jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I was pretty sure they said it fairly plainly on their own site but what I could immediately find was more roundabout. You can see the things donations are used for here: https://foundation.mozilla.org

For a more straightforward statement, try this HN post relaying one user's correspondence with the Mozilla Foundation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20895624
I started off with Eclipse in school, I still stash all of my code in a folder called 'workspace' as a result.

But, I've since switched to intellij for Java (and later, lightweight editors like Sublime Text for JS, until a while later JS finally got modules and editors added more support for JS), and nowadays I'm using it for everything; I'm currently managing a 200KLOC application (it's too much but my employer isn't hiring, sigh) in at least four languages (JS, PHP, TS and Go, it's an older application and a rebuild I'm working on), and intellij has no qualms with it whatsoever.

I even set it to PHP 5.2 mode so it warns me when I try to use `[]` to initialize an array.
They are a juicy target. Their doorknobs are doubtless getting rattled all the time. We haven’t heard anything, but also they have to know they’re breached before they tell anyone. Let’s see what happens over the next couple of years.
They don’t in the US, so I doubt it.
Whereabouts does it say that it's deprecated? The GitHub link doesn't state anything.

Do you know of any alternatives?

EDIT: Nevermind, I skipped the picture-stamp thingies.
The rule of hippos?

[Edit] Thanks for clueing me up.
You can set the minimum instances to 1 (default 0) or simply call the service regularly from somewhere. Both approaches work. When it gets killed, we have a 30 second latency on the first request. If you have a busy server, it will pretty much stay up.

I actually only set the minimum instances to 1 a few days ago as we at this point are preparing to onboard some customers.
I've used Shopify a few times and it's clear they're trying to be an Apple for e e-commerce. Slick and easy set up with strong lock in and high fees.

As a result, I'll advise clients to use Shopify for a POC perhaps but then to put money aside to build their own system when they gain some traction. And I'm starting to wonder if there's a market for someone to build the Android equivalent of Shopify because this pisses me off royally. Especially when non-US customers pay the same fees but have less features for some unknown reason.
a little more angle & it's a valid wedge-shaped battle-bot versus todays "everything is an suv". reinforce it well & it's probably a great survivability strategy, just like it was in battlebots!
Are you telling me we can't eat the rich in this case?!?
Many moons ago, interviewing for my first full-time job out of school, I visited a certain large aerospace company in the Seattle area :-) One of the things that turned me off and helped lead to my turning down their offer was their bullpen-style office arrangement. (Arguably even worse than today's incarnations, it was just a bunch of desks in a large open area though we seem to be heading back in that direction.)

Mind you, it wasn't the only thing. Everything about the hiring process and people I spoke with screamed replaceable cog--they actually hired me solely based on my resume and only gave me a plant visit when I asked for one--but the bullpen office arrangement sure didn't help.
That's absolutely a laudable goal, it's simply the idea of a marketing department for a language that I find frustrating.
Yes, and Go apologists would also know at least one solution if wouldn't keep pretending that they can't keep reading the post until the very _first_ comment on the same page.
It sounds like the acoustics are pretty bad if small noices are that noticable. Can you get them to install sound dampening?
What's interesting is that, afaict, there doesn't seem to be any archive of her videos. She managed to go all the way to one extreme of livestreaming her life and then to the other extreme of total privacy, taking her videos along with her. 1996-2003 was probably the only opportunity to hit that balance.

Hard to imagine a popular Twitch streamer disappearing along with all their videos in 2019. Then again, not knowing anything about Jennicam while she was online, I reckon any popular Twitch streamer has at least 100x the audience that Jennifer had.
The "any feedback" tab is broken on the iPhone, as CSS fixed position doesn't isn't supported on mobile phones. Another reason to move it to the side.
Ok, maybe I don't understand the difference. Aren't you suggesting testing many different versions of a page, rather than just two?
one more in the trend of re-submitting old PG essays.
Yeah, because technology did not exist before the internet... The word may not have been used that way back then, but the 1867 equivalent of an expensive smartphone bought as a status symbol rather than for its actual utility would have been a pocket watch.
The talk was a great punctuation to a great conference. Jarkko really delivered on this one.
When I hear the word "maximally" shitty in this context, I don't think of MVPs - I think of products like IE6, RealPlayer, or E.T. on the Atari. A product can't be maximally shitty unless it manages to affect both users and developers in a seriously negative way, at huge scope and cost.
It was ahead of its time, perhaps. I never heard of it until this thread. It would good to learn from its failure and not repeat the same mistake. But certainly just because something did not succeed does not mean another solution won't.
At my last workplace, the OSX laptops were all 2-3+ years old... and were all incredibly slow. I was always surprised that people could get any work done on them. One woman had an OSX laptop that would boot up with the entire 4GB of memory in use, with no applications or agents loaded except maybe spotify. All the shiny UI in the world doesn't make you more productive when you have to wait for a mouse click to register.

The linux machines were whiteboxes of the same age, and while there was a curl or two in setting them up, were still just as speedy and usable when aged as they were when new.
And what if there's a is7 woof criteria as well? You going to add another set of special cases for fizzwoof, buzzwoof, and fizzbuzzwoof?

You see the problem, versus just doing fizz, buzz, and woof distinctly?
Very low barrier. Once every couple of years (For the 20 or so).

The first two days the first time you do it are a not comfortable. But other than that, it's no big deal - around the beginning of the 3rd day, you just lose your appetite and food is not appealing anymore for a while.

It only seems like insurmountable because, if the discomfort you feel for a few hours of unsatisfied appetite continued similarly (linearly, parabolically, exponentially - whichever way it feels to you), then it would actually have been insurmountable. But that's not the case.

It's like cold showers - a guy on this board, joel_runyon, advocates 40 days of only-cold showers[1] as, if I understand it correctly, part-physical-part-psychological therapy. Regardless of any specific merits, the only possible cost is a slight discomfort - yet it seems insurmountable to some people.

[1] http://impossiblehq.com/cold-showers-excuses
I've been running linux on a variety of laptops for 15+ years without any issues that were outside my comfort level.

If you are looking for a locked-down consumer appliance of a computer then linux really isn't for you.

That's really the most extraordinary part of the whole movement. 20 years into it it's become mainstream on phones, set top boxes, and embedded devices everywhere but it hasn't also necessarily become some washed down, stupefied, lowest-common-denominator black box that is impenetrable to look at where you rely on the whims of some private company to fix issues that you are unable to communicate to them.

It's still grass-roots and community driven at its core. It hasn't sold out. Anyone is still just a bit a time and hard work away from making a difference - that's pretty powerful.
Works great here on Firefox 4, so maybe a problem with your graphics card drivers? Do any other WebGL demos work?
Will try another machine. This looks great. Just need to get it working.
Indeed I do!

Try something like this to get started:

-webkit-text-size-adjust: 160%;
Not just ignorant, but willfully ignorant. The copyright violations have been brought to his attention yet the project is still available and he's acting as if he's done nothing wrong.
it's not 70% done, it's about 70 vaccines per 100 people, at 2 vaccines per person it should be 140 vaccines per 100 people to get to 70% of the population vaccinated.
There has been a study now, it's just not gone through peer review yet.

https://www.ft.com/content/de00fe75-9ba1-4be7-8cf1-6e9fa55f0...

Additionally the advice to delay the second dose is now also part of the WHO recommendations.
Hard to say, because many performance improvements were done after the JRE had been removed. There are reasons why a custom runtime can have better performance, though. jlink can place both a modular application and the runtime into a single image file that can be loaded quickly, and whose metadata can be cached efficiently.
There are newer heat pumps that work below 30 degrees, but they're more expensive and not typically used in Texas for obvious reasons.
It's simple to do what you write, multiple languages already do just that. It's the class of problems that is called "embarrassingly parallel" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel). However, it turns out that it places some rather serious restrictions on the kind of calculations you can perform this way. In general for two pieces of code to be executed in parallel, they must be independent of each other. I.e for the following

1: tmpA := A(input)
2: tmpB := B(tmpA)
3: tmpC := C(tmpB)
4: result := D(tmpC)

it's impossible to calculate a line before the previous line has finished. You cannot do this calculation concurrently. On the other hand if it was like this:

1: resA := A(input)
2: resB := B(input)
3: resC := C(input)
4: resD := D(input)

You can calculate all 4 concurrently and achieve a great speed-up if you have resources to do it. Except if B, C, or D somehow access the result of a previous line. For mathematical notation this is simple, but for general programming languages there are plenty of ways to do this.

We know that an optimal optimization, i.e. finding the fastest way a program can be executed is known uncomputable. Not difficult, not brute forceable, but impossible to compute with traditional computers. The best we can do is identify _some_ concurrency optimizations, but so far it has not been a fruitful adventure for general programming languages. So what we can do is use patterns and constructs that rely on dividing the problems into concurrent pieces and use proper guarding on shared state. This is however notoriously easy to get wrong.
All of that is the same here in Sweden, the main difference is: we get a pre-filled tax form with everything Skatteverket (the Tax Authority) knows about your income. You are free to adjust as you need, you can make deductions as you would in the US, we just don't have to pay for software to help fill out our forms.

Why you would prefer to have to re-enter data that your government already has and that they will match against your own data I don't really understand...
You move to a shared flat?
In Venice, of course.
You can't change one word to a close synonym and then claim that your branding is totally different. "The New White Meat" is obviously something that could be confused with "The Other White Meat."
I have to admit, I have no idea what the @ symbol does. Can anyone clarify?

It can't be a macro, so I assume it's a C++14 feature I'm not aware of.
That doesn't match with the headline "top 1% owns nearly 50% of wealth." If 50% of wealth couldn't sustain the government for more than a few weeks, then that government would be running already on lollipops and rainbows.
Dogs aren't people, they're tools bred for a purpose.
This is of course only remotely possible on limited access highways, because there are squishy human beings that are easily killed by large speed differentials on urban and suburban streets.
That typically means they're shadowbanned. I can usually figure out why by a quick look at their comment history. Even people who like to toss bombs throw the occasional dud.
You're right, and for exactly the same reason: If somebody dies in the human challenge trial it's very specifically your fault. The people that die due to a delay in the vaccine because of not using human challenge trials? Nobody knows them, they don't count, and they can't sue you.
It can play a million times against itselve in the virtual world every day.

But applying that in the real world takes years.
That is certainly not true in many regards. See for example my sibling comment on progressivism and eugenics.

The Progressive party had followers in its own right, as well as those in both the Democratic and Republican party, at least until Theodore Roosevelt left the Republican party in 1912.

Among the progressive movements goals were getting women the right to vote, and disenfranchising black voters. The philosophies of eugenics, and obsession with purity, were in fact an inspiration for those people who would eventually attempt to purify Germany during the Nazi reign.

Although much has changed in the progressive movement in the years since, the application of eugenics through abortion to eliminate undesirables has not (from my other comment, see Iceland).
for whatever reason I actually find the leading "and/or" to be more readable than the trailing and/or, as long as there are more than two. The leading commas look too noisy to me, though
I'm glad to have made you aware. They wield considerable clout.
Let's say you have two groups of people. One group is pro-skub, the other group is anti-skub.

If you run an ad in the newspaper that says 'pro-skub people want to literally kill all anti-skubs', that is broadcasted to everyone. People outside of the target group can independently fact check it and/or apply pressure to the paper itself to remove an obviously fake and inflammatory ad.

Now let's say you run that same ad on Bookface. You target specifically the anti-skub people, and especially those that are already predisposed against those that are pro-skub. Even if your ad is obviously fake, you're contributing to the radicalization of a group which increases divisiveness. This becomes much harder to independently fact check because when you search that ad on Dooble you find results which seem to reinforce that ads message because all of these algorithms are optimizing for engagement.
My right-wing grandma who's a bit nutty reads tabloids. Like that's the only magazines she reads.

Pretty sure a specific 'type' of person reads that crap. It's like Alex Jones' in print. There are probably other similar 'print' publications.

If you hit a specific magazine/publication you can target a specific demographic without hitting 'all of us'....

Edit: I'm playing devil's advocate here. I agree FB needs tempered a bit. I believe though that truth doesn't need to be in ALL ads, but if it's political in nature or could affect society at large then yes it should be controlled.
I was at an Elasticsearch meetup yesterday where we had a good laugh about several similar scandals in Germany recently involving completely unprotected Elasticsearch running on a public IP address without a firewall (e.g. https://www.golem.de/news/elasticsearch-datenleak-bei-conrad..., in German). This beats any of that.

Out of the box it does not even bind to a public internet address. Somebody configured this to 'fix' that and then went on to make sure the thing was reachable from the public internet on a non standard port that on most OSes would require you to disable the firewall or open a port. The ES manual section for network settings is pretty clear about this with a nice warning at the top: "Never expose an unprotected node to the public internet."

Giving read access is one thing. I bet this thing also happily processes curl -X DELETE "http:<ip>:9200/*" (deletes all indices). Does it count as a data breach when somebody of the general public cleans up your mess like that?

In any case, Elasticsearch is a bit of a victim of its own success here and may need to act to protect users against their own stupidity since clearly masses of people who arguably should not be taking technical decisions now find it easy enough to fire up an Elasticsearch server and put some data in it (given the amount of companies that seem to be getting caught with their pants down).

It's indeed really easy to setup. But setting it up properly still requires RTFMing, dismissing the warning above, and having some clue about what ip addresses and ports are and why having a database with full read write access on a public ip & port is a spectacularly bad idea.
I love the way it's at the end of the ray tracing that the quality seems, visually, to improve dramatically. It's almost as if, perceptually, a lot of noise or a bit of noise are quite similar, but no noise is hugely more pleasing to the eye. This also explains why some of the lower megapixel cameras which create less pixel noise sometimes have better perceptual quality.
It doesn't happen overnight.

Maybe not, but that's how Steve Jobs made it seem. When he was creating the iPod, nobody was looking (except hard core apple geeks) and the bar was low. After the iPod became a huge hit, it still seemed like every year Jobs was introducing some breakthough feature. He was very good at manipulating public perception. Cook isn't as good at it, he started with the bar ridiculously high and everybody is looking now.

I completely agree with everything you and the parent said about innovation and the Mac Pro. But this is a perception issue, through and through, and something Cook is going to have to deal with if he's going to be successful as Jobs's successor.
I apologize in advance for the digression.

>>What I do, hopefully well, is shield them from external interference so they have a developer-friendly environment where they can better contribute with their skills.

I'm not a programmer, but I work closely with them. I'm responsible for demonstrating and supporting the products they build, as well as finding new areas in which those products can be used.

What I noticed is that the teams that are the most shielded produce the highest quality code, but - and this is a huge BUT - the product itself ends up being the most short-sighted and limited in terms of good user experience. The reason is that "shielding developers from external interference" inevitably equates to shielding them from a real understanding of how the end-users actually use it.

I don't mean that as a derogatory comment. But, as someone who is on the "business" side of things, when I work with products developed by shielded teams, often times I find myself wondering, "Holy shit... what the hell were they thinking??" The features and functions work, and they work well - but they are not terribly relevant to what the customer actually wanted.
It's probably still to early to tell. But I don't see how anyone can dispute that Google Now is basically what Siri tried to do, but significantly better. I'm yet to see Apple's response to that.
I haven't had much of a chance to play with it yet, but I wonder how it would handle a query to find all the "baz" elements for a structure like this: http://pastebin.com/m7qTy8kw. Does it just support a loop, or possibly something similar to xpath like /document/foo/bar/baz to get an array of all of them. (Perhaps document["foo"]["bar"]["baz"], though I think that would break other things.)
> Most hardware was not powerful enough for Vista when it was released. It's the pressed who killed it.

But Microsoft gave them the gun by agreeing to the OEMs' demand to create a "Vista Capable" classification, for machines that were too underpowered to run Vista well (see http://www.crn.com/slide-shows/channel-programs/206905984/tr...).

The OEMs didn't care about customer experience, they just wanted a "Vista!" sticker they could slap on as many machines as possible. MS had to know these machines would make Vista look bad; they should have resisted the demand. But they didn't, so tons of people bought machines they thought would run Vista acceptably, only to find out they did not. So they (understandably) thought Vista was just a dog that couldn't run well even on "Vista certified" hardware.
What I mean by that is that there is no company in the computer industry that owns so much of the stack as Apple does. And shepherding such an integrated company through one of the biggest tech booms in history is nothing to relegate to mere salesmanship.
"For most people this is no ethical dilemma"? That's an argument? For most of Wall Street there's no ethical dilemma in speculative schemes that wreck the commercial paper market. Can I trot out "for most people there's no dilemma" in the zillion HN Wall Street threads too?
All that means is that in the analogy, you set the "cost of replacement" to factor in the cost of friction. You have an Hermes store factory and the $1,000 covers not just the cost of raw materials for the bag, but the labor to produce it, and the cost attributable to not having another item until the next shipment.
That's a pretty big conclusion to jump to (they are cheating the test) based on a small amount of evidence. If they were "precompiling" the java script for the test, and had functionality to "preconpile" java script code in the cache, would the fact that they precompiled the benchmark mean they were cheating? No. It wouldn't.

Keep in mind that there is a lot of code, such as Jquery, that is identical but distributed from many sources. It could benefit from similar matching and pre-compilation.

If dead code analysis (and other optimizations) was part of an "offline" compilation step (that's not efficient enough to do online), then changing the code would result in a slower execution path. Once the method body changes, the compiler wouldn't know it was dead without re-running the analysis (the changes could introduce side effects).

Now, this doesn't mean they are not cheating, because there is no evidence either way. But, what you are observing in this case doesn't imply cheating either.
I still think hackernews is inappropriately named. It should be called startup news, but that doesn't have the same ring to it. Hacking is now a security word. It hasn't been reclaimed at all, it's just confusing to everyone that doesn't read this site (and still many that do).
The whole point is that the games improve your work. Why would that be a bad thing? Why would motivation for your work be bad? Why would encouraging submitting bugs be bad? Why do incentive programs encourage the wrong behavior simply by their existence? (Trying to understand your argument)
And to answer that, I think it's an awesome idea. I can totally see the team getting more motivated (especially non-developers).

I've noticed people using badges (outside of any software) during testing. Things like "I'm the bug king!" etc. I see that all the time. So building that in to the software seems like an awesome idea.
To be honest, I don't think it's a good idea. Someone did this with git, and I ended up choosing not to do it because I didn't want games to interfere with my work. The people who like achievements/badges/trophies are the type who will actively work towards earning them, when they should be focusing on their work instead.

This is also the reason a lot of incentive programs are flawed... They encourage the wrong behaviors, simply by their existence.

And yes, I'm one of those people who like achievements.
The way you talk about "innovation" makes me wonder what your definition is. Is "a specialized, properly linked version of Google Images", especially one with as specific a market as this one, not innovative?
Almost all the people I know (Including myself) who use Sinatra were more willing to use Padrino than Rails.