jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I've found that the best thing you can do with a bad programmer is to let them write the code in whatever potentially inferrior way they think it should be written, in contrast to trying to force them to write it in some better way that they don't understand. It's always better for them to understand what they are coding and why they are coding it that way.

Java forces bad programmers to use patterns that they don't understand. Inevitably, this results in those patterns being applied incorrectly, which is worse than not applying the pattern at all. It's worse still if the programmer thinks they understand the pattern, but doesn't. No type system can guarantee that an API is used correctly on more than a superficial level, nor can it guarantee good architecture or correct behavior.

The best language for a bad programmer to use is a flexible and expressive one. The more easily they can express themselves, the better chance you have of understanding their misconceptions. Forcing their broken ideas into a restrictive language will just mangle them further, producing dailywtf material.

Monkeys are dumb, but a monkey doing calculus is even dumber.
No, these are falsehoods people who define the requirements believe about names. That's very often not the same as the programmer, especially at large organizations.
I had not actually heard of freeCodeCamp. That looks pretty cool, and will probably shoot to the top of my list for entry points to JS. Thanks for the mention!
Now balance it against the more important questions that are unanswered or even unasked because SO becomes a place where there's no point to that. It's not as simple as that.
How can I switch if my friends use WhatsApp?
I’d put more of the blame on mainstream media which was basically gaslighting anybody who wanted to rest assured that the election results are accurate.

Calls were made too early too many times over the course of the last couple of months, eroding the trust of the 99% of the completely normal Trump supporters out there.

Even if the Democrats are 100% sure the election is totally squeaky clean there should be no problem to go over it with a fine tooth comb so that everyone can be certain. Instead any attempt at transparency was ridiculed from the beginning with lots of goal post moving to follow about just how much discrepancies there actually were.

Some law changes right before the election also don’t really make sense (like waiving the need to verify signatures and in fact making it impossible to do after the fact by destroying envelopes) and instead if bringing clarity to the situation, mainstream media ridiculed anyone who had doubts about this as being crazy.
"We need to stop any speech that we think is wrong!"

Well, what if the definition of "we" changes? What if you become the minority and the majority wants your speech limited?

The only reason why we have things like gay rights, women's rights, civil rights, etc, is exactly because of free speech. The speech at that time were the minority but were protected by the Constitution.

If we don't respect the rights of those that we disagree with, when (not if) they come into power, they will use those same rights to quash our free speech. And remember that almost half of the US voted for Trump who is demonstrably the worst president in US history. If there is a smarter, more palatable right-wing candidate (ex. Tom Cotton, etc), we really could see a Republican president in office by 2024. And they would use that hammer that the left have been trying to use to quash that free speech.

We have the Constitution and Free Speech for a reason. And it has worked for centuries now.
Then the reality is insanity!

My mind is blown.
"Fast, clean and no ads" was a big deal for me. Internet was very slow when I starting using it. When I discovered Google, it was a breath of fresh air to my life. For a change I was using a search engine that loaded fast.
If the goal is to make follower counts more accurate, why not just clear the old accounts' follows? That would dodge the many issues with this that people are pointing out.
Julia does this. You can run the code and you get the output right next to it in an expandible dialog. You can write your while program this way, executing a line of code, tweaking it until it is correct. It can be quite nice. My one complaint is that VSCode doesn't have support for this, so it runs in Atom, and I find Atom to be quite slow and buggy.
Probably not 486 - this was 1999-2000 timeframe, so some sort of Pentium thing.

It was definitely the new instructions though, so whatever Intel chip had the new features had this 1 stepping that had this bug (and it wasn’t the first version of the chip either)
I remember I and many others starting to use them for exactly that. Look at this comparison (not that early is starts at 2004 while google iirc started to see usage at 2001)

http://aautar.digital-radiation.com/blog/uploaded_images/goo...

Some other search engines were even more heavy handed on advertising.
Not exactly a dupe, Annual Letter != Annual Report.
Aha, I see. I thought it was a throwaway account, which seemed odd for someone who was wanting to get partners in a project. Good luck on whatever you end up doing!
For most passwords, you should be using a password manager, which means long, high entropy passwords (which will not be memorable as a result).

For the few that you need to manually enter, something long is good, but it should ideally use characters or different classes, and ideally not be comprised solely of dictionary words (which your first example is), otherwise the search space is greatly reduced.

Also, manually entering a 60 character password is not going to be fun :) I think the longest "manual enter" password I have is 25 characters, and it's a PITA to enter in a password field!
Comparing the dollar that is basically the foundation of the entire world's financial system to Bitcoin which is basically a niche hobby currency is a bit disingenuous...
Another project screaming for a screenshot in the homepage. So many projects that don't have one.
I would imagine the US intel agencies and probably those of other countries have figured out the person or people behind it; either via passive monitoring or targeted attacks against systems they were known to have used, such as GMX email.
It's not like they take down your power line and run a new one. It's just a software switch flip on who has to chase down your money for a bill..
I think I know the answer, but I'll ask explicitly.

Suppose we have two components: A and B. A is defined to `RequireComponent` B. If I do `has(object, A) && has(object, B)` then can the C# compiler compile away the check for B given the check for A, turning it into just `has(object, A)`?
Mouth guards for American football, customized by heating and biting them, are pretty cheap in my experience. Not sure how workable they are for other issues.
This is my fear. C# keeps adding things to appeal to a different user base. What I've seen (anecdotally) is that most C# devs don't know or don't use the new features. This pretty much means they are useless to me, because even though I can use them and understand the new features, other people can't. The new code isn't maintainable to most people beyond me. Yes, I can go and show them and train people, but really it comes down to coding the imperative/oo way is what the majority of people are used to.
> By my own observation (which may obviously be flawed), the integration of Asians outside of urban Chinatown-like areas is pretty much complete.

That's because there are so few of them in most areas (i.e., outside those Chinatown-like areas you mention) that they're forced to integrate. The reason blacks and Hispanics are segregated is because they're minorities that are big enough to form their own communities. If blacks made up 1% of the population, they'd have integrated a long time ago.
I never saw one of those, but I don’t think I could be a senior COBOL developer. I’d need training on both language and zOS.
Done 8>)
People equate news with celebrities and outrage because that's what 80% of airtime is dedicated to.

If you want to be educated voter, pick any journal or periodical like The Economist or The New European. Their journalism will actually cover an issue in some depth, from whatever is their biased perspective.
I am not sure that writing a web app is the best way to learn common lisp; it introduces a lot of extra complexity (libraries, web server, etc) in a language that is itself quite complex. You'd better start from a simple CLI application as your first project.

Books: there is also Graham's "ANSI Common Lisp", which has a different approach from PCL; I found it clearer as first text (but PCL is a necessary reading anyway, for various reasons). But it's a matter of cognitive styles, start from the one that you prefer.

Absolutely download the Common Lisp Hyperspec and familiarize with it. Is the main everyday referemce tool of any CLisper.

Environment: Emacs + SLIME is the most popular option. Commercial lisps (and their free evaluation versions) also have good IDEs.

Have fun!
The class of theories is hardly even new. Dirac suggested the possibility of variation in universal constants in the 30s. In the 80s and 90s, at least three different instantiations of VSL popped up and have been getting varying amounts of press ever since.

From John Barrow:

"[An] important lesson we learn from the way that pure numbers like α define the world is what it really means for worlds to be different. The pure number we call the fine structure constant and denote by α is a combination of the electron charge, e, the speed of light, c, and Planck's constant, h. At first we might be tempted to think that a world in which the speed of light was slower would be a different world. But this would be a mistake. If c, h, and e were all changed so that the values they have in metric (or any other) units were different when we looked them up in our tables of physical constants, but the value of α remained the same, this new world would be observationally indistinguishable from our world. The only thing that counts in the definition of worlds are the values of the dimensionless constants of Nature. If all masses were doubled in value [including the Planck mass mP] you cannot tell because all the pure numbers defined by the ratios of any pair of masses are unchanged."

Quick plug: Probably the most public proponent of VSL is João Magueijo who wrote a really interesting book on the process of challenging the scientific orthodoxy, called "Faster Than the Speed of Light." It's an interesting (and often scathing) view of the process of academic science.
Yes and yes!

I have some very religious family members and friends and sometimes when I talk with them, you would think the internet = Jesus and nothing else (perhaps Facebook too). When I talk with other friends and the communities I frequent, it's atheism or you're a psycho.
It apparently also doesn't surpass a website which lets people throw sheep at each other.
Yeah, I've got a similar impression. The only 2 things I care about are 1) productivity (time to finish a task) 2) how pleasurable is it to use a language.

And I just don't find Haskell (or Lisp) to be as productive as many would suggest, even if you adjust for matureness of the ecosystem. (Note: I have a moderate experience with Lisp, very little experience with Haskell and these days mostly program in Java, Julia and Python.)
Thanks, haven't heard of uBlock until now. Giving it a try.
Similar bad design decisions prevent my father from using Chrome on Linux, at least as of when I set it up a year ago. I couldn't make the text in tabs bigger, something Firefox has no trouble with.
Very easy to click the wrong thing in a GUI, It can be rather punishing. Keep in mind the buttons are like preconfigured CLI commands, so things can be more catastrophic.
When we started with Firecracker, there weren't really any projects built on top of it.

Even if they had been, though, most things that touch kubernetes are incredibly complex. We have to be very careful how we manage complexity.

For example, we decided not to use any CSI or CNI projects for our storage and networking because those are designed to be pluggable. We don't need pluggable, and it's simpler to just build the very small things we did need.
SMX (http://smxemail.com) | CBD, Auckland, New Zealand, GMT+12ish | Full-time | C++ Developer

SMX aims to be a global leader in managed email security, analytics and deployment solutions.

We deliver enterprise-grade email security, analytics and messaging as-a-service, with a unique focus on the Australasian and Trans-Tasman threat landscape. As a Microsoft Co-Sell Partner and NZ All-of-Government supplier, a growing list of enterprise and government customers trust their email security to SMX.

We're looking for experienced engineers to build our bespoke mail stack which is primarily in C++ on Linux but also using Lua for orchestration.

The primary role is software development, but you will be required to configure, manage and troubleshoot email systems to ensure our customers receive world class service and uninterrupted mail flow. You will also be involved with systems integration, automated deployments, threat analysis, big data ingestion and product design. You won't be on the pager!

GMT+12 adjacent might be an option for remote work. We currently work a mixture of home and office and expect that to continue.

Visa Sponsorship is an option, we are a NZ Govt. preferred employer so very fast turnaround.

Technologies: C++14 on Linux, Lua, Redis, Ansible, Azure.

Contact: careers@smxemail.com
Calling C++ or Rust code from languages other than C++ or Rust respectively involved much more accidental complexity compared to calling them from C.

Even calling C++ code from compilers other than the one you were using (e.g. you are using a 3rd party precompiled library) is a risky proposition.
Absolutely horrifying. A digital interface to the human brain is the most dangerous thing to possibly exist. Thank god I was born early enough that I'll die before this technology becomes widespread. I hope.
Maybe. Depends on how environmentally friendly manufacturing, packaging and transporting the new part is. I suspect it’s a win in chemical terms most of the time, but it may not be an overall blowout win.
did not laugh, 0/10 would not read again.
meh gold, now if those were dogecoins ....
TBH home/educational/personal use is probably perfectly suited by the office online suite being discussed here.

Otherwise I pay like $10 a month for the full office 365 suite, which is rather cheap.
And that's a problem. Competition is (usually) good for the entities that can shop around. But companies' interests isn't what matters. Citizens' interests are.
It's running in unRAID and I've seen no healthcheck/SMART issues, and the monthly parity checks have been 100% fine too.
So I take it Retric is your full legal name? Or are you posting under a pseudonym? If you don't want to be associated with your comments maybe they shouldn't be made.

Is that the point you are trying to make? Why is porn "special" in this regard?
> An author of a post in social media may not recognize the fact, that the actual audience is beyond what he or she expected and that he or she is not in control of the access to this publication.

I agree with you wholeheartedly were we discussing Facebook or any number of platforms that give the user the ability to restrict the audience to something that is not-quite-public and not-quite-private. However outside of DMs everything on Twitter is explicitly public.

I see the point of desiring some ability to have an "open but private" conversation online, but again I really don't think it applies to Twitter as it currently exists. There are a lot of inequivalences when trying to apply the aspects you describe from the real world onto the online forum, not the least of which is the expectation of privacy when posting a public tweet has been explicitly waived.

Should something like this exist? Sure, why not? For many of us oldschool geeks, IRC was kind of like this, but modern replacements like Discord and Slack take a completely contrarian view and probably couldn't succeed otherwise. Humans are still very much in the infancy of what it means to extend society into cyberspace, and the end result is increasingly looking like it's not going to be the way any of us pictured it.
What's the significant difference? I've seen viral videos of people in compromising or embarrassing situations. Some have even lost their jobs as a result. Should all video uploading sites demand documentation that every person in the video consents to it?
> completely misstates the purpose and findings...primarily carnivorous, but still had some level of dietary plant consumption.

That's exactly what the article says, so not sure why you're saying it completely misstates the purpose and findings.
A lot of REST APIs are just as hard to grok as GraphQL is as a whole. Companies often lack schemas and documentation, which GraphQL helps with out of the box.
Lets start with the first question - how much revenue is generated by these products for the companies that produce them?
The article actually says the opposite, that these kids weren’t particularly smart.

“Though not especially gifted, these children used whatever skills they had effectively”

At least that’s how I interpreted the above quote.
Billing is very hard. That is why systems like Geneva is used.
Boot time is rarely an issue when working with long running daemons such as web servers.

We run the millions of lines of code because web servers typically serve up web applications which in turn depend on a whole host of infrastructure being available. The millions of lines of code support all the possible hardware that you could throw at it (and so you can save some if you compile your kernel just for that purpose), and if you know exactly which services your web-app will depend on then you can prune even more.

Specialization always pays off in terms of efficiency and it always costs in terms of ease of expansion and adaptation to future needs.
unless different OSes provide different versions.
The NYT was also complicit in the propaganda run-up for selling the ill-conceived attack and invasion on Iraq.

The author of the NYT article, John Bolton, is a card carrying neoconservative - a group that I think is motivated both by war profiteering and flawed ideology.

The war mongers never go back and look at the history of bad outcomes from US interventions in other countries (e.g., overthrowing the popular democratically elected leader of Iran in the 1950s, what we did in Guatemala, etc.)
What about using some type of pod system that you get into, and then get picked up by the train while moving. Then when you arrive at your destination your pod jumps on a different track and comes to a halt at the exit from the station. This would also allow for a inter-train exchange point, so you stay in your pod from start to end of your trip. The pods could be individual, or multi person, and hook on to different train wagons. The entire system could be close to 100% automated, and inter passenger crime could probably be lowered.

I think it could be done relatively easy, if the train slows in the stations etc. We have the advantage that it could be speedup in the future when the tech allows it.
He's using it to frame what he thinks is public perception. In this case, he's putting that number into some kind of perspective more relevant to regular Janes and Joes trying to become engineers. Made sense to use it, or at least I thought so.
Why can't GitHub just serve up pages with javascript that causes the user to re-attack the source of the initial attacks?
I would start with this awesome free book on Ruby on Rails (it's designed for beginners): https://www.railstutorial.org/book
Far too many in the media are social justice warriors and simply cannot see outside the box they put themselves in. For them every story with specific actors must always have a set outcome. As such when the results don't fit the narrative they tend to try to put forward the result regardless by associating the event with similar but more convincing ones.

For readers it comes down to finding a set of news sources and through all of them distill it down to some semblance of the truth. Perhaps robo story writers will supplant people for hard news simply because they should be more objective
> Yeah you did misinterpret his comment.

Don't rub it in. I had a long night.

> What jurisdiction or tool-implementation would consider DDoS prevention a crime?

That depends on how the tool is implemented. Nobody cares what you use it for; what it does and what that (potentially) enables you to do is usually the deciding factor. I can't give you a concrete example because I'm not a judge and these kind of laws are way too vague anyway. We're obviously not talking about "traditional" methods here (hence the fun fact). Note that the problem is not you using a tool, it's you distributing a tool that can be used for ... well ... I don't know.
One reason would be the age of the airframes. Technically, why not? But at a certain point you will need to compleely rebuild the airframes, like completely down to the last bolt and rivet. Only to still have an old airframe, in some sense. So new aircraft it is. And developing new enngines, avionics and software to put them into a new, and most likely modernized airframe, is frightingly close to a completly new aircraft design. And will give people the oppertunity to add features as well. And of course, because common sense doens't play a role in military development and procuremt for anything more complex than a Hummvee. Looking at the proposed Humvee replacements so...
A shell script which pushes everything everywhere in one command. Two git commands per server: One to push the code, and one to push the tags.
> Furthermore, they didn't "enslave colonies". They established colonies.

They established two kind of colonies - one which exploited man power and natural resources, and the other was territorial and treated as a natural extension of their own kingdom (after they conquered and replaced the orginal habitants with their own citizens). All the Asian and African colonies fall into the former category where as all the "white mans land" - Australia, New Zealand, Canada, USA - falls into the latter category. (I know some Americans would debate that they were in the exploitive category too, but as an indian I'd disagree).
The reason you don't get flying cars, is the very same, you cant make a lot of other technology. People will want to invent the flying car parking house. And they kind of did - on the 11 of September 2001. You can not hand technology over a certain level to a infantile (nicer sound then retarded) species. Its that simple.

Its already madness to allow wealthy citizens into space. Tesla and Amazon are one freight flight to space, filled with tungsten rods, away from becoming there own nation - with non-nuclear deterrence. That somebody - whoever it is, out there is getting humankinds tech progress to a grinding halt, is a blessing in disguise. We actually do not even get a honest discussion about the risks on this path.

Problem is though, we always scienced our way out of our problems with our volatile nature. Tap some energy here, create some fertilizer there, oversupply solves the problems we do not want to solve. Exponential supply for exponential unchecked demand.

Enter social tech- in theory we could limit ourselves, could curb our demands, could become starving monks in the desert, hypnotized by coloured lights playing across enchanted stones. This seems to be the road we need to take, for the other road to be traverse-able.
Not sure, I accidentally started a flamewar! I wouldnt consider the atomic bomb low hanging fruit either, it took many different breakthroughs in nuclear physics and structural engineering to procure the isotopes.
Wow, that is nasty, and the article makes no mention of this?

Is there a page on the canadian government website that details this agreement with china?