jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I certainly see the value in Tofu for a large screen, but on my iPod I'd only want one column (so Tofu-style reading degenerates to pagination). My question is whether on an iPad sized screen Tofuness would be convenient. What do you think?
ThirdVoice had the problem JonnieCache identified, you generally either had a wasteland (long tail) or so many elements on the page it was as useless as a YouTube comment set. And those were persistent comments; seems like this will have the same sensitivity-to-conditions problems where a page(/domain/whatever atomic unit) either has 1000 users or 0, only since there's no persistence it all has to happen at once so you'll trend even more towards 0 and have an even-smaller sweet spot. (20 notes on a page? Pleasantly active. 20 people talking...?)

Since you mention it, I was the one who first worked out how to block ThirdVoice; their little image tags were all assigned the same class and so one CSS rule made them all display: none. They "fixed" that, so I made a JS script that ran after theirs that could look at img source and remove them if they were Third Voice's. At that point they changed their license to forbid those who downloaded the program from "interfering with another user's experience of the product", and while I would happily have refrained from downloading it and clean-room implemented something, it was never an issue; their day in the sun had passed.

Technical detail: ThirdVoice was implemented as an Internet Explorer plugin that worked in the context of the page itself, so all the DOM nodes were accessible within the page once ThirdVoice "fired", which, in a 1999 browser, was a very noticable event. If in fact it was still around today, it would be notorious for breaking otherwise-functional websites by changing the DOM in ways the website didn't expect. They also had the usual bad HTML filtering, so their product allowed you to insert cross-site scripting attacks into arbitrary sites. I was able to convince <p onmouseover=""> to work, another group discovered <bgsound src=""> worked as soon as you opened the note with no further interaction. Fun times.

(And I count myself vindicated by time; this approach never took off, and the one I advocated did, which was sites that aggregate links and collect comments and communities on their own. Sites such as, oh, say, Hacker News. Or less crowd-panderingly, Slashdot, MetaFilter, Digg, Reddit, etc. Please forgive me if I take a moment to toss that in here, ten years later.)
A "fun" conspiracy theory I've been mulling over for a bit... What if Snowden was a false flag operation? After all, what good is panopticon if nobody is aware of it?
Back in a previous life I used to work for a software company in the defense/GIS space. It's pretty incredible how much labour goes in to making the earth somehow representable as a series of X, Y and Z tuples. The difference between floating and fixed point could mean being off by dozens of metres.
The issue I see is that women would not find guys who had to pay attractive because it implies desperation.
So the only women who would go there are specifically the ones looking for a sugar daddy.
>Um... pointers are O(1) size. Usually either a fixed 32 or 64 bits.

If you want to talk about asymptotic growth of an algorithm, you need it defined on a machine model that supports infinite memory. Saying that pointers are special O(1) size values are a reasonable way to do that. Another way is to let them be variable size, and include that cost in your measurements. With your 64-bit pointers, you're overpaying that cost. And the transition from 32 bit pointers to 64 bit pointers is an object lesson on the real existence of this logarithmic factor that you'd like to pretend doesn't exist.

Edit: also, going with O(1) pointers, the expected asymptotic space usage doesn't mean anything without specifying the probability distribution of dictionaries involved (maybe parameterized on the size n). It's not hard to construct one that changes the outcome.
Even if Toyota went away, it wouldn't be so hard to just go and buy a Mazda or whatever and drive that around.
Here are a couple other reasons why I don't think the Giving Pledge will have an enormous impact on philanthropy or nonprofits in general.

First, not every billionaire is going to make the pledge. I double that it will be more than a third of them. So, instead of the $15 billion given annually as the article suggest, it will probably be more like $5 billion.

Secondly, since 1957 giving to non-profits has increased all but about 3 years (2 of those being the last.) Some estimates say that in the next 5-10 years, annual giving will be at around $400 billion instead of the current $300 billion. So, the $5 billion in giving from the Giving Pledge will be a much smaller percentage of total giving than it currently would be.

I certainly applaud the generosity of these individuals and families but we need to maintain perspective. If we could get the average American to increase their giving by 1%, we would probably have a greater impact on total giving.
I don't know about modern chromebooks, but I have an Acer C7 that I spent $199 on and then added another $240 for it to have a 128GB SSD, 16GB RAM, a working bluetooth module, and an upgraded battery. $440 total and it's been a solid dev machine running first chrubuntu and now crouton. I've mentioned before that the only issue I've had with it is lack of CPU horsepower for clojure-based work to get into the REPL, which as I understand, is slightly fixed on later iterations (or other models). All of my hardware (AFAICT) works under Linux, and I use Google Hangouts, Skype, Steam (for TFC), and vim/tmux on it routinely.
A lot of platforms have arbitrary requirements of who they'll serve or won't serve. Even those with fixed rules can enforce against anyone, and then just ignore your support tickets when you try to appeal.

I guess the difference in this case is targeting someone due to a disability/protected characteristic, compared to some other reason. One fair thing might be Uber subsidising rides of disabled people with guide dogs (in the sense that it pays drivers a bit more to account for cleanup costs etc). I dunno if they can be expected to do this, but such costs probably won't show up on their bottom line and the PR of doing that alone would probably make up for any costs.
It used to be that the x86 instruction set was representative of the processor architecture that it programmed. That is no longer the case. Now, it is valid to view the x86 instruction set as an abstraction of the processor architecture. That is, you can mostly pretend that the processor you're programming for is accurately represented by the architecture implied by the x86 instruction set, but it is not. And when it comes to instruction timings, this abstraction leaks.

If the term "abstraction" bothers you, then ignore it. The point of the post is to give people perspective.
> I continue to feel that Soylent is the first company that will likely feed the world - literally.

I've never seen any coherent reason to believe this, or even anything individual piece relevant to this that Soylent has innovated on.
> Although I guess that would only be a partial solution at best. If an attacker could monitor many runs of the same "real" workload, some simple statistical analysis would still tell you some things.

Yes, exactly. If you're doing a timing attack under non-ideal conditions, there are already plenty of sources of random delays -- e.g. network delays, delays introduced by the kernel scheduler, and so on. Adding additional random delay doesn't solve this fundamental problem.
A protective put against an equity position can function like an insurance policy. For example, if you owned a large position in CRM stock and were sitting on significant unrealized gains but didn't want to sell, you could buy CRM puts to protect your equity position. Of course, there are other strategies (like a collar) that are probably going to make more sense in many scenarios.

Buying a deep OTM put in a single company as an "insurance policy" for your privately-owned SaaS business is patently silly. The correlation, if any, is far too weak to be meaningful but even if you believed there was some correlation, to follow your own criticism of your strategy, I find it hard to believe that $500 worth of puts would provide protection unless you have a tiny business. Even if the value of your puts grew by, say, 3900%, an entirely unlikely scenario, your dollar gains would still only be $19,500.

So I'll repeat: folks should not consider buying puts (and deep OTM puts at that) as you suggested.
I'm learning Haskell right now for fun and don't personally have any opinions on the naming of operators. However, I will say that "." is as far as I can tell a practically named one, because it is just composition which in mathematical notation is also a dot.
Not shocked at all. I got somewhat addicted to Trivia Crack for about two days (I'm ashamed to say I actually bought the "infinite lives" package) got tired of how terrible the app was, and the quality and quantity of the questions. After a while, you just memorize all the questions anyway. Despite playing it frequently for two days, I eventually got so fed up with it, I haven't touched it in over a month.

Doesn't surprise me in the least that they have sloppy development as well.
"dart2js serves me well, and the resulting JS is said to be more performant than raw JS."

But is it more performant than raw Dart?
I know many game developers that download assets (spritemaps, textures, etc) over http. In fact, it was one of the bullet points in Apple's Optimizing game development on iOS talk this past WWDC.
Regarding the contrast in durability between corporations and cities: I think this mostly a matter of definition. Nearly everything about a city - who lives there, what language is spoken, what industries it has - can change, and we'd call it the same city. Yet a company can be bought out, and keep most of the same staff, and we'd say the company "died."

That's because a company is defined by ephemeral things, such as what activities it engages in and what its name is. At base, it is a collection of people working on the same task. A company could dissolve, and all its people could keep working in the same building, doing different things, but again, the company would be dead.

On the other hand, the only thing that really ties a city's inhabitants together is that they happen to be in the same place. And unless the city is nuked, SOMEONE will probably always want to live there. So the city has a seemingly continuous life, even though nearly everything about it changes over time. What doesn't change is, say, the fact that it's located on a river. Which will always be a desirable feature.
I was about to post something similar but with less kindness. I really hate this self-righteous posts from people that have no kids and essentially no real responsibility except themselves. It's the height of arrogance to preach to other people from such a position.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you said that directly, just using quotes for grouping... maybe single quotes? Or just re-working the sentence?
Says who? X.org will be supported for at least the next 10 years as part of RHEL 8. Not to mention the possibility that someone other than Red Hat could continue supporting it after that time.
> Your language, that was made in c/c++, can hardly be faster than the language it was written in.

It doesn't work that way.
These don't do anything on their own. You need to couple them with a spectrum analyser - another $1k+.

I've used these for hunting down problems with EMC on a PCB. They're quite useful, but it's hard to get a good picture of whether the device will actually fail or not based on the results. Generally if you put one of these near a switching power supply it'll go crazy, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the device will fail EMC testing. You really need a far field antenna with some sort of calibrated source to really know how you're doing.
Is there an ELI5 of why all this cash doesn’t find its way to the economy (and that we get housing and companies valuation bubbles instead of inflation, with salaries stagnating for more than a decade)?
> its purpose is to request a region of memory that is mapped only for the calling process and inaccessible to anybody else, including the kernel.

Easy fix: at the next context switch, the kernel overwrites the code of the process with its own code that copies the contents of the "secret" memory to somewhere the kernel can read it, and then executes its own code.

I guess I don't understand the threat model in which having data protected from the kernel is helpful.

If the idea is that the kernel is malicious, then it's not going to work in the first place (e.g. the kernel could just fail to honour the MAP_EXCLUSIVE flag in the first place). If the idea is that the kernel is initially trustworthy but gets compromised some time after the memory is made "exclusive", then it can execute its own arbitrary code in that process's context and get the contents that way.
With Elon's latest truck, we've just crawled out of the cyber winter. And that was a cold one.
I get that there is a very small window for funds that have alpha. However they are of no use to the average investor. Either they are closed to new investors or they are open and the performance edge goes away after some not too long period. Which is also the reason they stay closed.

Stocks don't have a 50% chance of being up per year. It is more close to 80-90%. The size of the return however makes a really good case that Simons fund is better than the other managers at discovering prices.

https://www.slickcharts.com/sp500/returns

I don't think we can be sure that Baupost's performance is not due to luck. Since 2001 it is reported to have an annual return of 9.4%, that is decent but not much above the market.

In the end, the average investor will not be able to invest in a fund that has consistent alpha. The alpha that a fund has will get smaller the bigger the fund gets. Just look at the recent performance of Berkshire Hathaway.
Yes, it's the logical equivalent of saying someone is anti-military for opposing the occupation of Denmark by the Nazi troops.
I was hoping that this would have some technical insights on how automated proof repair could be improved. The ideas presented just seem a bit pie-in-the-sky.

That said, I think the final point is the most important. Making proof repair more magical will just intensify the black-box nature of proofs to the programmer - and the more divorced specification and proof are from the people who actually write the code, the more likely that errors will slip in, not from bad code, but from bad specs instead.

IMO, the most viable path forward for "proofs which repair themselves" is proofs that the average programmer can understand - at which point, their repair will be as easy as writing the code, and you wouldn't need to worry about complex self-repair techniques at all.
I use DO because it's simple and easy. I got tired of dealing with AWS corporate-sized crap, all I want is to spin up several servers using terraform and get work done. They way you can automatically apply firewalling rules to server tags, for example, is exactly what I need.

And don't even mention Azure, where I feel like in a huge maze of mirrors. Nothing is simple, and you waste lots of time on clicking and figuring things out.

So yes, DO has very real value, and I'm glad they exist. The only roughly comparable provider I found was Vultr, which I like quite a bit, too.
How do you figure?

$10 DO Dropplet gets you 1 CPU, 2GB RAM, 50GB SSD, and 2TB of bandwidth.

$10 AWS Lifghtsail instance gets you 1 CPU, 2GB RAM, 60GB SSD, and 3 TB of transfer.
Again, that argument is more FUD. It's predicated on 'if people were rational'. Consider this: I've written three comments trying to rebut an argument based on nothing but FUD. If people were rational, there would be references to studies or statistics to rebut, but no I have only tired lazy arguments to try and refute.

To address that latest FUD, working from an office is worse in the interruption aspect. At home I can make draconian rules about when I'm interrupted. Not so in an office.

WOF doesn't always work, but it can work and very effectively. Way more often than folks are willing to try it.

And consider: this argument is from somebody who has worked from home for most of their career. How often have you tried it?
Remember when an AWS outage a few months ago took down like half the Internet?
They lost me after I couldn't switch from CentOS unless I also agreed to lose my IP address. Reached out to support and got the unhelpful reply of "use another OS version within the CentOS family" which didn't really help considering CentOS was charging its direction.
what's their IPO valuation?
how do i stop those two images from alternating so i can read one?
There's no proof that it had anything to do with the poll; that's pure conjecture on their part. The only reason the forum posters feel that way is because it was all they cared about; they wanted EVO to win this meaningless poll. If we take Engadget at their word, they probably didn't even look at the poll when deciding to remove the article; they were more concerned about the quality of the article itself.

My point is, I agree with you; I hate manipulative media as well. That's why I think that on HN, we should not be using sensationalist titles with unconfirmed inferences like the one in the title of this post, and we should be discussing this from a more neutral point of view. Otherwise we're just as guilty as anyone else.
GNU Screen is the big new thing for me. While old hat for many programmers, I just recently started realizing the power of it, especially detaching and reattaching, or reattaching to a broken SSH connection.
I don't know what kind of bandwidth you really need, but I am running a couple of services on dedicated servers with them and all my customers are very happy with them. In fact US East coast customers often find my services faster than equivalent hosted in California.

On the forums the only person complaining where people doing NSFW hosting or radio streams. For web app stuff (including Git/Subversion hosting) it is really really good.

You can check the backbone here:
http://weathermap.ovh.net/

Also, for people not aware, they have their own servers with liquid cooling and they are crazy with respect to optimization of their processes, think TPM and Toyota.
I wrote a cheque but the margin was too small.
Yeah, but there isn't enough money in the world to make me want to go back to developing "enterprise" software. Let alone document its development.
How can the school punish students for using the prior test to study?
" In such a state of society the master fears and flatters his scholars, and the scholars despise their masters and tutors; young and old are all alike; and the young man is on a level with the old, and is ready to compete with him in word or deed; and old men condescend to the young and are full of pleasantry and gaiety; they are loth to be thought morose and authoritative, and therefore they adopt the manners of the young." - Plato (The Republic, VIII)
I'm not averse to nationalizing the entire system, so that's as far as my thinking usually goes.
1) and 2) -- it's hard to really feel alive if you live your life in a mundane, average state of happy-enough, and you're certainly not going to accomplish anything worthwhile.
This brought a smile to my face :)
If you live in MA, you can purchase health insurance using the state exchange over the web. Minimal prices for a family of two are about $550/month (or were last I checked). Prices/availability can only vary based on age/gender/location so you don't have to worry about being denied coverage for a preexisting condition. You can cancel with one-month's notice.

https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/
Whatever is available online or anywhere public is fair game, as long as it's not gained by hacking the professors computer or something along those lines (and not used DURING the test). That's just my opinion.
I always thought that teachers who reused tests year over year or used pre-made tests from the textbook publisher are just not doing their job...

I strongly believe that tests should be unique from year to year, calibrated to what has been taught in class, made hard enough that very few can answer all questions, have no multiple choice questions as they usually just rely on rote memory and be made in such a way that taking the test open book doesn't influence the result of the students (that's mostly for engineering...)

The problem I found when I was a student (and it was much more acute in the US when I was an exchange student at RIT) is that some test instead of measuring if the students understood the materials and was able to use critically, would only test for rote memorization and be worded such that students who have learned the content of the course of by heart without understanding it could still pass...

But later in life, pure rote memorization is useless, understanding the different subjects and being able to apply the knowledge gained during one's studies is what matters...
No kidding. Every question on that midterm came out of a test bank. Why didn't the professor come up with the questions himself?

If his "team" was able to write a new midterm exam in a few days without any recycled questions, I'm not sure why his "team" couldn't do this for every exam. This would ensure that no student would be able to cheat even if they wanted to.
I thought the way they handled a failed demo was cool. Most companies would have rolled the product off stage or put something in front of it, but Elon rolled with the punches and continued the presentation with two shattered windows. It lowers the probability the truck was hardened or altered for a better presentation.
Imo, this is not the problem. The glass passed the test when it was not fixated on the car. (assuming the glass used on the freefall test is the same used in the car).

The freefall test height is pretty significant, so either: 1. They were not using the same glass and lying on the freefall test or 2. They mistakenly put another glass type on the demo car. Which is a really bad mistake for the guys staging the demo.

I expect Tesla to give clarifications as well as put the tech specs for their glass.
I think you might see some in the countryside, so not exactly in the streets. But I've only seen one myself.
Reminds me of BillG presenting Windows 98 on live TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKy9fV_zX_o
Form over factor = endearingly ugly. I can see the narrative for a simple aerodynamic wedge eventually changing public sentiment. Basically the modernist argument against decoration. If this actually ends up being a solid workhorse, the same energy efficiency and fragile masculinity arguments that shamed humvee owners might also work against frou-frou status symbol pickup trucks. That said the bedrail is high AF so I don't even know if this design is practical. I assume there's some sort hood and winch int he front, and mounts for lights / accessories that would ruin the profile.
Sure, but they explicitly advertised to not go for the commodity version but more durable/damage resistant ones.

This is not really very new tech (bullet proof glass for VIPs, bank transporters etc.) but also not a commodity.

> I don't really understand the point

Congrats, you are not the target market. It is a demonstration of a feature some people want (though these peoples are wrong to want this according to your authoritative judgement).
Also note that in a such a scenario, you've become heavily invested in the real estate market, as opposed to diversifying your holdings. Not necessarily bad, but you really need to pay attention to this imbalance.
My sister was teaching math. One student asked why they even needed to learn that stuff. She said "how will you ever know if you're getting ripped off?". The kid considered that for a moment and started paying attention.