jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Agreed. A big part of why I enjoy thinking about historical problems so much is that it's virtually impossible to supply a definitive explanation for anything (we're still arguing over the Roman empire's demise one and a half millennia on). I think the author's point - or at least the stance I take, which I suspect he aligns generally with too based on his work - is that quantitive data can only be used in historical arguments in what is effectively a qualitative way, i.e. as part of a larger, holistic assessment based on many perspectives rather than as a definitive "proof" of anything. But it's an exciting addition because historians typically haven't taken this approach at all prior to the last decade, excepting some forays into punchcard computing in the 60s and 70s by people like Lawrence Stone and the Annalists.

Incidentally, I'd point to Pinker's "Better Angels of Our Nature" book as an example of the risks of putting too much stock in a scientific/econometric approach to history. I actually think his argument is (in broad outlines) convincing, but the way he marshals his evidence drives academic historians crazy because it ignores that history is a complex system, as you say. (i.e., he does things like saying "x tribe in New Guinea is a 'stone age' tribe and according to one or two studies has a high murder rate, therefore all humans in 'the stone age' had a murder rate comparable to that tribe.")
The future of AI is scary for capitalists, since AI and robotic production is not worth anything for a capitalist. But it is very good for people, since the AI and robotics products have a usage value for people.
No one has really given an answer besides what you've stated. Personally, I have no idea what the best option is; my cynicism tells me that making it public may be the best course of action, though it's a very scorched-earth approach. By making the harassment known publicly (within the workplace, possibly outside), it forces HR's hand in dealing with the abuser rather than the abused. It also has a chance to backfire spectacularly and alienate the person. It probably would result in alienation even if the abuser was dealt with. There's really no good answer here, just varying degrees of bad ones. Perhaps there needs to be a fine against companies that attempt to silence/remove the victims, that'd create a financial incentive for HR to protect the company by removing the abuser.
A comparison can still be made between the same age cohorts i.e. compare rates of Alzheimer’s for the cohort 60 to 65 year olds. There is always a potential for confounding factors, but if the rates are up 35% for all cohorts then that says something.

Also the beautiful flow graph https://images2.minutemediacdn.com/image/upload/c_fit,f_auto... (graph for US Women I think) does show that after about 70 “mental” starts being a significant percentage of deaths, although Parkinson’s is only one component of that I think.

Source for graph is: https://flowingdata.com/2016/01/05/causes-of-death/
Similar project: http://e-basteln.de/other/stm/overview/
We're releasing our iOS app (feels.com) next month on Parse, including Parse Core, Parse Push, Parse Analytics and IAP – pretty much all our backend except for S3 – Our experience has been awesome and we'll definitely be applying for FbStart to get some of those free Parse credits :)
Neither does being a doormat.
I hate to break this to you, but they've beaten you to the quantum bowl: I think it was patented some years ago as the "latrine". It has the same properties you describe, similar properties to the OP's "shitbowl" concept, and can quickly deploy artifacts in one button push*.

(Unless your artifact volume exceeds the recommended capacity in the readme, also helps to make sure the pipeline has sufficient capacity for large deploys to efficiently release to the municipal cloud)
That's fanboyism.

Most places on the world dont have the infrastructure for electric cars yet.

But I'll be damned if you won't find a Toyota Hilux in the most backwater village behind a mountain range.

I know a vast majority of people of my friend group who aren't in tech have no idea about tesla and at best have heard the name something something electric car something something Elon Musk

Compared to VW or Toyota - who shift millions of units in every concievable market - Tesla is just a cute curiosity like the carmakers of the 20s.
You could have, you know, all that good stuff also without Facebook.
Great article. There’s definitely something there. It reads like the beginning of a good New Yorker article.

There’s definitely a relationship between rationalism, objectivism and libertarianism. It seems to afflict the captains of industry. And in this case it’s Silicon Valley’s turn.

Yep definitely something there, probably a book too. After all It’s a marketplace of ideas.
I have tried a few of these budgeting applications. Unless you have a large amount of bank accounts in different banks, investments with asset managers etc, it is just as easy to process it in Excel. I just download my monthly bank transactions and import them into an Excel flat file. Each item I tag against an expense hierarchy. Then I run a simple pivot table to compare spend over time. It’s not as fast, but it’s free, very flexible and I’m not bound by predetermined rules.
They took a $117 million exit and sold their soul to Big Bank. At least Josh doesn't have to worry about budgeting money ever again for the rest of his life despite his vision of bringing this functionality to the financially challenged masses all come crashing down in flames with this announcement.

I will never remain a user of a start up that sells their soul to Big Corp because of examples like Simple and being burned in the past so many times, I'm jaded.
I waste a lot of time to make vim transparent. So I compile all the `vimrc` settings and put it in a single place. Just paste this at the last of your `.vimrc` and make your awesome vim transparent.
You can do 50% renewables without any storage. The world is pretty far away from that.
> I'm not proposing that we should optimise for life years saved, but I do think that the death of a 86 year old is less tragic than that of a 38 year old, and that we perhaps shouldn't evaluate lockdown vs no lockdown purely based on the percentage of the population which died.

I of course agree with that. Just stating lives lost in isolation is misleading. It simply much easier to use for back-of-envelope math, and generally back of the envelope math indicating a course of action would lead to millions of excess deaths is enough to conclude that probably it won't be a great idea.

> which indicates that on average those people would probably live <10 years

This is plausible, but it may not be much less than 10 years either. The life expectancy of someone who reaches average UK life expectancy is close to another 10 years. And we'd probably both prefer neither ourselves nor any elderly relatives or friends to suffocate 10 years before their or our time.

> There have been a significant amount of excess deaths that are not attributable to COVID [2].

So this sounds initially plausible (lockdown stress/economic hardship leading to an increase in suicides) but I believe it's bullshit and that these deaths are in fact due to covid. Since we were talking about the UK, let's go back to look at that: the baseline figure of suicides is pretty low (~6k in the UK for 2019, which is 1e-4 per individual per year). The number of excess deaths in 2020 is at least 12 times higher than that. So the suicide rate would have had to at least double to account for a significant part of that. And nationwide suicide rates are quite stable, year-on-year, including, crucially, during times of severe economic hardship.
Every BD video should at least contain a fragment of somebody poking at the robots with a stick.
It's not a name generator, it's a referral site for sellers of existing domains... and it makes stupid choices.

I fed it "tickets" and "insider", and its #1 result was felt-coin.com. WTF?
I've been taking it 5 times a week for the past 10 years and I'm not addicted to it in the slightest. Whenever I go on vacation or have longer periods off of work or school I stop and I never feel the urge to take it.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean - you are right, cardboard or really any paper I'm fine with because its reusable, recyclable, and a renewable resource. But all the endless layers of cellophane, plastic wrap etc.
Does anybody know what happened with part three? Was it ever published?
This has been discussed ad nauseum but there exists a group of developers who value other language features, such as ease of deployment, readability, compile time, language simplicity, toolchain simplicity, maintainability, etc etc

For these developers Go can be a good fit. Everybody knows it doesn't have feature parity with Haskell et al from a computer science perspective.

If that's all that mattered we would be seeing a lot of Haskell adoption wouldn't we?

You shouldn't pick a language based on a checklist.
You never get to click it though, unless you disable "Google Instant predictions". But it's not the default on majority of the devices out there so it is in fact technically useless. But sure, it's a placebo and for that reason Google's UI won't change. Comments on LinkedIn clearly show that people conflate habits with good UI. But I don't think it's fair to say that search button's existence is useful. It... just is there, that's all. :)
True -- unfortunately this doesn't work against a patent holding company with no actual assets.

It's likely they hold thousands of patents but have nothing to return fire against.

Thus, a very GOOD public company can be attacked by someone who has simply bought IP, and does not have recourse against them.
"Why are there so many black lines? Do they have to be black or could we use a different color?"
There is also js-git [1], a complete implementation of git in JS, founded by two fundraisers [2][3].

[1] https://github.com/creationix/js-git

[2] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/creationix/js-git

[3] https://www.bountysource.com/teams/js-git/fundraiser
"Assuming it's not everybody, are consumers/enterprises equipped with the risk management and actuarial tools to assess and influence their chances of being attacked?"

I think those are separate questions. Consumers largely are not.

Enterprises are getting wiser on the risk management side and are starting to use things like "Factor analysis of information risk" (FAIR) to create a framework around the effect of various incidents. Assessing chances of being attacked quantitatively is probably much more difficult than influencing their chances of being attacked (which includes the various best practices tptacek alludes to such as firewalls, having a SOC, utilizing proper controls, AV, etc. (the implementations of the S&S 8 principles.))

As to chances of being attacked, I think it could be examined similar to something like a health issue. What are my chances of getting cancer? Well, I can read the literature and follow behaviors which should reduce my chances of getting it (in the risk world that would things such as using antivirus, not sharing passwords / SSNs / etc in plaintext, over the phone, etc.); however, I should also be preparing for what do should I contract cancer.
My take: 90 days is a reasonable amount of time for Microsoft to get a fix out. It's not a reasonable amount of time to get a fix out and get it deployed to a reasonable percent of the user base.

The article is not just saying Google can fix their web applications faster. They're saying that is the whole point of making technology choices like webtop versus desktop.

Further, after the decades of outright disdain to bother releasing a stable, much less, a secure product from Microsoft, I'm not in a hurry to grant them leeway on this. If they published a counterpoint explaining why they need so much more time, I'd give it a fair reading.
I see. So the button status is more up to date than the diff, and I suppose it is rare enough that the two are out of sync, that people just don't see it much? Makes sense I guess.
I’ve always found it interesting how children learn a language. After 3 months of crying as the only form of communication, they babble for about 6 months. Then they start to articulate single words (mama, ball etc.)—quite often even with meaning, context and while pointing at something. Once again 6 months later they start to form 2-word sentences (big bubble, my ball, mama ball, ball up etc.).

It seems that babies are already able to reason about the world in a rather complex way, for example the baby can already think that someone has the ball, but they can only express it using their limited vocabulary (mama ball etc.). It seems unlikely to me that once the baby can express the subject–object–verb sentence "mama has (the) ball" the thought processes would suddenly be replaced by grammatical constructs.

It does seem, however, that grammar can be used as a tool to verify thought processes. It casts the thoughts in a mould, so to speak, and puts it on the examination table of our echoic memory with a capacity of about 5-20 seconds. There also seems to be a higher motivation to form logically coherent thoughts when they are articulated, presumably because they are naturally intended to be interpreted by other individuals.
If wolves are not scared of humans, that is a huge problem. The last recorded wolf attack on human in my country is from 14th century.

In Europe we try to reintroduce them as well. But after any serious accident, we would probably wipe out local population, and start over.
Ironically a basic statistics class indicates that cherry picking companies that deliver 2x, 3x and ... whatever the fuck that third pick is ... as a guaranteed return over 5 years is indicative of the overenthusiastic hype that historically surrounds bubble valuations.

#3 is a die roll. #2 is the killer. And I might take the bet on just #1.
/dev/random will take forever; too slow.
Imagine you have to take over someone else's 1,000,000 LoC written with their own, unique, classes and methods, some of which may invoke other methods, and interact with instance variables in surprising ways, depending on which method gets called first. Now you have to be able to keep in your head the flow of data (because the methods need not explicitly pass instance variables around) while you're trying to read those 1,000,000 verbose LoC.

At that point, you may not find Objects (aka copyable global scopes where instance variables are globally available to all instance methods of a class) to be so much of an improvement over symbolic computation.

Honestly, what you said never happens in practice (no one is abusing macros like that) but what I said is literally taught by Sandi Metz in her book Practical OOP in Ruby.

Your (common) reaction is just your everyday fear of the unknown. Try it.
It seems I want the opposite. I don't want to have the files on my local machine. I want storage that is bigger than what my local machine has. Hopefully at least one of us will get what we want from this.
That's the point. For big companies bug reports are meaningless unless they result in loss of sufficient quantities of hard cash. In fact, i'm pretty sure comcast is happy about the outcome of this so far, since the conclusion of the author is: Do Comcast's job yourself first.
Some context for this: The developer of this is also the developer of Meteor Cluster, which aims to reduce or eliminate the need for a reverse proxies (and dedicated load balancers) outside of Meteor.
Exactly.

Humans have been doing agriculture for 10's of 1000's of years. Simply stating, "Well, that just has to go, period." without explanation (and then moving on from there) is cute, and ridiculous.
Has anyone ever used something like the "MichiVan" from vRide? It's been around for quite some time as a work carpool service. I'm curious how it compares with Lyft/Uber in terms of cost.
> Self driving cars just have to be safer than Humans -- probably not that difficult.

Sadly, this probably is not true.

TERRORISTS are the reason we go through ridiculous security theatre at airports - costig many millions of dollars - when the drive to the airport is very much more risky that flying.

People are not rational about risk. They will drive a car because they thinkthey are safe drivers. Giving up control is tricky.
I think the picture in the header says it all, on one side I can see very dirty fans and on the other side the improved design.

The first thing I would have tried is to replace the fans. I had to do this with other laptops I have had in the past (HP mostly) but never with the two models of MBP (and I run pretty hard too), so I guess it has to do with the model as he mentioned.

While I sympathise with the idea of improving the design of a product massively consumed, I first try to think that the engineers did a well design and try to look for the malfunctioning component to replace.
It's hyperbole, fine. But the marginal value of the same million dollars to the pro investor and the founder are wildly different. To one it's a shrug, to another it's a life-changing amount of money.

I'd also be interested in seeing the expected lifetime outcomes. Taking a hit for several years, every few years, is probably not as wonderful as you're making it out to be on the average.
I am wondering what is exactly measured here (by timeit). For example for test 5, there is noticeable difference between timings of variants b and c despite them evaluating to the same list of instructions (and I did tests by myself).
Snowden pretty much had root - he had access to more or less everything that wasn't airgapped, including things the NSA wasn't supposed to have direct access to as part of their data-sharing agreements. (Of course, some ECIs presumably are airgapped - but much less than you probably expect these days.)

Not everything is being published, however. There are details from GCHQ STRAP3 (location of individual listening sites) but only STRAP2 documents, and all details of personnel and telephone numbers has been redacted by the journalists (perhaps a little too broadly - for example as in the GCHQ "refer requests for disclosure to" telephone number, you could actually Google it! I think they know by now, however <g>). Snowden wanted to end mass surveillance and sabotage of public security products; not reveal their cryptanalytic advantage to targets. It's the journalists who are doing most of the selection, I gather - but they've seen the whole haul, including what is not being published, and the picture is consistent, though (yes) incomplete.

My impression has been for some time that their cryptanalytic advantage is not actually vast, but their operational resources truly are. Throwing money at things doesn't magically give you breaks to the DLP - but it totally can buy you computing resources that can break 1024-bit Diffie-Hellman. (It mentions Cavium cores - suggesting large, parallel RSA/DH-optimised multipliers were on their HPC shopping list. They are much faster at 1024-bit than higher.) It can buy you insiders, or let you conduct operations that threaten or coerce insiders, or conduct astroturfing campaigns to frighten people away from encryption you can't break, or further the goals of your agency (which do not necessarily align with the government paying your way - it's not so much "oversight" as "don't get caught doing anything you shouldn't"). You can throw (a lot of) money at military contractors and hope some malware-by-committee comes out that you can use to hack anyone that looks interesting, grab intelligence or keys, or any of the above. And they typically attack from every angle at once.

My take on the HPC resources is that they're mostly used as brute force CPU/GPU power for low-entropy situations - anything where passwords are involved may be vulnerable. Email an encrypted DOC, ZIP or RAR file to someone? They're going to at least try it as a matter of course, even en masse, but they're not going to give it much juice unless you're tasked.

Money can't give you magic. However you very, very rarely need magic.
You don't need to remove the plugin and add it again. Just change the config in the plugin, and then when you get back to the daw, you should already see the new outputs.
They did. The retina macbook pro has vents on the sides.
I met someone who was specifically using `dict()` instead of `{}` because, he told me, the CPython parser was much slower on the later than on the former and that it was noticeable on larger code base.

(That being said I think using Python should be about writing maintainable code, not about micro-optimization.

I don't claim the purpose of that site is to push you to use those micro-optimizations, even if the title seems to suggest so. Including the disassembly makes for a nice visualization.)
I’ve been doing coding interview exercises used at big corps. It is sent via email daily.

They seem to be quite easy and after solving some, it feels like I’ve ‘seen them all’.

You cannot be doing anything fancy in a short interview afterall.

If this is really how they filter programmers, it does not seem like a really good way to measure one’s ability to create true value.
I can't remember if it was on YouTube or not, but the other day, I wanted to watch a video about an Acura concept car, and it forced me to watch a Honda ad. I quit in disgust. People insist that online advertising works, but it's just too much to swallow any more.
An Amazon recruiter messaged me via LinkedIn. He thought he had an opening that fit my profile. He sent me a link to an online test/questionnaire. The content of the test: Active Directory, Linux Commands, Exchange Server - not even the same ballpark as my skill-set, as my background is SQL Developer. Half way through the test I was bombing, I just quit, it made absolutely no sense. I suppose it makes no sense unless you have another agenda, like using it as proof to say: "we can't find qualified workers"
Working from the other end with recruiters, I cannot confirm this. It feels to me, the recruiter I'm working with respects both parties and really tries to find a great fit.

All of the applicants he brought were better, than the ones that applied via an online job portal. Even tough some ask 20%-40% over our budget, we are still considering them.
Interesting, I've always wondered how hex editors did it.
The submitted title is for s different article.

This article is about "supermoons" - when Earth's moon is at perigee.
According to [1], it (cement) has been around ~70 megatonnes in each of those years, while the same site agrees with the article and puts China at around ~2 gigatonnes for each of those years.

Usage in the U.S. took a nosedive in 2008, I assume because of the recession. Pre-2008 shows a local maximum in 2005 of 128 megatonnes; so still an order of magnitude less.

[1] http://www.statista.com/statistics/273367/consumption-of-cem...
Funny idea. Are there more examples of fictional YC applications of historical or modern companies?
It does not tell us if it has some side-effects, like making you blind. Chlorine probably also kills MSRA in a petri dish.
Look no further than Solar Flare's Open Onload[1], Mellanox's VMA[2], Myricom's DBL[3], Intel's DPDK[4], etc to see that kernel bypass tech is used in 10G+ networking all the time.

It is super fast, but also lower latency. Many of the features used in lower latency environments like busy polling have been slowly making their way upstream[5]. I think Linux will get pretty close to the userspace kernel bypass stuff, and this is coming from a guy who works in a low latency environment for $REAL_JOB.

[1] http://www.openonload.org/

[2] http://www.mellanox.com/page/software_vma?mtag=vma

[3] https://www.myricom.com/support/downloads/dbl.html

[4] http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/intelligent-systems/i...

[5] https://lwn.net/Articles/540281/