jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Programming languages are specificational: you say everything up-front, then the computer interprets all your statements at once and executes them.

Natural language, however, is conversational. You say A, the person you're talking to interprets that as Z and asks for clarification, you explain the difference between A and Z, now the other person thinks M and asks more clarifying questions, etc.

Computers are fully capable of working conversationally, instead of specificationally; it just requires that instructions be stored in a form that's a bit more complicated than a linear tape (e.g. a database of constraints, like Prolog.)
But at some point in understanding probability, as it is actually used in the real world, you need calculus. The same is true for economics, which you didn't mention but often comes up as something everyone should learn. I think by not covering calculus, students are forced to learn things (economics, physics, statistics) the hard way and without understanding them deeply. Unfortunately, calc generally requires trig. It should be taught while teaching calculus.
Even if the CSS is cached, your browser still needs to ask the server if the files has changed and receive back a "304 Not Modified," so you're still incurring the overhead of those connections.
This is clearly demoware, good enough to impress the general public. But once you go from "Draw a red circle" to "Draw a red circle overlapped one third with a blue square with white dots over the lower left corner" that would be progress. And then I wonder if this will also work: "Paint a white-dotted blue square that intersects over a third of a red circle in the lower-left corner. Or will it give a "compile error"

Why not just create a DSL (e.g. in Scala) with a simple standardized NL-like syntax that can give meaningful "compile errors". There is no need to impress the general public.
These guys are smart.
(responding to cletus about New Jersey)

There is a cluster effect to our social lives that is just as important as the clustering effect that puts the epi-center of certain industries in particular geographic spots (for instance, the movie industry is centered in LA, the software startup industry is centered in the Valley, etc). To be specific: a lot of the parties that I want to go to are in Brooklyn, but none of them are in New Jersey. If I go to a party in Brooklyn, and then at 3 AM I am heading home, then for me getting home is just a 15-20 minute taxi ride. Whereas if I live in New Jersey, getting home from Brooklyn is at least an hour of trains and buses and walking.

This point would be moot if there were an equal number of parties in New Jersey that I wanted to go to (and therefore getting home to Brooklyn, from New Jersey, would also be a big ordeal) but there are none. I've never been invited to a party in New Jersey that I wanted to go to. Even when I lived in New Jersey, all the social events that I wanted to go to were either in Manhattan or Brooklyn. So, for me, it makes a lot more sense to live in Brooklyn.

I could maybe see living in New Jersey if the rents were dramatically lower, but they are not. I have a little studio apartment in Brooklyn that I pay $1,100 a month for, and in New Jersey I might pay $900 for an apartment of the same size. The extra $200 a month is just not worth it to me, not when the real cost involves being an hour further away from the social life that I want to have.

Not that I'm a 20-something, but I assume the logic is the same for them as it is for me.
Any news that could put Windows sales in doubt could be seem as the always announced beginning of Microsoft's inevitable downfall.

But $259M doesn't really change the discussion about Windows. Windows did $4.8B in the quarter, up from $2.9B a year ago. Making it $4.5B doesn't make anyone pause.

But would take E&D from $1.8B to $2.1B and show 50% YoY growth. That's impressive, and something that might begin to move the stock.

The fact of the matter is that everyone knows that Windows is not a growth area for MS. And if anything, they'd want to wait until a bad quarter to begin to shift earnings to Windows, not in a record-breaking quarter. Now they have less accounting games at their disposal in the inevitable future when Windows does begin to make less money.

In summary, what I'm saying is that this accounting has nothing to do with trying to make Windows look good (or E&D look bad). I think it is just internal restructuring of P&Ls that had a coincidental a minor effect on fiscal reporting.
Sure, I think we can all acknowledge that medically speaking, breastfeeding is ideal. But if it’s not feasible, mothers shouldn’t feel guilty about it. There are all sorts of ways you can provide for your child.
Everything 7-11 sells is addictive. They're literally drug dealers set up on corners. But I really enjoyed this analogy.
Most pieces of technology tend to become more energy-efficient as time goes on. See electric cars or even gradual improvements to the internal combustion engine like VTEC. Same with computer CPUs. Bitcoin is pretty unique in that it gets more wasteful over time.

Disclaimer: I have some Bitcoin so “you’re just jealous” isn’t a valid retort.
What happened to memristor based storage revolution ?
Their "[X]% of new apps are reviewed within 7 days" board on the dev site hasn't been updated in a while. It seems they have slipped from the awesome 3-day turnarounds we were seeing around this same time last year.
Or "Technical Difficulties"

http://www.techdif.co.uk/one/street-view-race/
1. You learn an awful lot.
--This is no different from a small company. Nothing that stands out to be a reason to work for a large company.

2. You get to work with lots of clever people.
--Are you nuts? A good percent of large companies are made up of "resources" who chug on the framework created by few good men(mostly when the team/company was smaller). Usually an offshore vendor is already established and politicizing the project.

3. You become part of a large diaspora/community.
-- The explanation makes more sense if you are working in a large non-tech company (say Ford,Toyota plant). But again not a reason that stands out as unique to a Large company.

5. you learn the art of politics
- You are crushed by the number game (with equally competent(or otherwise)) competing for promotions, that loving to lick ass becomes more of survival than a favorite activity.

6. You have time to reflect.
-It is not necessarily slow. It is fast paced repetitive, enough to numb you.You ponder about the life in general (and get into depression?) (this doesn't apply to the crowd that join the large company to live the retired life)

"You might also appreciate the relative security, the calm and the chance to get your life in order. Once you join a startup, it is generally going to be permanent 'seats of you pants' mode."
-wtf is that about?

7. You get a baseline. Then you go and try to do it better.
-how is this a reason to work for a large company only.
>An IT major couldn't write a 2500 word critique on Kant if their life depended on it.

I can, but that's because I did a philosophy degree before entering CS. At any rate, I still can't believe how many people get viruses from porn. With the proliferation of tube sites, you don't need to download anything. AdBlock takes care of malware-serving ads. You pretty much have to fall for the "this video requires a codec. Click here to download" bullshit. I get that some people can barely google, but it depresses me that there's enough of them to make it worthwhile for people to write viruses.
Finishing up my undergrad at UIUC. A notable fraction of students in each course do cheat. I see two courses of action: (1) we could take the hard road and seek to catch all dishonest students and punish them or (2) we could make cheating extremely difficult with some simple changes.

I think (2) is the prudent course of action. The majority of cheating that I am aware of is only possible because professors reuse assignments and homework/exam questions from previous years. Solutions are simply passed down each year. One notable exception is in our theory classes, where the faculty make the effort to produce unique homework and exam questions every semester. I believe cheating in the theory classes is far lower as a result and I am extremely thankful that the faculty put forth this effort.

I am cognizant of the work required to generate unique assignments each semester. However, as demonstrated by how departments typically handle quals, it is doable if the workload is distributed. It is my sincere hope that this becomes standard practice. It is the easiest and most fair way to handle the cheating problem. The reason why such a system usually doesn't get implemented in practice is because it requires the entire department to commit to undergraduate education, which is quite difficult to achieve at research universities.^

Some other minor additions to the above system that have a good payoff/cost ratio: (1) static analyzers to detect duplicate code submission and (2) higher weights on exams to punish those who share complete answers on homework assignments.

^Don't take this as a condemnation of undergraduate education in the CS department at UIUC. There are incredible teachers here you'll get an excellent education if you make a little effort to avoid professors whose priorities are elsewhere.
The service provides STUN and TURN servers to aid with NAT and firewall traversal, allowing the WebRTC services/apps to concentrate their energies on their core service delivery. Further, the service allows the WebRTC service providers to monitor, audit and enforce policies for each of their users.
The thing is though, even as geeks it is hard to really tell which slight CPU and GPU variations are actually better. Most of us still just have to go on online opinion and FPS/computational tests.

I spend most of my life with computers but wouldn't know how a certain clock speed i3 compares with a different speed i5 and exactly how AMD processors are stacking up to their similar intel ones.
When your self-hosted blog goes down, it's usually your own fault. I guess that's probably more acceptable to hackers than when it's somebody else's fault, and all you can do is sit and stare at generically worded status updates on Twitter.
This is a remarkably bitter take. Sir Berners-Lee deserves thanks. None of us created the web and I don't think we can say that it was inevitable that someone would have in its initial open form. It changed the world.

That said, his attempts to reclaim the web to its original frontier state don't seem possible. There are innumerable reasons why; network effects and entrenched interests being the least of them.
Isn't threat assessment (risk/mitigation cost) part of their job ?
I'd consider startup time the least important metric for measuring speed of a text editor - as long as it's not ridiculous.

Important speed metrics for me are:
Switching between buffers

Scrolling up/down a page (vim used to be terrible for me before i switched terminals to Kitty)

Substitutions

Search
Interesting, I'm curious what kind of tradeoffs do you have to make and what places worked for you but your peers thought unacceptable?
I don't think that we read the same article. In particular, if over 85% of Google's revenue is from ads, then there's no way that the rest of the business can carry Google, nor that any particular single department could survive on its own. Youtube has never been profitable, and their acquisition by Google is likely what saved them from running out of cash.

If there comes a day beyond online advertising as we know it, then Google will collapse; Google cannot compete effectively outside the Web.

You are almost right, but didn't look high enough. Alphabet, the big holding company at the top, can survive Google's collapse, and Alphabet is diversified.
Honestly, I wish all research papers were written this way. Easy to understand, kept me entertained, and presented meaningful results with a way to reproduce (on a single GPU).

I grant all research papers on deep learning can't be reproducible with a single GPU in a reasonable time, but it should happen more often IMO. It seems lazy to just toss out a paper saying "we hit new benchmarks, by increasing the parameters and throwing more compute". I'd like to see "we hit new benchmarks with a new design, the old ones had this issue, etc.

Anyway, great read, recommend. Also, happy for the author haha

"The author has also moved to a one bedroom apartment in
San Francisco, removing themselves from proximity to the
alley of questionable odors and unsavory noises."
Like it or not this is a problem many of us have, and are avoiding AWS for that sole reason. You can keep blaming the victim, or you can accept not being able to set up a limit is a usability problem.

It's like saying "this website is stupid, it's storing passwords in plaintext", and you answering "hurr, it's the user's responsibility to create and manage cryptographically secure passwords".
I think considering the massive policy advantages - if not the total lockdown - given to conservative ideas in government, especially in economics and banking, that's not quite the problem it might seem to be.

The real problem with left-wing academia is that it has been persuaded to believe that ritualised criticisms of conservative public policy are a substitute for political influence. The academic left has almost exactly no political influence at this time.

As for evidence-based policy - when conservatives stop promoting frankly kooky positions like climate change denial or an insistence that raising the minimum wage kills jobs it's going to be easier to accept that conservatives have an interest in evidence-based rational policy.
Similar thing happened
in the past when application developers (most apps were written assembly in the past) built a dependency on instruction sets. If the computer manufacturer underperforms in future years, you are stuck. This dynamic can never be erased even as we keep climbing higher on the stack.
I found the lovingly hand picked play lists of the Wee Scone Variety show via radio.garden a year or so ago.

Grant Henderson does a great job keeping it interesting yet quite listenable, and upbeat. The fact that he outside of the US helps him find versions of things I've never heard as well.

http://www.blackdiamondfm.com/programmes/wee-scone-variety-s...
I’ve been half ignoring them because they tend to cry wolf with the high price emails. But this is no joke, I checked current rate which is $9.01/kWh. I immediately switched back to my old provider.
> the initial attack vector was a USB stick in a parking lot

That's not fair. It should sound like this: "the initial attack vector was a Windows 0day requiring 0 clicks, delivered by a USB stick in a parking lot."
There was an incandescent bulb phase out over several years that was supposed to end in 2020, but Trump blocked it because he claimed that LED bulbs were too expensive and made him look orange.[0]

You pretty much can’t buy them anymore at stores except for specialty bulbs like oven lamps, but that might vary state-to-state.

0: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/climate/trump-light-bulb-...
I read reports of Kramer patching things up with Fauci. Excluding the ones from after Larry died that were sourced to Fauci alone, what do you know? Thanks for any links.

March 8, 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pEcgDmEUk&feature=emb_logo

This video shows Fauci saying people should not wear masks, that they get a false sense of security, that there are unintended consequences: fiddling with masks, touching masks, dirtying masks/failing to clean, etc. At end "you should think of healthcare providers and people who are ill."

Also, that last point about conserving PPE doesn't apply to cloth, which health orders allow instead of polyprop. Surgical masks were plentiful in March.

Again, right there in this video, Fauci did not argue against civilian masking solely based on shortages. He really did say that most people should not be wearing. Right or wrong, he was giving advice consistent with the US Surgeon General, CDC at the time, and WHO (which has varied its advice in the last year).
Taleb makes great points here. The only counterargument I am aware of is Nick Bostrom's "Vulnerable World" hypothesis[1]. Taleb assumes that negative outcomes may simply be abandoned at zero cost, and therefore reducing research costs (options contract prices) is the sole necessary step for increasing optionality. The VWH claims that certain technological advances, once they're out of Pandora's box, are impossible to abandon or ignore.

[1]: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1758-5899.1...
You’d think someone would have come along who just scrapes Amazon’s listings, applies their own intelligent indexing heuristics, and spits out a new search/browse page that just links through to Amazon’s regular product pages. Like CamelCamelCamel, but for dimensions other than price.
More discussion as to why that treatment is not necessarily easy to interpret: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23654353
While this seems to be a battle of anecdotes, everyone I know who owns a smartphone uses it as their primary non-work email device, Facebook device, browsing device, LinkedIn device, etc. Many home personal computers no longer get turned on. It isn't a cell "phone" as much as it's simply a portal computing device.
And arguably it's best when it's done as little as possible.
> Pretending that we don't see race and yet operating in a world deeply defined by it will do precisely nothing to address structural racism.

What do you see as the steady state? Are the systems we're building now to be explicitly race-aware, like hiring quotas by race, the steady state we want to shoot for? Or do you see these practices as a stepping stone to some farther goal?
Because my compiles take to long - just noticed this. My compile takes a minute or so, so I flick to hacker news, reddit etc while waiting, then what was I doing...
Just to emphasize how conceptually easy the proof is when boiled down to its bare essentials, here is the proof in tweet form

https://twitter.com/BooleanAnalysis/status/11458375764876124...
> Solaris and Windows both do strict accounting by default, and overcommit is opt-in at a fine-grain API level.

Not sure what you mean by this - I don't think Windows has overcommit in any form, whether opt-in or opt-out. What it does have is virtual address space reservation, but that's separate from commitment; reserved virtual memory is not backed by any page, no matter how much free RAM you have, until you explicitly tell the system to commit physical memory to it.

In fact I'm not even sure 'opt-in' to overcommit is possible in principle. Because if you opt-in to overcommit, you jeopardize other applications' integrity—who likely did not opt-in.
cool. i will def. check it out
Right, but remove that Google "garden" and you close the web to many people. It might become more open to some people like you, but the average user likely will stop using it entirely. With that many will just stop maintaining a web page since the users are found elsewhere, and from there it is just going downhill until we are at current linux adoption rates. It will be alive, but only for enthusiasts.
SEEKING WORK - remote or relocation/full time or part time

Skills:

Primary languages: C (5 years), C++ (2 years)

Auxiliary languages: IA-32 assembly, Bash, AWK, Python, Perl, Tcl

Operating Systems: Linux (Debian family), FreeBSD

Miscellaneous: Git, GCC, GDB, Vim, Nginx, Apache HTTP, MySQL etc

Resume: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/eldar-gaynetdinov/61/64b/a05

GitHub: https://github.com/hal9000xp
(discussion of my project here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7712512 )

Email: See my GitHub page

About me:

I live in Moscow (Russia). I worked for a leading Russian internet company (Mail.Ru) as
a backend developer of the ICQ Instant Messenger. I decided to quit Mail.Ru last December.
You can read the reason here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8692961 (I wrote these words just before I actually quit Mail.Ru)

Ideally, I'm looking a job with relocation to abroad. But I would be also happy to get remote job (in this case, I can relocate myself to Thailand or somewhere else).
Pretty much, I guess I’m not adding much more than backup claims here, which I don’t personally see issue with.
As a person working in Facebook for 7 years I feel like this post is incorrectly portraying FB's process and culture:

- First, Facebook avoids titles, so there's no such thing "senior software engineer". Levels are generally unknown by people so ICs get judged by their ideas, and not their title.
- If there was such a thing as "senior" in Facebook, it's not starting at the E4 level. (If you look at levels.fyi and align the Facebook levels with Google you might get that an E5 is a senior)
- This entire list of chapters of CLRS chapters is ridiculous. It's a great book and I'd recommend it for people into theory and who will be around Computer Science. But if you didn't go through a college degree and algorithms course, and need to interview, do yourself a favor and go directly for LeetCode or Cracking the Coding Interview. YMMV as to how much you need to learn. Some people I know can easily breeze through these interviews with no prep, those people are also super smart. Some smart people I know have a harder time, no system is perfect.
- To actually get hired in one of higher levels at Facebook you will need to go through the design interview, which is a very different type, and the career experience one. No matter how well you ace the coding, you will not get an offer for a high level if you didn't succeed adequately in these.
- All of my coding questions in the last few years required knowledge I learned in my first year learning programming. This is usually the norm.

Of course, this is my personal experience at Facebook, but it is based on quite some time and a lot of interviewing.
> Meanwhile the guys who were doing all the new stuff, sucked at trying to juggle 12 things because it looked good on a resume.

This isn't helped by the current trend of trying to hire mostly fullstack developers, also known as hiring one person to do the job of three people. It does almost nothing but incentivize packing resumes to hopefully make the cut and burn people out from switching modes.
>> My understanding, based on the article, is that a normal processor, we would have expected arr[idx] + arr[idx+1] and arr[idx] to take the same amount of time.

That depends. If the two accesses are on the same cache line, then yes. But since idx is random that will not happen sometimes. He never says how big array[] is in elements or what size each element is.

I thought DRAM also had the ability to stream out consecutive addresses. If so then it looks like Apple could be missing out here.

Then again, if his array fits in cache he's just measuring instruction counts. His random indexes need to cover that whole range too. There's not enough info to figure out what's going on.
No, there's no cross-stack optimization here. The M1 gives very high performance for all code.
This is a shameless copycat of here.fm.

I've been using here.fm for several months and it is awesome. I'd highly recommend you check here.fm out before supporting a company that rips off other people's work.
Hi HN! Thank you for taking the time to check out extension.dev! My two co-founders and I built extension.dev to help developers better create internal chrome extensions for their teams. It's been really exciting seeing what kind of extensions people are already creating and hoping to create.

We are very early and a small team so please bear with us as we roll out developer preview invites!