While there are no right answers to dealing with the HN's length limit, I'd argue that it is better to not manipulate someone's titles beyond cutting at some point.
"Between 58 and 68 percent of citations to Chinese publications come from other Chinese publications, even for breakthrough work. This contrasts sharply with other regions, where cross-border citation rates are substantially higher."
I wonder if within my lifetime it is possible that Chinese will become the main language one has to learn to be on top of things, with English becoming more niche.
These shifts happen slowly I presume. There was a point where a lot of people learned French as a lingua franca, and it transitioned to English over decades.
Unlikely. Adaptability of the language to new concepts as well as ease of adoption for second language learners matters. English - indeed every other candidate global language (Spanish, French, Portuguese, Arabic) - excel Chinese in these respects. I’d wager that even we’re American hegemony to go the way of the UK, English will persist. It may become more Indian or Singlish, but this demonstrates its strength.
> but they don't need FreeBSD exploit-writing capabilities for that.
That's a solid point. There was a piece the other day in the Register [1] that studying supply chains for cost-benefit-risk analysis is how some of them increasingly operate. And, well, why wouldn't they if they're rational (an assumption that is debatable, of course)?
>if they're rational (an assumption that is debatable, of course)
Feels like crime is an almost perfect simulation of the free market: almost/ all of the non-rational actors will be crowded out by evolutionary pressure to be better at finding the highest expected values, where EV would be something like [difficulty to break in] x [best-guess value of access].
This is a total tangent. However note that the creator of the ‘free market’ idea, Adam Smith, wasn’t an advocate for zero law/regulation regulation.
In fact Chapter 10 of his “Wealth of Nations,” specifically states, “When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the work-men, it is always just and equitable.” He goes on to explain that regulation that benefits the masters can wind up being unjust.
Smith’s concept of ‘laissez-faire’ was novel back in the day. But by today’s standards, some of his economic opinions might even be considered “collectivist.”
Oh for sure and a good point. I meant the free market in the sense certain groups tout as the solution to all problems but that the studiously avoid themselves because it’s dog-eat-dog.
Great comments from whoever reviewed it! For instance, "Vague but exciting..." on the top margin of the first page and "I'm not convinced" on p. 7 about "bells and whistles" such as GUIs.
> Making Linux distro maintainers responsible instead (duplicating work).
As this has been one (but not the only) of my arguments, the wording is a little off, I think. Rather, the argument is really also about using "stable" rather than bleeding edge software and doing some third-party vetting in-between; cf. also
"the meeting said something on my system was out of date. i installed the missing item as i presumed it was something to do with teams, and this was the RAT."
I had a job offer interview sent to me a couple weeks ago that ended like this.
Everything was normal messaging. Back and forth. Got the invite to schedule a google meet. All looked like all the other things.
Day of meeting, click the google meet button in the email.. redirect to a browser screen showing that google meet needs an update, this is the microsoft store.
Rush, hurry, meeting will be late!
except it was not the msoft store it was all fake.
I wish indeed and other job sites shared more info about these (like fake company signed up with a fake email from a vpn to publish this job listing that possibly infected 1,000 computers- and some are reporting X Y Or Z (ransom, whatever)
That's the bit that scares me. I've often found myself installing software in a hurry to join a meeting on some platform that I've not previously used via my current machine.
The time pressure means I'm less likely to pay attention to what I'm installing.
IMO, rushing things never helps. If possible, I investigate external calls/meetings well in-advance, at worst case, I add 30-minute calendar block before those. (To prepare and install/update things).
As a DevOps, I have seen the quote about "premature optimisation's root of all evil" in real life quite often. In fact, optimising one bottleneck quickly yields another one -moving the goalpost further-, potentially increasing business-impact if the flow is not contained properly.
Especially during incidents, _rushing_ to fix often yields more problems. I've seen people isolating/shutting-down mildly misbehaving instances. Causing excessive load to the remaining and starting the cascading failure like dominos falling one after another.
Which reminds me a scene from "The Office", where Dwight goes rogue and conducts a "Fire-Drill" by locking doors and deliberately causing smoke. Everyone panics and hell breaks loose. This is at the beginning of the episode, maybe 5-minutes tops. I show this at the incident-management training, this is how people behave in real life. No joke.
To give more concrete aspect on the moving goalpost: SWEs improve transaction processing with multi-threading, but that causes more connections/transactions to the database. Even though theoretical gains are Nx (n-times depending on threads/cores), real life gains are 1.2x-1.3x, because database connections are getting occupied. As the next step, increasing number of DB connections helps, maybe add another master node (risk of having deadlocks increase, but ignore for now for the sake of argument). But then the disk IO becomes the bottleneck due to write-heavy (payments domain). Then we add Redis to reduce load, and maybe some asynchronous processing. At this point complexity increases and we need to solve rare occurrences of duplicate data or race-conditions because it is not single-threaded process anymore...
While there are no right answers to dealing with the HN's length limit, I'd argue that it is better to not manipulate someone's titles beyond cutting at some point.
reply