jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
Agreed. The poster is speaking for himself:
"This is obviously not an optimal development practice - customers paying monthly are starved for new features during these dormant periods"

Personally, I love that they are just leaving sh__ alone. It works. And amazingly well. Just don't touch it. I'm not starving for a dang thing.
A long time ago I switched to DDG, and then switched back to Google. Then about 2-3 months ago, I tried DDG again (mostly because of how responsive Gabriel has been to the community, and because of all the privacy improvements to DDG) and it is now my main search engine.

I can still easily search in Google by appending "!g" to my DDG search, or by using "g" in my Chrome URL bar, but most of the time I don't have to because DDG does a good job.

I'm happy about this partnership as long as it actually does improve results and reduce spam. If it achieves that, then long live Blekko!

Update: The only question I have for Gabriel is: Are you running Blekko code on your servers, or are you pinging them every time there's a search? How do you keep it from slowing down DDG?
I'm also a pretty consistent Adagio customer. Lapsang is my favorite by far. I wish Adagio's was just a tad bit stronger, though. Even with longer steep times (5-6 minutes) I don't quite get the smoky pungency I recall years ago when I had some loose Twinings Lapsang...
IMO, if you're trying to make inroads into search market share against a juggernaut like Google then underdogs banding together makes a lot of sense. It's the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" model. In a way, Yahoo went this route with Microsoft's Bing search engine, except they're letting Bing lead the charge completely. If either Blekko or DDG began to grow too big for the partnership they could always pull back. Actually, that's what Google did, since they used to supply some search results for Yahoo.
I am sure the NSA are involved with at least some aspect of all .gov addresses.
Sure, in a way, but, at what point do we say the idea has value? PageRank didn't seem particularly valuable until the Google folks built something "useful" out of it. I can imagine that someone who could envision its use (or, more esoterically, someone with lots of money who likes collecting things) might have bought the idea itself, and while the idea itself has intrinsic intellectual value, it is of no good [to society as a whole, or to those who do not enjoy understanding the idea for its own sake] nor of any profit just sitting there as an idea, or as a research paper.

Companies spend money regularly to license patents... to pay to use ideas. But what company would find value in simply licensing the patent just to enjoy it? The value is found in licensing the patent and using the idea to create something with it.

At the very least, there is more than one kind of "value".
The monetary cost of running is about $100/year, biking considerably less. As for the cost in time, the average person in the bottom 25% of earnings spends 30 minutes/day more watching TV than the average person in the top 25% (2 hours, 6 minutes total). (No breakdown for "poverty" vs "non-poverty" is given.)

I think the poor could manage some exercise or preparation of healthier food if they wanted to.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t11.htm
This article is not complaining about facebook privacy. On the contrary, it's claiming that facebook will become an unexpected force for good in the struggle for gay rights by merging people's circle of friends and unifying their public personas.
"I think part of it is due to academia. In computer science classes a lot of questions have a "best" answer."

Only if your conception of "academia" doesn't extend beyond first-year undergraduate coursework. Real academia is entirely about tackling questions for which answers are unavailable or incomplete, and finding better answers. Intellectual astronauts don't make it out of grad school, because they don't publish papers (for that matter, they tend to barely make it out of undergrad, because they're the guys most likely to be complaining about "jumping through pointless hoops").

Academics also tend to love to talk about their ideas with other people, and aren't very secretive (with the exception of their closest competitors, perhaps). My first real intro to the attitude that ideas are inherently valuable was when I moved into the tech world. If I had a nickel for every goofy entrepreneur I've met who is in "stealth mode"...well, I'd make more money than I did in academia.
I don't think statistics like what you've just stated are meaningful. The most brilliant people who are the most likely to be interested in a startup are going to be in San Fran.

I'm a software developer who's co-owned a company before.
I don't think that's a safe conclusion to draw. One of the benefits of a corporation is that it can multitask, in some proportion to the number of people involved.
If you need help to deal with your server logs, hire a professional.

By the time you got large enough to have to worry about scaling an infrastructure to deal with your server logs you should either have grown out of the average joe category or have enough revenue to hire a sysadmin.
If 5 years after release, Windows 10's "active hours" setting wasn't still braindead, I would be more inclined to cut them some slack. But it still hasn't occurred to anyone at Microsoft that the hours I need my home computer to be functional might not be the same on a Wednesday and a Saturday.

Even with working from home during COVID where I'm using my Windows machine for a large chunk of every day and the weekday/weekend use patterns are more similar, they're still not the same. And not everyone is on an office worker's weekday/weekend schedule either.

If it's so important that updates can be installed all the time, just give me a damn weekly calendar and let me say when to do it. "Active Hours" is already buried in a nested page of UI with mostly empty space, it's not like this would over complicate the settings app or take up room that they can't spare. https://i.imgur.com/x5I65Jx.png

A $10 clock/radio has more sophisticated and user-friendly alarm scheduling than Microsoft has managed to create in the world's most popular desktop operating system.

Edit to add: why does "Update and Shut Down" mean "Update and Shut Down then Update a Bit More When Turned Back On Later"?

Even if it has to reboot a couple times before staying off, "Update and Shut Down" should have the updates completely done the next time I turn it on to use it.

Edit 2: Also should point out that the "reopen apps after restart" feature on macOS is pretty much universally supported across apps and works nearly flawlessly. You can reboot and hardly notice it happened afterward. Not as much the case for Windows, where a forced reboot when you're away from the computer is probably going to destroy any unsaved changes in documents that you had open.

Apple has been working on seamless reboots since 2011 (OS X Lion) instead of just shoving in "3 AM is update time and we're forcing your computer to reboot, hope you didn't need the stuff you left open yesterday."
Cool site. I knew Harvard's yield was higher than the other schools, but I didn't expect Stanford and Yale to have higher yields so much higher than Princeton. I don't think this was true a few years ago when I was applying to schools.

How are you gathering information about where students were accepted? And where is Caltech in all this?

Also, you know that you can't just add the 25th/75th percentiles for individual SAT sections and come up with overall results, right?
What if your business is going pretty much like you expected? I am actually kind of stressed out that things are going smoothly, does that mean I am not finding the weakness in my business fast enough? Or are things actually going smoothly?
DNS is probably the worlds most used database.
I would hire a really rich investor and make him give me all his money and then go away.
They are effectively going to resegregate the school system. The parents of high performing kids that can afford it will move to school systems with advanced learning classes whether public or private.
All of STL.
TLS/SSL can cache the session in order to actually improve performance and scalability. Otherwise you'd have to redo the exchange each time you made a request.

My guess is that the level of caching you'd want TLS/SSL to do is dependent on what kind of content you're serving, the usage patterns of visitors, etc. As an example, Facebook has relatively long user sessions, and would benefit greatly from caching and just refreshing the session keys. Something like Google search, where a user session may only last a few seconds and a couple requests... maybe not so useful. I'm not familiar (off the top of my head) with any in-depth studies on this.
I've helped out my mother in her business for years, on evenings and weekends. Overall, I haven't found it a good experience, mainly because of two issues.

Firstly, I really don't have the time to put her affairs in order (and keep them that way), only enough to put out fires. I do get paid, but it's really not a matter about money. As you say, it then begins to pollute the relationship with that person, since you can no longer spend time with them normally.

Secondly, it's quite painful to see bad decisions being made against your advice when it's someone you know and care about. It also makes the motivation to put out fires much lower, since you know there'll always be more on the way...

Having chatted to friends, I understand that the situation becomes much easier where both parties have some kind of help they can trade with each other, instead of most of the help going one way.
To counter an anecdote with an anecdote, almost everyone I know uses their phone more for Facebook/Twitter/Hangouts/Snapchat/etcetcetc than for SMS (and I can count the actual calls I've received in the last month on... 2 fingers).
Your examples are a little misleading.

// Imperative: (essence of it)
x = 0;
x = x + 1;
y = x;

// Procedural:
x = 0;
inc(x);
return x;

// Functional:
return inc(x);

// Declarative:
select x + 1;

---
My argument is that all of these above are imperative. Down below sits imperative CPU which will give exactly the same result. Every time.

Wiki definition of imperative programming in my opinion is too broad: "Imperative programming is focused on describing how a program operates"

This applies to every program in every language. Because you as a programmer are always focused on describing how program operates. Prolog is only another higher abstraction layer.

Wiki:
"... imperative programming is a programming paradigm that describes computation in terms of statements that change a program state."

Lets reverse the logic here. Non-imperative programming will not describe computation in terms of statements that change program state. So, non-imperative program will not use statements.
Unfortunately PuTTY still isn't served over https, even after all these years. If you're concerned about esoteric MITM attacks, this is worth remembering...
In the NYC area, there's http://www.refactory.co/. I used to work with these guys, and they know their stuff.

They argue in favor of both designing and manufacturing locally. A quote from their blog: "If you kind of just prototype something and bring it to China expecting that then thousands of these things can be made easily without understanding the processes and materiality of manufacturing, that is gonna be a big problem for you. What works is when the design process is iterated alongside the manufacturing process."
Their link to the paper contains a typo, at least as I see it.

Fixed:

https://www.esri.ie/publications/latest_publications/view/in...
I often have the same problems as you (and I have to say, I constantly forget whether it's push/append too, even in my most commonly used languages).

My solution to the problem has been to setup my development environment to provide the requisite autocompletion and linting (I use emacs with the brilliant spacemacs package to be able to have "the one IDE for all languages").

It takes a bit of setting up for each language you use, but if you do the setup on an as-and-when basis it's not that bad (and "starter-packs" that have packages that work together are great)
Right, that would then be "better than bluetooth", not "the best technology". In particular, the network induces latency and buffering problems.
Very nice work, really great to see how it's improved as a result of your sustained effort.

Also - I remember that Nova Logic game ( Commanche?).
Huh?

I'm not sure I understand your first sentence.
Are you saying that people continue to use those words (the second of which I don't recognize) in the same manner as they were used before, and that at the time those words were being used in a way that was not harmful?

I don't think that I am aware of that any common use of that word that matches those criteria, but I may be mistaken (I certainly have not thought this through).

I'd like to note that I wasn't necessarily claiming that using the word 'man' now for a certain purpose is not imperfect, just trying to note a difference between the compared circumstances. (This may have been influenced by a position, and perhaps the method of discussion I am using might be counterproductive, with all its qualifiers and fallbacks, but uh, hm.)
Now I am mostly trying to understand what you mean by this most recent message.

When you are talking about using a word from a heavily sexist era, are you talking about using 'man' from 'mann'? Also, are you saying that the use of the word 'mann' at that time was sexist?

If that is not what you meant, I apologize, I don't mean to put words in your mouth.

Finally, I agree that connotation and other properties of words can be harmful when the denotation would not be.

Which very well may be a sufficient reason to avoid the use of the word 'man' to mean a human of any gender.

(though, due to ignorance, _successfully_ avoiding all use of exclusionary language might be difficult? Though of course, avoiding any single instance of exclusionary language likely would not be hard.)

I note that my way of approaching these sorts of things might be harmful, with all the extra qualifiers everywhere, and a few other things like that.
However, I didn't really feel comfortable not responding at all, because I felt accused of saying something that I felt I had not said, and which I did not understand how it might follow from what I had said.
I hope that I have not engaged in moving any goalposts, or similar harmful rhetorical-ish stuff.
However, I feel I might have done so (though I am not sure exactly where), so I apologize if I have.
Looking at which key exchange protocols, HMACs etc. various other SSH implementations out there support, it seems that many of them would be barred from accessing a server hardened like that :/. In fact, it almost seems like the intersection of mutually supported protocols is empty resp. only contains known-to-be-unsafe ones... :(.

Which makes me wonder: Is there anywhere a comprehensive comparison with tables that show which SSH clients (and servers) support which algorithms for key exchange, HMAC, etc.? That would help determining whom one is going to shut out by disabling which protocol, and thus help in making an informed decision on that.

Of course, to be really useful, such a table would also need to take into account which version of each listed software added support for which protocol -- as it is, the OpenSSH shipped in e.g. Mac OS X 10.8 (5.9p1) does not support curve25519-sha256@libssh.org which the OP recommends...

Sources:
http://www.libssh2.org/
http://api.libssh.org/stable/
https://support.ssh.com/manuals/server-admin/44/Ciphers_and_... http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/lsh/lsh.html
thomas followed by a point followed by dullien at gmail.
100% that is what I meant to say. thanks.
You can send a file descriptor over a socket between two processes. (Google "SCM_RIGHTS").

This is one place in the kernel where it employs a garbage collector (hey, they need to start somewhere ...). The reason is that there's an uncomfortable part about this API: the reader doesn't necessarily have to pick up the file descriptor it is sent. If the sender closes the fd, the kernel needs to detect that the reader didn't pick up the fd and deallocate the underlying file resource. Hence GC needed.

This code makes sure that many such fds are "in flight" over the socketpair, and by closing the socket instead of reading from it, ensures they are leaked. The GC doesn't get invoked under this particular set of circumstances so eventually you consume all system file resources. (I think even ulimit doesn't stop this).

Solution as in the follow up message is to run the GC in an extra place.
I agree and also feel like if you write your readme file in a way where it wouldn't be usable in a text editor by someone who merely cloned your repository or downloaded your tarball, you are simultaneously misunderstanding the point of a readme file and the point of markdown... what you want is a website :/.

(That said, this article is about your "profile", which I have never used myself, never look at from other people, and I guess don't care what other people want to put on theirs? ;P)
You mean just like LLVM?
Yeah, testicular cancer is real sexist
Dart is usable now. ES6 has long been delayed, and who knows when ES7 will be available for mass usage.

There are lots of intro pages out there to get you a little more familiar with it [0][1][2]. Dart as a language spec isn't all that deep, and it tries to keep things simple and easy to use. A lot of the power I feel like comes from the library and tools that come with the language.

[0] http://programming.oreilly.com/2013/05/dart-is-not-the-langu...

[1] https://www.dartlang.org/docs/dart-up-and-running/contents/c...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language)
Check this out as well from Visa.

Disclaimer: I worked/work on this https://usa.visa.com/about-visa/newsroom/press-releases.rele...
This year: most of the time I am not coding is because I am making sure my 6-year-old is paying attention to Zoom Kindergarten.
Money doesn't buy taste, clearly.
"trans men are men"

"Poverty causes crime"

"Women are neurotic"

"IPv6 is required to be implemented ASAP"

All of these are absolute facts To some people. And absolute falsities to others.
The writing style is amusing. :)

Some notes from a first glance:

* In the experiments, I see that he uses the Single Headed Attention model actually also with 4 heads, which is kind of a contradiction to the name, isn't it?

* The main motivation is performance (training speed mostly). So some absolute number of e.g. training time would be nice to have in the comparisons. He e.g. mentions that the Adaptive Transformer can also be trained on a single GPU within hours, and in the comparison, the Adaptive Transformer gets much better BPC (enwik8), and uses even slightly less parameters. So, isn't the Adaptive Transformer thus better in every aspect (speed and BPC)? Or how does it compare in speed? As far as I remember, also the Sparse Transformer is more efficient (as it has sparsity), so again the speed comparison would be interesting here. Or is the argumentation for inference speed? But then the inference speed should be compared, or not?
The current implementation allows Firefox to fully sandbox the DRM module, and optionally uninstall it completely if the user wants. It seems reasonable to me that if other voices hadn't been involved in the standardization process, even this small win may not have been possible.
Well I guess that makes it easier. I'd rather write Java than Kotlin anyway.
I'm not making a push to change things.

I'm just recognizing the current reality. I also agree that it's pretty crappy.
The two As are usually for Apple and Amazon. I think the shorter version of the acronym is just incorrect.
What's really needed is a standard GUI markup language (SGML) and probably a dedicated browser, or at least a browser pluggin. Emulating desktop-like GUI's using JavaScript and DOM has proven clunky and unreliable, largely because HTML browser makers do what they want when they want. A dedicated GUI browser wouldn't break GUI's because doing GUI's is its sole purpose.

HTML browser makers usually don't care if they break a particular JavaScript library by adding or tweaking features. It's a matter of focus. The SGML browser's only job is to do GUI's right. But HTML browsers have 100's of jobs. If changes harm a few of those, they become roadkill.

But using JavaScript as the starting point of a SGML may be the only way to gain momentum. However, the end game should be using mostly markup to manage a GUI, not JavaScript.

Standard and common GUI idioms and behaviors should be done in a declarative fashion using such markup, such as having a button open (make visible) a given window. While some client scripting may be needed, most of the processing could and should be done at the server if the SGML browser does most of the UI grunt-work.
The author Shellenberger is a somewhat controversial figure and is launching a political career. I don't have time to write more but people should read about him and make up their own minds for what it means when reading his oped.
> I expected the Haskell ecosystem to be far more mature in the backend HTTP service space.

I also could not place this remark. Haskell has about the most mature BE ecosystem I can think of. Servant, IHP, Yesod, Wai/Warp, and there is lots more.
Still incentive the energy savers to make investment to save more, so they can sell more rights, and incentive the biggest energy consumer to consume a bit less so they pay less.

I wouldn't call that stupid
The article mentions Amazon having the same trajectory but watching it unfold as reported by the gaming industry has been hilarious and sad. You have this tech behemoth that can and has thrown billions and recruited great people fail horribly because they haven't treated the domain with the respect and experience it requires.

You cannot simply order your minions to produce a billion dollar product in x years when dealing with entertainment. Almost every AAA game is created by studios/publishers with decades of experienced and even then the games don't always succeed (Cyberpunk 2077 comes to mind).

Thinking that you can go into a demanding and super competitive creative industry and make billions by treating games as another tech product is destined to fail. You need to play take the Sony or Microsoft route where you are both a publisher and several studios working over several years to change the video game landscape.
I'm calling BS, I have more than 20 credit cards, a mortgage, and utilities and I don't find it time consuming to manually pay everything (and my mortgage has no escrow)
As I understand it, Texas hopes to stimulate supply by offering higher prices. Does that work? Well, it clearly works to some extent normally.

If your legislature (not to mention local culture) has insisted you must only use a hammer, those screws are getting hammered in, too bad.

If you have greater import/export capacity the higher prices ensure you're importing. In this particular case that would likely have made no difference, it's not as though the storm was just affecting Texas, but in other cases or with a smaller deficit that might save your backside.

Also as I understand it, some places pay generators for their capacity to deliver power if it were needed, even if in fact they're never needed. So that can be a better plan because it makes the incentive not to fail clearer.
Too old to recognize the brand, but I'm not following the logic here at all. What kind of clothing manufacturer do you find most appropriate for a street tough?