Hehe. Definitely not to avoid the company micro time tracking their employees.

To OP, Great work, for keeping the verbal poetry alive. PEACE

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWH3vxIYZcA

Kudos for living this lifestyle, those pants look really sick..

We’re hiring early-career engineers (0–2 yrs) to work on open digital infrastructure with real-world impact.

You’ll work on backend systems that power high-throughput services used at population scale, with a focus on privacy, reliability, and interoperability. Most of your work will be open source, contributing to reusable digital public infrastructure adopted by governments and organizations.

What you’ll do: - Build and maintain Java (Spring Boot) microservices - Work on distributed systems and APIs at scale - Contribute to open-source repositories - Collaborate on system design and reliability improvements

Tech stack: Java (Spring Boot), Microservices, Kubernetes Exposure to Digital Public Infrastructure is a plus (can be learned on the job)

What we’re looking for: - Strong fundamentals (CS basics, APIs, data structures) - Ability to learn quickly and work independently - Interest in open source and public-impact systems

To apply: Email: talent_hiring@infystrat.com Subject: HN Hiring – Include: - Resume - GitHub profile (important) - A short note on why this work interests you

So i wanted to know whether this is a me problem, or others are also going through it and what your workflow for this looks like. but mostly I'm interested in the way you approach the work and the thought process behind that.

========

P.S: I'll leave the approaches i have tried before()

* always verify the work and only then approve. But this always leads me to a cognitive load and fried brain state at the end of the day. As a side effect producing poor quality work. And to resolve that i started approaching the work more slowly. This has brought down the development speed a lot but this has been good for my mental health.

* Other thing that i have been meaning to try is to get the development things done quickly, then spend another 1 or two days verifying things. This leads to continous iteration that i want and get the insights that only come after building.

* Other option i have also tried is, write tests and then refine ask it to generate code till those tests work, again the initial barrier entry becomes high, because there's so much of cases to be specified and generated and verified(this is the most reliable approach and happy path I've gotten till now that gives some sense of guarantee about whatever is built). Sometimes gain with agentic tools this initial verification has to be laid out clearly which consumes time and sometimes makes me wanna curse at AI because it misses out on somethings that i said(or i thought was clear with the spec)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46529713

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

We're building a high-performance Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) and looking for interns who enjoy systems-level work, performance tuning, and debugging real-world problems. You’ll work closely with a co-founder (me) on testing, benchmarking, and prototyping GPU-heavy components.

32+ hrs/week Paid internship Strong performers may be offered full-time roles

Stack: Python, C++, Java, Shell, CUDA, TCP/IP, Git, Linux, JS/TS (bun)

To apply: * Email hr@nexbiolabs.com * Subject: "HN Hiring: Your Name" * Include: Resume, GitHub profile, A short paragraph: "A project I'm proud of and what I learned from it"

Happy hacking!

Update: Thanks for applying folks, We have found the candidates for the requested role. Closing the application.

I had to put some prototype together in python and I just find it hard to work with it now. Python is something I used to regularly write and then ship code asap, now all the various scenarios where it can fail just runs in my head and I end up implementing multiple strict checks in places and even then I'm just bothered about future changes breaking these things. I'm skeptical and I have to go and write a lot of tests so that thins don't break and some of them are just silly tests like checking value is in the correct domain. I don't mean to particularly bash on python. Since its not Python's fault. Same goes for JS, I can no longer write plain JS now. I just reach for TS. This is partly due to the fact that I was working on typed code(TS[0] and Java[1]) for last few months. And some of the code in there required correctness guarantees, and it was just easier to reach out for typed language since I get many of the checks for free. However after going there, I find it hard to come back to writing dynamic languages now. Once I've realized that typed languages allow me to restrict my domain and the guarantee that this function can just bother about this restricted domain. I worry free write my code and the tests. I get some sense of confidence in what I'm building. This obsession with staticly typed language has been making me unproductive. And I can't find myself going back to it, even for something like scheme which I love so much I just can't find myself going back to it.

# Footnotes [^0]: Strongly typed TS, no any, and for dynamic values, used to use unknown parse into a known type and then continue with that. Ye there are some downsides here too, for e.g: I was not able to maintain few guarantees here like : if I take X = XS[0], there is no way for typescript to guarantee that X is a value is that is guaranteed to be contained in XS.

[^1]: Yea, Java type system is not the best, I have to use hacks like inheritance to make somethings work, anyway its better than no type system, especially I hate that java allows null which is a major source of annoyance for me and i keep wrapping values in that Optional monad.

==========

TLDR: How do you manage to code in dynamic languages after being exposed to static typing.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42823107

Points: 3

# Comments: 4

> I have an idea of how to solve the font issue (https://git.sr.ht/~pkal/ecg/tree/master/item/ecg.lisp#L342), but on my systems this never gives me all the fonts.

if i read it correctly `document.fonts` reads like "get all the fonts used on this web page" rather than "get me all the fonts installed on this computer".

Here are some of the things i was confused about, or thought could be improved.

1. The label of checkbox don't seem to respond to clicks.

2. On Font Input, There's no description or selections on what inputs are acceptable.

3. There is no mention of Javascript in programming language support section. iirc typescript package can handle js mode apart from the default builtin support for js. A mention of js would have be nice.

P.S: don't take this to mean i hate on racket, i'm just complaining about the default state of racket/gui, there have been attempts to improve it by 3rd party libraries(https://docs.racket-lang.org/gui-easy/index.html).

https://svelte.dev/tutorial/reactive-declarations

    unit type Meters = m
    unit type Seconds = s
    val speed = 5.4 m/s 

Some other ideas that changed the way i look at programs.

* Lisp Macros

* First class functions. Passing functions as a value is something that i do everyday.

* Garbage collection. Not having to worry about memory allocation is such a relief.

The last 2 points are surprisingly a common pattern now, but for someone coming from C[2] and shell scripting its a whole different world here.

======

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30749134

[1]: In school we were made to write units next to values, Now that ive seen it, i ask myself why don't more languages support this.

[2]: i'm aware of function pointers in C but its something that i rarely used(iirc qsort expected it).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30758776

Points: 4

# Comments: 10

I have a hard time with this. Earlier i used stuff like imdb and goodreads to determine and then i realized i don't like more than half of what i consume. Later i started asking what my friends liked, and consumed as per their recommendations, had a similar experience but this time around whenever i didn't like something, i complained to my friend and we had long discussions about it sometimes spanning multiple days. i found this approach better even if it sometimes meant consuming the trend of the week. After doing that for an year or two i started doing to consume/save-for-later anything that remotely looked interesting. These days I'm still following that approach. i still come across a lot of cheap makes but i think these help me to judge what's good and what's not. I mostly bring up this argument as i strongly believe "best" is subjective And going by all time classics or other people's recommendations you may miss out a chance to discover for yourself what is truly best for you. This was a straw man argument. Ignore it if it doesn't apply to you. But i'm curious on how you determine what makes "highest kind" and "best" before consuming it.

> "Mastery" by Leonard Gordon

I couldn't find this book.

Among lot of books i've read this was the one that pushed me towards questioning my beliefs. Although i can't say this book made me irreligious it certainly was a gateway to a whole new world.

* Calvin and Hobbes.

this is one of those things that completely changed my perspective on creativity, oh and not to mention all the things about life and philosophy in there, its in good spirit.

* Animal Farm

This is arguably the best piece of satire I've read that is also fun and easy on the brain. It flows like water.

* The Little Schemer.

I hold this book dear. I've tried reading SICP twice and given up. And thought LISP was not for me. The environment was horrible, all those parens it was just confusing. This book changed that, what it encouraged me to do is grab a pen and paper and try to work everything out myself[1]. It was such a fun read and i owe most of my understanding of functional programming to this book. Few days after finishing this book, i introduced this book to my friend and we spent all our days discussing life listening to sufjan stevens and working through this book, it was a sweet time.

====

[1] I wrote my actual scheme programs on computer long after i had worked through the book(i don't recall exactly but it was after 5th or 6th chapter). An online friend of mine recommended that i try DrRacket as i could execute scheme there. It was a much friendlier environment.