7777fps

> Uber-scale profitable

That's an oxymoron, Uber are massively loss making.

The way I read this is that companies who are slightly less evil than others are really the bad ones because someone else could come in and be slightly less than them, and then everyone loses?

Except if companies are fighting to treat employees better, then everybody wins because conditions get better.

I went to a Decathlon in the UK to buy a bag and it was a weird experience. There was something a bit unnerving about interacting with a system with not enough feedback.

A reassuring 'beep' from the system would have helped me know it had scanned and was happy rather than waiting for it to show up on a screen.

Overall I find self-checkouts with barcodes quicker and easier. A scan and beep is a quick action. Putting something in a basket and waiting an unspecified amount of time was weird but no doubt would be something I'd get used to if it was a regular thing.

Also a lot of people saying "It's just a flu" have clearly never actually had flu, they've had bad colds which they assume are the flu.

The flu deadly, and this is worse.

You've got me wondering about the utility of a genuinely write-only language.

As a thought experiment, would there be benefit to letting functions only be written once?

No-one could come along and break code by changing a function. If you wanted to fix a bug in a function you would have to write a new copy and explicitly update callers to use the new version.

A lot of maintenance overhead? Possibly, but tooling would take care of the majority of it. It would be useful to be explicitly know not just when a function has changed but when the functions it calls have changed.

You would need a naming convention, instead of Main you would need something like Main#23145. It would tick over very regularly.

Library functions like CalculateTax#12 would tick over less frequently.

By calling the old revision you could call the old code if you didn't want to update a module or function.

Perhaps you could extend that name to be something like Namespace.Name#IndirectRevision.DirectRevision.Hash which would allow tools to more quickly extract when the change was made in the logic of the function itself or when the change was in dependents.

This would be an alternative strategy to maintenance to IoC. Instead of treating dependents like they don't affect the code being executed, we can control instead the version of code

By forcing code change in all callers, you build up an explicit picture of where bugs happen but more important see also at the impact of those bugs on other places.

It would need great tooling to get over the paradigm shift of moving away from IoC but I think it would be interesting.

That's a bargain really, still less than rent.

My reaction was "These are all post-rock album covers".

Compare to the real things: https://www.factmag.com/2016/04/20/best-post-rock-albums/

The hoops are the way such discounts are made affordable. If you're not willing to jump through those hoops you pay more which then subsidize those discounts for those who are willing to do so or otherwise unable to afford the product.

Price segmentation helps businesses extract maximum revenue.

Super mario is orders of magnitude simpler than most web applications. Almost the entire state is encoded in the current frame and there are only three instructions.

Maybe it's because I'm a Windows user so I'm not your target audience Mac user, but my IDE already does all of this.

From my IDE , I can already interact with GitHub, JIRA, search stack-overflow, and pretty much anything else either natively or through the plugin system.

In the UK prosecutions are brought on behalf of the Queen (it is the Crown Prosecution Service), you don't escape that framework because your victim has potentially broken other laws.

I'm keen on the idea that priority is not a thing, a single issue cannot have a priority.

Priority is an order. If your tracking system makes you assign a priority like "high" then it is collecting something that doesn't have meaning.

It's called the "right of reply". It's courtesy to reach out to a company and include their response without critique about whether it's "corporate bullshit".

H1 used to have a mechanism where researchers could push to make raised issues public if a ticket was ignored or marked as wontfix.

That was a good way to keep companies honest, an implementation of responsible disclosure.

So H1 could implement that again. It doesn't get them a bounty but it does stop companies pretending reports don't exist, if that's what has happened here.

GitHub isn't git.

Code reviews, pull requests, actions (CI), are all value that GitHub adds over git.

Just because the VCS stays up doesn't mean github going down doesn't impact work.

We still trust photos 100 years after they were edited in the darkroom.

As ever, context matters. This isn't some armaggeddon scenario where suddenly either anyone can be stitched up for anything or all evidence must be thrown out.

To elaborate on this, the entire country does this on the same day to vote in our general elections and it scales to 70m+ people without any issue. The reference to the North East and Sunderland is that they are usually the first to declare around 2 hours after the polls have closed. Most other constituencies take between 7 and 12 hours to count votes through the night.

Yes, as frustrating as it is to need on occassion to rm -rf /node_modules and start again to fix things, at least that's an option.

Great soundtrack too.

At which point the government could produce more themselves.

Why shouldn't governments own private industry if it still competes through the market?

Hacker news, where everyone proves the point by recommending a dozen different solutions.

Well maybe Ring shouldn't have bundled so many third party trackers.

If it really were just crash reporting, this would have probably gone unreported on.

And by "don't take that into account" you mean "transact anything off chain" including other currencies, goods, services, etc.

If you can hash faster than everyone else combined you can re-write history. So you could make a transaction and then re-write that transaction out of history allowing you to spend that money again.

When you make a valid transaction, you have the necessary details for both that valid transaction and no transaction at all. Just because you can't make invalid transactions doesn't mean you can't effectively steal.

This is why lightning network is a shitshow, because you have to be constantly alert for that behaviour.

The "introduction to mix" was particularly fun as a language introduction:

https://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/mix-otp/introduction...

It's a short project in which you create a homemade key/value store application. What's illuminating coming from elsewhere is how much it "just works" across the network and with multiple nodes including grace under failure.

Very few appear to include New Zealand: https://emojipedia.org/world-map/

previous discussion from the release candidate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21981908

The new sort api seems like a significant improvement.

Spooky, that whole article relates so deeply even the examples feel as if they're lifted from my brain.

It's an odd way to cheat too, if they realised they had data from the validation set, couldn't they have over-trained a model with the validation set in the training data?

Isn't the "charging network" a thing that shouldn't be vendor locked?

Imagine if every petrol pump was tied to specific makes of cars?

Any current vendor lock-in of charging is surely at risk at being legislated away, by insisting that EV charging is done through a standard port like refueling petrol/diesel vehicles.

If governments were serious about electric vehicles as a way of improving air quality they would legislate that already.