict the use of a function to comptime (why you would want to is beyond me) it is possible to do with @inComptime builtin.

the only tricky bit is that your function could try to call a function inaccessible to you because it's transitively restricted and you'd have a hard time noticing that from the code but it's not possible for that code to be compiled (barring errors by the zig team) so its more of an annoyance than a problem.
This sounds like graph reduction as done by https://haflang.github.io/ and that flavor of special purpose CPU.

The downside of reducing a large graph is the need for high bandwidth low latency memory.

The upside is that tiny CPUs attached directly to the memory could do reduction (execution).
This is a fun blast from the near past. I helped organize the PyTorch NYC meetup where Ed presented this and still think it's one of the best technical presentations I've seen. Hand drawn slides for the W. Wish I recorded :\
New Golden Gate safety nets are reducing suicide deaths, study finds
https://archive.ph/WJq3D
I heard that even just getting the model to print a bunch of whitespace ("think for longer") improves the quality of the final response, because some kind of processing is still happening internally?
1. Delete or revoke your own access to social media accounts

2. Enjoy increased quality of life

Easier said than done, but those are the only steps
IMO dimensional analysis is still useful even if unit conversions are more compatible.
Separate microcontroller that can (barely) do one thing well. Any network traffic analysis that indicates they're using this for spying?
A famous great anecdote about Dirac (and Bohr and Rutherford) was in Absolute Zero Gravity:

--

Young Dirac arrived at Niels Bohr’s institute with a glowing recommendation from the great experimentalist Ernest Rutherford. A few months later, Bohr remarked to Rutherford that this marvelous Dirac hardly seemed so special: he said nothing and he did nothing. Legend has it that Rutherford replied with the following story:

A man went to a pet shop to buy a parrot. There was a gray parrot that knew a few words selling for one hundred dollars. There was a blue parrot that could sing and tell stories for two hundred dollars. There was a beautiful green and purple bird that spoke several ancient languages for five hundred dollars. And there was a nondescript brown bird priced at a thousand dollars.

“A thousand dollars!” exclaimed the would-be buyer. “That must be some bird - how many languages does he speak?” “Just English,” admitted the shopkeeper.

“His vocabulary is extraordinary, perhaps?” The shopkeeper shrugged. “Not really”.

“Does he sing, then?” “No,” said the shopkeeper. “Most days this parrot doesn’t even talk”.

“Well, does he do acrobatic tricks or something? What on earth is so valuable about that parrot?”

“Sir, this parrot thinks”.

Rutherford concluded, “Dirac thinks”.
New desalination technology being tested in CA could lower costs of seawater
in practice aside from interfaces the only thing you can't do at comptime is to generically attach declarations (member functions, consts) to a container type (the best you can do is to do it on a case by case basis).

you could probably cobble together an interface system with @comptimeError, but because of the time order of compilation stages, a failed method call will trigger the compiler error before your custom interface code, making it effectively useless for the 90% of cases you care about.

if I'm not mistaken in principle a small change to the compiler could amend this situation
I'm already at the point where I don't trust anything Amazon is selling.
> Sometimes you don’t know what you don’t know or you you just a little about what you might not know.

If you find yourself in this situation, that usually means you've skipped something on the way. Kinda like wanting to contribute to ffmpeg's core with no understanding of audio codecs and containers. Or wanting to code web applications with no knowledge of HTTP and the TCP stack, sysadmin, the DOM API, what cascading in CSS means,...
It's nonsense, only mentioned in some random deck with no technical details, the article says as much. So probably just a hopeful middle manager that let their fantasies get the better of them. Got an actual source?
From the paper linked in the post:

> [...] boiled coffee was poured through a two-layer polyester/acrylic sock (an occasional household recommendation as potential substitution for a paper filter)

No kidding. I thought the sock was just a cute icon they used for the graphical abstract.
You are confused about Microsoft.
They did (do?) have some bad anti-competitive behavior but they won because ultimately, they provided a competitive OS (and software suite) at a very competitive price and nobody was able to successfully offer a combination of hardware/software that could match that offering. Not Apple and not even Linux with their free stuff, and it still stays true after all these years.

If one company were to make a compelling OS as good as Windows for as cheap or cheaper, people would flock to them really fast.

We can talk about the software coupling all day, but similarly devs are going there primarily because that is where their customers are because of the cheap costs.
Gaming and 3D software are notoriously Windows only because it's the only OS that has provided decent stability/features while allowing access to a competitive hardware proposition.

Now that Linux is somewhat viable, we can actually see some high-end software working there, in the 3D effects and video business.

Microsoft might be shady but at least they are providing good value. Apple is a major dickhead clamoring how much better they are while failing to actual value.

I am an Apple customer and I do think their OS is nice for many things but the reality is that outside of their laptop the value is extremely questionnable (and even for the laptop, because of RAM/SSD pricing you better have some justification for the benefit of battery life, otherwise its mostly a luxury).
Yeah, back when I first started playing bass (which would have been around 2008, interestingly enough) I used their cables for a bit because of the unlimited replacements. As a young teen without any income, it honestly was a pretty decent deal; in retrospect, the cables certainly weren't high quality and probably developed issues far more easily than a higher quality cable, but I could also go into any guitar store that sold those cables and then trade them in for fresh ones, no questions asked. It wasn't like I really had that many gigs, so being guaranteed not to ever have to buy new cables was easily worth it even if it meant that I would have to go back to the store any time they failed. Eventually I got old enough that I had more disposable income and would play a bit more often to the point where it would be more inconvenient to have to get a replacement on short notice, so I moved on to buying higher quality ones, but I don't really see the experience I got as a scam. Maybe the were marketed to the point where people who really weren't getting the benefits from their model were still buying them when they would be better served by a different company's cables, but I feel like the model they were trying to do did at least make sense for me at the time, and I think that it's worth making a distinction between "trying to exploit naive customers by selling something no one needs" and "trying to market beyond the actual customer base that is served well by the business model", mostly because I feel like the latter is a spectrum that quite a lot of companies fall on to some degree, and it's not as clear to me where exactly the line should be drawn for how "acceptable" this is. (I'd be fine with literally any instance of this being called out and shamed, but realistically I think this is looked past by most people so much of the time that it's not accurate to claim anyone is actually doing it)
I'm quite comfortable knowing what they are and pointing out the early-2010s naive absolutist approach to privacy didn't work, hence where we are.

Regardless of whether people choose to conversate by telling me what to Google, instead of coming with curiosity and/or contributions.

The same thought process that leads to commentators being confused why Apple rejected someone's app for having a privacy policy of "I don't collect data" applies here.

I'm glad a less naive, and non-absolutist, approach has gotten tangible results, even if it'll take a few years for it to be common wisdom rather than disagreeable to look back on the 2010s and say so.
I guess if someone like Anthropic builds a proper registry, then the user wouldn't have to decide and the AI can decide itself?
I am firmly on the side of it's here to stay. I can't imagine going back to a non-MCP world while using Windsurf.

Example use case of Supabase MCP: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43388517
Not an expert but this reads like typical DDR to me
Did you miss this one?

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/06/red-h...

Again, be careful not to attribute past RH actions with IBM. Yes, IBM was very helpful in the 90s and later, but you can't fully trust a corporation past the next financial statement, and certainly not past a leadership change or three.
I think you misunderstood the article and my comment: this is about introducing new types, not about typing or not typing your function arguments.
If Amazon doesn't want to value customer safety, that's absolutely fine, as long as all listings have a big "Buy from this seller at your own risk, it's nothing to do with us" popup.

Just in case.

Seems like an easy, cheap fix. Amazon makes a single tweak in its listing code, and buyers know where they stand.
> I have bad news: Code completions were very popular a year ago, a time that now feels like a distant prequel. But they are now the AI equivalent of “dead man walking.”

I disagree. I view this as a "machine guns versus heat sinking missiles from the 70s" dichotomy. Sure, using missiles is faster. However, sometimes you're too close for missiles. Also, machine gun rounds are way cheaper than missiles. However, when they first came out, missiles were viewed as the future. For a while, fighter jets were made without machine guns, but they added them back later because they decided they needed both.

Sometimes I find I want to drill down and edit what Claude generated. In that case, copilot is still really nice.

With regard to ai assisted coding: the more you know what you're doing, the more you know the code base, the better result you'll get. To me it feels like a rototiller or some other power tool. It plows soil way faster than you can and is self propelled, but it isn't self directed. Using it still requires planning and it's expensive to run. While using the tool, you must micromanage its direction, constantly giving it haptic feedback from the hands, or it goes off course.

A rototiller could be compared to a hired hand plowing himself, I guess, but there's way less micromanagement with a hired hand vs a rototiller.

Kind of like horses and cars. Horses can get you home if you're drunk. Cars can't.

The proper use of AI agentic tools is like operating heavy machinery. Juniors can really hurt themselves with it but seniors can do a lot of good. The analogy goes further: sometimes you need to get out of the backhoe and dig with smaller tools like jackhammers or just shovels. The jackhammer is like copilot -- a mid-grade power tool -- and Claude code is like the backhoe. Clunky, crude, but can get massive amounts done quickly, if that's what's needed.
... the 20th century event was notable because it marked a change from the thought at time of founding up to then.

You can ignore history but simply declaring it can't be imposed on you ignores all the inertia of a system only partially amended since the 18th Century (and amended using mostly 18th century imposed criteria). It imposes whether you acknowledge it or not, and no matter how soundly you might think your rebuttal it does zero to change that.
Go reverse the operating system and you'll find this is just a paranoid fantasy. Many others have done so already, so you can also just hit up google and find their analyses.
I love how new technology becomes like religion. It develops both cult followers and critics.

In that lens think the AI cult is more right than the Crypto cult. At least I can use it to do something tangible right now while crypto is still pretty useless after many years.

In some sense I think these technologies need the cults and the critics though. It’s good to have people push new things forwards even if everyone isn’t along for the ride. It’s also good to have a counter side poke holes. I think the world is better with both optimists charting new paths forwards and pessimists making sure they don’t walk right off a cliff.
Playwright can actually use your existing browser cookies if you connect it through Chrome's debugging protocol. Launch Chrome with the flag:

--remote-debugging-port=9222

Then connect via CDP in Playwright like this:

const browser = await chromium.connectOverCDP('http://localhost:9222');
Not sure what the problem is. Everyone starts somewhere, and I don't see this person pretending to be an expert. They're just sharing what they've learned so far. Identifying idioms—even as a beginner—is totally valid.
I think they're unhappy Trump isn't exclusively punishing their political enemies. The broad attack on government programs that help everybody is not what they wanted, they know it's going to hurt themselves.

Electing a mad man or dictator is not equivalent to 3/4 of the states ratifying an amendment to the Constitution. The Yarvin, Thiel, Musk view of using autogolpe to place a CEO-dictatorship in place of Constitutional order is in progress. But the People haven't consented to that. Proposing that they have does enormously heavy lifting for this patrimonial diarchy movement.