hjorthjort

There are always decentralized exchanges. I think eventually people will get used to the UX of handling their own keys and prefer it over keeping their coins in exchanges. Either that, or banks will start doing crypto custody and government will guarantee the assets. But I think that's less likely, I don't see banks inviting the risk of managing crypto keys.

What about pretty much all of cryptography?

It almost sounds like this book is the reason we so often hear and talk about the imposed hierarchy between "pure" and "applied", and that "mathematics is a young man's game". Did it have a huge impact? Or were these ideas commonplace before it was published?

Question to all the non-swedes: why do you find this interesting? Is it the play on words? War propaganda in general being interesting?

I fully agree, but I still think it's good that people learn how to code. Why? Because it's good to know a little bit -- just a wee little bit -- about how computers work. And while you could just get a good description from a book, nothing beats hands-on experience, which is easy (and mostly fun, initially) to get when it comes to coding.

I think of it as learning a little bit of math or science -- good for your general understanding of the world, and how the thing that is your interface to most of the world operates, it's basic functions and limitations. It's even a bit like learning civics or economics -- as code makes more important decisions every day, a naive yet fundamental understanding of omgow these things work among the general population helps a lot. Everyone should learn how to code a little bit as part of a general education. If you want to do it professionally, then yes, learning problem solving and automation is the way to go.

And it would be nice if people practiced a tiny bit of debugging, so we could see fewer horror tales from tech support.

The final suggestions are good, much better than "why didn't you just". The problem comes when your initial thought is actually a good idea, and your colleague could actually have saved some time. This happens a lot in the interaction between senior and junior engineers. For those situations, it's not great to be asking for an explanation on the spot, because then the explanation is just "I'm an idiot/ignorant of that tool".

What's missing, I think, is a question that is not seeking explanation, but improvement. You are not seeking justification of actions, you are identifying an opportunity. This opens up for both an answer starting with "Aha, you might think that, but actually..." and the question "Huh? What is X? How could it be used here?"

Hence, I like

> Could it be made simpler by using `sshd`?

and

> Did you try `sshd`? This seems like it might be a good fit.

Timezones. Only time we can meet is end-of-day in Europe and early morning in the US. Hard to do fast ping-ponging on pull requests and design choices without me staying up late.

But a big pro is no messages before 3pm,lots of time to focus!

It's also an instruction in WebAssembly, which has a pretty sparse instruction set. There are only 29 integer operations, and this is one of them. There are also "clz" and "ctz" which count leading and trailing zeroes. Other than that all the instructions are run-of-the-mill arithmetic, comparison, bitmasking and shifting.

AFAICT the model seems fitted to historical data, and fit well. I'd be curious to see if they or anyone else kept tracing events using the model to check its predictive ability.

Thanks for the feedback. I wrote this post and I would like to clarify:

I did not intend to say that we should go outside of the confines of the law here and lynch anyone. But I sincerely hope that our legal system has the power to punish gross negligence (I mean that in an everyday sense, not as a legal term) and that officials and CEO's can't get away with anything by just burying it under several levels of procurement. The company in question was obviously not competent enough to handle the data that they received, and it is gross negligence to take on this kind of project without doing a proper audit of their systems and methods. At the very least, their handling was against GDPR, which should result in fines.

Yet somehow, they ended up with the project. That is negligence on someone else's part. If you're hiring contractors to build a highway bridge, you should be held liable if you pick the local carpenter to do the job, just because they say they definitely know how to make it out of wood. I hope that the legal system can punish governmental officials and government contractors for handing off sensitive data to a party that isn't even aware of how incompetent they are, and that merely the procurement can be considered illegal.

If my hopes are not fulfilled, and one can indeed hand off all responsibility in a procurement process, then I instead hope we will see the law change in this regard.

As for people losing their jobs, I think that warrants no explanation.

Still, I agree: the issue isn't bad actors, the issue is the process, and it needs to be addressed. But part of a good system is not letting contractors getting away with bullshit, and making sure something is at stake when you take on a contract. If you can walk away from this wreckage without consequences, what's to stop you or anyone else from continuing to play fast-and-loose (which is usually the cheapest way to do things) with the public's data, raking in the payments and shrugging it off when things blow to pieces?

I understand I could have made that clearer, and I'll think about how to change my wording, or adding a footnote or something.

From page 2: "The presented theoretical model enables analytic investigations of differentiable programs through algebraic tools [...]; i.e. the presented operators can take the same role as higher order functions in functional programming."

So maybe we should think more in terms of lambda calculus and pure functional programming? There, you don't really write Y to memory location X.

In section 5.5 they describe how they "generalize the notion of an iteration from the integers, n ∈ N, to the reals, x ∈ R, and consider fractional iterations."

> But, because it may save bandwidth or help pages load more quickly, a tiny minority of our users (0.1%) choose to keep it off.

That's a gross misrepresentation, isn't it?

I like how you dropped the name of the "big consulting company" in the end, there.

How did you get that past code review?

Is this real? Can't find any sources on it.

What is the quote, coukd you tell me?

Thank you for the clarification.

This wasn't much of an answer to "how", just restating that "we have a way to do it, we promise!". Could you give some explanation as to why it would be close to impossible to create enough reports to have them actioned? What markers do false reports have? It seems you only collect some free form text, and I can't imagine any way you could tell a good fake from a real report. So to a business, driving out a competitor out may very well be worth the cost of a few unscrupulous internet warriors.

I clicked this fully expecting "yam", "cultivate" and "cook" to be archaic Unix tools. Instead I got this. Such a happy surprise.

"managers are the ones who need to focus on people and elevating your team."

This is dangerously wrong. If you work in a team, your ability to work well with others and help others work well with you correlates strongly with both your productivity and the upwards slope of your career path. This is true in almost every profession, and even more so in complex and collaborative work such as software development. Labelling people skills as a manegerial issue is doing yourself a huge disservice.

That sentiment becomes increasingly likely the more hostile the workforce is to you, though.

Or is this a call for mainstream operating systems and applications to get creative (read, nice tiling or splitting by default)?

What if all browsers suported single page split view? So that the left side was your regular view, half width, and the right side was the continuation of the same page, where the left side ended.

There is a lot of statistics about how social media causes depression/unhappiness in the article. But I didn't see sources, and from what I can tell (without looking at the studies) it's just a correlation. I do believe social media impacts depression rates and creates some unhappiness, but the claims in the article seem unsupported. Surely, depressed kids would have spent more time alone in all ages, hanging out in their room, watching TV, maybe reading. Honestly, even if social media made you HAPPIER, I'd expect unhappy eight graders to spend more time on social media than those with a sunnier disposition.

I'm surprised no-one is calling "regression towards the mean" on this.