skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Pretending that modern type systems provide anything near an adequate control of effects is misleading at best

Adequate for what exactly? Programmers all around the world are using Haskell every day and finding it saves them headaches because it offers them some benefits with regard to control over effects. It's perfectly adequate for us. I've been writing Haskell every working day for over two years and one of the things I most appreciate about it is its effect system.

You keep repeating these kinds of claims but you don't actually offer any alternative, nor have you offered any compelling explanation for why debugging and profiling should be intrinsically harder in a pure functional language.

Maybe you can't write an air traffic control system in Haskell. So what? Who cares? Haskell is a phenomenally useful tool for a growing number of developers working on a wide range of different tasks (those tasks don't include air traffic control systems or missile defense systems, but we'll live with that).

And pray tell, what would an effect system look like that's not monadic? I'm genuinely interested as I benefit every working day from Haskell's effect typing and if there's something even better I'd like to know about it!

I'm keenly waiting for your talk to appear here so I can actually try to understand what you are on about:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-WICcSW1k3HsScuXxDrp0w

Hope it appears at some point!
The argument is that if you choose a traditional TLD your eggs are in the centralized basket. All of the mitigation techniques proposed by Marlinspike for HTTP can be applied at the DNS level as well.

And even if you choose a decentralized DNS solution, you still need DNSSEC.

The point is that DNSSEC has little to do with the centralization issue and that it can do a lot to improve the security and privacy of the Internet as a whole.
My parents called them consequences - the result I would experience was always tied to my actions in a manner that reflected what I would face in the real world as much as possible. I think this is a pretty good approach generally as it helped teach me the cause and effect of my actions at an early age.
I think Infiniti's induction charging concept seems much cooler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlYADNqxrPw
Ah, now I get your point. Yeah, unfortunately you can be pretty sure that any interesting "extended API" would be a small wrapper around a windows-specific OS-provided service and thus unportable. That was the big issue with the MS Java extensions too I believe.
Thanks for the kind words Dustin! Glad to hear you are crushing it. :)

Improved API Key management is on the roadmap!
Where do you see that? The article seems to only talk about moving to ECC in the context of better DNSSEC security and message sizes that are an order of magnitutde smaller than RSA's.
I think that is the point: that Americans universally spend time learning about morally minor damage to an American building, but do not so commonly devote curricular time to truly considering the awfulness of the large-scale bombing of Japanese civilians.
Of course women can also obviously send a message - just because they don't have to culturally doesn't mean they can't do it.
Most consumers don't care. If you get caught ripping off someone else's work, then you go out of business and open up the next day under a different name. Some buyers will take the part of the infringer because that was what they bought into in the first place and they don't want to deal with the cognitive dissonance of admitting they were ripped off. If you go to the legal sections of the Hollywood trade papers, you find there are always a couple of ongoing disputes over the original authorship of hit movies. Even where the authors may have strong cases, the general public has little interest in them and fans of the director or actors will often denounce the plaintiffs as scam artists.

For example, there's a $10 million suit against Warner Brothers of the film Gravity. Tess Gerritsen, a writer, alleges that the film film depicts the major events in a book she worte in 1999 and optioned to a film production company. The problem is that in the meantime that company no longer exists after a bunch of acquisitions, mergers and so on, and although there's good reason to think her book wound up in the hands of the film's writer/director and that the film is indeed derivative o the book, her legal problem is an inability (at present) to prove that Warner Brothers is the ultimate beneficial owner of the firm she was dealing with back in 1999. The problem here is not so much copyright as a lack of transparency in corporation law.
> It seems that as that's picked up the new norm is a "race to the bottom" for women who want traditional relationships.

I'm inclined to not believe that. Anyone on Tinder, woman or man, is very unlikely to want a traditional relationship. Or rather, people who want a traditional relationship shouldn't be seeking it on Tinder.
Hasn't Linux dominated supercomputers for at least a decade? The only place they don't have significant market share is on the desktop. Now we need Chromebooks to take off or for someone to add the extra polish and support needed to win over consumers.
Is there a way to see if any CA has issued a cert for a site? If all CAs posted the certs they sign to some database, then there could be services that alert you and you'd know right away and raise an alarm. If such a system doesn't exist, why not?
We see a dog, by looking at it's shape etc. The neural net by looking at features.

Have you ever seen a kid learn language? At first, every four legged animal is either a cat or a dog. Every car is a truck (or every truck is a car). The specific categories get learned over time, but they aren't in any sense "natural."
I know that and that's true. In the middle of that pool of people there are some high quality people, but most of them doesn't stay longer in the app.

Probably most of the people aren't going to find a man/woman for the life on Tinder but if you put a little effort on your matches you will find interesting people. The problem is that after some time and some "tinder scars" people put less and less effort in meeting better their matches.
I went to university with that guy. I genuinely did. It was unbelievable to watch, he was so brazen. He just didn't give a damn about rejection.
There's been a lot of talk of the decrease in 'cost' of sex, etc in this thread. I want to chip in as someone who has spent a LOT of time on tinder.

Last month, I was spending SEVERAL hours a day swiping on friends' behalf on Tinder. We'd swipe till our eyes hurt, and we'd swipe again. You get a limited number of swipes (and total 'targets') per day, so once someone ran out of their daily quota, I'd swipe for someone else.

The process is TIRING! -- looking at attractive/ people at their best putting on their best show is tiring! It's doesn't seem to be screen fatigue -- there's likely an upper boundary on how many faces/people you can process in a day. We'd end up not checking people's profiles and swipe based on the amount of skin showed on profile pictures. It sounds ridiculous, but being judgmental of people's face/facial features apparently gets tiring at some point.

This leads me to believe that the interactions don't come for free -- they may be cheap, but the costs exist.

So as someone who spent all that time on Tinder, it is not clear to me what 'friction' Tinder removes as compared to dating sites say, 10 years ago. Having a hookup app on your lap, and on your cellphone is not that different. Or sites on the desktop 15 years ago. I know people who think 'mobile' hookup apps are the most godawful things to have happened in the world (and that because, as a lot of people have said here, because they reduce the cost of interaction), but that's not significantly different from say, 10/15 years ago, is it?

If 'hookup stats' are really higher, it could be because not everyone agrees on the definition. For a lot of my friends, going over to sleep at someone's house constitutes a hookup. I'd imagine something like that would have happened 20 years ago anyway in an offline setting, but you'd have met the person in a bar, or a club or what have you. That you happened to have met them on Tinder doesn't make it an 'apocalypse' for the dating type.

All the friends I swiped for ended up going on multiple dates, some in the same week. Two ended in a committed relationship, and one who never wanted to be in a relationship was almost dragged into one. I mention this because without tinder, he would never have been out their anyway. So here's my theory: tinder is bringing out all the 'marginals' -- people on the relationship margin who would otherwise not have been 'out there' anyway. Since their ratio to the general population has increased because of increased visibility, it seems that more people are NOT into dating. That's a fallacy because it does not control for the marginals: they'd not be 'relationship minded' without tinder anyway.
Yes, I suppose so if I was the one choosing the inputs. That's why I rather the machine to find the inputs automatically. But, then again, I supposed there is the bias of the training set.
> I don't like wasting my time on things my computer could do for me.

So don't. Let the interpreter check profile.verified_email twice (horror of horrors!) and get back to your day job.

Even if there are no in-program side effects, removing a 2nd check for verified_email immediately before preparing and sending the email introduces a race condition: the user's email is verified, your first check runs, then you go talking to the DB and who knows what else for the last_interaction fetch/business logic, meanwhile, user changes their email address, and now profile.verified_email is false. By skipping your 2nd if check, you send your email to an address that is still pending verification. This assumes that .verified_email is a property that talks to the DB, and while it'd be better style in that case to make it an .is_verified_email() method to make that clear, doing so is a plausible and not-incorrect use of properties.

It's not worth your (employer's) time to even check if that's the case. Leave the non-broken code as-is and return to your regular programming.
As someone who's been in a relationship for more than 5 years: totally! I dont think tinder even existed before I got into a relationship. Dating nowadays is so... weird.
I just realized that this is a "dual-use" technology, if you know what I mean.
that's not the task we trained it for!

Yes, exactly. We're not training consciousness networks. That's not even a goal of all this research. We're training dumb high-speed classifiers.

How might we train an ANN to explain its reasoning?

There are networks that exist today that'll happily explain an entire scene to you (the whole "this picture contains a pizza sitting on an oven in a kitchen and there is a dog in the corner"), which is closer, but still just pairwise training. The "thought" process isn't recurrent or turing complete so it can't make progress on its own.
If you want to say something about an article, writing a blog post is a way to spark further discussion. If it's interesting, it will spark a discussion on sites like Reddit, etc.
You remember that bit in Hitchhiker's Guide where Arthur Dent is explaining to the ship's onboard Nutri-matic thing (I think it was) all about what a cup of tea is. After getting back many different versions of a drink that was nearly but not quite unlike tea, Arthur explained about tea leaves and climates and tea trade and tea ceremonies and on and on. I'm sure my recollection and retelling do not do it justice.

My point is, what we've got now is crude visual-feature pattern matching and recognition. What you're asking for is conceptualisation. Wiring up concepts to sense-data is our trick. We are reverse engineering ourselves bit by bit. You make the next step sound so reasonable, and maybe perhaps it is.
Thanks for that slidedeck! It was really informative and enlightening to have some of these vague, hard-to-explain ideas that I've been wondering about cemented by Bottou.
I doubt that any current is being passed through that snake until it has made a connection with the car. Then once it is charging it will be protected with an RCD, so your dog might live.
Wow, what a line.
The rapper who wants to make Unilever pay up for contamination
I've been impressed with the performance work you've been doing across the board. But in these sorts of write-ups (and the corresponding issue trackers), it'd be very helpful to qualify with which version of Ruby you're using. I've surmised it's MRI, but even then different MRI versions can have different performance profiles. It'd be helpful to know what your GC tuning looks like, too. Particularly in cases where object allocation is determined to be a factor.

Anyway, this is all good stuff and I don't doubt there's an improvement. A little expansion on the methodology would just make it all the more valuable.

Tangential note: In one of the commit comments there's an exchange about the performance of `any?` and it links to MRI source. However, it links to a line in master, so the link will eventually fall out of date. If you press 'y' in Github it'll change the URL to one with a SHA in it. Or maybe pick the release tag so the link doesn't change as the file updates.
What is missing from the kids’ internet?
In summary, what book printers used to do is have a line of numbers on the title page of the book, which they would erase one at a time with each printing run. The reason why is that they would be reusing the original plates in the printing press, and it was easy to erase a number (by destructively removing it from the plate) as opposed to recreating a whole new plate for the title page.

Flash memory works in a similar way. After a block is erased, which is a slow process, it starts with all ones. It's very fast to switch a cell from a 1 to a 0, but to turn a 0 back into a 1 you have to erase the whole block again. (Block sizes can vary considerably, as much as 512 KiB on SSDs.) Note that it's the erase cycle which reduces the lifetime of the flash, not the switch from a 1 to a 0.

USB flash devices and SSDs don't expose low-level access to the NAND flash so it's not possible to take advantage of this property, but if you could you'd be able to have a small counter with one bit per number. Perhaps in some circumstances a bitmask would also work well. A bloom filter could also be implemented efficiently this way.

I imagine that embedded programmers and the SSD firmware takes advantage of this property of flash memory for its own data structures, I'd love to hear if that's the case.
go two
Obviously not, when it comes to sex. Men pay for sex, women get paid for sex. That's all you need to know about the demand and supply dynamics in the sexual "market" (which Tinder embodies).
Automated Web API Testing with Bulk Edit Capabilities Using Microsoft Excel
How vs why

I started learning genetic algorithms (random permutations selected/promoted for picking better combinations of Hamiltonian paths for solving NP-C problems obtaining near-optimal solutions quickly) and neural networks (mainly backpropagation, using different topologies) circa 1995 (college). It was like magic: you learn how to use those techniques easily in order to solve problems. However, the why was not so evident: while in the case of genetic algorithms you can understand that in a space of solutions with many similar cost solutions could allow you to pick a "good one" easily, in the case of neural networks the idea I got was like some a "magic box" which was supposed to do some interpolation/extrapolation that effectively work like generating a convex surface for giving a "solution"/"location" for a given input. It was like you got alien technology simply to make it work for simple things, but not being able to really understand why it was working (except for trivial/small networks).

Do people really understand what complex neural networks do? I.e. is still trial-error only, or are built on purpose?
And men also get messages. When I was online dating, I'd get between 1 and 4 a day. But my assumption is that we're dealing with the aggregate behavior, not the outliers.
Might makes right is the law of nature. Anything else is unnatural.
Can Oracle sue Microsoft?
Stop complaining about ContentEditable and back ProseMirror
That has two possible readings:

1. Do well on retention before doing well on virality and you build a long-standing business (facebook).

2. Focus first on retention, ignore virality, do poorly on both and never build something worthy of even being called a fad (many, many, many startups).
Not to mention that the federal government then decided to standardize the size of shipping containers, and picked an arbitrary size that was different that the sizes used by the only two companies that had any container ships. When they offered huge subsidies to ship builders who adopted their new arbitrary 40' and 20' standards, it made the companies that pioneered the technology almost instantly non-competitive.
While we're on the subject, does anyone know why books don't usually start at page one? Even in the case of a novel, where there's no preface in roman numerals, the book will often start on page three or four.
Flexport's hiring for basically every role under the sun

If the idea of revolutionizing one of the most important industries in the world interests you, reach out!

https://learn.flexport.com/want-to-revolutionize-global-trad...
Inside the $100M ‘Business Club’ Crime Gang
How much to log in production is a balancing act – log too much, and you impact performance and make it hard to read through your logs. Log too little, and you won’t be able to use your logs to actually debug anything. However, with a few lines of code, you can change how much you log on demand, without restarting any processes, and avoid the balancing act entirely.
All you can take away from the moon passing over the sun's reflection is this. The moon crossed over the sunlight reflected from the earth. To create a shadow, the moon must cross through the light emitted from the sun.

This image might better help explain. Since the earth's orbital plane is in a different xy plane than the moon's, the moon crossing over the reflection guarantees nothing about whether it crossed the sun's emitted light.

http://www.cnyo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014april10_e...
Google DeepMind: Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehend [pdf]
It buys you time. I think that's what the OP was saying. You can stare at a match for as long as you want. In a bar, the deal expires rather quickly.
"Experiment 1 results indicated that observer rhesus monkeys acquired a fear of snakes through watching videotapes of model monkeys behaving fearfully with snakes.

In Experiment 2, observers watched edited videotapes that showed models reacting either fearfully to toy snakes and nonfearfully to artificial flowers (SN+/FL-) or vice versa (FL+/SN-). SN+/FL- observers acquired a fear of snakes but not of flowers; FL+/SN- observers did not acquire a fear of either stimulus.

In Experiment 3, monkeys solved complex appetitive discriminative (PAN) problems at comparable rates regardless of whether the discriminative stimuli were the videotaped snake or the flower stimuli used in Experiment 2. Thus, monkeys appear to selectively associate snakes with fear."

Experiment 1 shows that monkeys become afraid of snakes through watching videos of other monkeys being afraid of snakes. Experiment 2 shows that monkeys don't acquire a fear of flowers if shown a video of other monkeys being afraid of flowers. Experiment 3 shows that monkeys can still be conditioned in other tasks using videos of either flowers or snakes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2230660
It is "copying". The same way accessing a webpage is "downloading" it.
I hardly believe it's enough to justify the poor 2015 quarters financials
Maybe the original authors have passed it on. If they're still working on it then it would be great to see an OpenGL backend.
You're falling into a common misconception of assuming you can tell the likelyhood of a person having an STD by the rest of their attributes.

Fact is, I see very little correlation. Intelligent, well-paid, well-groomed, well-cultured men who bitch and moan and complain about having to use condoms only wondering if the girl is on birth control.

I don't think you can vet someone for STDs ahead of time. You can only practice safe sex and hope for the best.
Attending High School in Silicon Valley
Yep, that's what we did, starting with the process of clearing goods through Customs, and then expanding aggressively into air freight, ocean freight, and trucking over the last 12 months.
like all titled property it benefits those who can leverage the legal system to their favor

The potential inequity of litigation outcomes doesn't mean that I would be better off without this property right.
This. There is another double-standard at play that is often ignored. Women are just as capable (and willing) as men at keeping options, having backups, and upgrading to something better. A number of my female friends are constantly complaining about not being able to meet a guy who wants a relationship, and then continue to spend most of their dating energy on Tinder, while also keeping open several options constantly.

This article is super one-sided and makes it sound like all these women in New York have no choice but to be on Tinder. Can't have it both ways.
"God laughs at people who complain about consequences, the cause of which they cherish" - Bossuet (circ. 1680).
Uber denies misleading passengers with 'phantom cars' on app
go-one
go-two
Can you volunteer as tribute, though?
yeah I excitedly showed that to a friend sitting next to me and she straight up shrieked
Also alarming is how the writer has taken the opinion of about a handful of Canadians (I did a search on the reddit page that this writer posed the question and located about 9 self-proclaimed Canadians) and generalized it into an entire Nation's ( of 35 million + people) feedback / experience.

From the WP Post by the writer

>>> Canada: "Most Canadians are unaware of the crucial role Canada played in the development of the atomic bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki." (A uranium refinery in Ontario supplied the Manhattan Project.)
I spent a decade working with and writing software for LTL freight and 3PL companies on the receivables automation side and all I have to say is I hope these companies are successful.

There are tons of opportunities for efficiency gains all over these companies as they are some of the most low-tech back office operations I've seen. There's a definite gap between the biggest companies and the rest. These companies are notoriously conservative on all facets of their business, and they are a very tight knit industry. They all know what each other are up to, and they're leery of being the first mover on a technology.

This is one of many "old school" industries that are going to see some of the biggest innovation in the coming years. That will only be accelerated if we see fuel prices start to inch up again.
International expansion and preserving culture at Tilt
No. I don't know what that comment means, but presumably it's a sophomoric joke, and we don't ban people for that.

The reasons are the ones I gave and have given many times.
Reminds me of one of the best scenes about the Iraq war from Hurt Locker:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PgbNQU3cYo
I hate this quote. Who's mind is it trying to change? People who already enjoy random frivolous human interaction are already filling their days with it, the same way he is. And people who dread useless chores like this and feel they get more pleasure and enjoyment out of the rest of their life are certainly not going to suddenly try his way.

Are there people who are optimizing their workflow while secretly pining for a less efficient more personal approach to buying envelopes that could read this and see the light?