akavi

Seems odd to have a strike with 33% of the population in a democracy.

If that many people support the changes, couldn’t they just vote for them? I can’t imagine that fully 75% of the non-striking 66% would turn out to vote against whatever changes the strikers are proposing

I don't see where you're seeing execs making any money off of Convoy in that quote.

If there are any outstanding debt obligations (which I expect there are), then those would be senior to voluntary severance even if the company hadn't spent its literal last dollar.

Better search is super valuable though.

You don't always have to create new paradigms; integrating existing ideas can work wonders.

That’s the name of the alumni slack (serious)

"More than 80% of Americans have an individual income such that if they were the sole earner in their household AND chose to purchase the median cost new car, they would be spending more than a threshold chosen fairly arbitrarily by Market Watch" is the more accurate headline.

Universal Childcare at the margin means some people who would rather take care of their own children are pushed to take a job and have someone else watch their child.

I fail to see why that's superior to a universal childcare subsidy, which can be used for childcare or retained if someone wishes to care for their child themself. Or better yet, a universal child allowance that parents can use to defray whatever child raising costs they see fit.

And I say that as someone whose current plan is to be a stay-at-home dad while my (female) partner continues to work.

Just like you learn anything else. Flash cards, pure repeated exposure, reading about the symbols long enough that you have a framework to fit them into, etc.

Non-rhotic accent, eh? Estuary English?

"ˈθʌrə"'s was interesting to me, I'd render "thorough" in my ideolect (Southern-inflected General American) "θʌrow". Is your pronunciation "standard" in British English (or whatever the prestige variant where you're from is)?

Also, I think you meant "ðə ˈmɛtᵊl Pb lɛd"

Sounds to me like there’s demand for a second one then

As someone who's familiar with Rust, but not at all with C++, can you elaborate on what situations Rust is less expressive than C++ in?

My naïve guess is high performance data structures with reference cycles?

And you can eschew the JSX syntax entirely with nothing but a small cost to dev ergonomics.

A company I worked at had a O(1 MLoC) React frontend with no JSX at all for a long period of time due to the Typescript compatibility issue, just `export const El = React.createElement`

Love it, and love using plain ol' functions for it

You're making the classic move of conflating developers with landowners. These are two very different groups, with two very different incentive sets.

What's your corner of the world? I'm sure we can find hard data on the population growth vs. new building rates which might be illuminatory.

Well yes, but the "other group" commanding them to do so is municipal governments, at the behest of existing property owners.

Why would a south Indian meal involve naan and lassi?

What does "dinner service" mean to you?

I cook a fairly standard south Indian dinner of daal stew, rice + stir fried veggies a couple times a week in ~30-45 minutes of total work. Nothing preprocessed, premixed, or premade other than (and these are really stretching the definitions thereof):

* Asofoetida powder that's been preground and dried for me

* The rice has been polished and debran-ed (ie, turned into white rice)

* pressure cooked lentils (I make a big batch every weekend or so and freeze it into dinner sized portions)

The sibling comments here are weird to me. IME the primary reason to us GraphQL is explicitly solve the dilemma of "ReST-ful" endpoints:

1) An endpoint returns a superset of the data any client may need, which means more data is loaded than any given client needs (which means wasted bandwidth/compute)

2) An endpoint returns a subset of the data all clients need, which means any given client has to tack on additional queries to get everything it needs (which means more roundtrips)

(There's the third option of tacking on "includes" or "excludes" parameters to endpoints, but at that point you're evolving an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden implementation of half of GraphQL, to massacre Greenspun's tenth rule).

How important solving this dilemma is to your application may be a function of your team or system topology, and the type safety that GraphQL happens to come with is a nice bonus, but this dilemma is the crux of things.

The tragedy of JS if blocks being statements not expressions is made explicit here

Right, it would fail even before hitting the typing check.

Japanese the language qua language is relatively easy from a language agnostic perspective. Formality levels are tricky, but the phonology is fairly simple (very few "weird" sounds) and the grammar is on the regular side.

The writing system on the other hand... IMO the worst used by any major language in the world. Graft a logographic system (already a bad choice to start) from an isolating language onto a highly synthetic verb system, necessitating a whole extra syllabary. Evolve numerous "readings" of each logogram, depending on etymology and history. Then tack on a 2nd syllabary for abstruse historical reasons.

Not for even the simplest schemas.

Eg, given even the type:

    {"aLongerKey": "value"}

The generation prefix:

    {"a

would by your algorithm produce the following invalid output:

    {"a}

Typescript's type system is much more expressive than the one the function call feature makes available.

I imagine closing the loop (using the TS compiler to restrict token output weights) is in the works, though it's probably not totally trivial. You'd need:

* An incremental TS compiler that could report "valid" or "valid prefix" (ie, valid as long as the next token is not EOF)

* The ability to backtrack the model

Idk how hard either one piece is.

Both a specific request here and a general proposal for a norm here on HN: Can you be more numerically explicit when you say "well paid"?

Software development is a very segmented world. In the various social circles I'm connected to, I know devs who were thrilled to finally be making 6 figures 7 years out of college (in line-of-business software in a regional hub) and devs who were disappointed not to have crossed 400 k$/yr in that same time span (at FAANG in the bay area).

This comment feels like a deepity[0] to me.

Saying anything at all is "to deal with words". Discussing anything at all about your internal state is "to deal with... consciousness".

Yes, it is deeply human to put to words internal thoughts and share them with others (that's what I'm doing in this comment, after all). But there's nothing special about dreams in that regard.

And unlike most ideas we attempt to communicate, dreams are by their nature fragmentary and illogical (or perhaps "pre-logical" is better phrasing). While humans love imputing meaning and profundity to obscurant musings (whole academic careers have been built on that fact), that doesn't mean they are actually meaningful and/or profound.

[0]https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:deepity

The number of people who have even heard of "federation" or "Mastodon" is a vanishingly small fraction of the target audience for this app. Why waste precious page space on it?

As an ABCD, likewise. My mom told me to specifically buy turmeric at western grocery stores (as opposed to other spices, which could be had for better prices at Indian grocery stores) because of concerns around lead.

"De-facto industry standard" is heavily a function of what slice of the industry you're looking at.

It feels like the dominant style of programming in the companies I've worked at (YC startups and FAANG) is "functionalish" procedural, with a sprinkling of objects-qua-objects to interface with libraries and frameworks (Eg, react class components or rails ActiveRecord models).

Note I'm distinguishing between objects-qua-objects (data coupled tightly to methods that operate on them) from structs-implemented-via-objects (eg, ruby's `Struct` or Java "beans") or modules-implemented-via-objects (like a class with a bunch of static methods used as a namespace). I only see the first one as "object-oriented".

I believe Tiktok basically does that already.

This feels like the job prospect equivalent of saying "there's a 50/50 chance the sun rises tomorrow, either it does or it doesn't".

If by "big tech" you mean FAANG cos (and assuming "startup" means bay area YC tier), then a more accurate analysis is something like:

Stability: Lower likelihood of being laid off than the median startup in any given economic conditions. Way lower likelihood (I'd estimate <1/20th the risk) than early stage (series A/B)

Base pay: Higher than early stage startups, around the same for later stage (series C/D)

Stock: Much lower variance than startups, slightly higher EV

Fulfilling work: YMMV hugely depending on what you find more fulfilling. Making O(100M) users' lives 0.1% better? Big tech. Absolutely making the day of O(10) people? Startups