jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
1. I never mentioned yacc. What relevance does it have to my comment? I typically use (f)lex without yacc/bison to do a similar job as I would use AWK for: text processing.

2. "statically organize the file into different areas"
One is a code generator and the other is a scripting language with an interpreter, is that what you mean? In effect, this difference means little to me (except for speed of execution): I store my (f)lex programs as source files that I feed to the (f)lex code generator. Then I compile the generated C code. I store my AWK scripts as source files that I feed to the AWK interpreter. I use both flex and AWK to perform a similar task: text processing.

For whatever it is worth, I get better performance from my compiled flex scanners than from my interpreted AWK scripts. But I sometimes use them for the very same text processing jobs.

AWK:

BEGIN { define variables }
pattern-action rules
END { stuff to do after EOF }

(f)lex:

{ definitions } user variables
%%
{ rules } pattern-action rules
%%
{ user routines } stuff to do after EOF

From the blog:
"_BEGIN_, which matches only before any line has been input to the file. This is basically where you can _initiate variables_ and all other kinds of state in your script."

From the Lesk and Schmidt:
So far only the rules have been described. The user needs additional options, though, to _define variables_ for use in his program and for use by Lex. These can go ... in the _definitions_ section...

From the blog:
There is also END, which as you may have guessed, will match after the whole input has been handled. This lets you clean up or do some final output before exiting.

From Lesk and Schmidt:
Another Lex library routine that the user will sometimes want to redefine is yywrap() which is called whenever Lex reaches an end-of-file.

I regularly use yywrap in the "user routines" section.
It functions much the same way as commands I use in the END section of an AWK script.

I guess one can either focus on differences or similarities. I choose the later.

I care little about the "intended purpose" of a program. I care more about what a program can actually do.
Wow, judging from the comments in here, there are a lot of people that are in management positions that are horrible judges of technical ability and value. This question asks so many things that it doesn't really ask anything at all. No matter which field they decide dive into, if they can dive into any at all, it sheds no light whatsoever on their ability to solve problems, or their ability to learn new difficult concepts. Moreover, making assumptions about where their specialties lie because of the topic they chose to answer in is wrong--if they answered well, they could be skilled in many other topics as well, and if they didn't, that doesn't mean they're incompetent--it means they didn't know how to answer what is essentially a trick question.
Great, one more step toward a panopticon.
You're thinking inside a bubble. PayPal makes a tiny fraction of its money on crowdfunding. So, again, a "better" way to kill them would be to build a bunch of companies that provide their whole portfolio of services, but serve customers better. And that's what people have done and are currently doing.
In what world would I want to add an extension to GMail and deal with mail client rendering of code rather than just sending someone a link to a Gist?

Is sending code snippets over e-mail very common?
A bit off topic but I'm also from Toronto as well looking for developer friends. I'm around cityplace. m [at] eveo [dot] org if you want to grab a coffee and talk. I feel the same way about privacy. I lose my mind when I hear "I have nothing to hide". There is nothing you can say or do. They already know the risks and what's happening, they just truly do not care.
I agree entirely. Long ago, I got some amazing advice, which has helped me to this day.

"When you have n choices, and you aren't positive which to choose, choose the more popular one".

I used to think this advice was about "the more popular is better". Now I don't think that's true. But the more popular is (in the case of software for example) more likely to be tested on more OSes, or have questions with good answers on stackexchange, have people you can employ to work on it, and still be functioning in 5 years time.

The same arguments apply to hardware too -- much easier to convince Android developers to fix their app if there is a bug on the Galaxy Note (for example), than some obscure handset.
It also has a rather general meaning for the majority of non-experts.

We re-appropriate words all the time in English, and it's generally a fine thing to do, specialists' consternation notwithstanding.
It says explicitly in the article:

> The BBC's assistant political editor Norman Smith said the caller was put through to Mr Cameron by the Downing Street switchboard and the prime minister's phone number was not given out.
Besides Bruce Momjian, Tom Lane is also a defining, fundamental character behind PostgreSQL. His unforgivingly insightful posts on the pgsql-hackers mailing list makes reading it a very entertaining and educative experience.

(By the way, I can't recommend enough reading that mailing list. It's an ongoing masterclass in "this is how grown-ups write software".)
Byline: "Press Association". I guess the question is how The Guardian choose articles to aggregate.
Several large and respected security companies agree with the FBI's assessment, like Crowdstrike. Crowdstrike claims to have been tracking the NK group that did it for years. They've published information about that group (whom they've codenamed SILENT CHOLLIMA) in the past, so they're telling the truth about that at least.

Obviously that is not proof that they're correct, but it adds a bit of weight.

And of course, the company that Sony hired to investigate and clean up the breach, FireEye/Mandiant, believe it was North Korea. FireEye and Mandiant also track APT groups; Mandiant notably released their report on one of China's state-sponsored cyberwarfare divisions, APT1, some time ago.

There are some dissenting opinions from other companies, like Norse and ErrataSec's Rob Graham. They are skeptical. However, these companies do not share Crowdstrike's or FireEye's niche industry, which is tracking and defending against targeted and government-sponsored groups.

As far as I can tell, the organizations that would best know whether it was North Korea and who have information directly related to the case (FBI, NSA, FireEye, Crowdstrike) believe it was North Korea. The dissenting opinions are from security experts who are undoubtedly intelligent and great in their respective fields, but are really just being armchair analysts.

So unless you think all of these organizations are either incompetent or are colluding to intentionally lie to the public, then NK remains the most likely hypothesis.

It is certainly possible NK retained help from non-NK individuals, and it is possible an insider was involved, but the prevailing hypothesis among a large part of the security community is that NK's government ordered the attack.
Unlikely the reason, since the no 1. on the list is not globally available either. But I guess things can change quickly.
Chloroquine has a host of potential, damaging side-effects. It's reasonable to hold it to a higher standard when the risks of taking it are also higher.
They could theoretically.

They could also theoretically provide adequate bathroom breaks for their workers.

Previous history hints at what we will see.
We made sharing of server access simple and secure. Now users connect to all servers accessible to them, with a single sign-on using their login and their private key. We do not change the way to work on servers, we change the way to connect to them.
Easy to use - https://werbot.com
It is relevant now!!
Terms such as "the end of history" were popular for a while, so I think a big part of it was a huge sigh of relief after the Cold War. Even during the heyday of the Cold War, some thought defence was futile, some thought it would never be needed at all, so I can imagine that when everything looked alright for a while, cooler/more cynical/hawks didn't have as much sway and the balance shifted.

We are way past it and back to where 50k conscripts should be trained a year again, but I guess everyone is used to lower taxes etc nowadays.
> Theoretically a company like Amazon should be able to provide masks, goggles and health monitoring to its workers

Theoretically yeah, but practically Amazon is driven by people with short-term profits in mind, so you don't see this happening. In the ideal world, capitalists realizes that if their customers / workforce goes out of jobs because of sickness, they won't earn as much. But seems that's too much future thinking, so business are trying to extract as much value they can before they'll be forced to shut down.
This is not the right approach.

First, ReadWriteMany implementations (which depend on your cluster) might not guarantee the sort of POSIX filesystem consistency that databases expect.

Second, does Postgres in read-only replica expect to be run on a read-only, possibly-changing volume? What's the consistency model then?

The standard way of doing this is to run a single postgres instance on a single PVC/PV (that replicates across the cluster anyway), letting the cluster move the pod if it dies. In addition, you can run read-only postgres replicas for some semblance of read-only HA while the master reschedules on failure. You can also go deeper into faster failover mechanisms (without having the k8s scheduler in the hot path of that) using any of the tons of postgres HA systems.
Covid overload
Thomas, you keep focusing on the 'type of private property' where as Patrick, me and others are talking about the benefiting party. The 'type of private property' being seized is IMMATERIAL.

If NYC wanted to build a subway and needed to acquire the gas station, I would be completely on-board with the use of Eminent Domain but that's not what is happening here.
apcmag just failed hard:

You are not authorized to view this page
Unfortunately APCMag.com is not currently available in your country for legal and commercial reasons.
If you wish to contact the site administrator, please email apcwebproblem@acpmagazines.com.au.
We regret any inconvenience caused.
Yeah, "within 24 hours" doesn't mean "in exactly 24 hours".

Edit: Here's my hint to those who have trouble solving this puzzle. Don't read it before trying to solve yourself!

http://pastehtml.com/view/1c02p65.txt
Check your bank and card statements for entries that you can't identify or that match up to the value of the item they claimed you bought. If you haven't bought anything then they haven't got a leg to stand on. I'd politely offer to help them with their enquiries but wouldn't take any crap from them.

If you have had something taken out of your account then you need to contact your bank/card provider.
I mentioned SL4A somewhere else, but I think it deserves its own comment.

http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/

Python/Lua/Ruby/Perl/etc interpreters and scripts in your pocket. Imagine the potential.

[Obviously not a Killer App for the general public, but maybe for the HN crowd...]
Oh no, they must be really desperate to hire you.
Parenting is a tough job, especially with your first child when you have no experience to fall back on. But OMG do I think they made a bunch of bad decisions with this kid.
My summary of the article would be:
Relying on the statistics of a distribution works but relying
on a optimization of the same distribution doesn't work.
Can you point me to the paragraph on this website where they claim to be providing 8 core cpus?

http://www.theplanet.com/sand-castle/

I'm fairly certain the first 2.4ghz Xeons came out in late 2001 .. These could easily be 8-9 year old servers.
Rather than using the roundabout technique of writing another tag

This isn't so roundabout:

var path = 'http://www.domain.com/script.js';
$('#code').html('<script type="text/javascript" src="'+path+'">');

jQuery loads the script, evaluates it, then discards it.
That may be true, but unfortunately a good portion of society is screwed up like that.
We don't know much about the RCE. It may have been able to do something in the browser, with more effort, e̶s̶p̶e̶c̶i̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶g̶i̶v̶e̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶"̶n̶a̶t̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶p̶p̶"̶ ̶h̶e̶r̶e̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶a̶n̶ ̶E̶l̶e̶c̶t̶r̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶p̶p̶. Perhaps they stopped once they saw they had done enough for the $200k bounty.

Edit: Not an electron app.
The hooks API literally "hooks" into React's lifecycle, by allowing the ability to save state and force re-renders as needed. In addition, React-Table explicitly implements support for doing rendering of whatever React "cell" components you have supplied as part of the column definition.

Yes, a lot of the logic probably could be extracted as a pure vanilla JS lib, but there'd also be a lot of work that would have to be done to then integrate it into React.

Also, the creator is a fairly prolific author of React-based libraries, and that was his focus when he wrote React-Table. If someone else wants to try to create a vanilla JS version, you're free to do so.
"Some people also fail to realize that there will always be poor people" and "If they really wanted to get out, they would. I did" are interesting beliefs to share at the same time.

The connecting thread is "some people are satisfied being poor" but it's pretty tenuous. If those people stopped being satisfied, what happens?
Stripe honestly does a lot of this for you. You can hack all that together with what you've got, the problem is that there's some seasonality to business as well as other market effects that make it tough to determine _why_ something is trending one way or the other.

For instance: we had a week last year where we had a flood of cancellations at once and there was nothing I could attribute it to. Looking back it was just a coincidence, however it consumed a lot of my time (writing emails and looking at analytics) to figure out why instead of just pushing ahead.

I was likely over-reacting, but I have noticed there's a lot of people spending a lot of time doing analytics and doing research on trends in stead of just executing. And, especially early on, you should just be executing and not thinking too much about trends.
Didn't FinFET technology come through DARPA funding? Did TSMC steal that?

https://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/devices/how-the-fat...
> Today, those tunes are hopelessly overplayed

Which is, in fact, the point.

You can't "jam" over a tune that everybody doesn't know forwards, backwards, and sideways.

I do agree that it would be nice if musicians added something from the latter half of the 20th century to "standards".
(checks their parents' recorded voting habits)

... Can they?
Apple computers might actually be a good device for that role. Enough variability to cover most pricepoints, high quality build, consistent components.
Probably would be similar, aside from more regulations to follow. It's hard to remember sometimes that the assholes make the news, but most regular people are pretty friendly. Even police.
> Biometrics such as fingerprint sensors are generally considered more secure than password protection

Not necessarily: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/11/digital-security-tips-....
Ok, sounds feasible. Thanks for the advice!
Interestingly, I was thinking about this exact thing a few hours ago, before I saw this on HN. The thought was that you can design much more interesting languages by not making them be everything for everyone. Not quite domain specific, but also not quite general purpose.

I made a language a while back that was used to implement custom logic for a product (I've since replaced it with a more declarative system that's basically TOML but where values can be expressions that get evaluated to generate the actual values). One goal of this language was that it should always terminate[1], so it had no unbounded loops. Another goal was that it should be deterministic, so all input was gathered before execution and all output was accumulated to be processed at the end. The entire thing ran in a database transaction (so input could be queried, then the code was executed as a pure function of this input, then the result would be written back to the database or sent elsewhere). Externally triggered events would cause this to run. Essentially an event driven synchronous[2] language of the transformational system variety. It was slightly inspired by Lustre[3], which is used in critical systems like aeroplanes, trains and power plants. I'm a big fan of this style of language.

Basically, by constraining what the language can do or can be used for, you can design much more powerful semantics or language features for the things that it is designed for, similar to a domain specific language. I guess it really would be a somewhat more general domain specific language, or at least domain specific to multiple domains.

I was thinking about this while walking home from the shops and was wondering if such a language would be beneficial to solve some challenges I hit in my work and I was going to spend some time thinking what semantics would be useful, but haven't done so yet and then came across this HN submission. :)

[1] I was also thinking about how the halting problem doesn't really say that determining if a program halts is impossible, just that there are programs that are not computable. If you add constraints (like not being able to feed the program to itself as is done in the halting problem and not allowing unbounded loops) then it is possible to determine if a program will terminate or not.

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_programming_langua...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lustre_(programming_language)
Are you familiar with polls? From the FAQs "This is an experimental feature so there is currently a fairly high karma threshold for submitting new polls."

Create a poll http://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll

Examples: https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Anews....
The top American marginal income rates from 1944 to 1963 were 92%.

http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1794484&cid=336...
I am still working on that. I didn't know if there would be any demand for that so I pushed it down in priority. Basically, the locked profiles can never be viewed by any other user. To view it, the user has to enter via OAuth. I am still working on it and what you see (the authentication dialog) is still unfinished. I will definitely update here once I am fully ready. Thanks for pointing it out
It's interesting, I guess, but the focus of Twitter is the tweets and the way this is presented makes me think they're not the main focus, surely they should be -- unless I missed the point of your application?
I thought about mine a lot though. It was awesome in my imagination.
"Assange did not force anyone to have sex or physically violate anyone."

Well we don't know, do we. You seem to be very certain he didn't, I'm wondering what you're basing that on. It seems like the conspiracy theory is the only 'reason' being given.

"Swedish law calls it "rape" when a woman has regrets about sex later on."

Right. Do you feel a claim like that passes the smell test? Or do you have any other sources that are not Assange himself or his lawyer? You seem to be referring to one of the articles that basically quotes one of these two, I have yet to see one that actually substantiates this. Furthermore I haven't seen the lawyer say what you are saying, either; he's just claiming that there was no rape, that it was consensual.
That Naggum email was beautiful, informative, funny and wildly digressive. Mind blown.
That's actually besides the point. Once the seat trades parties a few times, the occupant will figure out that if they want to be reelected they have to listen to their constituents. Or so the theory goes.
WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT:

Life Force 8:
--------------
1) Survival, enjoyment of life, life extension.
2) Enjoyment of food and beverages.
3) Freedom from fear, pain, and danger.
4) Sexual companionship.
5) Confortable living conditions.
6) To be superior, winning, keeping up with the Jones.
7) Care and protection of loved ones.
8) Social approval.
I suggest you read this post and its comments: http://magicscalingsprinkles.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/why-i-...
Done. Thx :)
I've oft wondered why MySpace doesn't attempt to become the standard for bands- so much so that they don't need standalone websites for their group. If they could offer all of the functionality and backend that bands set up on their actual websites they may be able to parlay their last stronghold into something with great value that also hasn't been done to great extent elsewhere.

Drop the social network- focus on the millions of myspace bands.

(Also, Snowgoons on HN? My worlds just collided...)
buy twitter
> Escrow accounts and merchant layers are in development.

Sorry, this does not make BTC a bank.

As they continue to add more features, we will see what BTC will become and how it may be useful. But comparing it to a bank is silly.
If there truly is no meaningful exchange of details before giving a price, pretty much yes. (although tbh even "who is the client" can be relevant - few people are going to put "in our experience companies in industry X are always a pain to work with and cause more support needs, and thus we'll bill higher" on the website, but if you have few high-value contracts that's a relevant concern. Not so much if you sell many small things.)
I hadn't heard of Mishima or the coup attempt. After reading the article I didn't get much of an idea of what motivated him to be part of this coup attempt other than there was some right wing motivation that's not completely spelled out.

> "The cinema audience was agog at the huge moral issues that were being argued in a way that could never happen in today's world."

I guess I need to watch the documentary of figure out what issues could never be argued in today's world in that way.
> Presumably, forcing illegal actions to happen through bitcoin adds friction to it.

Adding friction to non-illegal actions is harm, not benefit. Adding friction to illegal actions is the opposite of what happens, because it's enabling something that wasn't previously possible. Also, criminals can survive higher friction than dissidents and vulnerable populations because the illegality creates a moat that raises margins.

It's why drug cartels make billions of dollars and can finance submarines and stuff but marginal changes that nobody thinks through the implications of get dissidents killed.

> But more importantly, as far as I know bitcoin is not designed to guarantee anonymity in money transfers, and the fact that every transaction is set in stone publicly in the blockchain makes it relatively easily traceable. Am I wrong in that area?

Every transaction is public but it's only the transaction and there is no requirement to reuse the same wallet for multiple transactions.

You go to some cryptocurrency hangout, pay some stranger a hundred bucks in cash and they transfer a hundred bucks in Bitcoin to your wallet. You go pay for a VPN with it. Then everybody can see that A transferred money to B and B transferred money to C, but nobody knows that you're B and those are the only transactions for that wallet.

Also, there are cryptocurrencies where this isn't the case and you don't even get that.
That's exactly why i think knowing that a famous and respectable person (in the sense that he already accomplished great things) is behind the project is important.

When someone creates a browser around token and adtech, and offers to be a gateway between content and ad money, it better has a serious reputation of integrity for me to even start digging into the technical details and see what it's really all about.

Until now, the whole project looked scammy because i only paid a cursory glance at it, because i didn't know who was behind it. Now that i've watched the podcast and understand the whole reasoning behind it actually makes a lot of sense.