nlavezzo

Yes, That Hideous Strength despite being written probably 60 years ago seems dead on as a criticism of many of the things being pushed today.

All true. But also GDP, science and innovation, and charitable giving - both overall and per capita.

THANK YOU!!

I'd strongly disagree with this. Since becoming serious about my faith as a 15 year old from a non-christian background, my life and my friend group has gotten progressively better. I had an existential crisis that helped bring me to faith - basically what is the point of anything if there's nothing beyond this world of matter? I've not had one since, as I don't believe this world of matter is all there is.

Having spent several years unexpectedly alone after a big breakup in my mid twenties, I'd also highly recommend getting involved in a church, even if it's just to serve others in some practical way organized by the church. Most churches have plenty of need in "care" ministries like bringing meals (and conversation) to people who are homebound, or in the hospital. One cool thing our church does is organize volunteers to help with teaching English as a second language to refugees living in our community.

Do enough of these kinds of things and not only will you connect with those you serve, but also with those serving others out of love. These are good people to be connected to, especially since you'll become more like them over time.

100%. I never was excited about having a kid but it's totally amazing to be helping a little human that you love to figure out the world and grow into a good person.

People can obviously make the opposite choice, but I'd encourage anyone that's never been around good little kids as an adult, to find a way to be around them in a helpful or fun role for a while. Volunteer at a youth group, sports camp, coding class, whatever. Or just be an "uncle" to some of your friends' kids. My volunteering at a church youth group in my early 20's probably gave me the nudge I needed.

This is absolutely not our experience, but we've been intentional about joining communities / activities that involve lots of in-person time together. Church is a huge one (especially joining small groups / service groups), but we also do 4H (they have them in urban areas too!), and my wife started an educational co-op with cool field trips, and we organize neighborhood events like caroling at retirement homes, a pre trick or treating party, and a New Year's party for kids.

Community isn't the default that everyone's forced into anymore, but if you are intentional about it, you'll find lots of other people are feeling the same way and are happy to join in.

There are in fact neighborhood kids. It only takes a couple of families deciding to restrict phones and video games and support their kids in spending real time together. We’ve done this in our neighborhood and it’s great. It just has to be intentional now, where it was the default before all these screens.

What leads you to believe the reason parents are willing to dedicate huge amounts of their time and money to homeschool their children is racism?

Maybe it's:

  - the terrible educational state of the school system?

  - the fact that device and social media addiction is a prevalent and growing problem that they don't want their kids brains rotted by?

  - they want to provide their kids an education based on experiential and project based learning rather than filling out worksheets? 

  - they don't want their kids to be forced to wait for the slowest / least interested kids in class to catch up before moving on to more challenging material?

Some of my favorites recently for intellectually engaging Christian thinking are "The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God" podcast (first season is the best), and the book "Reasonable Faith" by William Lane Craig.

If you're interested in some of the classic intellectual / philosophical arguments for faith (albeit from a Christian perspective) you should check out "Reasonable Faith" by William Lane Craig.

HN has never made me cry before, but here I am crying. This is really a wonderful article and discussion. Makes me appreciate this community even more.

This is great. Please put together an extension. I use Safari but this might get me to switch.

Something that would give me a button I could press to de-bullshit a site, not one that tries it on every single site maybe?

Not sure how you define "biggest" but WWII killed the most people and WWI is probably a close second and neither of those were primarily motivated by religion, but rather nationalism.

I'd suggest you check out Tom Holland's "Dominion" if you'd like a well-researched and nuanced take on the effect of (Judeo-Christian) religion on Western civilization.

This is a cool idea. I’ll ask the team about it. Would make for a very interesting blog post or talk!

This is very cool.

That said, it reminded me of a funny collider meme I saw recently:

https://tinyurl.com/2k8u4dk6

We’ll be writing a lot in the near future about how Antithesis works, stay tuned :)

One of the cool tricks we can use is that since the testing is all fully deterministic, once we find an interesting point in a test run - even if it is “deep” into the run time wise - our system can start many new branches of test runs off of that moment or moments just prior. So it is much more efficient than having to re-do the work to get to that rare interesting moment for each new branch.

I'd suggest taking a dive into the docs - there is quite a lot there that should address some of these questions.

That said, Antithesis doesn't require you to write manual tests, integration or otherwise. It requires your software system to be packaged in containers, which is fairly straightforward, and then requires a workload to be written which will emulate the normal functioning of the software system. So for example an e-commerce store would have product views, cart adds, checkouts, etc.

With this, Antithesis can start testing (running your workload, varying inputs, injecting faults, etc) the software and looking for violations of test properties. There are many (60+) test properties that come "out of the box" such as crashes, out of memory, etc. You can (and should) also define custom properties that are unique to your system, as this will surface more problems.

As your tests run, violations of test properties are reported, with lots of useful debug information included. Test runs that are particularly interesting can have a lot of extra analysis done, due to our ability to "rewind" and change inputs, get artifacts, add logging, etc.

Depends on how far you mean with "advanced" here. We specifically cover the differences between Antithesis and Chaos Engineering in our "How It's Different" page:

https://antithesis.com/product/how_is_antithesis_different/

Here's the relevant text though:

Antithesis testing resembles chaos testing, in that it injects faults to trigger and identify problems. But Antithesis runs these tests in a fully deterministic simulated environment, rather than in production. This means Antithesis testing never risks real-world downtime. This in turn allows for much more aggressive fault injection, which finds more bugs, and finds them faster. Antithesis can also test new builds before they roll out to production, meaning you find the bugs before your customer does.

Finally, Antithesis can perfectly reproduce any problem it finds, enabling quick debugging. While chaos testing can discover problems in production, it is then unable to replicate them, because the real world is not deterministic.

Nick with Antithesis here with a funny story on this.

I became friends with Dave our CTO when I was 5 or 6, we were neighbors. He'd already started coding little games in Basic (this was 1985). Later in our friendship, like when I was maybe 10, I asked him if he could help me learn to code, which he did. After a week or two I had made some progress but compared what I could do to what he was doing and figured "I guess I just started too late, what's the point?".

I found out later that most people didn't start coding till late HS or college! It worked out though - I'm programmer adjacent and have taken care of the business side of our projects through the years :)

Antithesis here - curious what part of the Getting Started doc gave you that impression? If you take a look at our How Antithesis Works page, it might help answer you question as to how Antithesis is different from just bundling your unit tests.

https://antithesis.com/docs/introduction/how_antithesis_work...

In short though, unit tests can help to inform a workload, but we don't require them. We autonomously explore software system execution paths by introducing different inputs, faults, etc., which discovers behaviors that may have been unforeseen by anyone writing unit tests.

I think the reference to "all the bugs" here is basically that our insanely brutal deterministic testing system was not finding any more bugs after 100's of thousands of runs. Can't prove a negative obviously, but the fact that we'd gotten to that "all green" status gave us a ton of confidence to push forward in feature development, believing we were building on something solid - which, time has shown we were.

We'll be starting some meetups, attending conferences, etc. this year. Also hop into our Discord if you want to chat, lots of us are in there regularly. discord.gg/antithesis

We've actually done quite a bit of testing on open source projects as we've built this, and have discussed doing an on-going program of testing open source projects that have interested contributors. We'd probably find some interesting things and could do some write-ups. Reach out to us via our contact page or contact@antithesis.com and let's chat.

FDB co-founder here.

Aphyr / Jepsen never tested FDB because, as he tweeted "their testing appears to be waaaay more rigorous than mine." We actually put a screen cap of that tweet in the blog post linked here.

I generally agree, but there have been some really great ones. For All Mankind (from Apple) is in my opinion fantastic, and I don't think could have been done well without a big budget. Also from Apple, Ted Lasso was very good.

Yep!

When we built FoundationDB, we had a maniacal focus on quality and testing. So much so that we built it in a language we invented, called Flow, that allowed us to deterministically simulate arbitrary sized FDB clusters and subject them to crazy conditions, then flag each system property violation and be able to perfectly reproduce the test run that triggered the violation.

We got to a point where the default was that all of our 10,000's of test runs each night would flash green if no new code was introduced. Tests that flashed red were almost always due to recent code additions, and therefore easily identified and fixed. It let our team develop knowing that any bugs they introduced would be quickly caught, and this translated to being able to confidently take on crazy new projects - like re-writing our transaction processing system post-launch and getting a 10x speed increase out of it.

In the end our focus on quality led to velocity - they weren't mutually exclusive at all. We don't think this is an isolated phenomenon, which led us to our newest project - but that's a story for another time.

This is exactly it. On-prem deals were generally large perpetual license fees based on some quantity of software installed, and then a % of that as an annual "maintenance" fee which would provide access to support and software updates.

The problem was that the maintenance revenue was valued at a much higher multiple by investors than their Perpetual Licensing revenue because it was recurring. Cue the thought... "What if the whole thing was recurring?"..."Hmm how could we justify that?"..."We make it a SERVICE that WE host!"... and then here we are now where if you want to actually own software, chances are you're out of luck.