Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 2rsf's commentslogin

100% agree with the "you don't", but I wouldn't be surprised if young startups or highly stressed teams delivering low-risk products will do just that and deliver unreviewed code

> Is lighting an invisible variable in productivity that startups are ignoring?

There are two questions here- lighting is a known factor influencing productivity, you can easily google that.

Are startups ignoring it? I don't have any data showing that, but I wouldn't be surprised


LLM's are far from perfect, any production grade code must go through a human inspection unless it's a tiny ad hoc app. This means that you need to be familiar with the languiage and the environment to get good quality code.


> That said, it’s not my strong suit. Others are far better at it than I am.

I don't know you, and I feel the same about my public speaking but I suspenct that there's a lot of imposter syndrom in that


I’m comfortable doing it, and generally receive positive responses, but I’m not “a natural.”

If I have something that I need to “get just right,” like a class or main speaker gig, I have to practice a lot, and can come across as a bit “stiff.” If I don’t practice, I do well, but not predictably so, which makes me a bit of a “wildcard.”

I know quite a few folks that can walk up to a podium, in front of hundreds of people, at little notice, and knock it out of the park. They often practice.

Steve Jobs was one of the best public speakers I ever heard, and I’m told that he used to practice for hours. I knew a woman (I’m friends with her ex) that used to regularly appear on TV, and keynote finance conferences. She has an “aw shucks,” casual style. Her (ex) husband told me that she’d practice before each gig for many hours.

The folks that make it seem to be “natural,” at anything, generally practice a lot. I speak frequently, but it’s not structured practice.


I suppose it's a combination, some people are more comfortable speaking and improvising on the spot but everyone needs to practice. I can add to your list a CEO of a big bank, he speaks freely and it's a pleasent to listen to him, but I heard that he practice using a private instructor as well


> 9. render the presentation as a pdf file, so any device can display it

That's good as a backup, or for simpler presentations (in a good way!) but Powerpoint allows you all kinds of benefits like animations or transitions. Presnting PDFs is not guaranteed to be pain free as well, as I expereince on my corporate controlled laptop with stange versions of Adobe software.

> 11. the anxiety goes away

It does! also remember that the audience doesn't know what you are going to present, so they wouldn't care if you make mistakes.

I will add

13. Practice and learn speaking, a good start could be Vinh Giang's Youtube channel


> Powerpoint allows you all kinds of [things] like animations or transitions

Those are not benefits. Do not do those things. Anything more complicated than embedding a video is a distraction and will not help your presentation. (And the video can be done by alt-tab to VLC or linking YouTube or ... .)

Seriously, trust me on this one.

I have seen a lot of presentations in my day, from sales engineers trying to sell me on things to literally hundreds of guest speakers from all over the world back when I was in grad school. That last one was especially valuable, because I got exposed to a huge variety of speakers and styles, not just a monoculture from one place or company.

And the best of them either never used that crap, or it passed through my brain leaving so little evidence of its existence that it may well never have been there to begin with. I only remember the bad associated with that stuff: a speaker once had to answer a question, went back a couple of slides (fine so far), then had to wait fifteen seconds or so for his dumb, contentless transitions to play out, each slide he advanced, trying to get back to the slide he wanted to be on. Stuff like that is all that's in my head when I think of transitions and animations. The best speakers really do just never bother with it in the first place.


>Those are not benefits. Do not do those things.

>The best speakers really do just never bother with it in the first place.

This person has a preference which is not universal despite them stating it like a universal truth. I have also watched hundreds of presentations (and presented dozens), so I'm at least as equally qualified to say:

A fade between slides, fading-in bullet points or a picture on a slide as they become relevant, underlining/bolding/changing the color of a word to draw emphasis to it after the fact, etc. All of these can be perfectly fine. In fact, I think these small details can turn an okay slide deck into a well polished one.

>[...] had to wait fifteen seconds or so for his dumb, contentless transitions to play out, each slide he advanced, [...]

But yes, don't make your transitions 15 seconds. And if you're going backwards or skipping ahead, you can skip animations. You don't need to let it play out.

Also important to keep in mind that a good (or bad) slide deck alone does not make a good (or bad) presentation. The speaker and their knowledge + passion for the topic is what is important. A good slide deck is just a bonus.


I agree with that. I do experiment with different slide styles and may use a quick fade-out/in but I don't use Powerpoint any longer and keep things pretty simple. Sometimes slides are more graphically heavy than other times. But rarely use much of the Powerpointish slide chrome. And I'm not really a designer and will mostly mess things up if I try to get too cute.


Instead of making animations to do bolding/underlining, simply copy the slide and then bold/underline it. It will look like an animation, but it isn't, it's just the next slide.


> Those are not benefits. Do not do those things. Anything more complicated than embedding a video is a distraction and will not help your presentation.

> Seriously, trust me on this one.

No, that's your opinion. The best presentations I've seen use animations. Just not on every slide, and not huge distracting animations. Animations can be amazing to emphasize what you're explaining.

DO use animations, just make sure they bring something on the table.


We may be talking about different things.

If your talk is about, say, heat engines, and you want to have an animated Carnot cycle or something, great! Do that! That sounds useful! (These days it would probably be implemented as a video, which is why my brain binned it as such, but it really could be done with PowerPoint alone.)

If you want to have your slide chug in from the right "like a locomotive" then have each item on the screen individually fade in "like puffs of steam" then once you're done the whole thing drifts to the top "like smoke" because "steam engines are heat engines", that is the crap I am telling people to get rid of.


> Powerpoint allows you all kinds of benefits like animations or transitions

I know. I just go for very basic stuff - large fonts, black text on white background, no border, no colors. I ruthlessly eliminate everything but the point I'm trying to make.


Generally, I'm fully on board with the "eliminate everything but the point" philosophy, but transitions can be really useful for displaying that the same element is present in multiple slides. I've had a few cases where I've shown a "before" diagram/code sample/whatever, then on the next slide shown the same diagram again, alongside an "after" version. But the layout I use to put two diagrams on the screen is going to look different to the layout I use for just one, which means the original diagram is going to jump around suddenly.

A ~100ms transition where the first diagram moves from its place on the first slide to its place on the second slide ensures that a person looking at the slide understands very intuitively which of the two diagrams is the original, and which one has been added. It's not perfect (e.g. you'll miss it if you're not looking at the slides at the time), but for diagrams or code samples you generally want the audience to be focussing on the slides, so it typically works well. And in 90% of cases, even if you do miss it, it'll be obvious after a couple of moments' thought what's going on, but the transition saves you those couple of moments.

I could just show both items on the first slide, but I find it's often pedagogically useful to explore the initial state by itself, rather than jumping straight in with the comparison. That way you can motivate the comparison more clearly by identifying the issues with the initial state (be that a code sample, a diagram, whatever), before moving on to the comparison with a potential solution.

If it weren't for this one use-case, I'd probably also switch to PDFs, because I've been bitten by presentational issues before that would have been a lot easier to solve if the presentation had just been available as a PDF.


Depending on the context, git lfs for essential binaries, Artifact/Asset Repository for high volume of binaries like build or test artifctas.

Security and the avaialble scannning tools are also part of the decision, and so is the expected usage- do you expect to consume the resource outside of the context of Git.


> I issue invoices only after a successful payment, because I owe tax on all invoices including unpaid

(IANA I am not an accountant) but how is it legal? as a customer you want to pay against an invoice, and AFAIK it is required by law in most places.


You pay against a proforma invoice, or if your credit card gets charged automatically, there is no proforma and you just get an invoice that confirms the transaction.

But in general, this is why proforma invoices exist.


I was in a team that wrote the firmware to handle that 15 years ago, with focus on automotive implementations where temperature might be high and access to the data is harder.


a. I am too lazy to search but they probably did, the problem was what was done with the information. Same with 8200 the all mighty signal intelligence corps

b. The Mossad is the equivalent of the CIA, they are not meant to act inside Israel


> b. The Mossad is the equivalent of the CIA, they are not meant to act inside Israel

For that purpose is Gaza inside or not inside Israel?


Shin Bet (Israeli internal security service) have an Arab desk that covers the West Bank & Gaza.


Israel would probably dispute it, but for most of the world Gaza in relation to Israel is "abroad" and not "domestic".


Yes (TBD)


(playing the devil's advocate here) But that's not the case- if you find someone's physical keys in the street, will try to open the neighbor's door with it? so why is it ok to use a password that you "found" to log into a site?


Curiosity. I once dropped my keys on the way to my leasing office. I searched the entire complex and office for my keys. Then I saw a guy at the mailboxes trying to open each one, one by one.* I asked if he needed help and he just said he found some keys on the ground and wanted to find out who they belonged to. They were mine. And my mailbox was in the other side of the complex so all bets were off for him anyway.

It costs next to nothing to try out a key in multiple places in the same proximity. Once you start going door to door using a random key you found, that's suspicious.

*it occurs to me now that I write this that this behavior is suspicious as well and probably illegal. He should have turned it into the leasing office.


that actually maybe super illegal if they are usps mailboxes.


They... Probably are? They were my complexs mailboxes but only usps has access to them.


Instructions unclear - any key I find now onwards I’ll mail it to this guys leasing office.


No, it's different. I would compare it to my neighbor using a padlock with code combination. It takes 15 minutes to brute-force that. If I tell my neighbor that his padlock is shit and in response he sues me to oblivion, next time I'll just tell local thugs "hey here's the padlock, here's the code, do what you must", zero regrets, if the asshole insists on being an asshole just for the shits and giggles then so will I.


If I don't try the keys in my neighbor's door, how will I know which neighbor they belong?


It's even worse, you find a key that you know belonged to your neighbor so you try it out just in case in his door.


I don't think the common analogy of "key to a house" makes any sense. For starters, a significant portion of people in existence aren't trying to break into your house 24/7.


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

Search: