jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
"However, they also provide an API, with clearly defined terms of use, ..."

But are those terms an enforceable contract? Probably not. Merely making available a document that purports to be a contract does not make it so.
This post mixes up several related concepts, and then proceeds to damn all of them by criticising only one of them.

Separate concepts:

* C++ iterators, itself made up of different concepts
- input iterators: a kind of input pipe;
- output iterators: an output pipe;
- bidirectional;
- random: not really an iterator at all;
- often requires pairs to operate over a range

* Java iterators, and the fairly closely related concept of .NET's IEnumerable, IEnumerator and associated generic types

* Sugared iteration syntax (as opposed to imperative explicit iteration syntax)

* Iterators as read-only containers

Even with Java containers, iterators are not recommended as a poor-man's collection - rather, one should derive from AbstractCollection so that you can at least provide size() as well as the iterator itself.

But iterators as implemented in .NET, IEnumerable and IEnumerator, are more interesting as they represent a kind of lazily-calculated monadic stream of values, which can be filtered etc. If you condemn iterators, you're also throwing away LINQ.

Seems to me that he primarily dislikes the explicit iteration syntax, likes the sugared syntax, but to leap from there to condemning iterators ignores the question as to how the sugared syntax ought to be implemented. It's not clear that iterators aren't an excellent way to implement the sugared syntax under the hood for at least a subset of container types, not least because of the benefits of something like LINQ when applied to a bare-bones container that doesn't even supply a size() operation (think: infinite lists).

C++ iterators, being a jumble of related concepts, have separate plus and minus points. They're often too verbose and introduce too many moving pieces when simply dealing with a collection - you have to keep track of both the beginning and the end of your range, which is often relevant in an algorithm implementation, but rarely in use, which is usually just an iteration over a transformed or filtered collection.
Are you resizing the video at all in the browser? When messing around with it, I found that I could play 720p video with the video tag smoothly without any formatting in Chrome and Firefox, but that setting it's size attributes to something other than the actual file size made it slow to the point of being unwatchable.
Yes camtasia is a brilliant tool....but we are concentrating on the printable portion...not screencasts.

Captivate is great for power users but we are looking for domain guys that want to create robust instructions without copy/pasting screenshots.
Apparently it does. I learned about it today thanks to the Starbucks announcement.
Maybe I'm missing something, but under what scenario would I not be keeping my private key private and client-side? That being the whole point of it.
It's interesting, I'm not actually overly surprised Lord Falconer spoke out over this as whilst he's was repeatedly hammered over the fact that Section 7 was a clear affront to civil liberties he maintained a consistent line that it was for a very specific purpose. I imagine he's enjoying the opportunity to hoist the Conservatives and repeat his line of "we never made it for this".

Alternatively he might be angry that the overly broad legislation that he was involved with has been used an imperfect way and justified the criticism that it received. I lean a bit further toward getting one over on the Tories though.
I wouldn't exactly say Tim Cook's "shit-talking" it. His quote from D11 on Glass is:

"There are some positives in the product. It's probably likely to appeal to certain vertical markets. The likelihood that it has broad appeals is hard to see."

I think that's actually a fairly well-balanced statement. He also says this about glasses and watches:

"Nothing that's going to convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band or a watch or whatever to wear one. At least I haven't seen it. So there's lots of things to solve in this space."

This isn't saying that Glass will never work or that it's a bad idea, just that as it currently stands it needs a lot of work to have a mass appeal, which is probably true. I, for one, am looking forward to see what Glass becomes in two or three iterations time.
Optionals are part of Java 8.
Thumbs up to all 400+ contributors involved!
(EDIT: I believe that most of the markets we have are mostly saturated)

But marketing is not "getting information where it needs to be" anymore. If you let everyone know about your product and this didn't lead to at least some people buying it who otherwise wouldn't, you failed at marketing. This is where you enter the zero-sum game, because you don't want to just inform about your product, you want to influence choice - and so do your competitors.

"The person selling the book and the person reading the book find enough value in the transaction" is a nice theoretical sentiment but I doubt it actually holds in practice. I'm yet to find a single person (except marketers themselves) who appreciates the amount of ads being thrown at them.

> I think your distaste might come from how inefficient it is, kind of like turning on every light in a neighborhood

Yes, this is where part of my distaste comes from - ads are broadcast messages today. This can be limited with e.g. targeted advertising, but it doesn't solve my main issue - that they're zero-sum game, so the inefficiency can increase up to infinity.

And to circle back to the discussion about automation - I suspect that, as people will get automated away from their jobs, you'll see a huge growth of advertising sector - because it's one of the few places that can accomodate unlimited amount of low-skill workers (it doesn't take much of training to make a junior social media marketer; I know from experience - my company's PR department is basically a machine for turning interns into people doing content marketing on Facebook).
I don't see people who've never had to work

Other than the idle rich, I don't see many people who've never had to work either. I've seen people unable to work, and I've seen people denied the opportunity to work, but the idle poor are really not as prevalent as people seem to think.
For the algebraic geometry side, though, *Ideals, Varieties and Algorithms" by Cox, Little and O'Shea is great.
It goes both ways in my experience. People often hate on Apple, but on communities with many Apple users there is significant negativity in the opposite direction. Criticism of Apple is generally not taken well.
Slowly, the creative imaginations coming to life. Eagle Eye....
> And oh look at the column on the left, Apple is going to license Mac OS to expand market share. How open!

That would have been nice had it ever happened.
Most people maybe are lacking in common sense and don't know these references as well, so I too think it can be helpful and it's fine as long as he isn't ripping anyone off.
Slightly off topic but - Does anyone here have an opinion on whether or not it's a good idea to update to an M1 macbook?

I'm usually weary of GEN1 products, but it's been hard for me to hold off on picking up one of these. The performance boosts seem to be quite impactful in a daily workflow especially if you're compiling a lot of code regularly.

I'd be upgrading from a late 2015, 15" non-dedicated GPU macbook pro. It works fine and I don't really have any complains other than of course I'd love if it were faster. Since I'm on my computer all the time, removing sources of friction are important.
For myself, I run dual 4K displays and the M1-based laptops don’t support that.
Doesn't Photoshop require an internet connection?
I believe ECS is in fact quite a bit older than that. As far as I can tell, ECS first started being talked about by AAA developers who were trying to find efficient ways to deal with the memory hierarchy in modern computing platforms (it got quite big specifically with the PS3, which had a very hard to deal with memory layout that could totally kill game performance). ECS allows data to be processed in a very cache-effective manner.
Actually, this is an excellent analogy. Nobody would believe that mining the Interstate highway system in case enemies used it to invade would be a good idea. But put the word "computer" next to anything else and most people's brains just switch off.
>The usual rebuttal seems to be "iOS users are more sophisticated or wealthy

That actually can be a valid argument IF your revenue model is heavily skewed toward IAP or you are charging up front for the app. But for a free social media app whose sole purpose in life is to get as many active users as humanly possible, it's absurd not to have an Android version when it represents most of the market.
I don't know if the research is that crystal clear right now.

I have no doubt that developers will write more code whilst in offices free of distraction. But the question is do they miss out on key business knowledge by not being around other people. Especially if they are in Agile feature teams.
Did the results get published? Were the queries "external" or "user generated"? We found it very informative to compare the results of relevance testers (which were people who were shown a query and a set of results) with users (which were people who actually generated the query and evaluated the results). I had hoped to get a study done to get more data on that.
Seriously, the ability for the interviewers to say "Okay, now actually answer the question I asked you" would be helpful. This is an absolutely infuriating pattern - question is asked, answer is given that doesn't even attempt to address the question, interviewer moves on.
Then you missed the massive TV campaign Google did last year telling you how they were going to track your child's life from conception to death. Uber-creepy.
If that’s true, most programming languages work from the CPU perspective. I think that suggests the syntax may have come from consistency with “A = B” in programming languages (similar to the initially weird looking argument order of strcpy and friends in C), or, maybe, programming languages followed what assemblers did, or the two are similar because of some other common reason.

What I don’t like about Intel’s syntax is that the normal phrase is ‘move A to B’, but ‘mov A, B’ moves what’s in B to A.

(The reason I don’t like it may be because the first CPU I programmed was a 6502, which had separate load and store instructions. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work well with memory-to-memory (which the 6502 doesn’t have) or register to-register (for which the 6502 used a T for ‘transfer’, as in TXA for ‘copy X register into Accumulator) instructions)
Yeah edit ability times out quickly.
guest@sif~% sudo rm -rf /
Command not found : 'sudo'. Type 'help' for available commands.

Oh well, it was worth a try :)
Yeah that's exactly what I'd want for marriage. I'm definitely more inclined to think this is just one of many features they didn't get around to adding rather than an intentional omission.
Lotus 1-2-3 was on Windows so I think I am missing some context here around version differences?
I read in https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-union-vote-why-some-w...

> He said in messages to Insider that he used to be "a huge pro-union person," but that his time working for unions made him believe that his work ethic didn't matter and that unions would value seniority over everything.

I wish it were FUD, but I can't people like this that their own lived experience wrong.

However what I can say is that an Amazon union would be much better positioned than coal, steal, or autoworker one. Those industries can go away --- either move somewhere else or dispensary altogether. But until dollar looses it's primacy in international trade and the US becomes a lot poorer, there will be cheap shit to ship to Americans everywhere (https://phenomenalworld.org/interviews/trade-wars-are-class-...), and those warehouses have to be near them.

Put simply, production can move, distribution can't, and the American market for selling goods isn't going anywhere.

Back to unions, I think the combination of a shrinking pie (deindustrialization) and the post war depolitization of unions (a very fascinating and tragic history) made it quite likely that unions would start shafting some members vs everyone going down with the ship. Take away those conditions (Amazon isn't going to become unprofitable over this...) and the fact that I think that these new unions will have a cultural break from the old, and I think we'll get better outcomes.

------

For those of you worried about an automated warehouse --- that's good. Job flight to evade humane working conditions sucks. Actual automation of the work in place is amazing and should be considered a labor movement win. Because only big visible automation that's designed to intimidate will lead to a UBI, even though we've been hurting for 50 years of underemployment and overcapacity.
When I was a kid, this is the first thing I did that I'd call programming, but it was to use a hex editor on my Warcraft (the original game, yeah) save files to give myself more gold and wood. I had a friend teach me how to convert to hex, learned about LSB/MSB then away I went.

It's amazing how cheating or tweaking a game can spark a lot of interest professionally.
That's saying that people with disabilities shouldn't ever do jobs unless they can do 100% of the job.

Instead, the ADA says that companies must make reasonable accomodations for the employee.

In this case, it means drivers with allergies don't have to take animals in their cars.

For someone with a back injury, it might mean they can stock shelves so long as items are kept under a certain weight.

There are plenty of instances of people with disabilities not having to do the full job, because they can do most of the job.
So it’s not fair that some cars can’t accommodate all passengers of all sorts with any various disability, but it’s fair to deny employment to those with some sort of disability (animal allergies). Odd perspective.
Who said it’s a crime for businesses to keep their own interests in mind or even to weigh them heavily? Seems prudent
All systems are open to abuse, which is why it's important to build systems with robust measures to counter abuse. The spread of some information should be limited. Takedowns should be logged and reported on to regulatory bodies to ensure everyone involved is acting in good faith.

With regards to video hosting websites maintaining identification information, it's possible to provide this functionality without they themselves storing sensitive user identification data. Third party providers (ID.me comes to mind) could be utilized to do so, with adult content hosting providers treating this data similar to payment data and the PCI requirements that go along with it (store the verification/attestation token and timestamps, not the data itself). I would agree that I wouldn't want Pornhub storing my passport photo and metadata.

Finally, to your point about preemptive vs reactive, in the case of adult content platforms, it seems reasonable to require preemptive documentation considering the record keeping requirements for producing adult content. Refer to 18 U.S. Code § 2257 for specifics [1] [2].

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257

[2] https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/adult (Control-F "Who is required to keep records about adult images under federal law?")
> I am familiar with the cynical riposte that jail isn't supposed to be fun. But we Americans can do better than that. The punishments received should be those mandated by the legal system, as properly expressed through the decisions of judges and juries. Some people might wish to argue for tougher penalties for some crimes and thus for some criminals, and that is a debate worth having. That is precisely the point: Such judgments should be made after public debate, not by gang powers within a prison.
>Exponential improvements aren't very helpful if you're working on exponentially hard problems.

Sure they are! They reduce it to a problem that's only polynomially hard! :-p

>Exponential growth of technology hasn't solved machine intelligence (by direct simulation) for essentially the same reason why it hasn't solved numerical weather prediction or made quantum computers pointless.

Okay, but that's a rather high bar to judge it against. Humanity has solved many lesser machine intelligence problems, like web search, voice recognition, routing, and recommendation. Though I agree the relevant exponential growth was in the power of the algorithms, not so much the hardware.
I you've got a Mac, check out OpenEmu.

Otherwise, go for the lower level part: mednafen.
It's a copy, in the hopes that governments won't want to block github.
What service wouldn't be susceptible to such an attack? The only way to avoid it would be to not put your [code|website|etc] on the internet. That seems a bit extreme.
Or you could, instead, not bother wasting time on it? I can't get to it, and I'm not willing to subscribe, so I won't read the article.
I don't think it is, unless that's a recent change? It uses webkit, which is the continuation of the same engine it's always used (and was originally written by the KDE team).
There's a case [1] of an old guy who fell into coal fire and regrew his hair. He basically regenerated his skin and his hair. Microneedling [2] has been used successfully to regrow hair.

Methods like minoxidil and finasteride work well as preventative measures. However, it has been shown that with advanced balding there are skin changes (e.g. fibrosis), so you have to regenerate your skin first if you are visibly balding and then use preventative methods to not lose your hair.

There are some encouraging results [3] with people using skin regeneration methods like microneedling together with minoxidil & finasteride.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1351889/

[2] https://perfecthairhealth.com/microneedling-frequency-how-of...

[3] https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/one-year-fight...
My dad was involved in military aircraft purchasing.

It was very tricky to avoid getting in trouble.

Putting stuff out to bid was the main thing he managed. When possible he just went with previous winners as it cut down the paperwork needed.

Lot of times someone would come in really low on the bid, he knew the people and that it would be crap product. So lots of work to get higher bids approved.

Also apparently if you get a ride in the company limousine, the drivers have tons of juicy gossip.
This doesn’t actually address anything in my comment.

It sounds like you are saying tax rates should have nothing to do with home values and should just be arbitrarily adjusted to make property owners pay for whatever the local government wants.
They never covered their shorts. It's only a matter of time before it goes ballistic and, frankly, threatens to take down the entire stock market. It's a ticking time bomb -- and now it's smoking.
Even if it were really that easy to fall prey to the genericide rules, couldn't companies fulfill the enforcement obligations more amicably by asking for a nominal fee?

I suppose that might open the door to the party making wider use of the trademarked term though.
Yeah, let's block ads on websites and put them in the browser UI instead. Only ours of course.
- someone at mozilla corp
Thank you! Wish you all the best!
I think this is a good analogy, because the national debt is not a good measure of anything. People bring it up at all the wrong times, and takes grandstanding postures around it. Just like this, eh?
> How many printers does Amazon think I need?

I usually buy a new printer when it runs out of ink because it's cheaper than buying a new ink cartridge.
cactu2093 is exactly right. It's basic supply and demand. What their explanation doesn't touch on are the things that have affected supply and demand. Here are a few of them:

1. Massive media hype surrounding the price in 2014 caused everyone and their mom to try and buy bitcoin. The original developer (Satoshi) had added short term limit on the number of transactions that could be processed in a given time (transactions per block) as a short term fix for a few bad actors spamming the network. So the network was left unable to process the massive increase in demand caused by the price hype. This "fix" was stated to be temporary but was left in for the reason below.

2. A handful of new BTC devs ran off the old guard who believed the network should scale up with demand. This resulted in them intentionally refusing to change the software to accommodate yet another round of increased demand due to media attention (2016).

3. Increased regulatory scrutiny made it difficult to buy/sell crypto outside of large, regulated exchanges, effectively reducing liquidity for those that aren't institutional traders and those unwilling to give Coinbase a DNA sample just so they can buy crypto. The new regulatory and institutional friction killed many of the original use cases for bitcoin leaving mostly institutional traders left. These traders are unphased by high transaction fees, especially since most of their trading takes place off-chain on an exchange website.
No, they don't. This spy pixel crap is exactly how privacy-invading tools like Superhuman get read receipts. Some even show the city and country that the e-mail was read from by GeoIP-reversing the IP address that accessed the pixel. This practice needs to be ended, and IMO is a far worse violation of privacy than GDPR or anything else people are making noise about today.
You are then saying Amazon and Ebay are the same as The Silk Road.

They are marketplaces, but from an ethical standpoint they are vastly different.

You cannot stop piracy but a different thing is saying music piracy is legitimate. You are conflating different things.

If you don't understand the difference between Napster and Scihub you probably think music piracy is OK. It is not.

First of all, scholars themselves use Scihub and most scholars that do not have a conflict of interest disagree with how companies like Elsevier operate.
These problems with Twitter don't just "happen". Twitter, like other social media companies, have unparalleled access to some of the best talent out there. Then they target that talent at maximizing comically reductive metrics like "engagement" and call it a day.

Twitter's design is extremely naive, that design leads to rampant toxicity and misinformation, and then they surprised_pikachu.jpg. For example: no matter how you interact with a post, you will boost it. So if you say something horribly toxic that incites outrage and reactions, Twitters dumb blind algorithm goes "NICE! Engagement!" and goes off to show that tweet to more people. Facebook does the same thing; every news article posted on Facebook has the most toxic comments right at the top.

These sites have designs that are not expressive enough, but they think they can get away with throwing ML algorithms at them; it does not work, and we end up with toxic cesspools.
What I do not get is how many jobs have yet to be replaced by computers that'd do the job better.
Get your health right first. Your side project will always be there, the time you spend with your daughter will not.
You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.
Not defending Google or anything but correlation doesn’t imply causation, as Bloomberg tries to imply.