jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
We haven't arrived anywhere. We were already here. Personally, I'd like to see less rather than more of this type of thing, but studios, sports leagues, and sometimes legislative bodies have long had traditions of removing celebrities from their umbrella for misconduct and various morality clauses even if they are never convicted of a crime.

Twitch streamers are just another form of celebrity and subject to the same dynamics.
You can make solid polyethylene out of plastic bags by pressing them in a mold heated to ~100-150C.

But it's quite flammable, so you might not want to use it as a building material.
There are some interesting examples of large visual programs at https://blueprintsfromhell.tumblr.com/

I think the goal of Dynamicland is to build computational paradigms other than procedure-oriented programming. Individual cards can call lua subroutines, but the emergent behavior between cards is not the same type of composition as connecting subroutines.

It reminds me of the gameplay in "Baba is You": the "program" is the set of rules currently in play, and the emergent behavior is the set of moves allowed by those rules.
i don't buy into the cancel culture meme, but what you're describing is exactly how accumulating power exerts itself to eradicate dissent. it happens with every form of governance throughout time once a tipping point of consolidation is reached (which is why i don't buy into this meme, because it's only a specific and ultimately a distracting manifestation of this larger phenomenon).
What was his job out of curiosity? haha
There's already tools in Go for meta-programming. In fact coincidentally I was reading about a few of these tools earlier today [1][2][3] - but personally I don't like that approach.

[1] http://www.slideshare.net/wuvist1/metaprogramming-go-with-py...

[2] https://github.com/pquerna/ffjson

[3] http://blog.golang.org/generate
Deep Channel | Full-Stack Engineer | Remote | Full Time
Deep Channel is building the next generation of tools for data professionals (data engineers, data scientists, etc).

Our mission is to reshape the toolchain of the modern data team, building the most advanced tools across the entire analytics lifecycle.

We're a fully remote team and are looking to bring on Full-Stack engineers - our stack revolves around Node.js, TypeScript, and React.

You can read the more formal JD here.

https://jobs.lever.co/DeepChannel/62a51577-3b33-4571-8552-b6...

My email is in my profile - happy to set up some time to tell you more about our vision.
Apologies, you are of course correct. Round here it is referred to as "EUR drop" (relative to CHF) and I mixed that up. (I fixed this in the original comment)
Merchants lose about $500 billion/year to transactions fees, chargebacks, fraud and equipment fees. Want to know what the inherent value of Bitcoin is? Then think in terms merchants desire to avoid payment processing fees in a 3.6 trillion dollar marketplace. Guys like Draper, with wealth sufficient to absorb significant paper losses to volatility, are playing the long game and betting on bitcoin reducing transaction fees globally.
That's probably even more scarce than sand.
You learn a lot while bullshitting, but probably not about what you're talking about.

Like in programming: a lot of "functions" don't return anything, they're ran for side-effects.
Do not forget security updates and service packs.
Situations like this are all I can think of when considering offloading more and more work to machines. I am all for automation, and maybe it is the lesser of two evils, but there is a certain human problem solving/reasoning element that desperately needs to be figured out.
If you can't be trusted to get the bookkeeping right what makes you think the rest of the program is solid?

Being able to manage your allocation is a pretty good sign that a C programmer knows what he's doing. Relying on 'exit' to free your memory is backporting the web mentality to unix land, it just simply doesn't work that way. There is no different attitude when you write a long running daemon versus a utility program because for all you know your utility program code will be re-purposed to become part of a longer running daemon. So you write your code in as clean a manner as possible and balance your allocs/frees and make sure that you don't have any latent buffer overflows which you may not care about today because of the context your code executes in today because tomorrow that context of execution might change and then we're looking at yet another exploit.
Angle-brackets may be familiar to C++, Java, C# and friends.
But square-brackets are used by Scala (and maybe others).
> Some smart people are interested in this stuff, but that doesn’t mean it’s about to transform the industry.

I would argue it already has. Now, has it transformed the entire industry? Obviously no. Just like there's no silver bullet, you have to pick the appropriate tool for the job. Having an understanding about the tools available will aid you in making better decisions.

Are there people overexcited about scalability? Of course. Just like there are people obsessed about premature optimization, choosing languages for a product for the wrong reasons, or trying to push a project in the direction of their skill set rather the most appropriate.

The skill comes with the ability to pick the right tool for the right job. And for that you have to be aware of the options.
I'm fascinated by how precisely arranged the atoms are. Not surprised per se, I just think it is so neat to see the precise structure of something at such a minute level of detail. Now I want to see what it looks like even lower down the scale!
It's been there for at least several months. They don't advertise it as much because it doesn't earn them money to do that.
Having lived through the computing renaissance of the '80s (that ended with Microsoft dominance through the '90s and 00's), I do not assume that something better would have come along.

Early 80s were a mess, with tens of competing hardware/os combinations (e.g. in 1985, you had C64, Spectrum, QL, BBC B+, AppleII, MSX, CPC664, Elan, Oric, Dragon, PC-XT, Lisa, Mac, Amiga, TI-99/4A, Atari {ST,XL,XE} and a few others I probably forgot or ever knew). Each of these was usable computer with its own ecosystem, and they were entirely incompatible with each other. Just like in the early 20th century, there were over a hundred car manufacturers.

Consolidation was imminent. But consolidating to a single vendor (Microsoft), I believe, was bad for the market. Three or four hw/os combinations for home computers would have been much better overall. E.g. the Amiga in 1985 had better sound and graphics than the majority of PCs in 1993. It also had a functional multitasking OS that worked better with 512KB of ram in 1985 than Windows did with 4MB of ram in 1992.

With microsoft becoming a single standard, there was no pressure to become better. And contrary to what some people here think, microsoft did NOT win the war fairly. e.g. Users did not choose BeOS because microsoft strongarmed PC makers into not including BeOS.
Hey, author here. It does sound kinda bigoted, doesn't it? Lemme clarify. I would really love for more people to learn this stuff. Truly. That's why I wrote a book to teach it to folks in Excel. What freaks me out a bit is that in order to enlarge the ML pie, a lot of vendors are trying to democratize machine learning not by teaching it to more people but by putting the gun in hands of folks who don't actually understand how supervised machine learning works and where it can go wrong.

I don't think people need PhDs to learn or do this stuff. But I think they need more than a "machine learning made easy!" app and a gung-ho attitude.

I feel that I'm halfway between main street and an ivory tower...not sure where that puts me. The upstairs bar at a pizza parlor?
Perhaps in the country. Europe is a big place. Places I go in Paris, Stockholm, London, Amsterdam usually accept cards.
You're making a claim but you're not substantiating it, could you elaborate what you're referring to exactly?
In the hands of the Chinese government being on such a list could get you sent to a reeducation camp. The US isn't there yet, but "yet" does too much work here. If you ever wonder why pro-gun folk are so adamantly against gun registration, remember the yet. If 1A won't hold, 2A through 10A likely won't either.
Sarcasm that needs to be declared with /s is not sarcasm. /s
I would actually think the opposite, he finally has someone to learn from.
Can't econonomists learn LaTeX? The typesetting is so horrible its putting you off from reading it...
>"Policy X will help group Y in manner Z."

While true that conditional statements about the future ("X will help") is not falsifiable, it is still a well formed if-then statement. The statement must be either true or false even though we can't derive a proof one way or the other. I disagree that we have to just throw our hands up and accept belief in unfalsifiable "subjective facts". I can easily fix your statement. Watch me:

"Relevant organization W projects that policy X will help group Y in manner Z."

Now your belief in "X helps Y in manner Z" is no longer blind but derived from trust in organization W. If you don't want to trust W you can dig deeper into their methods and data. There is no link in the chain that can only be filled in subjectively.

>"Politician A voted against X" isn't necessarily as factual as it may seem since it's a common tactic to have X bundled in with a whole bunch of other things, and you don't know whether A voted against X, or voted against boondoggle B buried in the bill, or if X was in fact the only thing the politician agreed with in the entire bill and was forced to vote against it because everything ..."

If you looked closely you would see "therefore politician A hates Y" is a false conclusion from a true premise. Not to victim blame here, but if true facts are leading someone to false conclusions then that's on them for being bad at critical reasoning. The facts aren't subjective. The flaw is in the wetware. Human brains have exploitable bugs. We call them "fallacies". The hotfix was released in the education system. It hasn't reached everyone yet.

If the public can't be trusted to evaluate facts presented to them then the very premise of democracy is flawed anyway.
A bunch of things converged to make it happen.

1. Rollover standards enacted in the 2000s lead to slightly thicker or bigger a and b-pillars. Many were redesigned with better steel and/or geometries, but most just got bigger.

2. Additional airbags fitted behind a and b-pillars required more area, and specific angles, complicating design.

3. Technology and wires. Clearance for tweeters, light and rain sensors, microphones, and then the various harnesses required to make them work. Add to this the wiring for anything mounted up high, and you got a bundle goin baby.

4. Cars with all this cruft are heavier now, and mostly already top-heavy suvs, so lets make them even thicker to hold the increased weight when sally flips her explorer when it hits a curb going too fast in the cosco parking lot.

P.s. Please, watch for motorcycles.
Why is it scary? There's plenty of other old technology (materials, propellents, etc.) that is in these systems I would worry about before I ever worry about a DEC system.
I don't see any connection between LSD and geek culture, except for the one programmer who happened to be at that conference.

I'd go further and say that I don't see a strong connection between geek culture and the countercultural movement in general. I see it as a carrot and stick approach by the left. On the one hand, the stick is attacking geek culture as a bunch of sexist racist losers. The carrot is allowing geek culture to be co-opted (recuperated, to use a long out of fashion term) by the countercultural movement. We are allowed to celebrate "hacking" as long as it is considered as part of the grand tradition of countercultural rebellion.
I agree that the price of land is a tough nut to crack, but the cost of actually building stuff on that land could be reasonably expected to fall at a rate similar to the rate of other manufacturing. That it hasn't is, I think, largely because we build buildings right where they end up, so we can't take advantage of the efficiencies afforded by assembly lines and outsourced labor. This mostly seems like a good thing to me. The notable exception is trailer homes, for which the price of the land really does dominate the cost.
Not sure how much you paid for banking, but where I was it was always free or very low charges, nowhere close to even 2% of all your payments (which is a minimum estimate for credit card charges).
You can work around this by either setting a fake gateway in a static IP configuration, or configuring your DHCP server to give a fake gateway to requests coming from the TV's MAC address.

By "fake gateway" I mean a non-existing IP on your LAN: that way, no outgoing request from the offending MAC address will ever get out to the public Internet.
Do they have a "move fast and break things" philosophy in 2020? I know they did a decade ago, but is that still true today? Further, does that philosophy apply to their core infrastructure, or just leaf-node feature development? Is there any indication that Facebook's cloud infra team sacrifices stability for innovation? When was the last time Facebook had a major outage that was traced to some core service? How does their infra track record stack up to AWS (I'm a happy AWS customer, but their infrastructure flakes on us in a major way several times per year)?
> I've long joked I wish there was a storage company devoted to personal libraries, a "Rent-a-Library".

I've long had a similar thought, though not as user-friendly as yours, just the book storage part, not the reading room part. Some combination of LibraryThing, storage boxes, storage units, and shipping companies, managed to make book storage, retrieval, and sharing, convenient and reliable for its users. I think the only novel thought that I've had on the topic would be that the charge for not returning a book that was shared with you would be some base processing fee (say $5) in addition to the cost of repurchasing the book.
>> 1. Nobody would buy them.

Sure they would. If you price it correctly.

>> 2. Small biz doesn't have access to corporate paper markets, even in the best of times.

Not true. I am a SMB owner and have secured a LOC for my business as well as refinancing of my house personally. It's out there. Just at prices you might not like. But then again, we aren't guaranteed good prices. Or at least, we shouldn't be.
Will this track individual's symptom progression over time? e.g. if I submit everyday as suggested, are these uncorrelated datapoints, or do you get trend info?
This is inaccurate, the Lemur Pro supports charging through USB-C with a dead battery.
Are these all on-site roles or do you consider remote as well?
The difference is that Parse ran on AWS. In my opinion, the real reason Facebook isn't in the cloud business, and why Parse was eventually shuttered, is that Facebook will never allow external code to run anywhere in their network.
Well, I mean "It's better to burn out than to fade away" is a motto too, but it's one that people backpedal on when their organs start to suffer the consequences of their hard-living.
I have also heard the Boeing believed that supersonic airplanes would become de rigeuer for passenger travel within 10 years or so, so they made the 747 freight-capable so they wouldn't be completely worthless in the future.
> we continue to have working sustainably as an engineering principle

For me this is a major factor in choosing an employer so I followed your link ([2]) but did not see anything in your principles that refers to working sustainably or work-life balance, etc.
OK, I see the clock now but it doesn't work like the traditional one, I played a 5 min "blitz" game and I would have like 5:05, is it using perhaps the Fisher's clock?
What I find interesting is how well you indirectly answer the question.

Americans are irrational. We are superstitious and confuse things like the availability of early treatment with being forced to use it. We are also selfish and unwilling to live with the results of our poor decision making process.

PS: It's not hard to demonstrate that universal heath care would cost less and be more useful than are current system. However, most people already decided to do something else so people are not going to change their mind over something as silly as a rational argument.
Especially on the iPhone!
What I suspect is that half of the questions on the test came from the test bank, and half were original to the professor. Therefore, the cheaters can be detected as ones who got the first half nearly 100% correct, and the second half maybe 50% correct.
Very nice, Prolog is a vastly under rated language which is very useful for a lot of logic and decision making programming problems.
Previously..

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1865249
This confuses me. If it is impossible to time the market, then why does he think it is "pretty clear that the market is getting overheated"? [edit: in the comments he explains that he's looking at "revenues and cash flow and discounted cash
flow to get values", but if these are only weak predictors that don't enable one to time the market, why worry?]
'With all due respect', does usually come with the caveat that no respect is deserved.
Actually putting, "I'm not saying the deal is off..." makes me think the deal might be off if I don't 3 & 4. Your other statement, without the qualifier, simply makes me think we need to work on 3 & 4.

The qualifier in this case seems to be an attempt to prime the listener with the fact that this deal is not a sure thing still.
This reminds me of "Sorry-buts"...

When someone almost always says "I'm sorry, but..." they are never usually that sorry. I've noticed these phrases often used by those who have a hard time taking responsibility for their actions or failures.
> There has been some debate whether MOOCs can be as useful for teaching humanities and non-technical subjects as it is for computer science and math.

I've only taken CS MOOCs till now and undoubtedly the programming assignments have been the most interesting part. Recently, I've meaning to take a few history courses and was wondering how engaging would the assignments in those be.

Can someone who's taken any Humanities courses share their experience?
Please, somebody do this at a good skiing location.

I did it myself with 3 other guys back in 07-08 in Fernie, Canada, and it was awesome - but also a lot of work to get set up across the world before we arrived.
This sounds completely different than it really is. Angloshpere eagerly picks up anti-Meta sentiment, but old Germans and French are so disconnected that social media and the entire internet thing are some kind of caprices for them. That's why they say they're fine without it. Private jet, high end Mercedes, yacht, villa on Capri, revolving door with the industry - this is their reality and internet is toothles there.
While Methane has a shorter half-life it is also a much more effective GHG. The common way to look at this is Global Warming Potential, which is measure in CO2 equivalents. You can find this on the wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential

Notice that you can look at the GWP potential over time spans. For methane, over the next 100 years (which is the period that will impact most HNers the most) it is at least 20x as impactful as CO2.

The reason this matters is because the biggest unknown with climate change is positive feed backs. A classic example of this is that as the arctic has less ice it also reduces the albedo of the oceans allowing them to absorb even more heat faster.

Another, methane related, theoretical, positive feed back is methane clathrates which are essentially frozen stores of methane deep in the arctic ocean. If the ocean were to warm up enough this might rapidly release methane leading to a catastrophic runaway warming scenario, leading to what is suspected to have caused rapid climate change in the Quanternary period [1].

It is currently believed by many researchers that, in the specific case of the 'clathrate gun' firing, it is unlikely to happen. The trouble is we don't know for sure. That is just one unknown, potentially devastating positive feed back.

If you read Peter Ward's work (and some others as well) it looks like at various times in the history of the planet there was very rapid, very destructive climate change that was caused by a cascading series of positive feed backs. We don't know exactly where these are, but the more methane we release (and CO2) and the faster the planet warms the more likely we are to find these.

It is important to note also, that these positive feedbacks are not factored into the IPCC report (just like the potential collapse of Thwaites Glacier is not) because the is no way to effectively model this and make predictions about them. It means that if you think the IPCC report sounds bad (or even if you don't) there is a lot of potential risk not mentioned in the various pathways there.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_hypothesis
Here's a related, recent New Yorker article about the melting permafrost.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/17/the-great-sibe...

https://archive.is/ZyhPf

> Over thousands of years, the frozen earth swallowed up all manner of organic material, from tree stumps to woolly mammoths. As the permafrost thaws, microbes in the soil awaken and begin to feast on the defrosting biomass. It’s a funky, organic process, akin to unplugging your freezer and leaving the door open, only to return a day later to see that the chicken breasts in the back have begun to rot. In the case of permafrost, this microbial digestion releases a constant belch of carbon dioxide and methane. Scientific models suggest that the permafrost contains one and a half trillion tons of carbon, twice as much as is currently held in Earth’s atmosphere.
I've caught myself accidentally flagging something when I intended to favorite it. This proves that I actually do that quite often.
I’m surprised I haven’t heard this feedback earlier. You’re righht.
Java and Java ecosystem are an interesting case. Looking back over the last 15 or so years of Java most orgs went through massively over complicated setups like EJB containers to slightly better spring (GWT probably deserves a mention), to much better spring boot, and now to smaller, saner frameworks such as javeline or micronaut.
The language itself is leagues and bounds ahead of what it once was in java 7 and before. And of course, the all consuming drive to use every conceivable design pattern is not in style any longer.

Generation has nothing to do with it, but trends have everything to do with complexity and constant change.
I suspect that's not so much worrying as there are plenty of vapour sources on Earth (like the vast oceans)

More water -> less evaporation (but the partial pressure will remain the same more or less)
Speaking from experience, convincing management is a long-haul process.

It is needs to be repeatedly brought (but gently).

Forward links to success stories, provide counter arguments to FUD (but again, gently!)

I say gently because it's easy to create enemies by making people look bad, and that's a no-no, you have to gradually wear down the old consensus and build a new one.
I have an odd request regarding e.g. SHA-3. Can anyone tell me if it is implemented in a way that is in a sense 'one-pass' over its input, i.e. each byte of its input in memory is accessed only once, after which all of the algorithm state is held in registers and the original input is never accessed again? My scenario is one where I'm concerned about TOCTOU-like attacks on the memory where the input is stored, but I don't want to pay the overhead of first copying the whole input to a 'safe' memory location, e.g. imagine I have kernel code wanting to compute a hash over data stored in userspace.
Why doesn't it work? Genuinely curious!