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

It’s not uncommon. Google AIP spec requires it for example. I think the main driver for it is implicit idempotency.


The client’s ID for a resource and the server’s ID for that resource need not be the same.

Of course, adding two IDs for a resource complicates things. But so too does trusting client-generated IDs to be universally unique.


It's basically a long form linkedin article.


Incorrect


I thought so too, but it seems reasonable considering we're 70% water, much of it flowing and actively taking stuff out and around. Plus cells are apparently way more dynamic than is typically conveyed in high school bio (I think there was a quantamagazine article a while ago). So it's perhaps surprising that a body's atoms aren't fully recycled even faster than that.


IANAMD. IANAB. Let's guess anyway:

The Ca in bones is probably renewed very slowly. C H O N very fast, in particular water. Na, K and Cl are very soluble and also get renew very fast. Some rare elements like I are probably reused a lot and renewed very slowly. I'm not sure about P, my hand waving is confused. Assuming a burger per day, we ate our weight in meat every few years, but I'm not sure if all the Fe is absorved in and exchanged for the internal one.


At least historically, google engineers had 20% of their time to spend on projects not related to their core role


This still exists today. For example, I am on the payments team but I have a 20% project working on protobuf. I had to get formal approval from my management chain and someone on the protobuf team. And it is tracked as part of my performance reviews. They just want to make sure I'm not building something useless that nobody wants and that I'm not just wasting the company's time.


I never worked at Google (or any other large corp for that matter), but this sounds like the exact opposite of an environment that spawned GMail.

As you think back even to the very early days of computing, you'll find individuals or small teams like Grace Hopper, the Unix gang, PARC, etc that managed to change history by "building something useless". Granted, throughout history that happened less than 1% of the time, but it will never happen if you never try.

Maybe Google no longer has any space for innovation.


>I never worked at Google (or any other large corp for that matter), but this sounds like the exact opposite of an environment that spawned GMail.

Friendly fyi... GMail was not a "20% project" which I mentioned previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39052748

Somebody (not me but maybe a Google employee) also revised the Wikipedia article a few hours after my comment: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Side_project_time...

Before LLMs and ChatGPT even existed ... a lot of us somehow hallucinated the idea that GMail came from Google's 20% Rule. E.g. from 2013-08-16 : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6223466


I see, thank you for debunking. But I think my general point still stands. You can progress by addressing a need, but true innovation requires adequate space.


I see why they do this, but man it almost feels like asking your boss for approval on where you go on vacation. Do people get dinged if their 20% time project doesn't pan out, or they lose interest later on?


Previously it could be anything you wanted. These days, you need formal approval. Google has changed a bit.


It has nothing to do with success. It's entirely for making sure some one besides the person doing the 20% agrees with the idea behind the project.


Lol. They’d be better off giving people the option to work 4 days if they also signed over right of first refusal for hobby projects.


Which misses the point of 20% imo; exploring space that would likely be missed in business as usual, encouraging creativity.


> IMO the culling over managers over the past few years is really a way to make sure you don't have someone you can discuss career development, promotion, and pay increases with

That’s the point, surely


> those nuclear weapons quell a lot of our more violent habits, hasn't been a world war since

It’s only been 85 years, give it a bit more time…


The first season is a masterpiece. Second season goes off the rails and loses direction fairly early on


But it's very much redeemed by the third season, which is every bit as good as the first season, albeit rather different in tone.


Part 8 of season 3 left a deep impression on me. I still think about it regularly.


"This is the water and this is the well. Drink full and descend. The horse is the white of the eyes and dark within."

(I had to check if that was part 8 - but of course it is.)


Last few episodes are great again, and then we got Fire Walk With Me which is awesome. Also check out the feature-length The Missing Pieces composed of scenes cut from Fire Walk, if you haven't.

Frankly I find even the "bad" stretch of S2 better than more than half of allegedly-good TV, anyway.


I agree, although on rewatches I have fast-forwarded through a lot of the James scenes in S2.


James-hate is common even among the more devoted fans of the show, I think.

https://www.tinymixtapes.com/features/why-we-hate-james-hurl...

I think about the "Watching Twin Peaks" comic around 2/3 down that page pretty much every time he's on screen. "Ugh yes please go," indeed.

Oddly, I liked him in The Return.


I really only dislike his scenes with Evelyn to be honest, it's one of the few subplots that just bores the hell out of me.


Similarly python in optimised mode with -O or -OO flags will disable asserts.

I see asserts as a less temporary version of print() based debugging. Sometimes very useful as a quick and dirty fix, but 9 times out of 10 you’re better off with some combination of a real debugger, unit tests, tracing/logging, and better typing or validation.


Great PR move, but surely better to invest in more basic security measures supported by their app (chain of trust, verified callers/messaging etc). Instead their app is primarily a react native sales tool. Part of the reason that o2 was so affected by scammers calling from south Asian call centres with “the latest offers” was because they used to do exactly this with their customers.


To be clear while I don't enjoy the idea of receiving low-effort sales calls, I do think that real scammers are different. Real scammers don't have a business, aren't willing to go to court, etc.


Americans are weird. I’ve been going to the same barber for years. He doesn’t know my name, barely says a word and it’s just so comforting.


You may not realize just how lonely a lot of us are.


Which is exactly why you pay them, right?


It’s weird to be friendly?


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

Search: