jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Read through my list of articles and tell me to my face that my blog isn't an excellent resource for this. smh
Sorry, if I have been a bit harsh. It's just when people all the
time tell how depressed they are, but they're just in a pretty
normal bad mood, which vanishes the next day.

If you're then trying to explain people what a depression is, how it feels,
then they associate it with their "depressed" days.
5. Another random guess is that it's easier for a German than for a Russian to migrate to English service.

In principle, Facebook is localised. I could imagine that few apps are translated to German though, and even fewer to Russian, except those built by native developers; (I don't use any apps, so I don't know) that native developer pool ought to be the same as the one building VK (or VZ) apps. Assuming Facebook does a decent job of filtering localised apps, I can't imagine this to be a massive issue for users.

I can only assume the media upload is what keeps people coming back.

All of the other reasons you mention seem to be reasons why businesses would prefer VK over Facebook, but surely it's the users that are the key?
Step 1; let them draw your borders, step 2; figure out their money, step 3; print their money and buy what you want.

...repeat
I'm appalled that the author puts most of the blame on the faculty. I would hope that CS students had some personal integrity.

Dartmouth College addressed this in a number of ways:

1. Collaboration was routinely encouraged, so long as all work was properly credited. You weren't expected to be able to ace some of the theory classes by yourself, for example.

2. Many courses included large team projects.

3. Each course began with a clear, unambiguous description of what behavior constituted cheating, and which types of collaboration were allowed.

4. When caught, cheating was treated as a major offense: a 9-month suspension and a permanent annotation on your transcript for a first offense, and an irrevocable expulsion for a second offense. I was friends with a CS TA who _always_ took the time to ram through these penalties.

Even with those precautions, we had a cheating scandal in a non-major course. Unfortunately, it was hard to identify the cheaters, and the usual penalties couldn't be enforced.

Still, I do admire Dartmouth both for encouraging collaboration and for ruthlessly ending the academic careers of students who lacked personal integrity.
We set out to allow people to create their own news networks and incorporated the cms-style options and chat options later. We want to be able to create a secured Reddit - let people create their own version of Hacker News.

I think the concepts are similar although I think we are different in a few ways. I think we sit somewhere between creating your own social network and a cms, so its suitable for groups of friends or businesses alike. The focus on is also on the network rather than you as an individual, although we will be looking to allow the user to choose in the future, for example by being able to post to all their networks in a single-click.
Nothing seems to be happening when I click the "Create" button. I am using Chrome 6.0.472.55 on Windows XP.
Ben Franklin has a saying "experience keeps a dear school but a fool will learn at no other". In other words, seek wisdom and experience vicariously, and as Isaac Newton said, "stand on the shoulders of giants". The word vicarious means "experienced in the imagination through the feelings or actions of another person".

But there's a cost to vicarious experience when we start to derive feelings of fulfillment ("being in the game") from success stories at the neglect of reaching for our own. A telltale sign is when people start calling Steve Jobs "Jobs" or Bob Dylan "Dylan", as if they know them. Don't live in the movies. The real world is a better movie.

There's a Biblical saying that goes something like this "the Kingdom of Heaven is not a matter of talk, but of power". The earthly realm is certainly no different. Use vicarious experience to gain wisdom, not to trigger endorphins. Keep your head down, your mouth shut, and get on with your own business.
Create your own genetic algorithm for generate your own society of virtual beings!
>I'm not so sure we'll see the price of phones come down as component costs come down.

You can already get a low-end Android for free on contract:

http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/phones/?WT.ac=0941HOM21#LG-Opti...
Find more interesting work.
I think it is a good execution. What I don't like much is the dark design. I think that the header is too gloomy.
tl;dr Oh noes, geek culture is becoming mainstream, let's ruin it so nobody likes it anymore!

Alternate take: maybe we should embrace the modern renaissance of diversity in entertainment and ride it for all its worth rather than pouting about loss of uniqueness and pseudo-authenticity like some sullen teenager (or indy rock pete: http://www.dieselsweeties.com/irp/).
Please don't cross into personal attack. It's against the site guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), and we're trying to avoid the internet callout/shaming culture here (https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&type=comment&dateRange=a...).
I could see this in the extremes (a one-of data-munging script has no maintainability requirement, for example), but accepting the weights as completely subjective seems dangerously close to saying "All languages are equally powerful, and it's just a matter of preference", which I disagree with because it would invalidate the Blub Paradox.

It may be the case that the weights are affected by individual tastes and requirements, but the construction of the language (and therefore some inherent property of the language, rather than of the user or of the situation) would almost certainly affect those weights as well.
Note that I'm criticizing this beliefs, and not the distribution of future probabilities. Of course company might be overvalued now at $250, and sure, it might hit $500 later.

But if you're certain it will be $500 in three years, you need some serious risk aversion (~2500bps) to think it's not worth buying it now at $250.

In other words, by saying it will grow to $500 you're expressing your view on value; this value is higher than price, so stock is undervalued.
I LOVE THIS!!!

I've hidden my score/points on HN via UBlock Origin. I've also hidden the downvote button so I can't downvote anyone (one reason I wish I could run another browser on iOS so I could do the same there)

I want to see reasons responses to my comments not just downvotes which 5 out of 6 times seem like ideological downvotes which is not what downvotes are supposed to before. I'm tempted myself to click the downvote button if I strongly disagree hence the reason I hid them from myself.

Likes are not as bad is dislikes but I hid all the points/scores on those stack overflow too. An answer should be valid based on it's content not the it's score or the point rep of its answerer.

I agree that there's some maybe usefulness to ordering but I'm not entire convinced it outweighs the downsides of popularity where a celeb user gets up votes or a popular opinion gets upvotes effectively drowning out any valid criticism.

I really wish HN would get rid of the Q&A voting system. Bad faith comments can be flagged. And ideally bad flaggers can be disciplined.
If you're willing to drop 70k there is apparently a version with 14,000 lbs towing and 500+ mile range.
the fact it looks like a truck version of the DMC DeLorean doesn't help either.
> it makes it into essentially a blob of uneditable code.

No, it doesn't. It retains comments, the names of variables, and most of the structure of the code. You're meant to be able to factor the unsafe behaviours out incrementally from there (and there are a lot of bundled and associated tools meant for exactly that). I ran an example through c2rust the other day and rustc told me immediately that I had functions that didn't need to be marked unsafe. switch statements are probably the thing that suffers most with c2rust, though I think there's a tool for that.
Some people will like it, and some people won't. Tesla doesn't need to convince everyone. I expect there's a market for it, but time will tell.
It would be cool to have if we were always in the smoke ridden neon illuminated world of Blade Runner. But outside of that I think it is pretty fugly.
It looks way more aerodynamic than a regular pickup to me. The shape appears largely designed to fix the drag from the turbulent flow over the bed that most trucks suffer from.
Quote from the website "You will be able to complete your configuration as production nears in late 2021. Tri Motor AWD production is expected to begin in late 2022."

Ya right, production starts in 2 years. I would guess 4 yrs and I know nothing about car production. But I do know that just getting the subcontractors in order will take more than a year even if you have an assembly line in place already. Why is Tesla so optimistic about timelines? It just hurts it's reputation when they are years late.
As much as I fear a Dijkstra apocalypse and how much brain damage newbies will sustain by starting with JavaScript (and thinking arrays being hash maps to be perfectly OK), I started with 8-bit AppleSoft BASIC and I have to say that, while the concept of a function or recursion only appeared to me after my introduction to Pascal, I turned out well enough. Also, I had a good idea of how machine language programs operated - they map very neatly to what BASIC could do.
A blacksmith could craftily forge strong chains for the slave-owner, but the potential for his skills would never be met in the doing.
Ahh, but they have no competitors. There is very little reason for them to improve. It's genius! Their entire business model is built on the fact that they don't have competitors. They just have to be good enough for the big schools to sign on, and now that they have that, they have no reason to improve. They are no doubt raking in the cash, but aren't making things better.
I disagree. Learning to program in C is like climbing a tree ass first.

At some point, any serious programmer must learn C and Assembly, as well as the internals of their computer, how the processor and the memory works. But before you are decent in writing programs with an easy language or two, you should just regard the implementation of the language and the computer as the "spirit of the computer".
It's an interesting concept, but I am concerned about the closed-source nature of the project. OpenID and OAuth have gotten as far as they did because they use a verifyable mechanism, all parts of which can be re-implemented and checked at will. Autho.me on the other hand is just asking for the trust of users and developers. I'm not insinuating that the code can't be trusted, but there are issues to be aware of such as very sparse documentation and the risk of investing a lot of work and goodwill in a single, private provider.
The API is JSON. It only accepts valid JSON and it returns valid JSON.

Library != API
The API does not accept invalid JSON.

The JS Library will take object literals. It uses JSON.stringify internally. The templating language takes object literals.
> First, an argument that can only be falsified by running an experiment that involves the armed overthrow of the government is not really in the spirit of "falsifiability".

I disagree entirely. Ideas are either falsifiable or not. An idea is not unfalsifiable because the experiment required to test it is expensive beyond some M. Real physicists discuss and publish theories that are impossible to test with current levels of technology, but they would never say such theories are unfalsifiable.

>More importantly, you've missed my point. Which was, to the extent you can make these NSA claims about the Brown case, you can make them about every criminal justice case.

Yes, this is true.

>Which, fine, but I think it'd be more intellectually to lead off with the fact that you don't believe it's possible that any criminal investigation in the US is conducted in good faith.

You seem here to convert a probabilistic claim to an absolute claim. The claim was not that all criminal investigations are conducted in bad faith, but that there is a possibility any given investigation is conducted in bad faith.

But this is not the focus of my comment, which was to say that it is very reasonable to point out that this possibility exists for all criminal investigations, and that the fact the experiment to test whether the possibility is justified (by observing illegal evidence being used in a specific criminal case) is not in fact unfalsifiable.

>Here, the argument that NSA secretly tipped the FBI off is especially outlandish because Hector Monsegur ratted Brown out. The FBI had a gold-plated criminal informant. Why would they jeopardize their case with tainted SIGINT?

Please see:

>>It's not likely to have been used in this case, because Brown seems to have indeed made real threats and probably plead guilty because of that. But that doesn't change the unreasonability in the general form of argument the comment grandparent makes.

By "the general form of argument the comment grandparent makes," I was referring to this request:

"""
Do you have any cases where NSA illegal wiretaps were used as evidence in court in a standard trial like this against a U.S. citizen?
"""
I believe it does. I will spin up an OS X VM and test it later tonight, since my MBPr is fully up to date. I will of course update the site with what I find.
I agree with that perspective completely. The problem is that the people who are generally the most blindly pro-government say something like:

"I've got no problem with that. I have nothing to hide."

(I have a friend who says _exactly_ that.) But at that point you really can't keep the argument/discussion going, because you're dealing with someone who clearly says one thing and would act differently. I'm sure if the camera crew arrived and started drilling in his house he'd change his tune, but what can you do short of that. The problem with debating with a lot of people, sadly.
Regarding your second point, I think it's more that people don't care as much about privacy if the consequences seem to be low/nonexistent, and they weigh their interest in platforms like Instagram, TikTok, etc. more highly than the potential negative impacts of their privacy being violated. I know users of Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Slack, etc. who will almost definitely never move to encrypted email because they like the platform and the community. Folks on HN and in the tech sector in general can have quite different experiences with those in the world at-large, and one's viewpoint on this will differ based on who's in your networks. I think it's likely if you walk down the street in Manhattan or LA and ask someone if they know what DRM, copyleft, or GDPR is, the answer will be no. But they will care if the music they have can't be copied/shared, they'll know Wikipedia, and they'll care if their information with Google can't be deleted or is sold to other companies.
I think it's more likely that all the above (and Factorio, Eve, etc.) in fact generate intellectual potential.
I don't want to spend all my time being slave to productivity goals, yet there are things that worthwhile to work on according to my value. I would like to be efficient.

There are time that I decided I don't want to work more in th evening and spend my time intentionally just watching youtube instead. That wasn't procrastination.

A game like factorio, I would like to ideally spend maybe 3-4 hours per week. But if I spent like 10,000 hours cumulatively, that might be too much for me. If I spent way too much time on video games, that start to become procrastination.
That's something I think most developers would agree with, I certainly do.

Still, I don't think what I mentioned is unreasonable or goes against the framework's philosophy. The templating system already has plenty of logical statements, might as well make it work like expected.

See also Jinja2's take on that https://jinja.palletsprojects.com/en/2.11.x/faq/#isn-t-it-a-...
I'm hardly an accountant, CFA or politician, but the simplest thing is to define a taxation system (our progressive one is sufficient) and simply tax all every dollar that ultimately goes to a person at that rate. Finally, eliminate all deductions.

That should resolve most of the problems. The problems begin when we start saying certain things are virtuous - oh buying a home is a good thing, let's incentive that and allow people to deduct. Donating to charity is good - deduction! Investing in something in the long term is good - lower tax rate! Environment is good! Energy credit.

Enough. Who exactly benefits from all of these deductions? You guessed it! Regardless of how you feel about the actual deductions, if you want to eliminate "tax evasion" (I use quotes because it's not even a bad thing, it's perfectly legal) - that's the only way.
I have small and medium scale customers that have hundreds of distinct service types in Azure or AWS. Sometimes both. Several have had spending blowouts where a hard limit would have helped.

None have the engineering capacity to figure out how to cap the spending on each one of the individual services, each with their unique and special API.

You're arguing that Amazon can't afford the difficult engineering of spending caps, but the very customers that need spending caps because their budgets are so constrained are so well moneyed that they should all individually be able to invent a solution, engineer it, and manage it?
My only complaint about Bitcoin is the energy use. And I think it would be reasonable to whitelist things that are allowed to use so much electricity (or make their prices rise as a function of use)
@bane - can I ask why you don't switch to Python 3?
> Here's how we can fix it

> Immediately hit by paywall

The irony is astounding.
Where I work the strategy is called "throwing a bone to the dog" during a technical review.
You need some sort of cache, whether Wordpress-specific or Varnish or CDN or something.
Millionaires play golf. Billionaires play space.

Step 1. Make billions in something (not space)
Step 2. Turn billions into millions with space
Realistically you don’t, but...

You’re definitely not building hardware without much money. Maybe you can build software? Spend a lot of time talking to companies that already operate in the space industry, find some unmet software need that you can somehow build a software solution for (better than the thousands of other software engineers who have already worked in the field for decades) and sell it to them.

For instance, maybe you figure out a better way to write satellite management software. And then you sell that for a while (tricky, you’ve got very few possible customers and they’re all quite capable of copying what you’ve done if it’s so great) and eventually you get to the point where you start launching your own satellites.

I’m not saying there’s a reasonable business model in there; but if there’s a reasonable business model somewhere it’s likely to look something like that.
PreCheck itself is paying money for the privilege of not taking off your shoes.
I actually learned how to play chess through trial and error with BattleChess on my dad's computer. If I'm doing the math right, I was 6 years old. My primary motivation was to see every permutation of piece encounters.
> Nope, Maker contracts are not upgradable.

This may have been true in the past, but not anymore. Here's [1] an example of a minor bug that was recently discovered in the MCD deployment and how they're going to patch it. The modules in the Maker system have variables that point to which smart contract to call to execute their actions, and the Maker governance is involved in changing these values.

[1] https://forum.makerdao.com/t/proposal-upgrading-the-flopper/...
I am curious to why you think working at Google is reserved only for the very best of the field? I don't have good visibility into normal companies, but honestly all FAANG companies essentially employ armies of average developers, although they might have a higher density of exceptional developers than other companies. Mostly they are distinguished by two things:

* They work with economies of scale. What may be viable for a startup might be useless for Google. What might be viable for Google might be absolutely disastrous for a startup.

* They use a management style that fosters innovation and learning.

The interviews can be tough, yeah, but all it takes is practice and given that you seem to have good mathematical skills, hiding a few weeks or months in the basement with an algorithms book and a laptop, should make it easy for you to pass a Google interview.
And a large percentage of Google devs are Apple users.

Edit: for the apparent doubter of this, see any number of articles about Google's 40,000 macs that they use as dev machines, for example: https://www.usenix.org/conference/lisa13/managing-macs-googl... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/27/google_mac_support/
Similar, I use a cheap AWS Lightsail VPS $3.50 (Lightsail has DDOS protection)-> Wireguard -> Apache Reverse Proxy mod -> my local services.
He is ranting about the practice of creating "rich client side applications" when they are not necessary. His argument is predicated on the following, as far as I can tell:

1. JavaScript has numerous design flaws, mainly wrt giving developers many very large guns with which even experienced devs can easily shoot themselves in the foot.

2. Languages and frameworks targeting the server-side of the web are suited very well -- better than JavaScript, historically -- to creating dynamic HTML.

3. Complex UI interactions typical of single-page applications are inherently difficult to do well.

I am not sure why the first two commenters seem to dismiss his entire essay because he uses scoping issues as an example, but that's pretty unfair & close-minded.
can you elaborate? I find this very interesting. We can't choose which private key we get.

So is it possible for 1 seed to generate all of them? Doesn't that break information theory (Shannon's compression limit)?
You can base the fine on income http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

I'm actually kind of surprised it's not more popular.
Here's a different perspective to show the grass isn't greener on the other-side:

I've lived in San Francisco for 4.5yrs and sometimes I feel lost for interesting places to hang out in the evenings here in The City.

I'm not really interested in the pretentious hipster scene bars of Mission, I don't like the LA-wannabe scene of Marina and most of SoMa's clubs cater for East Bay bridge and tunnel crowd (before you think I'm being snobby I find the East Bay crowd unfriendly to city living folks, and all of the violet situations I've witnessed in clubs/bars have been from East Bay types. We're not talking Berkeley types but the more 'heavier' Oakland/Freemont/Hayward scene).

And everything closes at 2am (although granted, that's a CA-wide policy).

I guess I say all of the above with the disclosure that I'm a native of London, a 24/7 city with more bars and clubs than you could visit in a year.
Some people would claim that his own site is over-designed and too pretty. He isn't exactly following the Bauhaus tradition himself.

Pretty can be functional, in fact pretty is functional. Pretty is about expression and exploration. Pretty doesn't solve it all alone but neither does function.

Would you critique a blogger because his posts where way too philosophical and reflective rather than utilitarian?

Would you critique a developer for creating experiments in HTML5 that have no utility?

I would agree with him if HP, Amazon, BP and all the other fortune 500 companies where pretty over functional but they are not.

His argument is based on sites who's purpose is to be explorative and expressive not purely functional.

Design is not about style, but style is a tool the designer can use.