jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
My mother is notoriously immuno-compromised and gets sick two or three times a month for extended periods of time. This year, due to the increased amount of mask wearing, standing apart, increased cleaning, and seeing people on a limited basis she has only ill a handful of times at all this year.

She's going to likely be wearing masks from here on out.
Pycon and RubyConf!
Unfortunately no, but that's in the works. Now that several people have requested it, I've bumped it up on my list of priorities.
Note: This is satire. The author took a paper with the same title from PLOS ONE (which compared Word and LaTeX), then changed the abstract.[1]

1. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna...
For the record, I was pointing out that someone made a similar point as a good thing. I found the authors' post insightful, fun, and a little worrying. As, I think, was intended.
Karma observations: if you reply in the early morning, before everyone gets up and reads HN, you'll get more karma than if you reply in the middle of the night when no-one will see it. Same goes for replying to threads that don't have many comments yet. More comments = old news, less new viewers, less karma.

Also, the other day, I replied to someone, got downvoted to negative something, and then, as an experiment, I copied the comment, deleted it, and pasted it into a reply to the parent of the comment I originally replied to, and got upvoted +8.

It's science.
"to continue reading, subscribe now"

Uh... no.
what is the exit price?
In a free market, productivity tends to rise and prices tend to fall. Market leaders, in order to maintain their leadership, must constantly work to stay ahead of their competition.

This is a good rule of thumb to determine whether a market is free. So, for example, in the US, the high tech hardware and software markets are free (prices are continuously dropping) while the higher education market is not (prices go up every year.)
Basically, the western world went through their development cycle (aka the industrial revolution) and now the rest of the world wants to catch up. Of course, when we say they shouldn't because of climate change, they say "You had your chance to pollute and develop, now we get to do the same thing." Frankly, I find it difficult to argue with them. The only sensible thing to do is for the Western world to reverse back to where we were prior to the industrial revolution and ask the developing nations to do the same - no technology above a horse drawn plown and horse drawn wagons, everyone reverts to being in the agriculture business or supporting the agriculture business, no cars, no planes, only wind powered sailing ships, no rockets, no computers, etc.

Since that won't happen - we are royally screwed.
Some people just don't have the choice. My university class group depends on Messenger, several family members and friends do too. It may be easier to incite individual people to change messaging services, but when it comes to groups or common social connections, it becomes quite difficult. I can't ask everyone in a group to stop using Messenger just because I don't want to, and neither can I ask my family to contact me solely on Telegram or Signal if other family members refuse to switch. Having everything at the same place is so convenient for most people that it's nearly impossible to provoke this kind of change.
Something that just crossed my mind is whether this method is destructive or not. Is it possible to steal the key, read it, then give it back to the owner?
I’ve been wanting to get a 2015 MacBook Pro before they switched to the worse keyboards, but now I should maybe just look for an even newer one...?
PowerShell - bad syntax and quirky semantics. Looks like on the syntax front they took the bad parts from bash and Perl.
I wasn't trying to brag about my self control. I'm just pointing out that the "infotainment console" didn't seem to contribute to this person bringing a DVD player into their car and watching a movie on it.

The infotainment console wasn't used for that and couldn't be unless it was modified. That stuff only works in park.
Same here. I recently went to LineageOS and use fastmail for email/contacts/calendar. It's been wonderful.
When the 486 launched in 1989/1990 a typical system cost like $10k+.

In 1996 it was very cheap.
Lucky you! I dreamt of owning a machine like this. I thought the dx2 cpus had appeared later though (92?).

I was stuck with a 386/16Mhz/40 megs hd, and a whopping megabyte of ram.

At least it taught me that it was sometimes worth optimizing my code...
So overall, a good time to buy an Intel-based MBP to install Logic Pro and Photoshop on, then completely disconnect them from the Internet?
Because we're all here talking about how things should be designed, which often inherently requires fulfilling some needs at the expense of others? Not quite sure how you expect those decisions to be made without people gathering to discuss the relative merits of each approach.

If you're about to tell me we should just implement every user request that they claim is of 10/10 importance to them personally, then I'm not even sure what to tell you. Have you taken all of a few seconds to consider what happens when two people make conflicting requests? Then we're back to evaluating things and discussing them again. How arrogant of us.

I appreciate the implied authority you've given yourself to be the conversation police, though.
what is prebounce?
Right, unless you interpret the second half of the sentence as clarifying or defining the first. Which I do. If may not be your preferred definition of "private", but it is a definition of private.

To paraphrase it another way, it says "what you do on your browser is hidden, specifically it is hidden from other people who would try to find out using this device"

Further, given the overall ambiguity of English, and given the goal is something casual, not legalese, the way it is phrased is reasonable.

Actually, that raises an interesting point, how is this phrase rendered by chrome for other languages, and do any of them phrase it in a less ambiguous way?
Of course, the people who do polls go and fucking vote.
I am working on a recycling bin/garbage bin location website. It's purpose is to find the nearest bin for you to throw away trash that you may have in your hand.
It currently has 700,000+ bins from OSM data and users can add as well.I want to add some features like getting walking directions to the nearest bins and probably having to create am account to add a bin to handle the case of slamming.
Here is the site https://recyclair.eu.org
It always bothered me how Airbnb never addressed its impact on the residential housing market. Between the safety issues, Covid, stories on scams, and the greater awareness around its impact on housing I hope local governments really start regulating them more.
You could not care less, but evidently other people differ in that regard. Is it difficult to understand and respect that?

Just from a practical viewpoint, "gimme the parts, you ain't usin' 'em!" is not going to win you a lot of adherents.
Well... they do get your personal information along with tens of other companies involved in any transaction. Crm, payment processors, anti-fraud, manufacturers, etc.

When you buy a product you agree to whatever terms there are, you only get to write terms if you’re writing up a contract.
My first job title was "webmaster." Which meant dev-ops-designer-product-guy.
Thanks for your questions! Feedback like this really helps us.

To your first point about our development strategy: we used genetic programming, and tried to apply novel strategies for which there wasn't much of a precedent in financial applications.

To your second point, re: our testing strategy:

I will concede that we only have 2 months of live trading data, but so far it corresponds well to the behavior we were seeing in our forward tests (what we call the data that the system was not trained on).

We trained our system on 10 years of data (2001 - 2011) with two years of forward tests (2012 and 2013) for evaluating its effectiveness (and to verify that our algorithms have not been overtrained to fit the testing data set). Our forward testing involved taking the same data we would have received from our financial institution and feeding it through the algorithm to see what trades it makes. Having proven our algorithm worked with forward tests, we hooked it up to live data to get real results. So far, so good!

To you third point--risk--we need to explain how our algorithm trades.

We've trained our system to recognize patterns such that it will open a trade with a stop-loss and a take-profit. Because the take-profit and stop-loss are preconfigured, our system doesn't need to monitor data feeds with a time resolution of “real time” to make decisions; the onus is on the brokerage to close winning and losing trades.

The lot size of the trade is calculated such that a losing trade (the price of the currency pair reaching the stop-loss) will incur a loss equal to the risk. So at a risk of 2%, a losing trade on a $1000 account will bring the account value down to $980. Winning trades earn double the risk, so a winning trade on an account of $1000 at 2% risk will increase the account value to $1040.

With all this in mind, we claim 40% annual profit because our live trading exhibits patterns similar to our forward tests, and while our forward tests exceed 40% annual profit, we're extrapolating our two months' worth of live testing performance out to the rest of 2014. There's a good chance that this number will change in the coming months. We will revise it up or down accordingly.

It's possible that our system will need to be used "in the wild" for more than just two months in order for people to take us seriously. If that's the case, I am happy to continue dogfooding FX Machine; so far, it’s been a profitable experience :)

Thanks again for your great questions. We’ll use questions like these to build an FAQ section on the site!
Calling the Fed a private entity is really misleading. It was created by an act of Congress and its highest ranking officials, the Board of Governors, are all appointed by the President.

Yes, it shares some power with the banks it regulates (who can elect representatives), but the US government didn't "coopt a seat at the table." It built the table and had most of the seats from the start.

And it's true that member banks own stock in the Fed, but it's a super-funky kind of stock ownership. That stock can't be sold or traded, and doesn't grant the kind of voting rights one normally associates with stock ownership. It only entitles the stockholder to their share of the dividends the Fed pays every year. The Fed actually returns nearly all of its profits (something like 95%) to the US Treasury, and pays the rest as dividends to shareholder banks.
We already have flying cars; they are called helicopters.
I'm not sure you want to live in a neighborhood that has people commuting by helicopters; it would be very noisy.

Want an example of crazy cool shit we just accomplished?
Covid vaccine. Creating a vaccine/testing in less than a year and now distributing it at such a massive scale will likely go down in history as an event akin to the Manhattan Project.
I don't know that many dispute the specific data you reference. I think the oppositional perspective is something along the lines of:

We have good measurements of various recent phenomena.

We have bad, inferred, or proxy data of various past phenomena.

We have limited data on cyclic global and extraterrestrial phenomena.

We mash these data into computer simulations of the earth, hit "run", and observe the result.

Herein lies the problem: we're feeding good, not so good, and incomplete data into an incomplete model of a chaotic system the size of the entire planet and projecting this data many years into the future to a result of impressively narrow margins.

We frequently update these models as we learn about new phenomena and interactions. We refine the data we input as we learn to better calibrate or infer its correctness. We run the simulation again and observe the results.

While the desire to improve our methods in the face of new information is a very scientific process, I think the objection is that there is a combination of a tremendous amount of hubris to trust such a large model of such a chaotic system, as well as an incentive structure that is tremendously vulnerable to abuse or corruption.

Of course it is absolutely scientific to be skeptical; that is, after all, a crucial component of the scientific process. That skepticism of this particular process exists is not only to be expected, but should also welcomed.

However, there is exceedingly little dissent within the scientific community. This alone should raise skepticism.

Now, I'm not talking about dissent about CO2's thermal properties or ways in which we measure things. Obviously these are testable, so we can maintain a certain level of confidence in their methods or results.

The global models—and actual, physical global system—are not testable. We cannot "try a little of this and a little of that" to pull apart how the emergent sum of all the parts affect this great chaotic system.

So we have a majority of the scientific community vociferously defending our projections—mostly because of unrelated but adjacent social reasons—and very few pushing the narrative that yes, in fact this is a very brittle process that ultimately thrives on faith.

At least, this is how I imagine a reasoned skeptic may form the justification for their skepticism...
Gee I never would have guessed that a one size fits all replacement for every F- aircraft (and more than a few A-‘s) in the inventory for every branch would be difficult.

It was a trillion dollar stimulus package (or welfare) directed at the good old military industrial complex, plus it helps placate the chicken hawks in Congress who wanted pork for their district. Like most weapon systems developed in peacetime with unclear use cases, it’s kind of just an expensive tech demo.
You really believe an in office work environment was the only thing preventing this from happening? Top talent gets paid the most.
Same here. I have sent my GCP rep 5-10 follow up emails by now and still no response. It really feels like I have no one to talk to over there and I'm spending thousands per month.
Maybe cars or trucks are a better example. The ROI of buying, leasing or renting a vehicle varies and the optimal answer depends on the scenario!

It’s always better for you as a person to rent box truck to move. If you’re a company that needs a truck 3-5 times a month, there’s a probability that leasing may make more sense.

I’d say that businesses that suck at managing on-prem will not magically get competent in a public cloud.
Any regulated financial institution is required to do that. Where did you get the idea PayPal doesn‘t?
Human flying and directing drones to do some tasks is such a 20th century thinking. For one, human pilot in F-35 directing drones would be the weakest link.

Why would you want to send a human pilot to face drone(s) that does not care for it's survival, can pull more Gs, calculate trajectory and make decisions faster?
Obligatory "Bitcoin would solve this!" post. :)
Indeed. And products can get better and worse over time. If there's a consistent pattern of critical bugs at least with FOSS there is the possibility of forks and 3rd party patches.
Yeesh - where the hell does this guy work?
> Informal communication, informal collaboration

This has been happening with greater regularity when we have been working from home. All the time we will have informal communication on slack or jump on an informal unscheduled zoom call to mob on an issue. I worked on campus for 18 years prior to starting to work from home last March. I cannot remember a single time informal communication or informal collaboration happened. For some reason people are much more open to it over slack and zoom than they ever were in person.
Docker Swarm is being cannibalized by k8s.
Not a virologist, but I've heard of viruses in the past that mutated into asymptomatic variants, which are then basically contagious vaccines.

Artificially creating such a thing has been discussed, but I don't think anyone's ready to go there for ethical reasons. What if they screw it up?

Also, you still need _some_ symptoms to get people to sneeze the "vaccine" to their neighbors. It's a very fine line to tread.
I wouldn't assume illegal activities occurred. Did you know facebook had an easy to access search feature for key employees to view anyone's private profile. All very legal.

As for the ethnical issues. I'm not sure I buy in. At one point typing profilename/photos showed you everyones albums private or not with a small picture. You needed access to go further. That's more of a facebook design decision. At least one private photo and the any album name were purposely not private.
We just went through the deepest, fastest recession since the 19th century. And not a single major financial institution failed or even needed a bailout.

That's pretty firm evidence that banks are more than adequately capitalized. People want to see everything through the lens of 2008, but the difference between banks then and now is night and day.
Your trade assumes that none of your employees will want to live in a high cost of living area if given the opportunity to WFH. If their age / hobbies / etc. make city living attractive you will need to compensate them appropriately or be unable to attract them.

I love living in the city. If work wants to keep me remote, I need an extra bedroom or dedicated office space.
You should be able to PGP sign your emails to confirm that they're good. If an unsigned email suddenly appears, a confirmation email should be sent back to the sender address before it is posted.
I've often thought about this, as my two favorite languages are Ruby and Haskell. They are pretty much the farthest languages from each other in some ways, yet pretty close in others.

It's like two totally different philosophies that arrive at very similar conclusions.
I get what you're saying. But it is an interesting engineering failure story. Was one of our case studies in engineering ethics class...
OK, playing devil's advocate, and without believing everything I write ...

Although the article might be saying something interesting, I, for one, kept tripping over the grammar.

To start with, although it's gaining ground, this doesn't make sense:

I write python, I could care less about pythonic
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The original, meaningful idiom is "I couldn't care less." He wants to say that he cares so little that it is not possible to care less. He wants to say that he could not possibly care less. He couldn't care less.

Instead he says that he can care less, and therefore he does care, even if it's only a little. which is not what he wanted to say.

And yes, I know about linguistics. I know the arguments about language use, idioms, etc. I'm just saying that what he said, when interpreted carefully and in some cultures (including in British English) what he said isn't what he meant.

Secondly:

Recently I saw a post in the Tornado group,
saying it's use of libcurl is not pythonic.

He means "its" use. "It's", when correctly used can be substituted with "it is". In this case it can't, so it shouldn't be used. He means the possessive.

My point here isn't to diss the writing, but to tell you, the reader of my comment, that some of your audience will, on occasion, fail to listen to you properly if you get grammar wrong. It's not fair, and you may think it's unreasonable, but life isn't fair. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

However, to deal with the technical content:

If being pythonic means reinventing the wheel,
in python, I’m pretty confident I’m going to
stick with the opinion I’m not going to worry
about being pythonic.

This is a false dichotomy. It's perfectly possible to be Pythonic without re-inventing the wheel. All (and I agree that this is a big "all") it takes is to learn the language properly, in its own context, rather than writing Perl, C, Bash or Javascript "in Python." The dedicated "Real Programmer" can write ForTran programs in any language. Not learning the language "properly" means not taking the opportunity to expand your mind, but instead, to stick with Blub, and write Blub in whatever syntax you happen to be using.

I’ll worry about commenting and documenting what I do
in order for other developers to follow behind me.

This is the important bit, but style comes into it as well. If someone is writing in Javascript style, but Python syntax, it's harder to understand. Sometimes sufficiently harder to make a real difference.

I think I now have one of those first questions
for when I interview developers for my business,
when I get to that point. "How much focus do you
put on making your python, pythonic?"

It's the wrong question. The question is - can you write Python as Python. That will actually tell you something about the programmer's range of skill.

By why ask them anything as all? Why not just see if they can program?
they could allow for configurable security, like allowing users to specify a gpg public key. Doesn't have to be the default.
Of course, the raw text above won't suffice. However, you will note that the notation I used is learned in high school.

To me high school mathematics are quite accessible, though I understand that most people forget it as soon as they can. So, I just assume I will have to start from kindergarten arithmetic. And I had, in fact.

I once explained functions to a 14 year old girl. I went as far as high order functions (function composition, I think), and she understood. I checked, she could answer my questions correctly. She was bright, but still. I think I was able to explain functions in rather simple terms.

Now, if I can explain functions to a 14 year old girl, the rest is certainly doable.
I figured it was you who needed some comfort, since your voluminous opposition hinged on the excessively narrow semantics you were imposing on him. I, myself, was able to just take the essay at face value. Amazingly, I was able to understand that paragraph even though I'm a fan of both phone systems he mentioned.

Yet Gruber does.

That's just disingenuous.
It'll be that way until the US get rid of its guns, stop fighting the world and get some human rights in place... Don't count on that happening for a few hundred years yet though.