jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Yes. This is very annoying. Apparently this is fixed in 5.0.1 according to the few Gen2 Moto G users who got the Lollipop update. Hopefully it will deployed to everyone else sometime this month.

It would seem that the problem is due to overly aggressive memory management that was never properly adjusted for 1GiB RAM. One would hope that the popularity of the G and other small memory Android devices would help push for more efficient memory usage rather than requiring 2GiB+ for a decent experience. For starters, it would be nice if more of the core system was implemented in native code (ART doesn't count).
It's not all ephemeral, the physical servers we run are old-school redundant (RAID-10, two power supplies, etc). Even ephemeral is persistent — it's just something that'll go away if you migrate your instance to new host hardware.

Deployments are on two servers and the write ahead log is streamed to both the slave and offsite secondary storage. Replication is async so there is potentially a small window of data loss if a whole server goes. We are considering letting people opt in to synchronous replication, but don't have it available yet.
If it's too hard for the best then the concept is dead. But I don't believe it. They made some avoidable mistakes.

Just look at the pattern emerging from these kinds of incidents. There's an automatic cluster recovery mechanism that works for individual node failures but makes matters worse once a larger number of nodes fail.

I wonder whether they did extensive testing or simulation of that scenario. The initial root cause is probably unpredictable because there may be many, but what follows is not unpredictable.

I'm not ready to concede that because they are such an insanely smart elite group of people we just have to live with week long outages.
I use this script: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/58915

Thanks to pwlin for making this script
Technically the source code is an asset - so the company may be limited in terms of what they can do.

For example, a company that closed while owing money could not just "distribute" their remaining assets by releasing them into the open-source domain. Investors, employees, shareholders even founders may have legitimate claims to maximizing the value of that asset.

Equally, if there are multiple parts to the asset, they may not necessarily be disposed of "together". As a simplistic example a robotics company may sell off the hardware separate to software. And the software itself might be separated into different lots.

So the _creators_ of the product are not necessarily the _disposers_ of the product. And the person buying the thing (for whatever reason) is unlikely to spend money and then just give it away.

For companies that remain existing after the discontinuation of the product, the problems are even more complex. Take for example Sony's robotic technology. Just because they've discontinued the consumer products does not mean their investment in the tech is wasted. I think it's safe to assume that at some point in the future Sony would be able to either sell, or leverage that investment.

At the end of the day it's about balancing the upside and the downside. The upside to Sony, HP etc is negligible (some hacker types are happy) whereas the potential downside (loss of IP rights, effort to release, on-going impact, legal liability, trademark issues etc) are substantial. Even the effort to determine the downside is significant.

Now of course, if you've got some unheard of webapp, that attracted 5 users before you killed it, it's trivial to open-source that. On the other hand that _is_ probably happening all the time, and nobody cares.
Stopped giving a fuck about reading this comment after two occurrences of the word "fuck".
More to the point the market for FGPAs is fundamentally limited by some factors.

If you are making 10,000+ units the economics are overwhelmingly in favor of ASIC over FPGA.

(In particularly if you are the first mover that proves the market with an FPGA you should have started an ASIC design in parallel to it because the second and third movers will have ASIC from day one and a cost structure 10x or 20x better than you!)

This keeps FPGA a niche market because it serves niche markets.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26741539
Inactive isn't not "real", it's just a slow or aborted attempt. The Podcastindex.org site shows over 400k podcasts updated in the last two months out of a total of 2.5m (they do some de-duplication, discussed in their own podcast).
Thanks. This, and the GP, are helpful. Does naturally lead to the question of why in hell they'd implement this when, from my perspective as a user, it's much MUCH worse than S3 sleep.
"Isolated people become lonely, depressed, and anxious, develop addictions more easily, and suffer from a weakened immune system and impaired overall health," added Professor Inon Scharf, lead author of the article and cooperation partner of the Mainz research group at Tel Aviv University in Israel.

...like, say, an addiction to social media?
The thing Ive learned is that a lot of people have both a vested interest and a sort of stockholm syndrome with vendors (cloud or otherwise). If you spent tons of time learning AWSs special tooling, you are going to see everything as a nail if you catch my drift. Ive seen a few particular users here spend many threads defending their choices despite the often very logical criticisms levied against the "cloud everything" approach.

One thing I like to talk about to Cs is their strategy on capex vs opex, because honestly that determines quite a lot, but is often something engineers dont think about.
"What I’m saying is that it’s so, so simple to make sites easier to read."

If it was so simple, wouldn't everyone be doing it already?

"Websites are broken by default—they are functional, high-performing, and accessible, but they’re also fucking ugly. You and all the other web designers out there need to make them not total shit."

Or we could leave them total shit, and it would probably continue to work just fine. Focus on meeting your minimum requirements first, then add improvements over time.

Yes, it should be simpler, and we should make it easier for people to make things "work right" and "not be total shit". But until then, just make a shitty webpage and get on with life.
Does it even make sense to describe it as a "threshold" in that case? A threshold implies the existence of some kind of vertex, but what you're describing just sounds more or less like a straight line.
Doctors typically go straight to med school from undergrad, which is focused on clinical application, not research.
I’ve found that quick games are way more popular with my kids - easy to set up and take down. Games like Coup, Love Letter, and Exploding Kittens only take a moment to get ready so you can get in a few rounds before dinner.
Mitigations that are Linux only and hardly effective, hence why Android is now going to require hardware pointer validation on Android 11.

Protobufs, gRPC are only a thing if one is on Google land and even then quite primitive tooling, versus what those other protocols offered.

Desktop apps are quite alive, specially on enterprise and domains like lifesciences laboratory automation, medical monitoring devices and plenty of other areas where a browser just doesn't cut it.

Krita and Blender are lucky to have good sponsors, a drop in the ocean of FOSS.

ChromeOS hardly counts as Linux, specially since not all devices are Crostini capable, and yes Steam hardware survey puts it at ruffly 1%.

I gave up on hunting for Linux hardware ages ago, Apple and Microsoft OSes and related hardware keep me happy when doing graphics programming.

As you see, we have to agree to disagree.
Also check out: The mean center of the United States population (over time)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_the_United_Stat...
Because the erosion of the constitutional protection against unreasonable search & seizure is implicit in every article about the TSA, and some people would rather we trade essential liberties for an immeasurably small increase in safety in silence. And, thank you sir, may I have another[1]. This makes it political.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdFLPn30dvQ
> yes, once you get to a certain size (or for corporate counsel, start doing big or complex deals)

> and the best corporate counsels and HR people get very good compensation from not-startups

We're talking about startups....
I wrote this as a reply to 'icey and it got unwieldy:

The standards for what's germane to Hacker News have gotten looser. TSA is only the most recent example. What's especially toxic about this fact is that you don't notice it until it gets really bad. That's because most of these stories have nerd-structured narratives, involving tradeoffs and logic and subtext and affordances for contrarianism, which bait commenters. Having participated in a TSA discussion (for instance), you become socially committed to the idea that they're relevant to Hacker News.

Hacker News has become much more self-referential. All due respect to 'lionhearted and 'DanielBMarkham and 'jacquesm, but there have been many stories voted to the top of the site on content that wouldn't stand had they been written by an "outsider". There's a clear name-recognition bias. That's not the author's fault (it's their blog, they should write what they want), but it does make the site feel insular.

I'll go out on a limb though and assert that insularity is something 'pg cultivates. My most recent cue on that was his encouraging response to "Offer HN".

Like it did for Matt, Hacker News has killed any desire I have to write standalone content. I haven't blogged in over a year. A book idea I was tossing around has been dead for longer. Hacker News fills the same psychological place for me that Usenet did in the 1990s, when I also didn't write a lot of standalone content. Now, for me, this is actually a good thing; I dove into HN while fleeing the "blogosphere". But I can see it being a problem for someone else.

Having said all that: I get tremendous value out of HN. I've met tons of people running startups, I've done business with some of them, I get to carry on long-running conversations with people like Patrick McKenzie and Colin Percival, I've hired several awesome people off the site, and I'm still impressed by the newcomers (for instance, go read 'carbocation's backlog of comments on biology and medicine).

Perhaps I'd like to see people a little quicker with the "flag" button; perhaps I'd like to see the site tuned so that flaggers can more easily win the race against thoughtless up-voters. And it might be nice if we could take a break from blog posts by long-time contributors; maybe we can switch to a "best-of" 'lionhearted mentality, instead of a "today's" 'lionhearted mentality.

But, while it sucks to lose Matt (he seemed like one of the more no-bullshit members of the site), I'm not as alarmed as he seems to be about the decline of HN.
So what is the next big new thing? I'd certainly like a HN that is filtered much more. Plan to experiment with machine learning, but prospects are uncertain.

How did those sites work out where news are just filtered by your friends, rather than everybody?
Every story has a beginning, a middle and an ending.

Almost everything in life can adopt 'story' as a metaphor.

(What I'm trying to say, is that HN won't be good forever, and it won't be around for ever either... it's a fact of life.)
The hard part of replacing credit cards is not the magnetic strip. It is the ability to issue credit limits and charge interest effectively without losing all your money. That is the real challenge to make this work.
Thanks for the offer. I've been trying to get started with Android development, but I keep getting stuck in the first stages of learning java. I have worked extensively with C and Matlab before, but I have no idea of OOP concepts. Frustrated with Java, I've been learning Python and that's going along at a nice clip. I really want to get over this hump. I have tried skipping the Java tutorials and directly looking at the source code of applications, and after a month of trying, still can't make head or tail of it. I'd appreciate any pointers you may have.
I did not learn to program from Government Education.

The government also promotes bad IT practices overall.
I have to ask... Doing what exactly can get you constantly 500-1000 EUR per day? I know a lot of good programmers that earn that much per month, so this daily estimate (especially for a freelancer) seems way too high to me.
I still have the account. But have not logged in in months. There is one or two people who that is the only way I can contact them at all. I have been backing away from it for about 3-4 years now. My wife blew away her account 5-6 years ago. It was mostly a nice way to reminisce about old friendships, at first. But then you quickly remembered why they are no longer current friends.

I figured out that Facebook itself is not awful. It may be in many ways, but it is my 'friends' who drove me away. When I was around them they seemed semi normal. But put them behind a keyboard and the truth came out of what they were and how they really thought about me and my beliefs. Their inner keyboard warrior came out. They were not real friends but 'friends' of proximity. I had confused friendly with friends.
Of course. Currency itself only has value due to its ability to be traded for other objects. Currency on its own has no value. Bitcoins are in the same boat. If bitcoins can be traded for other objects, they have value regardless of any ability to trade them for currency. Put another way, the only thing that bitcoins (and dollars for that matter) require are that people perceive them to have value.

Besides even if bitcoins cannot be directly traded for dollars on an exchange, the same could still occur with intermediate objects. If I give you bitcoins in exchange for a laptop, I can then turn around and sell that laptop for money. It's not as convenient (and could be illegal), but it would work.
Yup, Home-Brew ISA Cards is a thing. There are people out there who have reverse engineered some to create clones, not only for ISA but for more modern buses too.
To be clear, I mentioned this stereotype specifically to claim this is not what's happening.
This is not true. RSUs vest fully after 4 years. They begin vesting (meaningfully) after 2 years.
I don't have any particularly interesting ideas about this, but here's a relevant and fun read; an interview with Simon Pegg:

https://kingalfredpress.com/2017/09/20/the-infantalism-of-cu...
Not sure I'm parsing this properly, but I think that you are saying that I'm untrustworthy for some reason, like I'm denying too hard or pushing back too hard against a fringe opinion?

First, redis_mlc's comments are auto-killed, so just because it was dead already doesn't mean that people had flagged it yet.

Second, that comment contains verifiably false information of a sort that is being spread around far too much already, so I am pointing that out, in the hopes that someone will have that be the straw that breaks the back of their illusion.

I recognize that the US gov. does a lot of bad things. Between the three letter agencies, the extrajudicial killings of US citizens, the non-stop spying, the control by corporate interests etc.

There's enough actual bad being done by the government, there's no need to invent any.
I think this is an equally poor analogy as it assumes Facebook wants to hire all the good people it can, which isn't the case at all. Facebook is trying to limit false positives. They would rather deny 10 world-class developers than hire one person they need to fire 6 months later.

Facebook, who is paying a lot of people to optimize its hiring processes, has found a correlation between the objective of "lower short-term attrition / first-year PIPs" and "quiz people about the mesh size of the goal net." I'm not saying it's the best long-term or that I agree with false positive bit as a business decision, but I find it hard to believe they're doing stuff like this just because they feel like it without any data to back it up.
> And yes everyone breathes the wrong way, we pull in stomach when inhaling which is supposed to be otherway round

This statement confused me, so just to be clear, this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldNnKVGxabA demonstrates the correct way to breathe right?

Wrong - pull in stomach (breathe with chest)

Right - expand stomach
I just got a Dutch oven for the same reason, too! I get the feeling that the world supply of domestic bakers will increase dramatically in the coming months. A lot of grocery stores nearby us are out of sandwich bread, but full of flour. Wonder how long that will last!
Real drivers face death and that's something simulations will never give you. You make balsier moves when you don't think you'll fly into a wall.
I don't think it's that hard to understand. Certainly as a voter it's very easy to understand what it is you should do - easier than under FPTP where you are forced to think tactically. The consequences are slightly hard to think through if you're not good at probability, but it's easy to boil those down into a set of pithy statements that will tell you most of what you need to know.
Romance? Doesn't Roark rape Francon at one point?
The problem is that if you have an A team where all the members are performing well and deserve good compensation compared to the rest of the company, stack ranking forces you to penalise some of them anyway, even if its for minor petty reasons that in other teams would not be a factor.

Nobody is arguing that good people shouldn't be rewarded compared to poor performers. The problem is that stack ranking actively works against the formation of stable teams of high performers anywhere in your company.
> Sun dumped a ton of money into OpenOffice just to be a pain in the ass to Microsoft

No, that was a defensive move to prevent Microsoft from completely taking over the software industry which would've made them irrelevant. You also forgot about Java, which original was targeted at consumers as a way to have multi-platform apps that will make the OS irrelevant.
Google made a smart phone OS based on desktop OS, so did Apple. They were both aimed at the do anything smartphone market. Blackberry and Windows Mobile were in that market already.

It doesn't really matter what the early Android prototypes looked like, since Google doesn't do that bit, the free market does.
Sorry, but where does Gruber say that they are evil? All he says is that they started competing with Apple in a – uhm, to quote him – dickish way and that therefore, it is perfectly alright when Apple then also competes dickishly.

He does not claim that being a dick when competing is wrong or evil. To quote him: “It wasn’t unfair for Google to decide to compete directly against and copy ideas from the iPhone. That’s competition. It may be angering to Apple, but it’s not out of bounds.”
Don't just down-vote - flag the link as well:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1435136
Gruber says nobody is arguing that there's a “How dare Google compete with Apple?” sentiment. That Apple merely took the gloves off and started taking the fight more seriously. But aggrieved sentiment is written all over Steve Jobs's reaction to Android.

'They want to kill the iPhone' -- remember that little gem? How did he know this? Because Android-based products were looking more and more like iPhones. But the reason for the convergent evolution of the two platforms is quite obvious: it's a winning design. It's a ridiculous justification for preemptive retaliation, on par with 'Saddam tried to kill my daddy'.

The reason Google decided to get involved in smartphones is the same reason Apple did: the internet. Before the current sheer-slab-of-touchscreen became the recognised form-factor of an internet-friendly phone, we waited years and years for Nokia, SE and Motorola and crucially, the carriers, to give us a device that could freely access the services and content that we knew were all around us. What did we get? Push email. The pressure was building and by 2005 the industry was ripe for disruption.

Apple's prestige, combined with the exclusive AT&T deal, was what forced the carriers to abandon their walled-garden ideal and take the internet seriously. The iPhone was an offer they couldn't refuse. Google could not have done that. The problem is that having freed us from the carriers' walled gardens, Apple now wants to take their place.

I think Jobs was being just a little disingenuous when he said Google wants to kill the iPhone. What he could have more honestly and accurately said is that Google wants to kill the iPhone OS's chance of achieving a monopoly position. Why do they want that? For the same reason they got into smartphone design: the internet.
I swear I thought of this yesterday driving to work as a way for one eyed people to get depth perception. I'm a genius!
(I have a long commute)
Hope to attend.
It's more like Windows vs Mac, since he's talking about Android which is the software operating system vs the iPhone which is the hardware plus iOS.

If HTC made a phone exactly the same as one of their Android phones and put Windows Mobile on it (which they basically do) then it's no longer an Android phone.

I note that he claims there is only one iPhone and you're guaranteed to get this years model, which is of course nonsense. Apple sold the 3G as the low-end model when the 3GS came out, and they're still going to sell the 3GS now that iPhone 4 is out. I can't recall if they still sold the 2G after the 3G came out but it wouldn't surprise me. This may seem like a small quibble but there seems to be a pattern of making stuff up about both the iPhone and its competitors that to me is an interesting sign all by itself.
I think people are not making enough fun of the "be a man, allow comments" claim.
> you see ads on top of and around television using Google TV

No you don't.
Happy to see abduction making a comeback. Seems like we've always given it short shrift

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abduction_(logic)
His logic is that you are in fact "dinging" the candidate. He used an artificial scenario to illustrate that.

In reality, you never have two candidates who are absolutely equivalent except for spelling ability. The interview process is extremely high-error, brutally timeboxed, and infamously ineffective. The most important capability you need to assess is "ability to code". You know a priori you're going to do a crappy job assessing that capability.

Whether or not he thinks you should be wasting time on trivialities like variable name spelling (I myself would dodge this problem by using names like "x" and "cp" for utterly trivial, well-known example problems like this), I don't know. My bias is pretty clear.
There are plenty of 'real' workloads that don't involve opening a file, hitting a database or establishing an outgoing connection. Even a relatively simple task like serving up a web-app uses caching heavily to avoid being bogged down by the grinding slowness of disk access. If he's aiming for performance, then the message processing overhead could be very significant, and is worth optimising.
Tune in next week for "Is Steve Jobs Justin Bieber?" on Adventures In Click-Whoring!
Unfortunately, the aversion to being spied-upon is also being bred out of the gene pool at a rapid pace.