jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Credit where credit is due, they did unicode "right", if you need to deal with those shenanigans it's really nice.

However it also adopts a bunch of the bad parts like having variance but not really having a way to handle it. Last I remember the Equatable instance for tuples was just magic, it was impossible to rely on it with the types. Even maybe 6 months ago when I last tried this if you write some code that appends maybe 6/7 arrays together immutably the compiler would go into an exponential spin.

The project I'm working on ending up dumping it entirely and moving over to being a web project written in TypeScript because it was so bad. Part of that being a laundry list of problems with the surrounding tooling like SourceKit which may or may not still apply.
For that matter, VB, C#, Java and even Delphi all had a RAD approach to developing UIs. Why don't more modern languages work on even a basic UI as part of their standard libraries. What kind of system doesn't have a UI these days? Outside of servers obviously. The closest Go and Rust (modern languages...) are getting to a UI seems to be WebAssembly, which for now points towards an Electron UI solution.

I'm not super familiar with SLIME, but that's the goals of LangServ is to consolidate everything into a known protocol. There's also a spec for debugging.

Oddly enough the Wikipedia page for SLIME doesn't seem to mention Racket[0], but it does mention Clojure.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLIME
Michael Ossmann's video series is another great resource:

https://www.greatscottgadgets.com/sdr/
How is it pronounce it in English lol
So because they have progressive and decent policies for the ~20k or so who work for them, we should be willing to excuse the repressive and reactionary policies they have for the millions of developers and customers who use their products?

I don't think that's being 'fair'.
I think things will go one way or the other with this: The Apple "You can't innovate on the small scale" bias caused by their dev license policies might actually help fight medical record fragmentation. I can see a couple "trusted clients" talking to a few "standard EMR formats" on standard compliant servers finally taking hold if the device captivates doctors.

Additionally, the iPad works just fine with web software that doesn't use onmouseover. Lots of hospitals have much of their software on internal websites.

Then again, medical software always has been ultrafragmented, and perhaps it will stay that way, in which case android will likely be the implementation platform (or jailbroken iPads)
There's not really an important distinction between seeking a theory in data which already exists and choosing a theory and then collecting data except that the later generally implies a large amount of data per hypothesis.

In particular, there's nothing wrong with the OP's example of picking 10 variants of an ad (i.e, testing 10 hypotheses) and finding out which one is better so long as you have enough data. It's really a matter of sample size.
If I'm a web developer but I have no idea how CPUs actually work or how a Cisco router sends my packets around the world, does that mean we should be concerned about the stability of the Internet?
This service already exists; PO boxes can do pretty much what you want.

The problem is that this is a service "worth" something so the postal services can charge for it. You'd have to remove that incentive to convince them to offer it as a global service.
My story? Probably similar to yours. I'm not as obsessed by becoming rich as i used to be, but it's still there. Now i just want to fulfill my rags to riches dream, instead of simply making money(They both involve money, but it's the thought that counts). I think it's wonderful how one, wherever in the world he may be, can achieve great things by just working hard and not giving up(Ofcourse, it's a lot easier for us because we're fortunate enough to live in a decent country). The only thing i'm currently afraid of is if something happens to me and i won't be able to reach my goal.

Love the song, by the way. Never heard it before.
The radiation hormesis effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
> You really need to explain how working for a little while and then "cashing out" was a viable option for these men that they simply chose not to exercise.

Actually he doesn't.

They lived far above subsistence. That's a choice. One consequence of that choice is that they weren't saving the difference between subsistence and their chosen lifestyle for investment and/or later use, including early retirement at subsisistence.

I'm also pretty sure that no one forced them into their occupations and that they ignored opportunities that they could have done while pursuing said occupations.

I don't know what they did with their time, but I do know that they had time to do other things that would have had different outcomes. If they're unhappy with the consequences of their choices....
I know, I read the article. We're talking about the utility of the design they ultimately wound up with, the "why" doesn't alter that. Designs are always a trade-off, the question is did they trade-off the correct things to make a really good utilitarian truck?
Heh

“I apologize for such a long letter - I didn't have time to write a short one.”

― Mark Twain
Yes that’s what I meant by semi-random. I was trying to keep it as layman as possible. :)
That's the thing with moving the months back and forth :), in Poland listopad is November, and October is październik (comes from paździerz (chaff?) - the husks of grains separated by threshing it).
You're right and I loved Sasha's Made in America show, however George Carlin would be absolutely fucked in today's day and age. His political/cultural angles are not nearly as "safe" as Sasha's.
I'd rather sell 100% at 10x the cost than 10% at 10x the cost. What's the benefit of deliberately reducing demand? Why not sell 10% at 100x instead of 10% at 10x by producing something that actually appeals to more, and is desirable by more?
Real life is not exactly preparing people for spotting fakes these days. The bizarre is real, the plausible will likely get a pass.
The main goal of Android is to have billions of users using Chrome (which is as of now the only major browser without tracking/ad blocking enabled by default), in order to track you across the web and sell the ads, which is the Google's raison d'etre and main profit center. So, nope.
While dealing with errors in any langauge is irritating, I think Rust has the best ideas.

* Pattern-matching for success/error check

* Error passing with the `?` operator

* The correct error seems to appear when panicing due to an `unwrap` call

The most irksome thing remaining is to have to create your own error objects..
Wait, is it quatre-vingt or quatre-vingts? Is there a context that would distinguish the pronunciation of those two?
it's much better to move from being a drugdealer
into other legal businesses, even with the cost of
learning ...

Exactly. The question to ask is whether what you know now is what you should know tomorrow (or, is what you knew yesterday still appropriate for today).

And then decide if the cost of transferring is worth it.

A problem with sticking with what you know and what has brought you success in the past is that times and markets change.

The gigolo probably should open a bike shop. But hire someone to run it. Running a bordello is likely to get his ass in jail. Which also suggests that not every move to a related field makes sense. Going form one dubious activity to another dubious activity might not be the best business choice.

One issues I've seen with developers who want to have a business is that they tend to stick to what they know, while not checking to see if what they know lends itself to a sustainable business.
The article forgot to mention his most hilarious stunt, where he claimed to have found a foolproof money making algorithm:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/04/10/hoaxster_hacker_disc...

The original website is long gone, but strangely there is a copy lying around here (the name is a combination of the word "trend" and the German DAX Index):
http://www.nulinegraphics.com/temp/trendax/index.html

A few years ago Kimble and his entire "kimpire" disappeared off the net, save for MegaUpload. I am 99% certain that it is his project since he announced so a while ago at a auto forum (but you never know when he is lying :D):

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/gumball-3000-forum/54147-we...
I am pretty curious about what the effect would be on flavour. Animal fat is pretty bad for you though, and probably much cheaper to come by so I imagine those are just a few reasons to go with vegetable oil over animal fat.
I have the RSS feed of this site for quite some time and this site delivers every single time with amazing recipes.
The premise is wrong. I mean, McDonald's fries are about OK as far as frankenfood goes, but they are really horrible compared to anything home-made with fresh potatoes, no question about it. They're too small, they have absolutely zero taste, they're greasy... This is supposed to be a model to follow? Gimme a break.
Yes, the odds of a single founder exiting for 10M is greater than 3 founders exiting for 100M, however, the article fails to take into account the odds of a single founder start-up being profitable vs a multi-founder start-up being profitable. I believe the second case is much more likely due to the sharing of responsibilities, overlapping skill sets and the ability to bounce ideas off one another.

There's always going to be a trade-off, things aren't so black and white.
That is easily solvable - clog/duct-tape the exit nozzle or tamper with the cartridge test (a lot of the substitute cartridges already disable this)
From the most recent post on LW http://lesswrong.com/lw/2aa/virtue_ethics_for_consequentiali...

Humans are not inherently expected utility maximizers, they're bounded agents with little capacity for reflection. Utility functions are great and all, but in the words of Zack M. Davis, "Humans don't have utility functions."
"Working on" is a far cry from "tested and in force for decades", though. When push comes to shove, it's not clear that the EU member states would unanimously act in collective defense. Ultimately, while Europe may be able to collectively defend itself, it is certainly less capable of doing so without the aid of the United States.

Against what threat, exactly? The big (physical, military) menace at the moment seems to be Russia, and European nations are now running almost continuous military exercises in eastern Europe to train for the possibility that any of those EU states might require protection from Russia aggression over the next few years. I don't know which banner they're operating under -- I'm guessing a lot of it is NATO -- but ultimately it's still European militaries co-ordinating to put the boots on the ground.

That said, realistically, the most effective way to protect ourselves against a belligerent Russia is probably economic anyway. Although some European states are dependent on Russia for energy supplies, that goes both ways, with Russia similarly dependent on Europe for having someone to pay for its natural resources. Neither side could trash that relationship today without suffering severely for it, but in the long run it favours Europe (because energy supplies are generally trending towards nuclear and ideally renewable sources anyway, giving Europe a credible long-term alternative, while Russia has relatively little other than energy exports to support its economy through international trade today).

Even setting Europe aside, what would you suggest for East Asia? Should Japan be allowed to rearm, potentially disrupting half a century of cordial relations and trade in the region? Should South Korea be left on their own to defend themselves from a North Korean army that outnumbers them two to one?

If you're going to make this kind of argument, you have to consider the effectiveness of armies. Bigger does not necessarily mean more effective if the little guy is better trained and/or has better technology.

More generally, I don't see why every nation should not be entitled to have a military force sufficient for its self-defence needs. The last world war ended 70 years ago. Concepts like expecting Germany or Japan of 2015 not to maintain effective militaries because of what Germany or Japan did in the 1930s and 1940s are obsolete.

In the modern world, I don't see why local agreements for mutual benefit could not provide similar assurances of defence and ultimately safer conditions than having the whole world depend on the US as you seem to want. It would take time to make the transition, but it would be better for everyone if that switch did happen over time. IMHO, that includes the US itself.
When she's talking about the balls of ice, you know, she's not really talking about balls of ice.
In my simplified view, I think we need to do something about the fact that you cannot build an application today that will not be obsolete in 6 months (at best). And by obsolete, we're not talking about obsolete like a COBOL application. We're talking about relying entirely on frameworks/libraries that may literally no longer exist. Think about an angular 1.x application 5 years from now.

If you're building an application that will take a non-trivial amount of time to build and will have a lifetime of years, what technologies would you pick? How do you train your team members? What is your strategy for maintaining it into the future?

If someone built a webapp 10 years ago, it would be php, rails, asp.net, java, etc. And you can find someone who would (possibly reluctantly) get in there and do something with it. But what about the app built using 20 npm libs. What do they do in 10 years?
Well JS is all about context, literally and figuratively I guess.
Wrong. Money becomes family money and when there is an inequity large enough that they can affect large parts of infrastructure you are basically guaranteeing power to scions who were not trained for the responsibility or the value of the fortune.
Are you using non-ISP provided DNS?
I also heartily recommend "How TV Ruined Your Life" which serves as sort of a capstone volume to the entire run of "Screenwipe".
I'd probably look into Paket (a nuget aware package/source dependency manager) for that. Sorry for the short answer, New Years celebrations beckon!
Agree, there might not be ops team as well, it is dev ops culture. No one in team was brave enough to take the risk. I am sure there are no units test as well to ensure nothing breaks.
The price of Bitcoin in early 2014 was based on popularity and hype. I really think that the normalization of a price for Bitcoin is good for the currency, and that's what I've seen happening.
It is, but only if you have access to a machine outside the ban. So outsourced employees and established companies are going to be fine, but if you're a 15 year old just getting into hacking spending $5 a month on a VPN service or a private server out of the country is going to be a problem. I can't imagine becoming the programmer I am today without the huge resource that is Github.
> "charity" was a tough sell internally

I've been saying this for decades:

For-profit companies are expected to generate profit for the shareholders. As such, donations are hard to justify.

- Most technical teams have pre-approved budgets for licenses, SaaS, consultancy services.

- Most teams do not have pre-approved budgets for donations. Managers need to go through bureaucracy and justify it.

- Donating to organizations that are not famous charities can look suspicious (think bribery & so on). Donating to an informal group more so. Donating to some person on GitHub even more so. Imagine lawyers and accountants having to explain it to some tax agency.

- Many countries don't have the tax relief and loopholes that encourage donations
Do you think it would still be "attempted lynching" if the students were white?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2034624
Apple went through a similar problem, and the same solution was suggested. Rather than adopting this, Apple went for better scruitinsing the apps it approves, but I imagine a few still get through. Although, the exact same problem could not happen on the iPhone app store, something similar can happen.
http://www.celt-codec.org/downloads/
I took it for a spin recently and enjoyed the experience. The Postgres driver was woefully slow, compared to Golang (50 queries per second for a trivial query vs over 10k), which is the only reason my side project isn’t in V.

It’s a great language, though. Looking forward to using it in the future.
Not just that... they also lease huge buildings, build "cubicles" inside, furnish them to look like bedrooms, get girls the same way as they would for any other adult business (from human trafficking to working from a very poor country, with enough desparate people for that), and then take a huge cut of profits.

Basically pimping out girls, but digitally.
You don't really need to control it. There are open source and off the shelf autopilots everywhere at this point.

https://store.3drobotics.com/t/parts/autopilots
http://ardupilot.com/
In systems where I find myself in the shell, I tend to prefer the shell to everything except certain system configuration tasks (I like the shell for things like tweaking network settings, but dislike it for things like printer config, for example), and for actual software dev (IDEs still win for me).

Once I feel I can buy into the shell, I'll probably go all in. Until then, I try to use Cygwin to avoid having to switch to a *nix box when I just want to use a simple admin utility or maybe test something out in the Python REPL, but otherwise I just tend to switch when I want to spend a work day on something.
Patch roasts aren't the issue; roasting contributors is. Telling someone their code is awful is not normally a problem. Telling someone they personally are awful for even having submitted it, and that they should have been "retroactively aborted" or any number of worse statements, is absolutely ridiculous.
I would say you should not go to interviews, where you have to prove generic coding skills. Stick with one narrow area/library and keep subject on that.

And if you can not implement singleton under pressure, there is possibly some underlying reason. Concentrate on that reason.
In the past when livestock owners had to contend with wolves they'd often use mountain dogs who would live with the livestock, sometimes they'd wear "wolf collars"[0] It's pretty intense and I have mixed feelings about the collar especially, but it goes to show that there have been solutions for this very old problem that don't involve killing all the wolves.

3 or 4 big mountain dogs out with the livestock are apparently enough to deter the wolves. Though I'm not sure if you expect to lose any of the dogs to the wolves and how you'd weigh that aspect of it.

[0] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_collar
mountain dog example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyrenees
I will definitely check this out. I recently played A Dark Room (http://adarkroom.doublespeakgames.com/) on ios. It was really great. The game was also really beautiful and just text. I have been wanting to create a game for some time and playing a Dark Room makes me feel that it is possible as my expertise is in algorithms and web development but I know nothing about animation. I'm excited to try out Hadean Lands.
"isn't hackable" isn't feasible to the layman, and I'd argue for even security professionals. You can take measures to make it difficult to hack, but to say you can make a system unhackable through those means is false as well.

There are just too many layers of abstraction to exploit to say a system isn't hackable.
So you're just saying: if the laws are just slightly wrong then devices built according to the wrong laws may fail but only very rarely and it may take us a while to notice? And therefore we can't say "these physical theories must be right because otherwise we'd see things failing" because the failures might be very rare?

Sure, that's correct, but no one[1] actually claims that present-day physics is known to be exactly right. For the excellent reason that present-day physics is known not to be exactly right. (Because our best theory of large-scale phenomena is general relativity, and our best theory of small-scale phenomena is quantum field theory, and if there's a way to combine those into a single theory that doesn't contradict itself then no one's found it yet.)

[1] Obviously any time you say "no one says X" you're likely to be wrong, because for any crazy thing there will be some people who say it. But no one who actually knows much about science is going to claim that present-day physics is exactly right, unless they're deliberately oversimplifying.
Exactly. Galileo was originally on very good terms with the pope. Then the pope asked him to write a book comparing heliocentric and geocentric ideas from a neutral perspective. Galileo instead wrote a book ridiculing geocentrism, and had some things the pope said repeated by a character called "Simplico" ("Fool"). He insulted the pope, and that's where the trouble really started.
What would it take to simulate a conscious mind? Several orders of magnitude more processing power than is needed to perform the simple tasks we currently ask of AGI, I believe.

For example, in another part of biology, DNA seems to be a
very inefficient as a data structure and tool for genetic replication. But you’d expect and forgive that from a system that self organized through chance, iteration, and a vast amount of time. Evolution has short horizons and lacks the long term planning required to be economical.

Human engineered systems are by contrast far more efficient with their resources. You can now sift through photos of cats and not_cats with a GPU and a few decades of collective technological progress. To get to the stage where a mind, artificial or natural, has self awareness, I can completely believe that it would require the level of processing only made available by a naturally inefficient evolution process.

We have minds that are focused on hunting, gathering, procreating, toolmaking, and surviving. Humans have succeeded at doing these things by growing vast brains that only accidentally became good at spotting incoming lions and finding mates. We are lucky that our complex brains evolved in such a way[1] as to allow conscious thought to emerge as a side effect.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention_schema_theory
The iconography is a bit variable. London is represented by the arms of the Greater London Council, which were granted in 1966, and which was abolished in 1986.

The soups look good though!
> If I read renewed I would think they have changed the formula of their food, hopefully for the better, and that is why I am receiving less of their product.

Why would you think that? If I read renewed, I would think that it’s some BS marketing, since there was no verifiable claim made.
Missing lots of very basic but good soups (then again, the search doesn't work well, returning "categories", "events" and "restaurants" rather than soups by keyword):

tomato soup with little meat balls

pumpkin soup

mixed vegetable soup

shrimp soup, fish soup, lobster soup

asparagus cream soup

spinach soup
I know the term is not en vogue these days, but I truly believe that people who choose to partake in the generational blame game are functionally retarded.

We are all homo sapiens. In the nature v nurture dichotomy, the emergent bulk properties across generations are clearly a result of the latter. If we see specific behaviors that ultimately prove to be problematic, we need to think deeply and compassionately about what the causes could have been and, to the extent that we are going to engineer society, attempt to account for those moving forward.
Maybe useful- http://www.forbesindia.com/article/startups/we-are-seeing-is...
Looking for work would be my full time job if I was unemployed.