jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I too am interested in attending conferences this year.

My list so far:

Nodeconf Adventure

Laracon

WordPress Seattle and Vancouver

CascadiaJS

Ruby on Rails conf
How exactly would it help af447? wasn't that determined to be an issue with the pitot tube becoming blocked and one of the pilots just holding the stick back until they stalled at 47 thousand feet.
Check out The Reference Frame blog if you want to read more (and more in-depth) about naturalness. For example: http://motls.blogspot.cz/2012/07/diphoton-higgs-enhancement-... http://motls.blogspot.cz/2013/12/doubly-protected-higgs-is-n...

Otherwise: https://www.google.com/?q=site:motls.blogspot.com+naturalnes...
Hm. This was a hodgepodge. I really sympathized with many criticisms, but others lacked focus.

Specifically, I'm frustrated with the author picking on the idea of police officers wearing cameras. I'm interested in how we can decentralize and unpackage law enforcement services, so this hit home for me. I'd like to expound on (de)centralization, community and transparency for a sec, if I can be indulged.

Democracy and society today implies distributed power (citizens) mediated by necessary centralized power (law enforcement, elected representatives, judicial systems). This was a choice we made as our societies grew, as it was the only one that technology (postal service, telegraph, horse, guns, etc.) allowed at the time we were working through our options.

The small, manageable communities of our past were ones where everyone knew everyone else. There was gossip. Secrets were hard. But this was bundled up with the security we had in these communties. We're being dishonest if we become nostalgic for that security and community, and yet conveniently deny the nakedness that is implied.

Democracy has been the only way we've known stability in recent history. But it doesn't mirror these small communities of our past. We trusted centralized powers to mediate the trust relationships the we lost when we grew up. This allowed us to live in a world where we didn't need to ask transparency. So we got used to that being a norm in a society where we felt security and stability.

But if we want to build more decentralized a robust societies, we need to accept that sometimes radical transparency is needed for certain institutions to lose their corruptible centers. We need radical transparency for any institution that operates at the scale where we can't know and trust one another through the nakedness of personal relationships. We CAN build a decentralized society that has privacy, and we should demand that privacy for situations where it need not be sacrificed. But we can't always demonize all forms of radical transparency, as this is the crucial element that will allow the most corruptible of our institutions to be reimagined.

OK, sorry, this was perhaps a bit of a rant. If you're thinking in similar areas, perhaps the words above will resonate with you. Otherwise, it might sound like an abstract rambling :)
This strikes me as an archetypal example of the legalistic sort of thinking that is popular with a vocal minority of internet forum users who like to make litigious arguments, look for problems that don't actually exist in practice, then demand bureaucratic systems to "solve" the "problems". I don't believe that we're violating human rights by operating HN, and the idea of building software to address such cases as "someone taking over the domain and making it a porn site" is an example of what I mean by problems that don't exist in practice.

I don't mean to pick on you personally—it's a style of thinking that I've encountered on a regular basis. Being a moderator, and thus a sort of bureaucrat, attracts arguments from the bureaucratically minded. All I can tell you is that it's the opposite of how we think about HN. In my view it would be a big mistake to let it direct how we operate HN or what features to add. The way I look at it, HN users have a right to an interesting forum that doesn't suck (or at least relatively doesn't suck), that's a hard problem, and anything that detracts focus from it is a really bad idea. I get that you think differently and I don't mean to be disrespectful. But yes, I am thinking about the culture of HN.
The only gap between "knowing" and "not knowing" is perhaps three seconds of Googling

Have you ever worked tech support and had to help a lawyer or doctor set up their router?

It's not about mental deficiency.
The option/apple keys are the alt key - until a couple years ago, there was no 'alt' and the option/apple key was called 'open apple option' by most people.
Sure, it looks cool, but it appears to require a lot of slow and inefficient physical movement to accomplish the most basic of tasks. Imagine a bunch of cubical works sitting at their desktops waving their arms around trying to navigate their computer's file system :-)
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/296708176/3G_tablet_pc_Wit...

This seems like the King sub $100 unit. Someone please buy then and test it out!!!

Edit: Found another awesome sub $100 unit.

http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/313429636/Come_here_the_An...
I've always likened these posters to the legal books kept on law office bookshelves. It's 2010 and I'm not sure I want to set foot in the office of a lawyer billing $200+/hr if they're seriously still sifting through tomes.

I know what I'm talking about...you see all this wood pulp at my disposal?
Scott McCloud discusses this extensively in chapter 2 of "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art." His general thesis is that detailed images that approach or achieve photorealism are close to the way we understand and experience the world around us and in turn how we view other people. Highly "iconic" simplified line drawings and cartoons, on the other hand, are closer to our internal representation of ourselves. The result is that we often find it easier to empathize with cartoons than realistic images.
Am I the only one that thinks this really isn't a big deal, some apple fan (judging by the guys twitter) making a big deal over nothing

[Edit: renamed to fan.]
Oh wow. That sucks. Here I am pumped about the future of Android and I didn't realize this. Google, please fix -- I know you read Hacker News.
> On the consumer accessible page Apple are requiring Safari because they can guarantee that the demos will work and they can guarantee they will have reasonable performance.

I'm sorry, how is that supporting standard again? I'm not illuminated yet.
What am I supposed to take away from this presentation?
Very interesting idea. Drop me a line and let’s discuss: nelewel291@maksap.com
I'd refer to it as more of a "set-it-and-forget-it automated financial framework". I'm not, for example, pondering how much I'm spending on groceries, frantically updating YNAB with those transactions. Everything's sorted and just keeps working for me.
It doesn't mean they don't either. It's the removal of the previous claim that's worrying.

But honestly, it doesn't matter anyway since Whatsapp is somehow able to backup all your data on Google Drive and restore it on separate phones. How are they able to do that without backing up the private key?

https://faq.whatsapp.com/android/chats/how-to-restore-your-c...
I think it's interesting that your list omits industry/manufacturing/construction, typically very space- and vehicle-intensive. Industry is no longer a part of the urban core of a lot of cities in the west (and it can have significant negative externalities for the folks living around it), but it really needs to be solved in order to reduce car dependence.
They are entirely based and operated out of America. That makes them American.

Apple, Cisco etc. might very well have >50% ownership from non-American sources, that doesn't make them 'not American'.

The outrage hyperbole over Dominion is completely fabricated, there's no basis it.

Their machines + system have the level of integrity necessary for satisfying the use case they are used for.

The possible 'loopholes' relate to who is using the ballots and machines, not the ballots or machines themselves.
That all makes sense, but people should be aware that what you are saying isn't backed by your terms, so they have to trust you.
How can Sci-Hub and LibGen be mirrored? When I last looked into it, it was closed source.
The world doesn't work like the models they teach at Econ 101 though :-)
StructionSite | Engineering | Remote | https://structionsite.com

StructionSite is the virtual replica of the physical construction job site. Our software gives teams the ability to communicate, track progress, and resolve issues from anywhere,
anytime. We are looking for software engineers of all stripes to build the next iteration of our product.

If you'd love to work on:

- Computer vision and machine learning

- Web applications with Elm

- Data pipelines and web services with Rust

... then we'd love to meet you. Apply here and expect a quick reply: https://structionsite.com/careers
Trivializes rape a little bit, doesn't it?
No. I've been spoiled by articles that justify their existence in the first few lines, instead of requiring the reader to make a leap of faith and trust the author with half an hour of their precious time.

Actually, I haven't been spoiled, they're still fairly rare.
Sure, the Taliban have far more political skill than the current warlord government. Which bodes well for their long term prospects.
what Lisp-1 is that? look clean.
White Paper on plans to privatize Iraq's oil industry (dated but an interesting read):

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/185/40...
It's a question of your threat model. Do you worry more about the cases where someone getting into the cockpit is a problem, or someone not getting into the cockpit is the problem? You can make provisions for both, but your final layer of security can only target one or the other. If you have an 'ultimate override code', eventually an attacker compromises it (hell, it'd probably be 1234 on most planes). If you have an 'ultimate lockout', eventually the wrong person locks everyone out.
Newer planes are fully fly-by-wire, so you could build software to attempt to address the issue. The problem is identifying a suicidal action. A descent is not suicidal. There are many cases that make a sudden descent a life-saving procedure. For example, cabin depressurization. Alternately, an ATC could require a plane to descend rapidly to clear airspace for another flight that is disabled.

Now, consider that programmers make mistakes (even in aerospace) much more frequently than pilots decide to commit suicide. If a software system is given first-authority instead of a pilot you'll have more deaths due to the system than due to pilots intentional attempt to destroy a plane. The problem of suicidal pilots can be addressed by a number of known mechanisms, none of which jeopardize the safety of a flight. Pernicious problems of software quality are still incredibly difficult to address in any context.
Hacker News is not proprietary software. It's open source under the Perl Foundation Artistic License 2.0 (FSF compatible). It's even written in Arc Lisp, which is nifty.

Some of us do care.
So make the cockpit a "No-lone zone" - makes sense:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule#No-lone_zone
I think auto-pilot already can override intentional actions of the pilot. It's my understanding that auto-pilot will prevent a pilot from many actions that would result in a stall?
Is this really the place for this?
If the point of choosealicense is to be non-judgmental, they should use non-judgmental language to do so.

So lets change the "I want it simple and permissive" text to "I want attribution. The MIT License only requirements is that users provide attribution back to you and don’t hold you liable."

Its a forthright and non judgmental description of the MIT license and its purpose, and it matches perfectly with the style of the GPL description.
I'd argue that the line between software and hardware isn't as clear in neuro as someone with an IT background would like to think, specifically because the electro-chemical activities going on are both, hard and soft, at the same time. This isn't some abstract process running on a biological computer, the biological computer is the sum of the processes that constitute itself. (That's the fascinating thing about bio)

To form a memory is something completely different than to store data in a db, as it involves lots and lots of encoding factors. If anything is actually stored, it's not the memory itself, but the perception at time T in relation to the expectations for T, i.e. a delta (think of the times when you listen to a song from the old days and it hurts, because the emotional connotation from back then doesn't match the current situation). Retrieving this delta would be meaningless unless you have the matching interpreter, the entire status machine.
Fix for thre dead link of his original post:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110924141857/http://public.num...
There seems to be a typo in the title (Hungarian speaker):

“von Neumann (1926). His third paper Az általános nalmazelmélet axiomatikus folépitése, his doctoral dissertation”

It should be halmazelmélet and fölépítése/felépítése
This might be true of the particular decoy approach used with Monero, but I don’t think it’s true in general; e.g. with mixer/tumbler services. If every transaction that everyone does has some outputs to darknet markets (because they’re popular and high-volume), and some outputs to legitimate businesses (because they’re also popular and high-volume) then that really is reasonable doubt that any particular individual did anything bad.

It’s like how you can’t charge someone with possession of cocaine because there’s cocaine on the US dollar bills in their pocket: there’s actually trace amounts of cocaine on every US dollar bill.
Demo page:

http://www.webpurify.com/features/

Well, it passes the "Scunthorpe" test for that word at least.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem

Oddly, it flags "sex" as profanity while finding "rape" not profanity. "sexual" is fine though. I found a false positive -- "cornhole" -- which is a sport most popular in the Midwest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornhole

It also handles the "space in a swear word issue".
A couple things:

First to the authors question regarding a similar profession - It would seem to me that actual musicians and performers would fall into this category. I haven't seen any definitive measure for identifying an actual Rockstar, or a Rockstar Actor (to use the same vernacular), or Comedian. I don't think salary alone would identify this type of person, since its highly a highly subjective area that are influenced by personal tastes.

I think software shares this as well. What makes a good piece of software? Moreover, what makes a good software developer? Is it ingenuity and intellect? Or is it somebody who is content with the more mundane aspects of a software project, isn't going to write a new Graph API, but consistently and methodically develops clean and working code? In a theoretical scenario - lets say a single guy was responsible for all of the Bash scripting that went into the Init system millions of servers use today. There's nothing cutting edge in those things, its a lot of "start this, then this, and if this happens call this" type of linear design. Would he qualify as a "Rockstar" based on the fact that millions of people rely on his scripts to start machines up? Is he worth more to a potential employer than, say, John Carmack if your developing/supporting a Software as a Service platform?

I've been seeing a lot of articles exploring the Rockstar complex in the past year or so, which makes me think its more or less an invention of marketing than an underlying trend in the industry. Its basically asking "Are there software developers who are insanely good at writing code to solve problems?" The answer is yes - I dont think it merits scientific inquiry.

But there's a more interesting question for me that nobody seems to address; Why the sudden fascination (demand?) for "Rockstars" in development? In my personal experience it seems to be because of a (false) perception that people who write good code are hard to find. And even when you have somebody writing good code, because of the abstract nature of the work, its difficult to deliver something quantitative and tangible on a consistent basis.

I think one huge failure of the industry so far has been to agree on even a basic set of what would qualify somebody to work professionally in it. If I'm a civil engineer, no matter how brilliant I might be, or what my pet projects look like, there's no way in hell i'm getting around a municipal project or getting a contract to build a bridge for a city without at least a PE certification.

Why doesn't something similar exist for programming? It would make sense given that programmers are responsible for things like Air Traffic Control systems, Automated dosing of drugs in hospitals, and a lot of "mission critical" systems that impact millions of people.
Super confused that anyone would down-vote this. It is empirical reality [1].

[1] https://faculty.fuqua.duke.edu/~charvey/Teaching/BA453_2004/...
I had an idea, that one way to eliminate this COVID-19 coronavirus, as well as the H1N1 influenza virus from civilization, is to shut down all human movement for 30 to 60 days.

You have to go 2 or 3 weeks, without any new reported infections to be sure.

This would require that all the countries and governments of the world, act in unison, to ensure that all 7 billion people are tracked, and monitored.

But the reality is, good luck, as this will never happen. The economic cost is too high, but the alternative, is that the COVID-19 virus will hunt down the human race.
Thanks for that perspective - it's something I had not thought of.
"Learning from the H1N1 pandemic"

"A major contributing factor to some of the criticisms of the management of the H1N1 pandemic was that its mortality impact was considerably less than had been predicted. "

"The documented worldwide mortality from H1N1 is 50–100 times lower than conservative pre-pandemic predictions and substantially lower than seasonal influenza deaths."

Source: https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/22/1/7/489927

How do they make sure that the mortality rate is between 2-3%? Same goes for the hospitalization rate, based on which the entire flattening-the-curve decisions are made.

From what we know many will recover with mild symptoms. Those "many" may not even be tested and accounted for total Covid-19 cases

Edit: I'm not trying to dilute the seriousness of this situation. Just questioning the statistical models based on the source above
The correct statement is some developers don't like Oracle. As for their business tactics, every business has to find viability in its own way. Obviously Oracle is providing services of value if they are able to consistently turn a profit on revenue in the tens of billions per year. This doesn't really answer the question why Facebook is not in the cloud business.
I imagine some country/region out there will adopt this approach so we'll all get to find out in a few weeks (possibly at their expense).
Happy to hear you've recovered. Could you share your experiences? (e.g. your earliest symptoms, later stage symptoms, tips/tricks you used that helped, etc)
That would only lead to more and more websites asking for payment info, so no thanks. I'd rather have ads that I can block or just tolerate than completely close off the web a part from some niche, personal websites. Ad tracking is nothing compared to having my real life identity linked to me everywhere on the web, and possibly get locked off most of it if they decide to ban me at some point.

"The good old days" where the internet was mostly ad free (a very short amount of time after becoming mainstream) was nothing like the internet we have now. It was small, amateur websites that were akin to blogs. That's cool, but to completely cripple the much more useful internet we have now because people don't like ads would be a disaster. It's baffling to me how some people would prefer to just ban/restrict everything they don't like. Just block the ads!
> Having played with the Surface Pro 3 tablet at BestBuy a few times, it's a dream to use

> So the Surface 3 looks about right.

You realize this has much lower performance, and most likely won't give you the same experience, right?
These aren't extermination camps, people are eventually being released from them. Their notional aim is re-education and making people genuinely love Big Brother/the Communist Party, but I doubt the deciders are naive enough to believe that will actually happen. Instead, it's sufficient that the detainees become broken, intimidated and compliant.
> Chinese warranty, if it's broken we'll replace the unit"

That's the mass production warranty for integrated objects.
Calling it "Chinese" is just weird unless you are calling attention to a claim that only china does mass production anymore.

For cars, we have the "extended warranty" which is just a bet that the car won't fail to much on average.

Same for hard drives with 3 vs 5 yr warranties.
telecom engineer here (not on a Huawei/ZTE payroll). the reason why the original piece is extremely unlikely is the cost of keeping a conspiracy involving this many entities and requiring collaboration between them under wraps. you do not need hardware implants or even sw based backdoors when the system is fragile enough to get the same undocumented functionality without.

it is not needed because the quality of Huawei/ZTE and all the Chinese based tech vendors is so shockingly bad that no such backdoors are needed to achieve their objectives. shitty quality gives much better plausible deniability than a well designed backdoor in thoroughly tested code.

The big and only story IMO is that Huawei steals shit from other companies. I had my own work for control-plane on eNodeB stolen by colleagues in our Chinese site that then moved to Huawei. The company should be sanctioned all around the world and their CFO hopefully will rot in a US prison.
We made a chrome extension that queries any html table in any open tab with SQL:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/sqanything/naejbcf...

You can export the results to Google Sheets too. One advantage of the extension is it works with JS rendered tables.
I expecting they will be resurrecting those any time now.
50% cost reduction though
Yep. 8x is the right ballpark I usually see comparing decent C/Rust to javascript.

I saw a 10x slowdown porting the Chipmunk2d physics engine to javascript. (Which dropped to 5x or something after a few weeks of JS optimizations). Porting operational transform heuristics from JS to C got me a ~40x speedup. The code in question used heterogeneous data types which V8 hates (causing both heap thrashing and code deopt). In C I handed it with a tagged union and the code needed 0 allocations in the hot path.

Generally the rule is, if your code has complex data types, heterogeneous data types or a lot objects being created and destroyed it be much slower in javascript compared to C/Rust. A lot of that benefit goes away if the native code does sloppy allocations everywhere.

And on the other hand, if your code is Math heavy, operating on simple data types, V8 will do great work.
It comes down to data caps, in my experience. Especially in rural areas.

My current options:

Dial-up (the 'high speed' option offered by big telco [F** you AT&T]): No cap, $50/mo

Satellite: 15gb/mo cap, $80/mo

Cell: "No cap", but throttled to 1x at 2gb/mo/line. $138/mo for 2 lines.

Thank Satan/God/Buddha/Whoever, the local ISP secured a rural internet grant to run fiber past our house this year.
There's a good premium priced in there for volatility. Safer to sell puts right now and buy calls later.