I think this might be rage bait.

I had one of these. My account ended up eventually being reinstated. No reason was given for the initial account freeze or reinstating.

One thing I did - in response to them saying I could no longer do business, I told them that they also could no longer do business with me, requested a copy of all of the user data they had on me under CCPA, and told them to then delete all of my personal information. They did not actually comply and I didn't pursue. I probably should, though.

Yeah, this is the single biggest reason I avoid go - I just don't want to clutter my "happy path" logic. It makes things harder to reason about.

"Errors are values", sure. Numbers are values and Lists are values. I use them differently, though.

I wonder if there could be "stupid" preprocessing step where I could unclutter go code, where you'd make a new token like "?=", that got replaced before compile time. For instance, "x ?= function.call();" would expand to "x, err := function.call(); if (err != nil) return err;"

There's no happy path in programming. Errors are just some of the many states in the code and the transition to them doesn't disappear magically because you chose to not specify them. Actually returning an error is just a choice, you can chose to handle the situation, maybe log the error and go on your merry way. Or you panic() and cancel the whole call stack back to a recover(). I like Go because it forces you to be explicit.

There absolutely is a happy path in programming - what you want the code to do, assuming no errors. It's the intent of the code and that surely is an important thing for the code to express.

Anecdotally the climbing gym is the only semi-public place in which I've walked past someone browsing HN; without material stats I would still guess developers and people in tech vastly outnumber other fields among climbing gym members.

Planet Granite Sunnyvale was my haunt when I lived in CA. Almost everybody it seemed were wearing tshirts with the same logos you see driving down 101, in those days (10 years ago before that was uncool).

"On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

A lot of devs love climbing. Problem solving is part of it, especially if you climb a route for the first time. Very different area but similar approaches need to be deployed to succeed.

Plus its properly great and fulfilling activity that very few sports can deliver (IMHO), not requiring massive investment or some ridiculously long and difficult trips to just get to it (gyms, if you want to climb in Patagonia or Antarctic then its a different game altogether).

The headline is about the guy who created new procedures and standardization. Those are certainly technologies by many definitions. The article talks about how he created a lot of what we consider the modern climbing gym. Fitness innovations are also a form of technology.

Hacker news never claimed to be exclusively about digital technology, or electronic technology.

This is an article telling the story of someone passionate about creating something new and innovative. Seems pretty aligned to me?

Weekend HN is a different vibe. Much lower bar to hit the front page. Maybe because everyone is out climbing instead of reading HN.

Climbing, especially bouldering, requires solo problem solving. It’s the closest thing to coding in athletic terms.

That could be said about a variety of athletic endeavors. Mountain biking comes immediately to mind.

That’s an excellent point

I think a simple redacted name would address that concern

For people taking part in the parade, I doubt that. Extreme example is Jackie Kennedy. “I was sitting next to the president” identifies her pretty well.

There were people in the crowd who can easily be identified, too. For example, Zapruder’s testimony would have to leave out that he shot a movie and was life on television that day, and quite a few other details to anonymize it.

I’d mostly agree with that. After sufficient years have passed. Name isn’t the only way to identify someone.

I'm also hoping for something like this! Bonus points if it had a "little snitch" type of operation where I could manually approve a matrix of (device x domain)

I've just hopped on. I agree completely and I've had the distinct pleasure of avoiding the past year's worth of churn as the tooling & best practices were changing frequently.

I cannot believe (well, I can!) that 10,000 by xkcd is unknown to so many people that it's going to be news to them when they look it up.