jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure what 'evidence' would be satisfying to you for something like this, but maybe something about the man himself will help you understand what he means?

https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/after-years-of-ab...

tl;dr for the article: “Please just kill yourself now. The world will be a better place” - Linus Torvalds, former "Candid" speaker
I did my own budgeting in a spreadsheet for awhile, and those big lump purchases were definitely something that's hard to model.

I think it's pretty easy to create a budgeting product for the 90% case but those odd lumpy purchases and split payments are something everyone wants to deal with differently.

For example, my girlfriend and roommates often split purchases by one person buying, and the other person adding an entry on Splitwise.

That Splitwise entry isn't a bank transaction until maybe weeks later when I get a Venmo payment from a roommate covering several Splitwise requests, and for my budget I want to match up the $100 charge at the grocery store with the $50 Splitwise request with the $250 Venmo payment that was only partially for the $50 owed on groceries... not an easy problem to solve in a general way that makes lots of users happy.
If you ever looked at different call conventions and how call stack frames are used with them, it would be immediately obvious that it's recursion via goto top making a loop using the same stack frame's local variable memory.
SciHub doesn't have value so much as Elsevier has "anti-value". Scihub is a space without the negative effect of Elsevier gatekeeping, thus seeming to have a net positive effect.

Instead of doing anything at all with SciHub, we should instead fight Elsevier. First blow should be on the basis that Elsevier is anti-competitive, by the logic that if wasn't there would be no reason for it to succeed at all.

Second blow should be a that any partially federal funded work would be required to be publicly available, or at least not derive any profit from discouraging public access.
Interesting he thought it was tedious - I thought this one was actually the closest to being like a real world software engineering task! No mathematical tricks or lateral thinking, just a gnarly problem that requires planning and breaking down into more manageable pieces. I actually really enjoyed it for that.
Please don't do this here, even if another comment seems useless or wrong.

Instead, if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't comment until you do.
The squaring a circle with compass and straightedge has been known to be impossible for 140 years.

We're obviously talking about the version of the problem everyone's been working on for roughly the last 100.
Or Microsoft, but yes, indeed...
U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon has already rejected that Maryland applies to the NSA bulk collection. Ultimately it will come down the supreme court but I would not be surprised to see them limit the scope of Maryland.

>The government’s legal justification for the call-tracking program is based on a 1979 case, Smith v. Maryland, involving the surveillance of a criminal suspect over a two-day period. In that case, the Supreme Court said that Americans have no expectation of privacy in the telephone metadata that companies hold as business records, and that therefore a warrant is not required to obtain such information. A succession of judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have adopted the government’s argument based on that ruling.

>But Leon said the question the Supreme Court confronted in 1979 is not the same as the one he was faced with. “Indeed, the question in this case can more properly be styled as follows: When do present-day circumstances — the evolutions in the government’s surveillance capabilities, citizens’ phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies — become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court thirty-four years ago, that a precedent like Smith does not apply?” he wrote. “The answer, unfortunately for the government, is now.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/judge-nsas-collecting...
It looks like it was added in version 8.19. Probably about time to update my Ubuntu box...

http://savannah.gnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=7342
Any chance of a reference for that? I'm in the middle of adapting a story about this and haven't heard this idea before, I'd love to learn more about it.
To have an enjoyable conversation with an interested colleague, rather than someone whose tone is "shut up and listen to your elders." Besides, having a crotchety back-and-forth makes for boring reading, and we should be respectful of the community.

Thanks for the pieces you've provided so far. I'll bring up my objections elsewhere. Hopefully anyone who's been having my same concerns will be able to do the same.
This is the real elephant in the room. With the end of the Cold War, pretty much all systemic critiques of the American Way of Life were swept away, and any request of change was shut down for ever. America (as depicted in Hollywood movies in 1985) was crowned "best society ever" and social mores were frozen in place. As globalisation started to hit harder and harder, generating a timid backlash in Seattle etc, 9/11 happened... and again any critical point of view was banished. Even "western" foreign policy is basically still the same. No wonder Reagan was all but beatified when he died.
Beware that if you make it difficult to buy your product, people may just pass over your product for one that is easier to buy.

At least don't hide your price behind a phone number as that is terribly annoying.
Yeah, it would be awesome if you could trade x% of your salary for x% extra holiday time. Just not possible in most jobs.
> morale code

The yubitsume(†) will continue until morale improves.

† finger cutting
What kind of reassurance have developers ever had that Apple won't pull the rug out from underneath them? It's a dangerous market, and has been from day one, because you do business at Apple's pleasure. When you build on a platform that is wholly and completely controlled like the iPhone/iPad platform is, the danger that the gatekeeper may change the rules or kick you out is an integral part of doing business on that platform.
>cloth diapers cause more rashes.

I'd heard the contrary (we use both cloth and compostable disposables), any citations?

I can see how those using strong washing detergents could have problems, we use ecover and haven't had nappy rash problems (anecdotal I know).
I suggest you move. If you're a decent PHP and RoR developer there wont be a shortage of work for you in Metro areas (at least NYC).

New Orleans (if you are lucky enough to even be there) unfortunately just doesn't have a great tech scene.

Also put those sites back up. You can afford $20/month on a Linode on your credit card for the value they add to your resume, trust me.
Well, what's a better platform, then?

I develop for the iPhone because in some ways, it's a "sure" way to make money. Not necessarily a lot of money, but still. Other than Android, which has its own problems, what other platforms exist that give as wide an audience willing to spend money on your apps?

It's all cheery and nice to say "Apple sucks, hahah iPhone developers", but what's are other options for those of us who cannot work at a normal job and do not have the resources, time, or dedication to invest our lives in a startup?

(Serious question, by the way, not just bashing your comment here.)
Ha object recognition is still far from foolproof if you ask me, but we're getting there!
Or from an associated bank, law firm, etc.
you are holding it wro^^^^needs more calibration
I think you meant to write needy GFs take up a lot of time and money.

If you are consistently working more than 60 hours/week, then maybe you need to learn to delegate. Working 100 hrs/week only leads to burn out. With or without a GF you will suffer health problems. So having GF with whom to share non-working time and "exercise" (ahem) is good for you. If you don't feel invigorated after spending a couple of hours with her, then maybe it's an inter-personal dynamic issue - time to move on.

In my experience there are many entrepreneurial / career-oriented women out there who work hard and play hard. Believe it or not, they often complain they can't find men who can understand them ... so there's your chance.

As for the money. You probably don't choose to be a sugar daddy - so stop dating gold diggers.
>if you're willing to testify

Most people aren't over $20, which is why the system is a complete failure.
> “I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.”
Of course they shouldn't. Only reason I can think is that they were testing the ability to get close to an aircraft. But it doesn't make sense really.

But whatever the reason, the idea that people buy the UFO thing when it's such an obvious cover story is incredible.
I've always been fascinated with technological weapons of war.

Do you ever reflect upon this and wonder if it is morbid?
The 10,000 hours is how much solitary deliberate practice the students who were accepted into some acknowledged music conservatory had put in by the age of 18 (or some such). They aren't considered experts. But for the ones that make it through the ordeal of that school, some of them will be what we consider experts some day in the future.
I’m not sure I agree with the lightweight point. WebAssembly is missing features needed by many high-level languages. As a result, they have to resort to less than ideal tricks. For example, C# on WebAssembly runs using an interpreter even though normally it is JIT compiled.
I feel obligated to point out that there are tools that effectively repair broken proofs, but they just aren't labeled as such. For example, Frama-C is a program that takes in a simplified written proof (in a C comment language), and then validates it (as in the tedious middle steps) with z3, cvc4, etc. Unfortunately, Frama-C can't handle dynamic memory yet, and it doesn't handle array sizes correctly forcing for loops over memcpys in some cases if you want to prove anything. I wouldn't recommend it for actual usability, but it does seem to "repair" proofs (as in they were never non-broken/whole in the first place).
>backed by scientific work

Sorry to rain on your parade but this is utter nonsense. Its not backed by anything. Words have meanings and you cant just use an existing word to describe some different imaginary concept. There is no such thing as baking "money" with past work. The benefit of past work is already "used", it can not somehow hold value for the rest of time. If you calculate the larges know prime number that number does in no way have or hold the value of work you put in to get it. the number is in fact worthless once it is known.

>sidestakes
I'm impressed what kind of nonsense people come up with and can somehow present as something valuable.
Sounds like the self fueling money printer system named gridcoin has a builtin function to donate fractions of the printed money to different addresses. literally donation by inflation - should be called stimulus lol.
This is all nice and all, but most applications use multiple paradigms, so why focus on just one of them?
Nice perspective. Won't summarise here, it'll be better for people to read/skim themselves (30 seconds), but in general the concept holds true.

Does this mean we could save years of tougher work by doing things manually? Is non-hacking going to become the next trend?
Well, just have a look at gosearch and see all the generic generators poping up in Go. Most developers want generics period. By the way while Java didn't have generics before Java reflection and static polymorphism could make up for them. C++ has a preprocessor so even without template you can do generic programming.

Go has ... code generation that isn't even triggered by Go compiler.
What about US insurance? Travel costs? Relocation costs? Etc.

The baskets of goods that most PPPs use are usually skewed towards basic necessities rather than goods that middle/upper class people spend most of their money on. So wouldn't look at that.
Precisely. People are proposing complex algorithmic solutions to a problem where applying such things might potentially make things worse. Generally, civil aviation is remarkably safe, and we should not go with knee-jerk potentially counter-productive reactions.

Airline pilots are a highly selective group of people, well trained, and they are showing every day how they work with integrity. That someone has once gone over and killed himself and others should not obscure our assessment of the situation. We have about 88 000 departures per day in the world. We don't accept even ppm-range risks of disaster if we know how to mitigate them, but when we're this low, we need to be careful that "improvements" don't actually degrade performance.
Oculus seems seriously amazing!!
Years of work. I networked my ass off for years. Hackathons, developer meetups, etc.

I probably would have had trouble finding projects if I decided to do contracting when I moved to the Bay Area right away.

For my first few projects, my rate was really low. It was meant to help friends out and get to work on high-profile projects. Some of the companies I have worked for ended up doing YC or raising seed/VC money.
I wonder if having the webcam always on but piping to /dev/null would prevent a trojan from accessing it...

I also wonder if plugging a 3rd party mic into line-in and switching it off would have a similar effect for the mic.

You can never be sure unless your fix is physical.
Sorry for the dot-confusion, i replaced it with "->".

As I said, it may be documented and known in the perl community, in my option it's still horrible. But yes, that's just my opinion of course.

> Perl is not the only language to support this kind of feature; it is present in Ruby with the "splat" operator (*array).

Unfortunately I also don't know ruby, but as far as i understand from what you're saying is that in ruby you need to explicitly tell ruby to "splat" the list in.

I really have problems coming up with usecases for this kind of behaviour, but yes, sure under some curcumstances it might be nice. But i'd argue it's the minority and so having to explicitly "whitelist" it would make sense. To avoid exactly this problem, of accidentaly calling a function that might return a list.
The problem that I also see is that at some point you could refactor a function that previously couldn't return a list.

Except maybe that's actually a thing in perl, to use this behaviour as a feature, I don't know.
Are you suggesting that it's OK for a private company to collect any data they wish? Do you feel this collection must be disclosed to be proper, or is it OK to just do it? Would "OK" data collection include keyboard logging, password and account info collection, video (camera) and audio collection?

If you do draw a line somewhere -- anywhere, really -- then I'd suggest you're just like everyone else who thinks that privacy is a right and it can be violated. You just draw the line in a different place.

If you really do think that any kind of data collection whatsoever is fine, then I'd just say I don't think many people would feel comfortable with that, not even serious law-and-order types. You're entitled to give away your own rights, but not mine.
I literally just discovered this when using a terminal and navigating to /Volumes and seeing the /Volumes/MobileBackup.

Hopefully I never have to use it, but pretty cool none the less.
I love mobile as much as every other geek out there. I have them all, iphone, ipad, android, laptops etc. It's fantastic and wonderful and all that.

But there is a certain amount of echo chamber to all this talk about mobile.

Yes it's one of the most important areas out there and especially for consumer oriented location aware stuff. But not all of us can do our jobs, just by answering emails.

So perhaps the principle should really be product first, platform second.
Rightly or wrongly, I came to the conclusion several years ago that North Korea is completely China's problem. That is, although the rest of the region and the world has to deal with an increasingly belligerent and unstable North Korea, it's the Chinese who provide them food and are uninterested in any change in the status quo. Not only do the Chinese not want a change, they're more than happy to let Japan, South Korea, and the U.S. continue along with the farcical arms talks that have been going on for decades.

In this case, I'm not yet convinced that there is anything going on here besides North Korea yet again yanking everybody's chain. I sure hope that's what it is. I'm watching for further escalation and China's response.

And as much as I hate to pointlessly rag on China -- its not clear to me that the Chinese have purposely caused this as much as they've just been distracted and neglectful -- somebody pointed out the other day that wherever in the world you find gross human rights abuses and festering problems nobody seems to be able to fix, somewhere in the background there's always China.

This situation bears some concern and watching
If Microsoft is really concerned about Google gaining a competitive advantage by looking at search query traffic from Microsoft IP addresses, it would be much less expensive for Microsoft to hide the traffic through proxies than it is to build their own search engine.

For a long time, Google's search results for MSDN were superior to Microsoft's. Perhaps that's changed with Bing. In any case, it seems to Google's advantage to provide the best search for MSDN.
One last thing, If any developers want to join forces, that would be cool too :)
This is a challenging problem that doesn't fit nicely into comments or short blog posts, but I'll try.

Search is a tremendously expensive game to try and win. It's economics are such that the more search share you have, the more money you earn per search. This is a critical point, so I'll spell it out a little further.

All search companies have more advertiser dollars than they have searches to spend them on, Google, Yahoo and Bing included. It's a supply constrained marketplace. The search ROI is so good for advertisers that they all want to spend more money at their current CPCs, but there aren't enough searches. This supply constraint leads to a problem for the smaller players. Search revenue is driven by having lots of advertisers compete in every auction. The larger the share, the more clicks each advertiser will get, and thus the more advertisers you attract. The smaller scale players don't drive enough clicks for some advertisers for it to be worth their time to set up and manage campaigns on them, while the larger scale players it is worth their while (the return they get exceeds the fixed cost of advertising in the marketplace). So with fewer advertisers, there are fewer bidders in the 2nd price auction, and the revenue per search is lower for the smaller scale players.

So how does this apply to Microsoft's online division? Well, if they want to catch Google, they're going to have to do it at a scale disadvantage, meaning that Google is going to make more off of the same searches than Microsoft will simply because they have a bigger marketplace. To beat that, Microsoft has to commit to spending lots of money to try and close that scale gap by buying share through distribution deals and spending a ton on technology to differentiate the search product while accepting that they don't monetize the searches they do have as well. If they can eventually build a product that will pull enough marketshare from Google to be roughly equal, then they should start to see better monetization.

The valid questions are:
1. Is it possible to catch Google? Or are the market dynamics such that without a transformative difference in how the product works that Google will never be caught.

2. If it is possible to catch Google, how much money will you have to spend, and what will your eventual ROI be when you get there.

Since Microsoft is a company that does 60B in revenue, it has to look at big businesses to drive a 10% growth in that revenue. Your hot little startup that does $100MM doesn't make a dent. Even Facebook only does 1-2B, depending on which report you believe. Search is a 10B going to 20B market, and if Microsoft can spend 5B over 5 years to get half of that market and earn 10B every year it's worth it.

Of course, the division has been horribly mismanaged for years. Qi Lu now runs it, and he's a different breed from most Microsoft execs. So time will tell if it's a good bet or not for Microsoft.
Regarding the "hunks" he mentioned, here's what Guy Steele had to say about them when I interviewed him for Coders at Work: "I implemented a new data type called a 'hunk,' which was probably the biggest disaster in language design we ever put in. It was essentially a cons cell with more than two pointers. It was a desperation move because we were running out of address space on the PDP-10. Recall that the -10 only had an 18-bit address space. In a list, 50 percent of the pointers were dedicated to just maintaining the structure of the list, whereas with a threaded set of hunks, maybe only one-eighth of the pointers were dedicated to the threading of the chunks so you’d get better memory usage that way."
Apple's ability to smoothly (re)use OS X components for iOS and vice-versa seems like a big plus. They can easily move staff around if need be, and the best features move back and forth quickly.
>"Think of an incubator as a tree nursery."

A nursery will plant 3000 seeds. Pot up the 2000 that survive the first year to one gallon and sell half as one gallon to recover their costs. Later they will pot the remaining 1000 up to three gallon and sell many of those. Very few will be sold as 45 gallon trees.
Wow, finally a voice of reason in this argument. Just because you're in the highest tax bracket does not mean you have disposable income like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, etc do. I'd think that most of the assets of people at the lower end of the highest tax bracket are illiquid.
If you are going to use hyphens, go f-u-n-k-y with it. Might be able to score some awesome domain names that way.
It's disingenuous to split people into those who whine about syntax and those who enjoy deeper challenges. It's possible to be in both camps.

Syntax isn't any more important than the other things you mention, but it's certainly as important. Syntax is not mere window dressing. Like punctuation in written language, there's good and bad, confusing and obvious, opaque and transparent, and it will be judged and analyzed like anything else.
The reason these websites are bad is because the owners have never heard of conversions, marketing iteration, "the funnel", so what they end up with is a shitty site that they forget about.
Kagi uses both Google and Bing index.
All claims on the website are valid with latest V.
Some are even intentional, like Sonos bricking devices to force upgrades.

I think everything should have an API to let you serve it yourself, eg from Home Assistant.