A fun first project would be something to cultivate bitter almonds, and then isolate the cyanide compounds from them.

I don't know what you'd do with the cyanide compounds. But maybe you could get some inspiration from the current attitude toward "AI" products.

> 1) Be the only ones to follow the letter of the law, break a lot of people's expectations, and catch backlash for disrupting traffic

Yes, they should do that. The fact that others don't follow it is completely irrelevant.

I'm sorry if it doesn't help them meet their quarterly targets, but I don't think it's unreasonable for a Company to follow the fucking law when it comes to human safety.

And if they can't, they should be dissolved and the directors prosecuted.

If they truly can't grow without compromising people's safety and breaking the laws put in place to prevent them, then they shouldn't exist. End of.

> The fact that others don't follow it is completely irrelevant.

This shouldn't even be a discussion. Because someone kills a person, everyone else now needs to kill someone otherwise it breaks expectations? Madness...

The fact that both our comments are being downvoted is dumb.

Over the last year, the vibe on site has become... concerning.

Yeah, it's always leaned right wing capitalist. That's fine by itself—I like the contrast to my own views at times. I'm a lefty—very left compared to US "left"—but still have some right wing economic sympathies at times and in certain areas. There's actual discussion to be had there!

But recently it seems like this site has gone off the fucking deep end in delusion when it comes to everything. The misogyny and transphobia has started becoming less and less hidden too. This is the first time I've logged in here in over a month, and I've seen my comments today getting flagged for arguing against a person saying that bicyclists have more fatalities on the road—just asking them to cite a fucking source.

What you are saying is not controversial. You're not crazy. This site is just full of fucking idiots who haven't realised they're the next serfs in the reality they're bringing about.

> This is why they often have a massively higher rate of fatalities

It wouldn't perhaps be because they're (a) forced to share a space with cars and (b) cars have crumple zones, unlike cyclists?

Now I'm really curious. What field are you in that ndjson files of that size are common?

I'm sure there are reasons against switching to something more efficient–we've all been there–I'm just surprised.

> Now I'm really curious. What field are you in that ndjson files of that size are common?

I'm not OP,but structured JSON logs can easily result in humongous ndjson files, even with a modest fleet of servers over a not-very-long period of time.

So what's the use case for keeping them in that format rather than something more easily indexed and queryable?

I'd probably just shove it all into Postgres, but even a multi terabyte SQLite database seems more reasonable.

Replying here because the other comment is too deeply nested to reply.

Even if it's once off, some people handle a lot of once-offs, that's exactly where you need good CLI tooling to support it.

Sure jq isn't exactly super slow, but I also have avoided it in pipelines where I just need faster throughput.

rg was insanely useful in a project I once got where they had about 5GB of source files, a lot of them auto-generated. And you needed to find stuff in there. People were using Notepad++ and waiting minutes for a query to find something in the haystack. rg returned results in seconds.

You make some good points. I've worked in support before, so I shouldn't have discounted how frequent "once-offs" can be.

The use case could be e.g. exactly processing an old trove of logs into something more easily indexed and queryable, and you might want to use jq as part of that processing pipeline

Fair, but for a once-off thing performance isn't usually a major factor.

The comment I was replying to implied this was something more regular.

EDIT: why is this being downvoted? I didn't think I was rude. The person I responded to made a good point, I was just clarifying that it wasn't quite the situation I was asking about.

At scale, low performance can very easily mean "longer than the lifetime of the universe to execute." The question isn't how quickly something will get done, but whether it can be done at all.

Good point. I said it above, but I'll repeat it here that I shouldn't have discounted how frequent once offs can be. I've worked in support before so I really should've known better

Certain people/businesses deal with one-off things every day. Even for something truly one-off, if one tool is too slow it might still be the difference between being able to do it once or not at all.

> No one cares at amateur level

Except people clearly fucking do for some reason, and all that's going to happen is make life worse for women both cis and trans. Trans women will get excluded, and cis women who are "too good" or not fitting societal ideals of femininity will be accused of being trans. This is already happening to children.

> If you chose to identify as another sex

When did you choose to identify as the gender you were born with?

Because they're probably a native speaker.

EDIT: this is exactly the kind of mistake that native speakers make, that ESL speakers don't.

If you can rsync from the other system, and likely have an SSH connection between them, why don't you just add it as an additional remote and git pull from it directly?

I probably could. How does that work with uncommitted changes on the host? Would that be a problem?

You cannot git push something that is not committed. The solution is to commit often (and do it over ssh if you forget on a remote system). It doesn't need to a presentable commit. That can be cleaned up later. I use `git commit -amwip` all the time.

Sure, you might neglect to add a file to your commit, or commit at all, but that's a problem whether you're pushing to a central public git forge or not.

You'd create a bare git repo (just the contents of .git) on the host with git init --bare, separate from your usual working tree, and set it as a remote for your working trees, to which you can push and pull using ssh or even a path from the same machine.

If you have ssh access to the remote machine to set up a git remote, you can login to the remote machine and commit the changes that you forgot to commit.

Roughly:

`ssh remote "cd $src/repo ; git diff" | git apply`

(You'll need to season to taste: what to do with staged changes, how to make sure both trees are in the same HEAD, etc)

> It's not about bypassing access restrictions.

Yes. It is. You've just made an arbitrary choice not to define it as such.

I will add a PR to enforce robots.txt before the actual scraping.

Or just follow web standards and define and publish your User-Agent header, so that people can block that as needed.

You're creating the wrong kind of value. I really hope your company fails, as its success implies a failure of the web in general.

I wish you the best success outside of your current endeavour.

1. What makes you think it is written by an LLM

2. Where is that rule, could you cite it?

3. How dow I know you did not use LLM for your comment?

1. Word choice, phrasing, and sentence structure make it seem likely. Ironically, one has to go on vibes. One gets a feel for the voice and tone used by LLMs after a while. It's also a new account with one comment.

2. "Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans." From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

3. You don't.

1 and 3 contradict each other. Last thing people need is anti-AI hysteria.

Can you remind me when those actually passed? I can pull equally up equally ridiculous bills from the US that never came to fruition.

I am not saying passing, but seems there is a large group of politicians(supposedly backed by voters?) who lobby such initiatives who are not some alt-right fascist outliers?

(I am not from US, please keep that strawman out)