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

Oh, the market will find a way around this too. The more US uses this particular button the less effective it becomes.

What free market?

I'm not gonna lie, double espresso with ritalin before work is pretty good too. It's the T+2 date which is uncool.

That’s the ritalin. Find a healthier alternative like an energy bar with that double espresso. I find if I stack too much at once, I crash. One cup in the morning when I wake up. One before work right before the meetings. One in the afternoon to keep me fueled until dinner where I let myself gorge on protein and sugars until I crash.

suggest many many cups of 1/3 caffeinated and 2/3 decaf. There are some observed health benefits to even decaf coffee... and its got potassium besides. I drink around 10 of these. lower longer peak. Joy!

Ritalin is a highly addictive substance that wrecks you, your life and the life of everyone around. Unfortunate that we have one in family.

As a parent, tell me more. I have not yet heard this side of the coin.

Ritalin is a chemical relative of amphetamine. In prescribed amounts it's often an effective treatment. In recreational amounts, ask your doctor about ΔFosB:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOSB#DeltaFosB


I was unaware that Ritalin is used as a recreational drug.

Well, I'd say lots of words for how horrible and terrible it is to have Mr. Jekyll and Hyde around. Any specific questions?

I don't know enough to ask specific questions. I could consult with an LLM, but if there is some risk or side effect that doctors do not typically mention, I'm all ears.

It kinda makes sense if you consider depression to be a mechanism to get into winter hibernation. It's just we can't hibernate and even if we could, somebody has to pay them bills.

That was the funniest social critique I’ve heard in a long time.

But are we built for hibernation? Or is the capacity for depression just a biological mistake for us?

We are not build for anything. It's a legacy codebase. Some stuff stopped working, but nobody removed the surrounding utility codes and the config entry to enable it.

Damned legacy code and technical debt always ruining everything.

Sir, your visa application is denied anyways.

Yes Sir Mr President Sir.

You can have a field with some value that just happens to match the id in a different table. That something could be a foreign key or just a number.

It's amazing, that django docs look and feel exactly the same the did in 0.9x. Damn kids with their JS bullshit have to change the whole site between v1 and v2 and then again when v3 happens. Links rot, API index is hidden and instead of text you get a dump of TS interfaces with zero comments.

/rant


>Or there were more reasons to it?

Internet was slower in both latency and throughput is one reason. The other is general tendency to separate things into smaller pieces. Faster feedback to user is the third.

Consider a typical form with 10 fields in django. You define the schema on a backend, some validation here and there, a db lookup and form-level rules (if this field is entered, make the other field optional).

This works very welly in django, but you only get the result once you fill all the fields and press enter, at which point the whole thing gets sent through model-tempalte-controller thing and the resulting page is returned over a faulty slow connection. It also hits the database which is not great because SSD is not invented yet and you can't keep the whole thing in RAM or overprovision everything 100x. Containers, docker and devops are not invented yet as well.

So you try to add some javascript into the template and now you have two sets of validators written in two different languages (transpilers are not invented yet) and the frontend part is the ugly one because declarative frameworks like react dont exist, so you add ad-hoc stuff into the template. Eventually everyone gets annoyed by this and invents nice things, so you move the part that was template rendering+form completely to the FE and let two different teams maintain it and communicate through the corporate bureaucracy that tracks the source of truth for validation rules outside of the code.

At some point you notice that people name fields in the json schema in a way that is not consistent and forget the names, so you put even bigger boundary between them with a formal API contract and independent party to approve it (I kid you not, there are places where the API between FE and BE teams is reviewed by a fancy titled person that doesn't deal with either team outside of this occasion).

Eventually you figure out that running the frontend logic on the backend is easier (it's doing the same model-view-whatever patter anyway) than other way around and remove the fence making all the bureaucratic overhead disappear in one clap.

Then somebody finds an RCE in server components.

You are here.

Add: if you want to feel the WEB before SPA, here is a nice example: https://formulieren.amsterdam.nl/TriplEforms/DirectRegelen/f... (bonus points for opening two different forms from site:formulieren.amsterdam.nl in different tabs and clicking through them in parallel)


You still end up separating frontend and backend in full js codebases, but it's not as explicit and can lead to wacky/confusing/unpredictable behavior if you get it wrong. I've never found a perfect solution to the frontend/backend boundary but I've found a mix of declarative container type libraries (pydantic on backend, TypeBox on frontend) with some code generation is a good solution.

I work in a place where it's proper to wait for a month, get the openapi spec thrown over the fence from the backend team and generate my typescript RPC out of it. The upside is I don't get paged at 4 in the morning if the thing gets into a bad mood and starts doing increased 5xx at increased rate.

> Then somebody funds an RCE in server components.

I'd say they found it, but I love the conspiracy theory :D :D :D


Something happened to my brain lately and I started to make this kinds of typos in English, which I didn't before.

I'm 32, but I noticed I started making similar mistakes around 28 or so. Occasionally I write out words which are completely wrong, but sound similar.

It's as if one part of the brain is doing the thinking, and another one is "listening" to it and transcribing/typing it out, making mistakes.

For a little while I was a bit worried, but I then realized nothing else had changed, so I've just gotten used to it and like to jokingly say "I've become so fast at thinking that even I can't keep up!"


I suspect that as I got more vocabulary (and more languages) and started to actually speak the language more, I remember the "sound" of the word where I used to remember the spelling before. Like "it's" and "its" wasn't a problem before, but now I catch it somewhere in the text. At least I consistently write more than 50% of the articles nowdays. Languages are weird.

While I was writing the reply, I considered giving the absolutely exact same explanation, which I agree with, down to the example you gave.

Two examples in portuguese that always trip me up, and absolutely never used to before are (i) "voz" (voice) and "vós" (you); and (ii) "trás" (back) and "traz" (bring).

I also do a lot more code-switching.


Its a strong hint it is

That approach works more often than it doesn’t — outside of certain spiraling situations most people don’t became alcoholics and drug addicts.

Some however do, which is why drugs and alcohol are controlled to some degree.


They weren't always. In fact it took many centuries for this to happen. The history of cocaine in the US is quite interesting. It was being used everywhere and by everybody. Factory owners were giving it to their laborers to increase productivity, it was used in endless tonics, medicines, and drinks (most famously now Coca-Cola = cocaine + kola nut), and so on. You had everybody from Thomas Edison to popes to Ulysses S Grant and endles others testify to the benefits of Vin Mariani [1] which was a wine loaded with cocaine, that served as the inspiration for Coca-Cola.

So probably part of the reason it was so difficult to realize there is a problem is because everybody was coked out of their minds, so it all seemed normal. And I think the exact same is true of phones today. Watch a session of Congress or anything and half the guys there are playing on their phones; more than a few have been caught watching porn during session, to say nothing of the endless amount that haven't been caught! I can't help but find it hilarious, but objectively it's extremely inappropriate behavior, probably driven by addiction and impaired impulse controls which phones (and other digital tech) are certainly contributing heavily to.

I find it difficult to imagine a world in the future in which phones and similar tech aren't treated somewhat similarly to controlled substances. You can already see the makings of that happening today with ever more regions moving to age restrict social media.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vin_Mariani


> The history of cocaine in the US is quite interesting. It was being used everywhere and by everybody.

Be careful with that comparison. The cocaine infused drinks of the past are not comparable to modern cocaine use for several reasons.

The route of administration and dose matter a lot. Oral bioavailability is low and peak concentrations are much lower when drinking it in a liquid as opposed to someone insufflating (snorting) 50mg or more of powder.

You could give a modern cocaine user a glass of Vin Mariani and they probably would not believe you that it had any cocaine in it. The amount, absorption, and onset are so extremely different.

> So probably part of the reason it was so difficult to realize there is a problem is because everybody was coked out of their minds

That’s an exaggeration. To be “coked out” in the modern sense they’d have to be consuming an insane amount of alcohol as well. We’re talking bottle after bottle of the wine.

Be careful with these old anecdotes. Yes, it was weird and there were stimulant effects, but it’s not comparable to modern ideas of the drug abuse. It’s like comparing someone taking the lowest dose of Adderall by mouth to someone who crushes up a dozen pills and snorts them. Entirely different outcomes.


Vin Mariani was 7+mg/oz with a relatively low alcohol content which would have been further mitigated by the stimulant effect of the cocaine in any case. And then of course other concotions (including Coca-Cola) had no alcohol at all - Vin Mariani is just a fun example because of the endless famous names attached to it.

Obviously you're right that the absorption is going to be different and a modern coke head with high tolerance likely wouldn't even notice it had anything in it. But give it to a normal person, and they're indeed going to be coked out - in very much the same way that small doses of adderall to non-users can have a very significant effect. The obvious example there being college kids buying pills around around finals.


> Some however do, which is why drugs and alcohol are controlled to some degree.

Following your argument shouldn't anything that can induce addiction be controlled? Seems that is not the case e.g. looking at sugar.


>Following your argument shouldn't anything that can induce addiction be controlled?

Depending on a risk profile -- totally. There are talks of taxing sugar drinks and not selling "energy drinks", which are coffeine + sugar, to kids for this very reason.

I also mean controlled in the broad definition, not as in the "controlled substance". The culture of consumption prescribed by society is a way of regulation too, more effective than laws even.


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

Search: