jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
You have to also take into account people's time lost and inconvenienced in scenarios where SMS fails. For example, if the user doesn't have their phone on them but needs the money, then what? Or when the SMS message doesn't get through for whatever reason. Or where there is a no signal.
GigaOm is still down, 2/3 hours later.
Its there in India too. Any transfer made via internet banking has to be authorized first via a code sent to my mobile. Pretty neat.
The only practical thing I can see it doing for you is giving you extra administrative overhead.
Please forgive any errors here: Windows has never been my primary OS.

Windows NT has had users and permissions providing similar functionality to what Unix offers for a very long time[0]. NT ACLs have actually been more sophisticated than standard Unix permissions for at least ten years.

The problem on Windows is the defaults and the behavior of third-party developers. Windows developers worked for a long time with the expectation that the system was single-user (Win9x) or that the user had administrator privileges, making doing anything else annoying at best. XP defaulted to making everybody an administrator, at least in the home edition. That has changed with Vista and Win7.

[0] I think some versions targeted at home users do not expose the full ACL functionality.
I wonder if you could do this with Nginx and the Upgrade header.
Nearly all interviews with technical staff are low stress in my experience.
This number is useless without the context of GDP, which is growing exponentially. Even if debt grows at 1.5%/yr, debt-to-GDP ratio can go to zero if GDP grows >1.5%/yr. This has the funny effect of people seeing exponentially larger debt numbers and freaking... due to lack of context.

Here's some more historical context, England's interest rates and debt over the last 300 years. About 100 of those years had debt-to-GDP of over 1.0.... And no problems with interest rates. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2013/10/28/opinion/10281...

Finally, the article's closing scare tactics of coming up with a high interest rate doomsday scenario is a red herring. In such an example, the article fails to mention the USD would depreciate and GDP would skyrocket(denominated in the dollars would go up, because about half of S&P500 revenues are foreign). The net effect would be a drastic lowering of debt and increase in GDP, thus somewhat fixing the debt-to-GDP ratio and largely fixing the high interest rates.

Of course we should pay down our debt when(or if) it makes sense to do so: when unemployment is low and inflation is close to target (or above target). Now is not the time. Additionally, structural government reform is sorely needed, although it should target more outstanding issues, rather than an out-of-context debt number.

If secular stagnation holds true, we may not have "normal" interest rates again.
This is one reason why I was so worried about Glysophate ("Roundup"). It attacks the mycelium -- you can see the result in the soil after a couple of years of use.

I once had a colleague who had worked on Glysophate earlier in his career. He was really proud of his work because "you can drink it, and it breaks down harmlessly in the soil". He never worried about the fungi.

Edit: moronic brain fart in writing rhizome rather than mycelium. Extra embarrassing as at the time described we were working on antifungal drugs.
This post is ridiculous. Why does this crap keep making it to the front page?
I'd like to see a detailed description of sockets work.
I said "porentialy". As an example: China, Russia, other countries like Iran could start demanding bitcoins for their oil and gas in the future. There is limited number of bitcoins. Limited by an algorithm. The numer of usds is potentially unlimited. I could come up with other examples that could be unrealistic today but possible in 5 or 10 years. So kill the cryptocurrencies while it is still easy. I dont own and have never owned any cryptocurrencies.
Why land?

You'd be better off simply dropping the cargo. It's not like it would hurt drugs.

So, take off in spot 1, trace out an arc, drop the package at some point (which would be so small as to be really hard to detect), land/crash in spot 2 a long way away. If the drone is cheap enough, just throw it away.
I don't really care what nationality my driver is, but I do not want someone who is on the phone all the time.
In Ruby we use an @ / self for both instance variables (mandatory, use self to call the getter / setter and @ to interact with the variable directly) and methods (self optional, generally used to reduce confusion if there might be multiple things with the same name).
You forget I don't know clojure. How do I install cryogen? Neither the 3 step guide, or the terminal, are complete by themselves.

I suspect you want people to do step 1 of your 3 step guide, then switch to the terminal, then switch back for step 3 of the 3 step guide? I would recommend making that clearer :) I like a guide I go through step by step, here it seems I have to follow nonlinearly.
Apps track gas prices quite easily...
What is it with people speculating over what Jobs/Apple wants?

The truth of the matter is nobody has a clue, and yet many people pretend otherwise.
While I agree that we should be skeptical towards the noise Wikileaks is making, we should always be skeptical towards the noise any government is making. Since Wikileaks is one of the best tools with which to take a skeptical look at the hype generated by a government's PR machine(s) I think it's great that news sources are rebroadcasting the noise being made by Wikileaks.
It's a cool idea, but I'm skeptical. This strategy does nothing to prevent the creation of a killer app. All it does is prevent the creation of a killer app on the iphone. If we assume that someone somewhere is gonna drop an app-bomb, forcing them to other platforms might not be the best idea.
Although Android is open source and could just be hacked around with most of the modifications seem to be modular components i.e. here is a new HTC keyboard, if you don't like it you can switch it to the standard Android keyboard or buy a 3rd party keyboard like Swype.
With no followup, that's not very compelling. Enlighten me!
Seems like there is a need for an independent third-party group to monitor the tests. Since that is likely prohibitively expensive, here's an idea:

1) Have schools partner with each other, where each school is matched to another school of similar size.

2) Extend the testing into twice as long periods (e.g., if it was a 1-day test, now the test period is 2 days).

3) Have partner schools test on opposite period halves.

4) Have partner schools give students the day(s) off on the non-test half.

5) Have schools send their teachers to their partner schools to monitor all the tests.

Now, this isn't fool-proof. It's possible that teachers across multiple schools could collude. It would be crucial to mix teacher pairs up so that if A monitors B then B does not monitor A, thus requiring a multi-way collusion that involves many participants.
> Like when you say an English sentence to a Mexican who doesn't understand it, and you respond by saying the same thing again but louder and slower. It looks like you think they're dense.

My wife is learning Spanish right now because we are moving to Costa Rica. Her most used phrase is “de espacio, por favor” which means “slowly, please”. She’s able to understand much more of the language when folks slow down and annunciate clearly.

When I lived in Chile as a teen, I also asked people to do the same thing frequently until I became proficient. I still ask sometimes in other Spanish-speaking countries because their accent or dialect differs from what my ears are most used to.

Speaking slowly and clearly to anyone learning a language is incredibly useful and is not insulting in any way.
> Something about it never fully stuck with me. ... Plopping an entire VM...

There's your first miss.
I don't think you can access them from the new App Platform, if I'm not mistaken. We use them heavily from regular Droplets, Kubernetes etc.
Cleanliness is booming too, but cleaning persons also live in poverty.

It's because:

(a) we don't compensate jobs based on their difficulty or the financial success of the product, but on how hard it is to find people to do them when we need them.

If there were 100 qualified surgeons for every patient needing an operation, and would stampede each other for a chance to work and get paid, we'd pay them $25/hour too.

(b) we allow businesses to profit wildly while not paying enough (by exploiting (a)), because we have the taboo that not meddling with the market is the best course of action. A more englightened society that didn't pay too much attention to economy pundits working for rich people, might find a way for better revenue sharing with employees...
just dont follow the rabbit hole to learn about author, I did and his yt channel is pure scam a'la Tony Robbins

knowledge is for free, here is my 3000$ course beacuse wE nEeD AcCoUnTaBiLiLty
> big blocks centralize

This math never checks out. I see this said and no one can ever show me numbers where it makes sense.

900KB Every 10 minutes is the actual throughput. This works out to 47.3GB per year.

For the cost of -5 transactions-, you can buy a hard drive that will last -184 years- before it fills up. The only people that even need the full chain are miners, exchanges and online wallets.

5 transactions -> enough space to store the current throughput for 184 years. $31 average transaction fees make bitcoin useless for anything other than speculation.

Bitcoin Cash already sustains more transactions than bitcoin. Ethereum has 3x the transaction throughput consistently. What math are you doing where you think any of this is a problem?
I don’t have anything against shorting – still a very interesting question!
> That it carries out no access control is somewhat irrelevant if it is not intended to do so in the first place.

That's circular logic - Google's access control is OK because Google intended to do it? Do the users get a say in whether these APIs are intended to do access control?
Yeah, the same way that I use a dictionary.
It reminds me a lot of listening to air traffic control somewhere busy.
"no, but your kind of talent is so valuable I pay you more than others and the awkwardness would hurt everybody"
Exactly. The whole point of her article is to make the claim that she is better than you.
There is a push for open source hardware, but it is a substantially smaller movement. The Open Source Hardware just formed a year or two ago: http://www.oshwa.org/ The movement is growing, but it appears to be around 15 years behind software, and maybe not growing as quickly as OSS did.
I apologize that my comment probably came off as a bit too upfront. I need to work on that.

I was only saying that it isn't really a good idea to present numbers like that without having a clear idea of what's causing the worst-case performance. Glancing over the code, and assuming the first bullet fired is always the first one to impact the ground, it looks like the code is always going to run std::vector::erase on the first element of the vector, which will always shift the 499 remaining elements. It's possible that's the reason for the worst-case performance, rather than vector being inherently a worse choice than list.

It was very counterintuitive and weird to realize that vector is almost always a better choice than list due to how powerful the CPU caches are. CPU caching is so good that taking full advantage of caching will usually outweigh algorithmic tweaks, like whether you're using a list or a vector. So the power of vector is that its elements are in contiguous memory, whereas the downfall of list is that they usually aren't.

It's difficult to prove that's true except in real-world scenarios. Unless a test is designed to introduce memory fragmentation, the cache performance penalty of using list won't really show up in the results. All of the list allocations will be pretty much contiguous in a test environment, so the tests will show performance on par with vector. But in the real engine, you'll be left scratching your head why everything's running so slowly, when the answer is because the elements are sprayed all across your memory space and it's causing the CPU cache to stall when they're accessed...

EDIT:

There is no actual rendering time or AI or anything else which would prevent us from seeing upwards of 100,000 "frames" per second.

When your FPS is higher than, say, 1,000, it becomes very difficult to pin down the reasons for performance fluctuations. An engine under load behaves differently than an artificial test, so you'll need to measure the performance impact in a real engine, especially when the framerates in the test are so high.

Your monitor is capped at 70 fps, or some high-end monitors can do ~130. Something like 100,000 fps isn't an accurate reflection of the behavior of the real system. Most of the discrepancy is due to memory fragmentation causing CPU thrashing, but your specific test might be running into some other discrepancies, like:

- clock() might not be a high resolution timer, so the worst-case timing might be due to discrepancies in the clock mechanism itself, especially at 100,000+ FPS. See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6749621/high-resolution-t...

- since your test is running for 100+ seconds and your timing measurements are taking into account an entire frame, some frames are going to run interrupts. If an interrupt takes a long time to process, that load will show up in your timing measurements. The result is that vector (or list) will be unfairly pinned as the reason for the performance issue, when interrupts were the cause.

I'm not confident about the second one, but the point is that there are all kinds of conflating variables.
Agreed. It's more than a bit gauche (and certainly off-putting) to describe ones own work as a masterpiece.
Not that I don't believe you, but could you link to said debunking?
Paul Graham, Eric Ries, Steve Blank, Sam Altman, and many others have promoted their share of ideas that entrepreneurial and VC communities have latched onto as sacrosanct. Take, for instance, the notion of "minimum viable product". Do the absolute minimum of work to validate an idea because that way you didn't spend years of your life creating something that there was no market for. If you didn't go to market after 3 months of development, you're doing it wrong. If you didn't seek sage advice from a panel of... "experts"... trying to convince you why you should give up 10% of your life's work for $100,000, you're doing it wrong. If you take a principled approach to your work and do what is right rather than what is popular, you're doing it wrong. Ship as quickly as possible. Go fast. We need Velocity©! You don't need to do anything right, just focus on appearances. Generally speaking, whatever you're thinking and doing is wrong. They know what is best.

Herein lies the great dead zone of missed opportunities, rejected by venture capitalists and entrepreneurship thinkers who worked too hard to advance ideas that aren't universally applicable and in many cases are simply wrong.

PG et al: break from convention and challenge your theories about what makes projects successful
> The service and/or product provided by their business is providing significant value to society (lest they wouldn’t be collecting profit).

This is assuming the conclusion.

They could just be collecting a monopoly rent or a land-rent or an IP rent; for example, when Martin Shkreli raised the price of insulin dramatically he wasn't "providing more value to society", he was extracting that value, potentially at the cost of human lives.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/shkrelis-former-...
In other words, mostly catching up features present in mainstream languages.
I believe this type of rewrite is a lot less risky that what you're suggesting: https://martinfowler.com/bliki/StranglerFigApplication.html
What is his email id?
It's called Engage, comes in grey bottles. It has sucralose though.
You seem to be pretty jobless.
I tried to register using "Connect with Facebook" but got this error message "An error occurred with sometimesyouforget. Please try again later."

Normal Registration - Did not receive account activation email. Can't Login.

Also there is no purpose of username in the registration when login is through email.
Don't kill it, if open sourced there are hackers who will fix/improve where you failed.
The first version of Clojure was a Common Lisp compiler that compiled Clojure down to JS to be run on Rhino. There's interest in the Clojure community to have a Clojure "Light" that runs on V8 or SpiderMonkey.
I'll continue on my karmakazi rant here. I disagree strongly that 'whining for free wifi' is a reasoned argument against domain name seizures.
That’s why when new people start work at the company, they’re not allowed to sit off by themselves in a corner.

Sounds like pretty strong social pressure to me.
The fact that bitcoin.org told people to install the slow-as-molasses Bitcoin-QT software was a big PR mistake. Fortunately they're now recommending fixed software that can sync in a reasonable time.
It's important to be able to delete dead code even if your developers never write any, because earlier compiler optimization passes can create dead code. For example, consider this simple function written in a hypothetical dynamic language:

function add(a,b) { return a + b }

Our hypothetical compiler turns this function into some IL that looks like this:

function add1(a,b)
{
if(is_null(a)) throw ArgumentNullException()
if(is_null(b)) throw ArgumentNullException()
low_level_generic_add(a,b)
}

...where low_level_generic_add sums a and b if they're integers, or looks for a suitable overloaded operator+ and invokes it if they're not.

Suppose further that our hypothetical language has a tracing JIT, and that most of the time when a and b are called, they're both integers. In that case, the compiler might perform the following transformation:

function add2(a,b)
{
if(is_integer(a) && is_integer(b)) return add_integers(a,b)
else return add_generic(a,b)
}

...where add_generic is just a copy of add1 above, and add_integers is a copy of add1 with low_level_generic_add() replaced by the less-expensive perform_integer_addition()

function add_integers(a,b)
{
if(is_null(a)) throw ArgumentNullException()
if(is_null(b)) throw ArgumentNullException()
perform_integer_addition(a,b)
}

But suppose one more thing: let's say integers in this language are value types; that is, that is_null(some_integer) is never true. Then you can get another performance win in add_integers by removing the two null checks - but you can only find out about that if you have a dead code detector.

This has been your woefully incomplete dynamic compilation moment.
"beginning to see" != "already at". There is TONS of existing code written in OO languages--you can't expect functional languages to replace that overnight. However, functional languages like Clojure and F# are starting to become more common, even in corporate environments. (I know eBay and Wallmart use Clojure for some of their projects, among others.)

I don't know if the trend will continue (my guess is yes), but you shouldn't dismiss it just because C, C++, and Java are still the most widely-used programming languages in the world.
Why do you care? I've already used Firesheep three times to downvote using your account.

I'll do it with this comment, too.
Low carb skeptics often raise this point, but I'd like note that it can be misleading to consider a single diet variable in isolation. The Japanese smoke more than we do, and yet have less heart disease. Hence, smoking reduces the risk of heart disease....

Of course not. Asians eat more white rice, perhaps, but they also eat more fish, seaweed (in the case of the Japanese), more vegetables, walk more, eat more soy, etc... The effect of all of these variables, combined, may result in better overall health, and yet it could also be true that white rice in and of itself isn't that good for you.
Congratulations guys!

I didn't remember etacts launched this year. Howie's mixergy interview seems ages ago.
"I wonder how gnosis found my blog?"

I found your blog through a search for Dennis E. Shasha, who you mention in this post:

http://thefeaze.livejournal.com/37102.html

Welcome to HN. I'm looking forward to hearing more from you, as you've clearly got some interesting things to say.

Just a brief writing tip (no offense): you may want to separate your writing in to paragraphs. Three to five sentences per paragraph is probably a good rule of thumb. It's difficult to read through a huge wall of text.
Neat, but... holy yellow. Maybe you could tone that yellow down to a softer color? Perhaps #ecca0e?
I dont think they need to go full enclosed office, privacy cubes might work. I prefer an office being a programmer, but I can see how other people, like the marketing or sales department, might not need that extent of quiet and/or privacy. I know cubes are much cheaper than offices, so for any employer, unless you are flush with cash, cubes are probably what you are willing top pay for.

I wonder if open offices spread illness faster than other layouts? (I say this has I'm listening to half my office coughing their lungs up with a cold)
It can be a lot less performant to chain several combinators.
> Mr Zaman has launched a fundraising campaign to gather cash to fight the legal battle against United and Orbitz. So far he has raised $10,538 (£6,776) of the $15,000 needed.

I'm guessing he'll need more than $15,000 ....
Already. The article mentions read, write ordering. That is essentially about in what order other processors see reads, writes being done by this processor: thus if procA does a bunch of writes will procB see them in the order (program order) in which they were done or in a different other order. There can be other interleavings when you introduce read into the mix.

Architectures like the late lamented Alpha (this is around late 90's) had fairly weak ordering requirements so you needed explicit memory barriers to tell the processor that you needed ordering preserved (think spinlocks for instance.) Mainstream processors (x86/x86-64) have always had strict write ordering but not read ordering. Let's see how long that lasts.
I think your preference (stack or queue) is dependant on the nature of work you are doing.

For instance, at my current job, I've been here for 2 years. I know the codebase pretty well. If an issue comes up, I can almost always get it resolved in a few hours or less. For this reason, I am currently a stack person.

On the other hand, when I first started this job, I didn't know the codebase very well, so it usually took me at least a week to complete a typical issue. Back in those days I was a queue person.
Almost everyone who "know monads well" agrees with you. Studying monads is silly. It's a pattern you'll eventually recognize and just so happens to have a syntactic trick. Study particular instances.
Can't take seriously an article with this kind of anthropomorphic attitude to biology
> I don't think these are the only outcomes, but lets go with it. A slightly slower compiler then. Solved.

Except that a capital-F Fast compiler is a design goal for the language, so that's the _least_ desirable of the three. I feel tempted to go with slower execution times, simply because it's already a part of the design as well: you can't optimise too aggressively on a limited compilation time budget.
I'm pretty confident that this is the answer. Their attempts to break said services only work intermittently, however.
Every .co I checked was down at 13:10 PST. I was starting to diagnose when everything returned by 13:20. Los Angeles.
One suggestion is to be extremely responsive. Make sure no question or comment gets missed. Answer quickly, clearly, correctly and succinctly, every time. Make sure you clarify anything you're unsure of.