duggan

> Some people simply aren't apt for the real world. That's sad but it's the truth.

The same argument might have been made before women's suffrage, civil rights, laws around accessibility, etc.

Beyond physical laws, "the real world" is what we make it.

Where I live, there are laws mandating the minimum distance a vehicle has to be from a cyclist when passing (1.5m) - this distance is not covered by the available clearance in the cycling lane.

If you can't see a cyclist is in the lane, it's difficult to give them safe clearance, and driving as though you are always giving clearance to cyclists means driving closer to the other traffic lane, increasing risk of vehicular collision.

A variety of reasons; high switching costs, perhaps due to skills, education, or having limited financial freedom. The current job may confer benefits not available with alternative lower stress options (hours, proximity to family, etc).

Perhaps it is an entry level job that is seen as a route to higher paid work.

Have you been in the position to hire many folks for startups?

Could you share a bit more about why, in your experience, this is something to prioritize with your first engineer?

Animation Shop, PSP's sibling application for creating animations, is something I still keep on a VM for making highly customized gifs - timing for frames, pixel modification, compression, etc.

Corel had made it available via Jasc's FTP server for free a number of years back when I went looking for it again.

I check every now and then, but I've never found anything nearly as useful. Other software seems to have a much reduced feature set, be extremely slow or unstable, and maddeningly, not offer any control over individual frames.

It's possible there's something in the Adobe suite, but I (alone, of seemingly everyone on the Internet) never pirated Photoshop, and wasn't willing to fork out the asking price.

Hah, yes, whoops. Hard to imagine blowing through 250GB of bandwidth via HN traffic in only a few hours.

Some whois sleuthing suggest a company called Conseev who operate a shared hosting service[1] with a 250MB bandwidth limit.

[1]: https://www.purespeedhosting.com/shared-hosting/

Glad to see other people also find it annoying.

I went searching to see if someone had written about the phenomenon last year, but eventually concluded I was probably mad. Thanks!

In retrospect, that sounded sassier than I intended, mea culpa.

If you can dismantle and replace desktop and server components, a few size and configuration differences shouldn’t pose a challenge.

Not much more than an expensive LEGO project, but with significantly fewer parts and usually more available documentation!

True, but that's assuming inputs go to a hash rather than something more robust like a probability function.

Agreed; I guess many of us will have a blind spot when it comes to recognizing our own minds aging, and our memories accreting into a golden history.

Seems to be a part of the human condition.

Time's arrow moves in one direction, the past cannot be reclaimed. The challenge is to not become bitter about it.

Agreed, and I would not claim it makes no difference, just that it eliminates only one category of brittleness from a project.

Others — poor testing, over-coupling, external dependencies, and the broad category of anti-patterns — are still available to us.

Just to clarify, I'm using trivial here in the technical sense.

YMMV on what counts as trivial to you, of course, after three days straight tearing your hair out!

It's just as possible to have huge, monolithic, and highly brittle projects written in languages with stronger typing support.

The only difference is that you get to eliminate a class of trivial annoyances.

Folks have been saying this for a decade. Actually they were saying it about EC2 and S3 a decade ago.

There are plenty of companies, large and small, running very successfully on all these platforms; sabre rattling notwithstanding.

Aurora keeps coming along in leaps and bounds, congratulations to the team, this is a fantastic achievement!

I only wish that every new feature didn't inevitably come with the caveat that it's only for the MySQL flavour of Aurora.

I understand both the engineering and product development reasons for doing so (different stack and MySQL is undoubtedly a much larger customer base), but it always makes these announcements a little underwhelming as an Aurora Postgres user.

Some of these automation companies are doubtless being run by people with legal backgrounds. I can't imagine all lawyers are interested in preserving the status quo.

I read the series as a twelve or thirteen year old and loved it, but when I tried rereading it a few years ago I came to the same conclusion.

As mentioned in another comment, it began as a serialized work, and it never really escapes Asimov's "make it up as you go along" style, resulting in quite a meandering series. I think it would have to be a very loose adaptation to make it interesting.

I think it's pretty reasonable to read the parent as making a general assertion about subscription models from a consumer's perspective, particularly as they began their comment with, "as a consumer" rather than "as tonyedgecombe."

It's all well and good to say "well, I just mean for me, personally" but I'm not sure it's adding to the public discourse without any further qualification.

Not exactly; example.com and .org are reserved in RFC 2606[1]. 1.1.1.1 is not listed in the special use RFC[2], it's just an address previously unused by APNIC.

[1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2606

[2]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5735

The logic would presumably be that using a significantly larger missile constitutes escalation rather than retaliation. Which begets escalation, which begets mutually assured destruction.

Game theory, rather than rhetoric.

Looks like they're still waiting on the results[1].

[1]: https://twitter.com/MadeInSpace/status/958730115353137152

No need for the snark, I was just curious as to whether the meaning had shifted.

Since this is an article about language usage, can you explain to me what "TFA" means to you?

I've seen in pop up increasingly on HN, and as far as I've always known it was a contraction of RTFA (from RTFM) and thus not generally a civil way to refer to an article.

An excellent point, had totally forgotten :)

The emphasis would be incorrect if the term were reversed - RankBrain is a Brain for Ranking like PageRank is a Rank for Pages.

No doubt there is someone in Google, however, who has a project for ranking AIs called BrainRank for their own amusement.

Anyway, your observation is also an amusing interpretation.

Perhaps it was left out in editing, or is made in Ullman's recently published book Life in Code: A Personal History of Technology.

I've always been under the impression that the dismissal of the "myth of the 10x programmer" was more about its use as a general hiring filter rather than whether there exist prolific programmers (examples of whom seem readily available).

Common in Britain and Ireland, at least - in context it just seemed like it might be a variation on the same idiom!