jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
"English textual datetime" as the input date format? What could go wrong... For an API this makes literally no sense.
There is a lot wrong with diets in developed countries, but it's not chicken, or at least chicken is way down the list of offenders.

AIUI the biggest dietary culprit is the insidious infiltration of sugars into the foods that many people eat. Much of the prepared, convenience foods people rely on contain sugars that even dedicated label-readers may not be able to readily identify. A whole laundry list of cane sugar, sucrose, high-fructose syrup, rice syrup, honey, invert syrup, molasses, panela, muscovado, etc.

Unless they're sneaking sugars into chicken, sure doesn't seem that it would be the main problem.
Actually no. A promise is a thenable oject, true, but a complex one. Simple thenable objects are in the simplest form objects that internally just holds an array of methods defined in each then() block. These methods then execute one after another at runtime. Any slightly experienced dev can probably create a library object or class like this in under 100 loc as a dropin replacement for most promises needs, and get a firm grasp of the internals in addition.

The usage of such an object won't be as terse and seemingly elegant as await syntax, but this is part of the problem: with await/promises so much of the complex logic is hidden from view and instead needs to reside the head of each dev, where it needs to compete with a thousand other things that need attention. It's an expression of the constant but unhealthy tendency towards golfing that pervades our field IMO.
Much of this story reminds me of Carl Jung's The Red Book.
Your US medical insurance will cover an illness or disease (why 12 step for profit rehabs continue to lobby this idea). Less likely to cover you for a lifestyle choice that became a learned behavior.
From what I have seen, this is a DNS block. Anyone not using their ISP's DNS or the DNS of an ISP that has not yet implemented the block will not see them blocked.
I know a few people who had employers who were not honest about this.

Every single one of them left within 3 months and they pretty much just used the time as paid interview prep. For one case in particular, they essentially just paid for this fellow to interview prep for an upcoming FB interview. And he stayed just long enough for the recruiter to get to keep their fee.

So it depends on your risk/reward trade off of this happening to you.
How to avoid deadnaming in some contexts isn't really clear. How do you talk about historical events where a trans person's original name was recorded?

For instance, nobody is retroactively editing a movie's credits to use their new name. Nobody is re-engraving trophies that had their original name engraved.

The policy seems to universally be "you're evil if you deadname in any context, period", which seems logically impossible to satisfy in some contexts.
I've heard a couple stories from women who had to stop playing WoW because they were sexually assaulted in game after past IRL experiences. When something like that has never happened to you it's really easy to just shrug it off as trivial or stupid. But, it really hurts when you've lived it.

I feel the same way about suicide and gun violence after experiencing it with my brother and a few friends. It seemed so funny and stupid when I was a kid. Now it's like being stabbed in the gut.
Destroying them out of spite sounds like a very effective way of turning a civil protest into an insurgency.
Exactly. I haven’t carried a significant amount of cash for several years now. I’ll pull out a little if I’m meeting friends at a cash only bar or something but otherwise, it’s just an encumbrance and a liability.
> they play chess better than they used to

I tend to believe that, given how intensive we train players these days, but are we actually certain that it is the case? I guess we could ask a chess engine to rate all available games but that would not be terribly convincing because they were playing a different style, against the players of their time (unlike a running competition, you really need two players to play a game of chess).
Also, for some past players we don't have that many games to begin with.
Try isort instead https://github.com/PyCQA/isort
> and the proceeds would be distributed uniformly to the population as a citizen's dividend.

Sounds like a form of communism to me.
If you're taking enough mushrooms to "see things from another perspective", that's not microdosing, that's regular dosing.
Same error here, firefox ESR
Isn't ghostery owned by an ad company?
Except, of course, scientists change their minds all the time based on the evidence.

Look at all the work in QM in the 20s and 30s. These guys had competing hypothesizes, and some won out based on the evidence. The people that held the opposing view? They quickly accepted the errors of their ways.

This is known as the bozo the clown argument. You know, somebody says "My perpetual motion machine will work! They laughed at Einstein, you know". And the reply is "yes, and they also laughed at bozo the clown".

Almost always, if everyone is against your idea, having tried it, you are probably wrong. There is probably no industry on the planet more open to change. We've gone from procedural to OO, functional programming is having a huge resurgence, static typed to dynamic typed, waterfall to extreme/agile/whatever, and so on.

And, despite the claims of the article, data flow programming has been alive and well the whole time. It hasn't been used much because of all the things that we have raised each time the topic is brought up, with no real response other than claims that we just don't get it, that people disagreeing is a sign that you are doing something right, and so on. I don't find it convincing at all. It's time to retire that Kuhn/Planck quote.
How is this different from what craigslist does?

Searching for "drill rent" in the NYC page reveals http://newhaven.craigslist.org/tls/3961251107.html
> You (and I mean you specifically) can obviously look at a new use and say "this is a new meaning" or "no, this is an error", but that's a subjective judgement and others would think otherwise.

Hence me talking about "widespread". If the consensus of the vast majority of people says that a usage is incorrect, then a helpful dictionary should properly document that that usage will be perceived as incorrect. Writing "there" when you mean "their" or "they're" usually produces a sentence that can be understood in context (our language parsers are remarkably resilient), but will make the writer look like they either don't know or don't care, and will create a strong negative impression in those who read it.

Dictionaries should document widespread usages, even incorrect ones. Dictionaries often attach information to meanings like "archaic" or "frequently misused as" or "frequently confused with".

For example, a dictionary can and should add a note to "their" saying "frequently confused with they're and there". There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But as long as the vast majority of people consider sentences like "there sentence structure needed some work" incorrect, a dictionary should not claim that "there" is a possessive pronoun without attaching the caveat that anyone reading it will consider it incorrect.

(This response applies to several replies.)
Why wouldn't Django just use South instead of creating ever more dependencies on itself?
thanks! I am currently doing the Andrew Ng one (https://www.coursera.org/course/ml?from_restricted_preview=1...), saw a Geoff Hinton talk on youtube and didn't even know about this course.
I'm fairly confident that they will simply tokenize credit cards/customers and use that info to process the charge once the project has succeeded.

This could result in the funds not being available when the payment is submitted, but is still a much cleaner implementation and does not require that you hold funds and leave the period at the mercy of the bank.
> Well then how am I going to figure out whether or not you can code?

Provide the candidate with a PC representative of what you'd give to him/her during the course of his/her's employment and assign an ~one-hour-long programming assignment to complete while you sit nearby.

If the candidate needs a particular program (e.g., "I don't like Vim. I prefer to write my code in VILE!"), then give it to 'em.
No, you would just fire all of the Cobol developers to bring in the experienced Pascal developers.

How does one become an experienced Pascal developer? That's somebody else's problem.
More to the point, between the cycles of the clock in your CPU a signal has to make it's way across a number of gates. This is usually measured in terms of the equivalent of the time it takes a transistor to drive the capacitances of 4 other transistors (FO4s). Your typical CPU these days will have between 10 to 20 FO4s of delay for each actual clock cycle.
That's the issue, it's much less important to ask someone to produce the code then it is to ask them how would they produce it. Being a Sr. Developer is less about what you know and more about how you work and think.
Creative idea. Also, if you complete the assignment in your spare time, it says something about your drive/motivation and discipline. These intangibles are hard to glean in an interview.
In the case of startups, you get people interviewing that have very little interview experience.
> And it has nothing to do with any sort of concerns that Google provides the NSA direct access to its servers.
> (Google's security engineers can be trusted, I think.)

A bit off-topic, but I'm not sure what you mean here. Yes, they can be trusted - to do their job. Which managers dictate. Which includes whatever NSA dictates. So yes, you can bet NSA has total access to everything it wants at Google, direct and total.
I like how anything can be blamed on China. There are many plausible alternative explanation down below, but nope, HNers gotta upvote to the top that one comment that appeals to anti-China (or Chinese?) rhetoric.
Some very opinionated people in this thread. My two cents...

I've had similar experiences to the guy who wrote the article. Something about interviews seems to make my heart race and I can stumble on very simple code. This is in strong contrast to how I am in normal social situations where I am highly confident and my personality is often infectious and passionate. I think it's a case of high anxiety in authoritarian/test conditions. Those that imply their working conditions are similar to interview conditions make a good point, however if that is the case I would prefer somewhere less confrontational and more forgiving.

Generally I prefer proper timed tests [0] without anybody watching. This is how I normally work.

I'm also one of those people that has to constantly look things up; actually I have a broad range of experience but I often find myself delving deeply into things I have only cursory knowledge in - imagine a librarian that remembers the locations of the books in a library and the analogy to knowing high-level concepts that allow thinking on your feet when used together with the correct reference materials.

Of course I believe that it's better to be good at making do with limited information. Understanding things from scratch is what I have been doing all my life. Like a chameleon when I look at some code that I did not write, it becomes my syntax and I quickly understand the contents. However different organisations and cultures sometimes prefer different kinds of engineers: there is either a preference towards robustness or flexibility [1].

[0] http://codility.com

[1] A test I would excel on would be being passed code in an unfamiliar language, domain, library or ecosystem and being told to quickly get to grips with it and add features/fixes (aka. flexible knowledge: unfamiliar territory which requires me to pull together a broad range of skills.) This is opposed to being passed a piece of code in a familiar language, domain, library and ecosystem and being told to quickly and robustly add a feature or fix to it (aka. robust knowledge: familiar territory which requires only a very specific set of skills.)
Same here.

My first thought was, yet another site succumbing to the NSA. My impression was reinforced by the name, "Alice" being one of three first names (Paul, Alice, Eve) often used when discussing cryptographic scenarios.

So, sigh. Maybe there's something interesting here. But, if so, it's about ordinary business failure, not spookery.
droning at a BigCo. with guys we go some way back.
Obsolete isn't a verb.
Maybe just a little more borrowing, stimulating and inflating will do the trick. The effects have contradicted the theory for a decade, but maybe it somehow just wasn't quite enough. Ugh.

When Japan looked to Western thinkers for modern economic solutions, they should have stopped at Deming.
Because of the oxygen which is also part of the 1000 t of "fuel".

However, I think I used the wrong value anyway, for Starship instead of its booster, so x4 or so. Doesn't affect the conclusion.
> paying them a consistent percentage for that value

Except... there's a market. People want to be paid based on a market clearing rate, not on your appraisal of value. And what is value anyway? If a company is in build mode and not generating any value is nobody paid anything?
It's a communication problem.

Looking at the homepage and the projects it feels like everything is ready and, if the claims were true, it would be the most ground breaking language of the last decades. When you go to look at the code or try to run something you find out:
- some things are still closed source
- some are broken
- some are wins from C

It's a great strategy for collecting a check from VCs and I wish the author the best of luck, but it won't fly with developers.
I don't get it. They're both async.
I live in an old building that has a lot of cracks and gaps for air to circulate, so it rarely comes close to 2000ppm. When I leave the house for a longer period of time (hasn't happened in a while), you can see the value slowly approaching the outside baseline. And in the night, while I sleep with the windows closed, I produce much less of it, so I don't get super high values there either.

But the rise is quite interesting! It differs a lot based on some factors, such as am I asleep, awake, or working out / are any doors open, i.e. how big is the volume of air I'm in?
One of my first troubleshooting steps is replacing /etc/resolv.conf with just a basic one. By seeing that using Google's DNS directly works, I would know that it's a problem with resolved.
I mean the Bugzilla literally has an example of a website that breaks.
It’s an exact one to one example of bike shedding.
Engineers have proven themselves unable to solve this. I will do so now:

(1) have ONE pushable and turnable knob, somewhere - steering wheel, dash, doesn't matter
(2) 25-30 one-word voice commands: "volume"/"louder"/"hotter"/"A-C"/"radio"/"front"

Want to turn on the radio? Say "radio", push button. Louder? "louder", turn knob. Cooler? Say "A-C", push button, turn knob. "Fan", turn. Maybe some white noise feedback while turning it, to indicate whether you're in the low range or high range. Done!
can i see a performance comparison here with total times? Why not just git clone --depth 1?

With github API rate limiting it seems ridiculous to expect it to be faster than a basic shallow git clone.
Next thing you know software devs will fight thunderdome style over which console text editor is superior, bracket placement and tabs versus spaces.
If you're going to build something like this, look to see how much cartridge filters cost locally. Nice big cylinders with a great many pleats. It'll simplify construction, may improve airflow (depending on the model, pleats, etc, and will make it look more like a missile launcher than an IED.
I've lost a few very good friends due to this. In-person and online interactions with the same person would vary wildly in tone and emotional intensity, like speaking to two entirely different people. The online interactions always pushed us apart, and the in-person interactions never failed to mend things, but of course those stopped happening over the previous year. I have to assume it's the same way with me toward others.

If I may entertain an idea without necessarily believing it, I would not be surprised if many of the accounts on major social-media sites like Reddit, Twitter, etc are non-human persons tasked with pushing one narrative or another (no specific implication intended/assumed). The "subreddit simulator" powered by GPT-2 bots has more than enough realistic-seeming conversations to make me not immediately reject the idea, since we've all seen how much better GPT-3 is and I assume private entities have even better language models than that: https://old.reddit.com/r/SubSimulatorGPT2/

My additional total-speculation is that all the NSA/FVEY surveillance of our everyday online conversations and interactions would be an excellent training set for such a hypothetical language model.
The oral history of the person claiming credit was stolen from him is not a reliable source.
Well, it’s sending a sha256 for your phone number, how is this not good enough? How you would expect to check the number in the database without hashing or passing it clear?
I stopped using Twitter for Lent a couple years ago. After the first few days I stopped thinking to look.
Very nice, thanks for sharing!

Best viewed in 2-up mode (unless you're on mobile or have a very narrow screen): https://archive.org/details/Computer_Language_Issue_09_1985-...
— the Knuth interview continues on the left-hand pages, and the Wirth interview on the right-hand pages.

I started posting a comment with interesting quotes from these two interviews, but it got very long. :-) But a couple of highlights of the Knuth interview, for me, were:

- Wirth accusing Knuth, in the politest possible way (“I have always admired his work”), of writing unstructured programs, and Knuth with a spirited defence of goto-s and pointers and knowing what the machine is doing,

- Knuth on his philosophy of science and art:

> Art, in one of its main senses, is something human beings can do, but we don't know how to automate. Science is something we understand well enough to formalize and mechanize. As science advances, we know more about the world. And we're able to automate more.

> When someone says, "Let's convert an art into a science," he's saying, "Let's let the science catch up to where the art is, to what human beings can do." What happens is. as science advances, art also advances, but even further. When we learn more science, then our human abilities jump forward too. Then there's more for science to catch up with. I hope science never overtakes art; I can't imagine that happening.

(As an aside, not understanding this core philosophy of his is IMO why the font design community had (and to whatever extent aware, still has) so many misconceptions about METAFONT, and why it never caught on.)

He had touched on this 11 years earlier, in his 1974 Turing Award lecture (Computer Programming as an Art, http://www.paulgraham.com/knuth.html) and said it crisply and memorably another 11 years later, in his 1996 foreword to the book “A=B”:

> Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do.
I feel deeply sorry for the AMD manager who's going to inherit management of the Xilinx software stack.
The most natural way is to join a startup that is scaling. You can of course learn by doing it yourself on the side, but in practice "learning by doing" on the job is by far the most effective in my experience.

I also hope we don't need to know all this stuff in the future. It's pretty really low-level and it's much better if we can focus more on creating differentiation and building your actual product. (Full disclosure: I've founded a startup that's trying to do exactly that, so I guess I'm biased!)
Given the history of humanity, I find this take to be anywhere between optimistic and naive.
I just moved a project from pipenv to poetry at work. My biggest issue with pipenv is that you can't selectively upgrade dependencies. Trying to `pipenv update xyz` basically blows away your lockfile and updates everything. There's a command line flag to be more selective but it doesn't work. I found an open GitHub issue about it that's years old.

Poetry by contrast works pretty much like any modern dependency system you'd be familiar with from another language like cargo, npm, or hex.
I feel that. It always seems to come down to tooling; the moment you have to fight with tooling for a language, it immediately adds friction. Sure, individual developers can overcome these problems, but it still decreases the adoption rate of said language.

It makes me wonder what differed between the .NET and JVM runtimes, with .NET moving towards fewer languages, whereas the JVM supports more.
Not true at all. UK was doing >1million rapid tests a day when schools were open. They will do that again when they are back from easter break.

Also, the false negative rate isn't a big problem IMO. The PCR 'false negative' rate is far far higher because we are only doing a few hundred thousand a day, so 90% of people are getting missed entirely. I'd rather a 50% false negative rate than a 89% false negative rate from PCR.

There is also the problem that PCR takes at least a day to turn around as well - which will result in more spread.

I'm not saying we should get rid of PCR testing and just do LFD but doing both is probably the best option.
Now you just need to also write a testsuite that covers every possible path through your code and you've proved the absence of errors that Valgrind can find. I'm not sure that building such a test suite is less work than using a safer language.
Sure, if generics and error handling mechanisms will be added to it.

Guys (Go team), please convince Gilad Bracha to spend at least one day with you...
>If you're worried about this, perhaps you should also be worried about entering the US -- including in transit -- in case you are declared to be an unperson and sent to Gitmo with no trial or legal recourse.

Quite.

>It's a bit worse than a maximum of nine hours of pointless tedium and handing over your Gmail/Facebook passwords which -- let's face it -- the spooks will have if they want them anyway.

I think you missed my point. Asserting your right to silence is a crime in this situation. You can be further detained, charged, prosecuted, jailed and/or fined for asserting a basic right.
Nope, SmartOS is pretty neat.
It would be nice to know why I'm getting down voted...
Until recently I was living this problem. I finished my PhD in Computational Biology and then joined the ranks of the long term unemployed. I got 1 job interview in 1 year. Things have improved and I now have a position in academia (the first academic position that I applied for).

I personally don't see that doing a PhD should be a issue for recruiters in industry. I worked as a programmer for 10+ years before doing a PhD and can confidently say that doing research was one of the most rewarding times of my life. I learnt an incredible amount - especially how to independently research and tackle hard problems. Does industry not have any hard problems?

Perhaps this is just a period of adjustment. The people recruiting don't have PhDs so they don't know what research involves or what someone with a PhD can bring to a company.

I have seen both sides of the fence and if I was ever in a position to recruit I would certainly consider someone with research experience on an equal footing with a new graduate. I often joked that I would have had the same employment chances if I'd have spent 4 years sitting on a beach instead of doing a PhD. In a complex modern world such as ours this is truly twisted and bizarre.
Stallman nearly always answers email sent to him, though he takes 24 hours or so to do it.