News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

synthetic-echo

Re:Go's Sweet 16 on Friday November 14, 2025 @11:44PM (#45935103)
Of course, but the dataset was mostly strings that needed to be cross-referenced with GIS data. Tried every library under the sun. The greatest speed up I got was using polars to process the mostly-string CSVs, but didn't help much. With that said, I think polars was also just released when we were working with that dataset and I'm sure there's been a lot of performance improvements since then.
Re:Go's Sweet 16 on Friday November 14, 2025 @10:21PM (#45934780)
Just an anecdote and not necessarily generalizable, but I can at least give one example:

I'm in academia doing ML research where, for all intents and purposes, we work exclusively in Python. We had a massive CSV dataset which required sorting, filtering, and other data transformations. Without getting into details, we had to rerun the entire process when new data came in roughly every week. Even using every trick to speed up the Python code, it took around 3 days.

I got so annoyed by it that I decided to rewrite it in a compiled language. Since it had been a few years since I've written any C/C++, which was only for a single class in undergrad and I remember very little of, I decided to give Go a try.

I was able to learn enough of the language and write up a simple program to do the data processing in less than a few hours, which reduced the time it took from 3+ days to less than 2 hours.

I unfortunately haven't had a chance or a need to write any more Go since then. I'm sure other compiled, GC languages (e.g., Nim) would've been just as productive or performant, but I know that C/C++ would've taken me much longer to figure out and would've been much harder to read/understand for the others that work with me who pretty much only know Python. I'm fairly certain that if any of them needed to add to the program, they'd be able to do so without wasting more than a day to do so.

Re:Ask HN: Is Computer Science still a good choice? on Friday November 14, 2025 @07:17PM (#45933766)
I have been reviewing your comment history here, including the pastebin texts you have linked.

I find your perspective intriguing. Mind sharing the offline writings you've referred to, if there are additional ones to the three pastebin texts I've come across?

Re:A Year of Telepathy on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @09:03PM (#43031937)
You mean the data that was already public and debunking half the shit he's said? You can't mean the data he refuses to actually release, do you?

So with that in mind, let me rephrase your comment.

> It's discouraging to see people that read hackernews, act in this way, and not look at the facts, and actual data, but rather use up all their energy on just blindly praising Elon.

Re:A Year of Telepathy on Wednesday February 12, 2025 @08:28AM (#43025201)
Is he rooting out corruption and wasteful spending though? Or is he himself corrupt and attempting to stomp out agencies for his own benefit? It seems like the latter to me, considering which agencies he's targeting, half (or more) of his statements about the spending being falsehoods, the lack of proper processes, the people he's hired, etc.

I don't understand how people can be against due process, accountability, and genuine public service. Or are you just brainwashed by right-wing media?

Re:Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US on Tuesday February 11, 2025 @05:37PM (#43019266)
I think they were talking about the "model giants" like OpenAI you mentioned. Not saying they're correct, but I will concede the amount of copyrighted information someone like OpenAI would want is probably (at least) an order of magnitude more than this particular case.
Re:Steam makes its ban on in-game ads explicit on Monday February 10, 2025 @08:19AM (#42999879)
Very rare to see Vintage Story mentioned in the wild. It's tied with Project Zomboid for my favorite survival game. I wish more people knew about it.
Re:Bluesky now has 30 million users on Monday February 03, 2025 @07:54AM (#42917718)
They said comparatively simple. As in, simple compared to AT