Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | xinu2020's commentslogin

KSA works too and matches UAE pattern.


KSA is never used in US media. No one here would know what it meant.


I'm sure almost no one watching US media knows what "human rights" or "asm.js" is, yet we allowed them in HN titles still.


I know what it means and I'm in the US.


No one here would know what it meant.

Unless they collect stamps.


I'm tired of all the recents npm packages supply chain compromises, so I've written a collection of `sandbox-exec` rules to wrap all the `npm install` and `npm run <script>` of my projects on my machine. It works but it's messy, so now I'm working on a small rust tool that acts as a wrapper and generator for that so that it's nicer to use and can be shared to other people.


Their argument is that ln(z) where z is a complex number is a multi-valued function, so the statement "Explore why i^i is real number" could be misinterpreted as i^i = a single well-defined real value.


Yes, but it seems strange to claim that i^i isn't anything. That just completely ignores what's interesting, namely that i(π/2 + 2πk) is real for all k ∈ Z.


In maths, an expression only ever equals a single number. You can't say i^i = e^(-pi/2) and then also say that i^i = e^(3 pi / 2), because if i^i equals two things, then those two things are also equal to each other, and then we get that e^(-pi/2) = e^(3 pi / 2), which is wrong.

Riemann surfaces are the only way to fix this. And they're not even that hard to understand, but I'm not sure if you do.

Stop making people confused.


Apologies if this is pedantic but "multi-valued function" is not a thing. The function doesn't have multiple values here. Saying "multi-valued function" is not just a way of misleading people about what's really happening, but it's almost the perfect way to stop people from finding out. Do people who say "multi-valued function" know what's really happening? Do you know what a Riemann surface is?


Except for the accountability part. That's the main feature of consulting.


Curious about this - How would local writes conflicting with remote updates be handled? I can't think of a merge strategy working on all scenario (or even most of the time)


Great question, I don't know. However, at least in my case, I wouldn't mind the source data always overwriting the local data. In fact, that's the way it works now when loading a newer snapshot, the local db is dropped and then re-built from the snapshot

Thinking about the developer experience though, when loading a snapshot manually, the dev knows they are overwriting their local db. However, if replication happened automatically/continuously on the background, it could lead to some really confusing/annoying behaviors


For those who are curious how we can construct such a function, and why it looks so funky on the negative side, I strongly recommend this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_HeaeUUOnc


Alternatively pick a light-weight template engine from your favorite language and use it to generate the html. More flexible than plain html files and very low learning commitment.

I've been doing that for years and really happy with the result.


Why not both? It's not much trouble to publish a Dockerfile while still documenting a normal installation.


It's not, but more often than not it's just a dockerfile


I was working for a fintech company that experienced a large growth (in the number of employees). The leadership team was keen to "grow fast" and on the surface it looked good: investors where happy, the company had a not so high yet but steady income (subscription-based) and each team seemed to have a purpose.

But in reality there were many issues: - there was a culture of launching "project/initiative" to justify more hires and promotions, rather than improving on the key issues we had (that nobody wanted to tackle). - People were often switching team after a promotion, for example leading a new team, and leaving their problems behind. - On the technical-side it was extremely tedious to contribute, we started with a monolith, then moved a micro-service architecture (with k8s, kafka etc). There was a push to do things properly, but it translated in over-engineering parts (for the cool stuff) while the valuable not-so-cool stuff was left to rot. At the end we had to maintain multiple things and the engineering effort to do all these migrations was huge, and took us away from doing more valuable work.

Eventually the company couldn't sustain its workforce and we had multiple round of layoffs.

My key learnings are: - Unless you are looking for a promotion before leaving (pump and dump), hiring a lot of people in a short amount of time is bad. - Even in best scenarios, having more employees make things harder and slower. People are competing for projects, there is a need for more communication, more processes, more tools. Having a lean workforce as long as possible, focusing on what's really important is best. - It's okay if we can't do everything we want. Not so many "ideas" are valuable and employees cost - Before hiring for a new project, can't we move other resources? Is this project really important or just a distraction?


Why do you suspect it is not ethical?

>What features could make it more ethical?

You should think the other way around, start with an ethical base, and only add features that keep it ethical.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: