HN user
The point is that it's a direct response to Forbes list of richest individuals. It's the same format, but arguing that measuring how much someone earned is a bad metric
While there's some truth to this, the early investments in Palantir and Facebook from In-Q-Tel were tiny. For Palantir, the contracts with a single government agency were far more capital than the investment.
The vacuum pressure is real. Using a system with the skip locked technique + polling caused massive DB perf issues as the queue depth grew. The query to see the current jobs in the queue ended up being the main performance bottleneck, which cause slower throughput, which caused a larger queue depth, which etc.
Scaling the workers sometimes exacerbates the problem because you run into connection limits or polling hammering the DB.
I love the idea of pg as a queue, but I'm a more skeptical of it after dealing with it in production
Because it's Afrika Bambaataa. He invented entirely new techniques for making music - which is already enough for him to be relevant here - that influences what many of us listen to daily.
I think a big piece missing from these conversations is compliance frameworks and customer trust. Of your selling to enterprise customers or governments, they want to go through your stack, networking, security, audit logs, and access controls with a fine toothed comb.
Everything you do that isn't "normal" is another conversation you need to have with an auditor plus each customer. Those eat up a bunch of time and deals take longer to close.
Right or wrong, these decisions make you less "serious" and therefore less credible in the eyes of many enterprise customers. You can get around that perception, but it takes work. Not hosting on one of the big 3 needs to be decided with that cost in mind
It's night and day. It's also about access. The labs in legal states usually just test for more things. For a while, it was one or two labs plus a Cole extraction companies that were pushing the testing boundaries. Then, relation caught up and pushed the broader testing on to everyone. Then there were managed batch sizes (though these got too small in Oregon). Hemp does not have the same regulations, and unregulated states have way less infrastructure (including access to good labs).
Nobody wants to harm their customers, but it 100% happened in the early days. A lot of harm is/was not immediately obvious. Of was repeated exposure to harmful chemicals. Good intentions are great, but resources and incentives still matter. Nobodyv wants to get hacked, but building a new feature over hardening is what stops you from getting yelled at
This is a weird one. It absolutely should not be haphazardly added as a rider. The 0.4 per container is also insane. But, this really was an unintended loophole of the 2018 farm bill. Most plants grow THCa, which turns into Delta-9 when heated. They were ignorant and straight up forgot to specify anything except Delta-9.
Cannabis is a bioremediator and absorbs basically every environmental toxin from the ground (pesticides, heavy metals, etc.). Extraction (for CBD and THC oil) increases the concentration of any present toxins.
The only way you know of the problem is by thoroughly testing every batch. Pesticides that are safe at low levels can get concentrated and become really problematic at high levels.
States where marijuana is legal require all of this testing, so the products are much safer. Hemp-derived THC does not require these tests. (Same is true for CBD, but that's a while other conversation...)
So their team is anonymous. While I understand the desire for that, trust is built through transparency. It's really hard to convince someone who's job, career, it potentially even life is at risk to trust random strangers on the Internet.
It seems like they need people willing to stretch their name to create credibility.
Ah, that's a shame they went that way. What I tell people when they're first getting into GCP is that it's gonna be a passion to set up what you want. But, the offerings are great, and once it's working, it'll just work
Oh interesting - I haven't been on their starting page in years. I'm surprised getting started with vite isn't higher up. That takes 5 minutes and doesn't require a full framework.
That said, starting with react router or expo is probably the right call depending on the project needs. Routing is not something you want to do yourself, and react native is pretty unfriendly without expo
I'm gonna be honest, I've been developing with react for about 9 years across a lot of projects and companies. I've never used next.
Maybe I'm out of touch, but I don't understand why people think it's so tightly could with the ecosystem
One issue we're running into at my job: we're struggling to find entry-level candidates whoaren't lying about what they know by using an LLM.
For the tech side, we've reduced behavioral questions and created an interview that allows people to use cursor, LLMs, etc. in the interview - that way, it's impossible to cheat.
We have folks build a feature on a fake code base. Unfortunately, more junior folks now seem to struggle a lot more with this problem
This comment makes no sense. They're actively open sourcing the patent and trying to get it upstream into Postgres. They purchased another company to get this patent, and they're spending a lot of money on lawyers to figure out how to release it to the community.
Call out shady shit when companies do shady things, but the sentiment behind this comment seems to be looking for reasons to bee outraged instead of at what's actually being done.
If companies get evicerated every time they try to engage with the community they'll stop engaging. We should be celebrating when they do something positive, even if there are a few critiques (e.g. the license change call out is a good one). Instead, half the comments seem like they're quick reactions meant to stoke outage.
Please have some perspective - this action is a win for the community.
Yeah, huge props here. There's a contingent on HN that seems to assume that almost any action by a company is done in bad faith. I dislike all of the shady stuff that happens, but that's why we should celebrate when companies are doing awesome things.
This is all positive. Super appreciate what you folks have done. It's clearly hard, well intentioned, and thoughtfully executed.
It really depends on what your use case is. E.g. of you're dealing with a lot of legacy integrations, dealing with all the edge cases can require a lot of code that you can't refactor away through cleverness.
Each integration is hopefully only a few thousand lines of code, but if you have 50 integrations you can easily break 100k loc just dealing with those. They just need to be encapsulated well so that the integration cruft is isolated from the core business logic, and they become relatively simple to reason about
I'm not even considering the coding use case. It's been fine in cursor. I care about the days extraction and basic instruction following in my application - coding ability doesn't come into play.
For example, I want the model to be able to take a basic rule and identify what subset of given text fits into the rule. (E.g. find and extract all last names) 4o and 4.1 we're decent, but still left a lot to be desired. o4-mini was pretty good at not ambiguous cases. Getting a model that runs cheaper and is better at following instructions makes my product better and more profitable with a could lines of code change.
It's not emotionally revolutionary, but it hours a great sweet spot for a lot of business use cases
GPT-5 is a bit better -particularly around consistency - and a fair amount cheaper. For all of my use cases, that's a huge win.
Products using AI powered days processing (a lot of what I use it for) don't need mind blowing new features. I just want it to be better at summarizing and instruction following, and I want it to be cheaper. GPT-5 seems to knock all of that out of the park
Super smart move. I hadn't heard of you folks before, but I'm interested in your product - open source and repairability are high on my list for home monitors. I'm lying in bed awake right now sir to an air quality issue, so it's top of mind.
The only thing you're missing for me is radon detection. I just bought a house and tests came in below remediation levels, but the report showed a lot of spikes and variance. So you have any plans for a model with radon detection in the future?
Because those other companies actively violated agreements they made with the government in the 2000 to offer those services for free. They regularly tricked people into paying and lost a class action lawsuit over it.
It's also weird that we have to file taxes at all. Other developed countries have their revenue agencies automatically calculate the taxes for you and send a return. The only reason we don't is because of Intuit and H&R Block lobbying like crazy to prevent this. It's rent seeking at it's worse
Sure, avoiding processing is just a heuristic. I just have trouble faulting people when it send to be a good one for maintaining a healthy diet.
I don't know much about Beyond Meat's specific processes. I wanted to like their burger, but they smelled too much like dog food when coming and tasted worse than cheaper black bean burgers. Aside, from my personal preferences, they could be totally fine.
But, of someone is trying to go through their life eating relatively healthy without having to try to keep up on the latest research, less processing is the way to go. You'll cut out things that are perfectly fine (e.g. there's a small backpack against Xanthum gum that currently makes no sense to me), but you'll also avoid a lot of the cutting edge garbage that gets added and then recalled.
Whole fruits, veggies, nuts, grains, and meat is always a solid choice. I have trouble faulting people for using that as a heuristic
I honestly want to know why you think trying to consume foods that have been through fewer processing steps is equivalent to rejecting medicine. Those are absurd comparisons to me.
If I have a medical issue, the risks often outweigh the rewards. Chemo ain't good for you, but it's better than cancer. Artificial food coloring isn't necessary, and multiple dyes appear to contain carcinogenic contaminates. I can appreciate that chemo exists and avoid artificial dyes.
The US food industry also has historically introduced a lot of unhealthy and/or poisonous additives that were later banned or recalled. Formaldehyde was added to milk in the early 1900s because the industry didn't want to adopt pasteurization. Partially hydrogenated oil as margarine was advertised as a healthier butter alternative in the 50s and 60s.
There are cool things that come out of food labs (Xanthum gum is one of my favorites), but it seems weird to be condescending towards people for taking a reasonably cautious approach towards food - especially when there's historical and scientific evidence that backs the approach
Can't agree enough. I just don't think that beyond meat is good. I'm a meat eater who grew up vegetarian and still enjoy eating vegetarian food. A well done black bean burger (my favorite blend is with quinoa) is delicious. I'd eat that over a regular burger plenty of times.
If I went full vegetarian again, I'd stick with the classics - they taste so much better.
Cool, we have a semantics issue. Processing can mean "any change to a food item" such as chopping, cooking, etc. In these kinds of conversations, it's often used as "significant alterations that are not possible or common outside of a food lab". E.g. I can do cured meats, or add corn starch to a soup at home. I'm not going to make partially hydrogenated oils or pink slime for chicken nuggets.
If you're being genuine and trying to point out that it's difficult to draw a clear line between "good" and "bad" processing - absolutely! Processes that have been used for a long time (decades, hundreds, or thousands of years) are generally well understood and safer. Newer processes and changes have risks. So, "can I do this in my kitchen" is a great heuristic for trying to walk a very fuzzy line.
If you're deliberately misunderstanding the intent to further an argument, get outta here with that BS :P
Using the amount of processing - particularly processing that hasn't been studied - as a heuristic for health vs. unhealthy is pretty reasonable. We have lots of examples over the last 70 years of companies claiming a new processed food is better or safe, only for it to be harmful. And a lot of the changes seemed innocuous:
- Partially hydrogenated oils (most margarines in the US for a while) were pushed as a healthier alternative to butter, but turns out those are terrible for you due to trans fat. And the main difference between a trans vs cis fat is that cis fat have a kink in molecular chain and trans fats don't. Small change, but huge health difference
- The sugar industry paid food scientists in the 60s to downplay sugar's impact on heart disease and play up fat and cholesterol (Check out the "Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents" published at UCFS). This lead to food companies replacing health fats with sugars in much of their food over the last 60 years, resulting in much worse health outcomes based on bias, paid for research
- Apples and other fruit generally have a higher fructose to glucose ratio than high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). But, all of the sugar is surrounded by other nutrients and fiber, which make apples a healthy food choice and HFCS pretty bad for you.
One of the common patterns is that new processes introduced harms that were unknown at the time. Food companies have very little incentive to proactively look for harms that occur over a longer time horizon. And one thing has consistently been true: that closer a food is to how we've eaten it historically (chopped/crushed, cooked, boiled, fermented, and filtered), the less likely it is to have an unknown harm
Nice! I'm using DBOS and am a little active on the discord. I was just wondering how y'all handled this under the hood. Glad to hear I don't have to worry much about this issue
I actually tried to use this pattern to make an audio controller interface much nicer. If you get a long enough queue, you'll start to run into errors (I'm forgetting the exact message, but it was similar to a maximum recursion depth)
Obsidian is just a very convenient markdown editor. You could rip and replace it with another editor trivially. You just don't get the convenient UI
I know someone who works for a university in event planning. They were putting together an event for a civil rights icon. Because of the new policies, they were forced to go through all of the brochures and pamphlets and censor any use of words such as "racism" and "black" (when referring to the man's skin color).
They literally couldn't say "black man fighting against racism" about a civil rights icon without losing millions in funding. I have no idea how someone can argue that this kind of censorship targeting universities is acceptable
You're getting downvoted because you're retreating into philosophical nihilism rather than actually addressing the points. If you disagree with how people interpret the studies, the studies themselves, or how science measures reality - just say that.
I also love SMBC's explanation of this: https://smbc-wiki.com/index.php/2010-09-23
I'm just not quite sure why "speed" is what be js bundlers are selling themselves on. We have a number of fast bundlers already, so that's not what's taking my time. DevEx is the real selling point for me, and that didn't talk about any of their differentiators there