HN user
Customs can and do block non-compliant imports.
Software people (generally) have a limited idea of just how complex and rigid customs enforcement can be. Moving physical product between countries is actually a very hard problem.
You cannot sell homebrew (and presumably won't be able to sell distilled beverages) without a very expensive license. Homebrewers (of all forms) are generally very aware of this when they get into the hobby. Even "cute" forms of recompensation are heavily frowned upon. The most I've seen are to "pay for the glass itself".
All that is to say, the government is not harvesting tax from homebrew.
You can view the actual data and control for your own recency bias one way or the other. I see data from 2005 - 2024 trivially accessible.
Stardew likely qualifies for the reduced store cuts. Steam _lowers_ the percentage for a game when it sells high. Still somewhere between 10 and 25%, though.
Generally, the Steam cut is considered “fair” for Indy devs. The benefits of steam (discoverability, massive audience) generate more sales. My Indy dev friends are not upset about the steam cut at all.
This, however, is one area where eventually Epic Games shines — they take a much lower cut and if they increase in popularity with gamers then steam might be forced to lower their share.
I don’t think you’ll find many race tracks that permit horses and cars to compete together.
(I did enjoy the sarcasm, though!)
That was a very fun sub thread to read, both for the on-topic and off-topic discussion. Thanks for sharing.
I would read that book.
Left handed person here. Writing is already a chore, tying up both hands just to use a fountain pen without smearing seems to cross an effort/reward boundary.
Maybe useful if you were really committed to the tool. I've been casually interested in fountain pens for a while but the downsides seem to stack up whenever I actually look into it.
Presumably, the original quote that would _not_ stump an LLM is "A father and a son are involved in a car accident. The father dies, and the son is taken to the emergency room. At the emergency room, the surgeon remarks "I cannot operate on this person, he is my son. How is this possible?"
Where the original gotchya is that the Surgeon can be the son's mother or other adoptive parent.
The modification catches the LLM because with the modification, the surgeon could just be the cousin's parent -- father or mother -- so there is no gender/sex at play here but the LLM continues to remark that there is, therefor exposing its statistical training sets.
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder...
What you seek is available and has been available for a very long time. Mathing out how your individual tax dollars map to these buckets is a fairly straightforward (IMO) exercise.
You can view greenpeace financial statements here: https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/annual-reports-and-financial-...
Damages won't be awarded based on the defendant's ability to pay. They are awarded based on the damages the plaintiff successfully argued they are owed.
I did try. Still “sign in to read.” Your second link gives me an option to close the full screen modal (or the NYT gives second-try people a pass.)
This isn't meant to persuade you, just sharing my own experience. I've found myself almost relying on Kagi's `Quick Answer`. Its fantastic having it off by default and being able to opt-in when I just want a quick summary of some brief search where the info cards don't give me what I want right away.
I clearly cannot speak to others. I can say that in my friend circles (very left) the _two_ trump assassination attempts were taken quite seriously and we were pulling up live feeds of it within 5 minutes of it being announced.
I generally don't subscribe to the "this event is more important than the news cycles let it be" thought. Its argument boils down to strawman or quickly circles to "news bubbles are a problem".
That's so much worse than the guys walking around the capitol building and shuffling papers, yet people only remember the date of the great January 6th nothingburger because it's the one convenient to the establishment.
I don't think that's a fair characterization of the day. Security personnel were _murdered_ in the _capital building_. Six people died. President Trump himself labeled it as the "Save America Rally". The _stated_ goal was to defraud an election. I'm sorry, I don't subscribe to your view that it was an event blown out of proportion. It is very much just as noteworthy as every Revolution Precursor I have ever heard.
As an aside, I find the comparison of the Trump Assassination Attempt and the Jan 6 Uprising as if one is more important than the other is false. Both are very much reprehensible acts of political violence aimed at destabilizing the American institution. Bluntly, they both terrify me. That one seems "overblown" says more about your political beliefs than you think.
This is a bad take. You're essentially making the claim that you shouldn't care about something unless it happens within your immediate vicinity or you are directly affected. Replace "viewed it through a screen" with "read it in a newspaper" or "heard about it from a friend" and the statement is more bad.
Revolutions have happened over less. The King of France lost his head because a small group of angry women marched on his palace, changing the course of history. Even if the net impact of this event is small, it is still _important_ and worthy of awareness.
Professional Engineers do not make mistakes. They are real engineers.
My _literal_ engineering 101 case studies on "engineering failure":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-35W_Mississippi_River_bridge
Are all failures traced down to the underlying design and engineering. Granted, they are famous because they are rare. I almost linked the Columbia disaster but that is sufficiently murky between engineer and management.
Stop being elitist.
This is me. My wife's old intel air was finally getting slow enough she was willing to replace it. Ordered a 2023 M3 Pro for her on Monday (that was even on sale!) knowing the refund window was ~2 weeks. Today, ordered a 2024 M4 Pro for the same price and better specs. (M3Pro, 512GB, 18GB ram -> M4Pro, 512GB, 24GB ram).
When Einstein literally discovered General Relativity.
Gravity is the curvature of Space Time. From that perspective, objects under gravity are traveling in a straight line.
Fun Veritasium video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1W0dpunOaM
All that follows is from someone who mainlines linux (just mild ubuntu) and macos but wouldn't complain too much about a windows workstation.
Hot (and perhaps tangental) take here,
Indeed.
but I can't understand why companies that attempt to enforce these policies for security reasons, do not just mitigate their largest attack vector and move to macOS for their endpoints where possible.
Citation needed that Macos is more secure than windows.
Far more reliable in terms of stability and security,
In my experience, macos/windows are about par for security and the "stability" also seems par. If anything, windows is _more_ stable since it is backwards compatible to a fault.
and dramatically less patch management required for macOS clients.
Fair, but I think this is mostly a boon to IT teams who want more control from windows.
I'd argue a more productive user experience also, instead of fighting the advertising, new AI integrations, Candy Crush and layout changes that Windows generously provides every 30 days
These concerns are not generally applicable in an enterprise environment. I feel them on my gaming machines, but corporate is generally locked down pretty tightly. Also, I mean, Macos is famously getting new AI integrations in 18.2 so this seems like a false comparison.
Hardware is also pretty easy to resell
Admittedly this is a boon to Macos, but I think there is an argument that the cheaper windows machines may have a better full cost-of-ownership metric than macs.
AppleCare covers replacements
Everywhere I have worked, the company pays for replacements out-of-pocket or has _very_ generous enterprise agreements.
and the fleet can be pretty uniform with stock available anywhere if needed.
Fair. I'm not sure that it matters for enterprises that already have a locked down hardware procurement process but its pretty hard to argue against the 2023MBP16GB is more uniform than {windows soup}.
Keep incompatible apps that are required in a Citrix Workspace or equivalent for isolation. This doesn't address social engineering or file leaks due to malicious employees obviously.
I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I'm hard pressed to see how this applies to any specific OS and not others.
I worked on my first (and my company's first) hardware product and the HTS regulations were absolutely eye opening. I lived my entire life without knowing about it until I had to actually deal with import/export of a product. It is mind numbing dealing with it. Correctly discovering, interpreting, understanding, categorizing, and conforming with the worldwide process is its own form of career specialization (and hell). No thank you, never again.
"A union of Software Engineers lets us collectively bargain for better working conditions, such as flexible working locations, reducing PTO request denials, and work-life balance conditions."
Thank you for pointing me towards the design document. Its well written and I missed it on my first pass through the repository. I genuinely found it answered a lot of my questions.
As I mentioned in another reply, "remind me every day at 7PM" isn't a timestamp. It's a formula for how to determine when the next timestamp is going to occur. Even those examples are too narrow, because it's really closer to "remind me the next time you notice that it's after 7PM wherever I happen to be, including if that's when I cross a time zone and jump instantly from 6:30PM to 7:30PM".
That's certainly fair in the context of a recurring event with some formula. I caution that a lot of people will still immediately reach for timestamps to calculate that formula, particularly for a next occurrence, and in the context if this conversation they would be given as an ISO8601 datetime based on Local Time. I would also caution that calendar events that have a distinct moment in time that they start are also prime for Local Time where a UTC-default mentality will cause errors.
Consider my statement more in the context of logs of past events
From the stance of computer generated historical log data, I definitely agree that UTC everywhere is a sane default and safe to assume :)
(And, in your defense, I would definitely argue UTC-everywhere gets you 95% of the way there for 5% of the effort... I get why people make the tradeoff)
(I know they're not the same, but they're similar in the sense that they can let you convert timestamps from one TZ to another).
More nitpicking on my part, again, I'm sorry, it lets you convert from one _offset_ to another or from an offset to UTC. Think Arizona being a special snowflake who (mostly!) doesn't observe DST. You can't assume all UTC-7 offsets are all Mountain Time.
I can't help myself. The grandest of nitpicks is coming your way. I'm sorry.
If you give me a computer timestamp without a timezone, I can and will assume it's in UTC.
Do you mean, give you an _offset_? `2024-04-29T14:03:06.0000-8:00` the `-8:00` is an offset. It only tells you what time this stamp occurred relative to standard time. It does not tell you anything about the region or zone itself. While I have consumed APIs that give me the timezone context as part of the response, none of them are part of the timestamp itself.
The only time you should assume a timestamp is UTC is if it has the `z` at the end (assuming 8601) or is otherwise marked as UTC. Without that, you have absolutely no information about where or when the time has occurred -- it is local time. And if your software assumes a local timestamp is UTC, then I argue it is not the sender of that timestamp's problem that your software is broken.
My desire to meet you at 4pm has no bearing on if the DST switchover has happened, or my government decides to change the timezone rules, or if {any other way the offset for a zone can change for future or past times}. My reminder to take my medicine at 7pm is not centered on UTC or my physical location on the planet. Its just at 7pm. Every day. If I go from New York to Paris then no, I do not want your software to tell me my medicine is actually supposed to be at Midnight. Its 7pm.
But, assuming you aren't doing any future scheduling, calendar appointments, bookings, ticket sales, transportation departure, human-centric logs, or any of the other ways Local Time is incredibly useful -- ignore away.
For what its worth, modern recruiting pipelines should be able to automate a good chunk of resume filtering for you if that's what your org values. Being able to only grab applicants that have `Go` listed in their resume, for example, or those who claim to have a degree. That should make a dent in the manual effort. Nevermind that you would still need to review whatever output the "test" is giving you.
I agree with part of what the OP said:
My take on interviews is that the company must eventually spend as much time as the hired developer in the process
In my opinion, making applicants take a test is creating asymmetrical busy work just so the job-poster can feel that they've selected the "best" candidates (whatever that means). If you legitimately have enough great applicants that you cannot possibly hope to interview them all, then just roll a dice!
Respectfully disagree, especially in a world where simple tests will be solvable by LLMs/code-assist tools remotely.
* How would you proctor the test to know the candidates aren't cheating?
* How would your test actually test capability to program? (Assuming a legitimate test and not just a blind take-home proving you can code a todo-app...)
* What do you do when your test is leaked online?
* How is your test better than requiring an accredited degree from some institution? (which, for the record, I think is also not a great filter.)
The test is switching the filter from you filtering candidates to the candidates filtering you. Why apply to you when I can apply somewhere else? Interestingly, Canonical keeps coming up as a place to _not_ apply for because their entire process is bonkers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39750181
I think asking candidates to fill out 18 pages of prose before talking to someone is inhumane.
Its both. I chose some particularly ostentatious examples to drive home you can select for whatever it is you may or may not want without subjecting your applicants to _tests_. I figured the dual-objectives would make that clear.
* Filter candidates who put objective statements in their resume".
What in the world is that?
Some people, as well as my early education, recommended to put "objective" statements on your resume stating your literal objective in applying for the role. I'm surprised you haven't heard about them! edit: Personally I dislike them as archaic wastes of space.
Well gosh, what a good problem to have. So many good options that still respect people's times. You get to write a process that selects for the things you want to select for!
Let's assume these are 700 _qualified_ applicants and its for a programming role. I.e. their resumes and applications have passed the most basic of filters of "claims they can do a similar job" and "is probably a real person".
How about... * Filter candidates if they have typos in their resumes
* Filter candidates who don't explicitly state that they leverage your tech stack
* Filter candidates who excessively job hop
* Filter candidates who have below some minimum of professional experience
* Filter candidates who live far from the workplace
* Filter candidates, for a remote role, who live in HCOL area
* Filter candidates who put objective statements in their resume
* Filter candidates who don't put objective statements in their resume
* Filter candidates who don't have a link to some online portfolio (Github, personal blog, etc.)
* Filter candidates who don't contribute to open source
* Roll a dice
The imagination is the limit!
Nitpicking. I agree with your broader point.
No, but modern jets need computer-aided control of flight control surfaces to keep the aircraft stable.
Most aircraft outside of fighter jets are aerodynamically stable. Loss of powered flight would mean the airplane will glide (in nominal operation). Even the 737MAX7/9 aircraft are still stable (although that brings up defining exactly what we mean by aerodynamically stable... )
Personally, it was Insomnia shifting to requiring an account and promoting "enterprise" features that clutter the experience and get in the way of me doing my job.
From there, I did research and found `insomnium` and a coworker found `bruno`. Bruno aligned closer to what I value, so now I use that.