skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You will be surprised how fast research can move when the generation holding the power are nearing their old age
>I do it because there's an infinitely greater chance of life after vitrification than there is of life after burial, or life after cremation.

Except that there are other things you could do with the money, some of which could potentially even give you a much greater chance of not vitrifying in the first place.
This is super sweet! I've recently been messing around a lot in C/C++ with GDB to spelunk through, and this kind of wrapper makes a lot of things immediately visible that I wish were there by default.

Thanks a ton for posting!
I'm not sure why you were down-voted. You make a decent point--though I'm not sure what the solution to this problem is short of abolishing civil penalties altogether. (Though I suppose it would be possible to set up some rather complex system where future plaintiffs can recover from the previously collected civil penalties held by the state,)

And certainly the issue you point out doesn't justify the "Yay, graft!" comment above.
This is the kind of statistics that really tugs at your heart strings. This is a Kaplan–Meier chart: http://oncology101.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/OPTMAL_sur...

Everytime the line takes a step down, at least one person has died. The only happy ending is that less people die, and a really happy ending is when significantly less people die in the treatment group than the control group. Really puts things into perspective.
Yes, right. There are no submersibles capable of reaching the vents that are not large and expensive.

It's not possible to simply take the toy you linked to and put it in a different body. I assume you want to see under the water -- you need lights. I assume you want it to move -- you need a better engine, propeller, etc. The body needs to be significantly larger and stronger if you don't want it to be crushed like a tin can.
And yet they're similar in several important ways (e.g. the legal framework around them, the fact that they should both be avoided for similar reasons), hence the fact that we have a word for them. I don't really care what the subjective experience of taking them is like.

They're certainly more similar to each other than they are to antibiotics or chemotherapy drugs, both of which are also labelled with the term "drug".
Asians are the US's so-called "model minority". Whites love to tell blacks and latinos -- "Look at the AZNs! See no racism. Maybe you should beat your children to respect authority like I read tiger moms do!"

Of course, whites legally kill blacks in broad daylight. Race isn't monolithic; oppressions intersect. Oppression isn't going to be applied evenly to minorities. Even whites have their own oppressions; certainly most are wage-slaves. Half suffer from misogyny.
That's an interesting argument, but it misses the fact that the US is effectively subsidizing the healthcare in the rest of the world.
There is a small difference though: Using those various OCaml features is not going to instantly kill you.

With the deprecated features of C++, I'm not so sure.
> Labelling it a workaround is disingenuous if people are claiming they prefer writing code in that manner.

Well, I've never seen a Go expert espouse this opinion. Do you have a web article that actually says that? What I see is that many experts just carry on being productive in Go in spite of not having generics but that's a different position than actually preferring to copy&paste code or add a preproc code-gen (as Rob Pike once suggested as a workaround).

>And if you write code in this manner anyway, the simplicity in the language makes a big difference.

One can write in "that manner" whether generics was there or not. Existence of generics doesn't take away the ability to continue with suboptimal techniques such as copy & paste of redundant code for different data types.
Why does time pass
> Can I ask you a quick question here? What does any of this matter?

You may want to check comment history of parent poster.
... before the company you've entrusted your brain to either makes a mistake or collapses.

A vastly more likely scenario is that the company is a scam in the first place, and has no particular interest in preserving your brain, given the complete lack of any possible accountability mechanism.
CSE341: Programming Languages
Just a reference to this previously posted article from the NY Times:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10204721
That's still not a good idea. Use your OS' random source.
First off, it depends on how you count marketing. Most of the studies i see lump all SG&A together which covers a lot more than just conventional marketing. Pharmaceutical marketing is expensive since much of it is face to face interactions.

Second, who cares? If you spend $1M on marketing the expectation is that it will produce $1M+X in revenue or you wouldn't do it. If they stopped spending on marketing, they'd have even less money to invest in R&D!
Why our future depends on libraries, reading and daydreaming
Unless that crossover into viability is preempted by some other technology. Look at oil. Everyone was screaming about the peek in supply capacity (peek oil) but that inflection point may have been preempted by a reduction in demand (fracking, electric cars, solar etc). The viability of mining the seafloor could similarly be preempted by new tech.

Oceanfloor work has already seen one such preemption: manned operations. Back in the 60s-90s everyone was talking about sending people down, but that was preempted by improvements in robotics, especially fiber optics.
Yes, saying that a problem can be solved by voting different people into office is a partisan argument. The problem is bigger than the voting cycle.
I just buy a few companies I like, hold forever, collect the dividends, avoid paying any management fees except for the fifteen-odd-bucks that I pay for every purchase.

Will I make more or less than I would under your strategy? I don't know, but averaged over all possible universes it's unlikely to be significantly less, and this way I at least get the fun of being in control, and deciding where to put each new chunk of money.
Thanks mzs for that great reference to an old HN comment. Appreciated!

The volume of string libraries only suggests how crucial core library design, often an afterthought, is to programming language design. The language itself encourages idioms, and it's for the core library to harness these idioms into a robust, cohesive, comprehensive toolbox for common tasks.
ML got ADTs and pattern matching out of the box. Fine. With Lisp you can quickly build your own ADTs, with some enhanced functionality which is not possible in *ML family.

See a couple of examples of this:

[1] http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/pubs/nano-jfp.pdf

[2] https://github.com/combinatorylogic/mbase
That's not a cons, that's a linked list. As tokenrove mentions, a cons in a Lisp is just a tuple (`cons` is the name of the type and the function constructing it). It can contain any two values.
Recent articles about tumor growth heterogeneity :

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v525/n7568/full/nature1...

Videos below are pretty telling.
Top 30 Ashley Madison Passwords Are Just as Terrible as You'd Think
Yes, it got macros, so you can build something similar to Nanopass framework on top of it easily.
Look at the recent decision by the UK's cancer fund to stop paying for a bunch of cancer drugs, including ones like Kadcyla which dramatically extends life in metastatic breast cancer.
Sorry to disappoint. Agree the Internet needs more of that. Makes it funnier when people don't get it, start a tangent, and get called on it in an epic way haha.
With Website to Research Colleges, Obama Abandons Ranking System
Paging Peter Watts.
As interesting as that collaboration is, I'd like to point out that Ravi Shankar is a part of the Hindustani classical tradition. The distinction between Hindustani and Carnatic music is one of the themes of the original article.
> Every other country on the planet have lower health care costs than the US by a large margin.

To put it in concrete terms, of OECD countries (comparable non-OECD data is harder to get), the #2 country in per capita healthcare spending (Switzerland) spends about 72% of what the US does per capita.

> US public healthcare spending alone, excluding private payments and insurance, places the US in the top 20, possibly top 10, in government spending on healthcare.

Again, to provide some concrete numbers, in the OECD, the US is #3 (behind Norway and Netherlands) in per capita public healthcare spending.

It also has the second highest proportion (52%, just barely behind Chile) of total healthcare expenses that are private, rather than public.
There are lots of news stories about this in Britain. A couple examples from 2015:

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21640343-well-meaning-...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3106130/Ovarian-ca...
You're kidding--right? I imagine the NSA has complete control over Google's head honchos? ("Give me the data, or we will audit every stock trade, every dime that you put into a bank? Every aspect of your private life will be scrutinized, if you don't go along with our polite requests?"). Hell--I wouldn't be surprised if the NSA has a pipeline directly attached to Google servers?

In my world, SPAM is any ad, including targeted ads? I actually miss the phalus enlargement ads?

They don't sell your information to Investigators(government, private, etc.), I imagine they give it away, if their lives, money will be affected?

I do feel their end goal is to sell you products, and services, but just the amount of information they have on us is staggering? Why do I feel they can predict the future? I wouldn't be surprised if they know right now who will become the final two, or three presidential candidates?

I have no evidence for these outlandish claims. I'm just a guy who doesn't believe in what these companies are telling us? Conspiracy theory nut--maybe I am? Or, maybe I watched Three Days of the Condor too many times? I just think they do a lot with that data? I think the government does a lot with that data?

I'm in no mood for a debate, I need to remove seven rivets in order to change my ball joints(horrid manufacturing/engineering), and the neighbors don't like noise. Need to complete the job before 7:00 p.m., or I might get a visit from the Blue boys? Love my kind neighbors?
To highlight the implications of what they were saying.
Readers may be interested in the extensive comments from when this article was posted in previous years:

https://new-hn.algolia.com/?experimental&sort=byDate&prefix&...
Thanks so much. This is exactly the kind of reply I was hoping for.

Is there anything you would recommend I listen to next?
Hehe, seems no one interested..
It's C1 server from http://scaleway.com,
kind of Raspberry Pi ;)
Compounded drugs are generally regarded as safe with a few exceptions. There was a compounding pharmacy in MA that gave hundreds of patient fungal meningitis due to unsterile conditions.

I would first see if your insurance will pay for Makena. The company that makes it has reduced the price substantially due to public lashback.
Are there specific advantages to using this pattern over e.g. just having a service factory with reference counting?
> that your estate will be able to afford the procedure -- before the company you've entrusted your brain to either makes a mistake or collapses

You've misunderstood the business structure of modern cryonics. A cryonics org like ALCOR is actually two organizations: one is a commercial organization which charges for storage and for the messy business of cryopreservation, and the second is a nonprofit trust which 'owns' the vitrified brains, pays the rent, conservatively invests the rest, and which will pay for the revival procedures if/when such are invented. When the commercial organization collapses, the nonprofit will simply have to have the dewars transferred somewhere else (it takes something like weeks for those things to boil down to a dangerous level; LN2 dewars are really cool!); and I believe there have already been transferrals of cryopatients in the past.

When you die, your life insurance is paying much of that out into the trust fund. There's not much question of 'whether your estate will be able to afford the procedure', since that's what the trust is for. It's not your estate's business at all.
"When street cleaning ends at 1:00 p.m. dispatchers, mechanics, and body men pitch in to help Kiouvas get all of the cabs back onto the street—quickly, before neighbors' cars fill in."

That's just evil. Rushing out to fill public parking spots. I feel sorry for any retail business in the area who's customers are now blocked out by this yellow tide filling the street. Nobody likes parking meters, but this is why they were invented.
> You're essentially making a bet that someone will find something useful to do with a frozen brain

Something is deeply wrong with this way of thinking: it doesn't value human life at all.

Here's another version. Someone comes to you seeking for help. He's dying. He could be saved by some recently devised miraculous medical procedure, which would return him to full health. The catch is, that procedure is relatively expensive (let's say a few weeks worth of your own salary). Question: would you let him die?

Put it this way, of course not. But we tend to forget that cryopreservation, if it works, is exactly the same.

See, a preserved person, provided she can actually be reconstructed back to life, is not actually dead. She's mostly dead. There's a difference. Think of it as a very deep coma. So, if we ever devise a proper reconstruction procedure, we have two choices: (i) pay for the procedure and heal that patient at last; or (ii) don't pay and let the patient drift into utter annihilation.

Heal or don't heal. It's that simple.

---

Now maybe you assume a frozen brain is not a living person. Maybe you're right. Maybe the preservation wasn't good enough on this particular brain. Maybe the preservation procedure was flawed to begin with. Maybe the brain doesn't hold enough information about a person to begin with. Maybe we won't find the technological means to actually get the brain back to its old state —even if it's theoretically possible. Maybe we won't be able to fix whatever caused the brainwaves to go flat in the first place —if that's fixable even in theory, see Alzheimer. I'm sure I've forgotten lots of ways this could go horribly wrong. Anyway, if any of this is true, that frozen brain can't be recovered, does count as dead, and you'd be right to call it a "frozen brain" instead of a "patient".

The thing is, to the best of our current knowledge, the odds are not nil. They're not good, but they're not nil. There is a chance that the brain is actually alive —I mean, in some real deep coma. I'm not talking about some abstract hope here, but some actual probabilities of the kind you have for experimental drugs on cancer patients. Slim, but real.

And of course, if we somehow come up with an actual reconstruction procedure, if we somehow can examine the brain and be assured that yes, a return to full health is not only possible, but highly probable, then we'll know that brain was alive all along. That it was a living person in dire need of healing.

Surely the people of the future would be willing to pay for such healing? If not strangers, maybe (distant) relatives? Some philanthropist? The transhumanist community? Government or mutual funds? Today, people pay good money to give Kim a very slim hope of living again. In what kind of bleak world would no one be willing to pay for a probable return to full health?
Even if that's true -- and people asserting that never support it -- I don't see what the point of that is in defense of the status quo US policy. If that is the reason that Americans are paying so much more for healthcare and not getting any more benefits, it would be better for Americans if the US stopped doing that.
Seriously? At a minimum, the hospital should have made an attempt to obtain her medical records if they are going to medicate her. That would have resulted in their getting her identity, and at least validating her employment. There is also no reason for any entity in New York to just blindly trust the NYPD.
If I worked on making the big mac tastier would you call that improving the world? I mean, plenty of people eat them and improving the flavour improves their lives.

Ultimately the specific terminology is unimportant. Do we agree that there's a distinction between digitizing books in a way that's accessible to everyone, and working to improve Google products that exist primarily to increase Google's revenue, and can you see why people would want to contribute to one and not the other?
Tech in America – SHARING AMERICA'S TECH NEWS FROM THE VALLEY TO THE ALLEY
Learning How to Think
Not necessarily. With ETFs like MSCI World, you simply get the benefits of economic growth.
There are always trade-offs.

For example, I'd rather read explicit 100 lines of explicit SQL than the 10 liner Active Record abstractions I've had to come back to on my old Rails projects.

It turns out that the 10 liner forces you to keep much more in your head (the whole Active Record abstraction, its idiosyncrasies, its edge cases, its performance profile) than the 100 lines of explicit SQL that let you bootstrap a mental model without having to credentialize in documentation every time you touch the project.

I'd also rather read 100 lines of explicit authentication middleware than 10 lines of Devise configuration (a Rails authentication gem) for the same reason.

The appeal of "keeping less in my head", as we put it, is one of the main reasons I use small frameworks these days.
Do you feel the same way about a cure for hepatitis C? Nearly a cure for some blood cancers?

Even in the last decade we've made incredible strides in improving human health through drugs. I kinda like the direction we're going.
That $15/purchase is probably waaaay more than the equivalent amount of Vanguard fees, unless you're buying thousands of dollars in stocks at a time. And those fees add up to a significant amount over the lifetime of your portfolio.

Speaking of your portfolio, if you're investing in "a few" companies, your volatility and risk are going to be enormous. Especially if you're not balancing your portfolio between industries, company sizes, and less risky investments. Automatic rebalancing is a fantastic way to obey "buy low, sell high", as you intrinsically buy more of cheaper instruments and less of expensive ones to maintain that balancing.
Emails won’t decide Clinton’s fate in 2016 – Tech in America
> Do you have a web article that actually says that?

That says what? That they don't find not writing generics problematic? Rob Pike has said so himself. The article you've just read says exactly this[1].

[1] "With no generics, you are discouraged from making big, overly-general abstractions. This might be on purpose."

> One can write in "that manner" whether generics was there or not.

I have a feeling we're talking past each other. I'm saying that if you're not going to use generics, there's no point paying the costs of having generics. Not paying the cost means you get a simpler language, which has run-on benefits I mentioned before.

I'm not saying that generics are bad, or that emulating generics with copy & paste is better than generics.
> similar in several important ways (e.g. the legal framework around them

You are mistaking noise for signal here.

> the fact that they should both be avoided for similar reasons

In no sense is this a "fact." Many people suggest LSD use. Many people regard themselves as better for having used LSD. I don't think LSD is something to be avoided at all - it's utterly benign and very, very interesting.

> They're certainly more similar to each other than they are to antibiotics or chemotherapy drugs, both of which are also labeled with the term "drug".

In which ways? LSD is dissimilar to just about anything else on the planet, and has little in common, as far as I can tell, with opioids, antibiotics, or chemotherapy drugs.

And again, let me bring up refined sugar. Sugar is a refined white powder, made by solvent extraction form plant matter, and is consumed solely for its chemical effects on the nervous system. It seems far closer to heroin than either of them are to LSD or MDMA or psilocybin. Yet these three, along with heroin, are "drugs?"

I can't imagine a consistent taxonomy which casts such a wide net on behalf of the term "drug" as to include both heroin and LSD but exclude sugar.
Did nobody else think of the old SQL on Rails (April Fools) screencast as soon as they saw this headline? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_PK1eDQyVg
So, if the distributed hardware infrastructure cluster supporting 10,000 EC2 mini compute instances is packed with 1,000,000 emulations of humans, how important are the physical data centers that encompass all their backups, master copies and live instances?
Put money into vanguard total market etf as a function of your age. As you get older, put less. Or, rather, put money into etf with lower risk as you get older. Same thing with startups. As you get older, work in jobs with less risk. Well, that is if you are optimizing for return. If you don't mind being poor, go crazy.
The Trouble with Digitizing History
We wanted to avoid anything controversial. Do we need to make this configurable to make everyone happy?

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/10/insecurities_...
A while back, I had to decide which of SML or Ocaml I'd recommend to people interested. I looked up comparisons hopefully from talented developers. Found this one by Chlipala:

http://adam.chlipala.net/mlcomp/

A C and C++ analogy doesn't make sense unless you really cherry-picking. A better analogy would be Wirth's original Pascal for classrooms vs Borland's Turbo Pascal (or Free Pascal): one is designed to get stuff done with syntax and semantic features that make a lot more sense. You can use Ocaml in a style that gets you much benefits of ML. Even Coq extracts to a minimal Ocaml. Or, you can go Jane St with it developing real-world applications with excellent properties that neither SML nor C++ would have in current state.

Talking like Ocaml is ML's C++ is an insult to them. C++ is garbage built on worse garbage to make the landfill smell less. You'll find plenty of C++ developers admitting they only use it because they have to for whatever reason. You don't see that with Ocaml: good design, tools, and community are driving much growth and happy developers. So, it's more "Ocaml: ML Go's Pro" rather than "C++: Bend Over, Here it Comes Again." ;)
The bail out that underpinned the financial crisis; "calling all funds everywhere : we will cover your stupid mess, you cannot, will not lose." This, and flogging all the gold are the reasons to blame Gordon Brown for the current mess the UK's in.
It's funny that we humans think we know things about the ancient past, everything is always a guess with data that we have no concept of how incomplete it is.
Cutting Costs of Sophisticated Tests for Diseases with ‘Lab on a Chip’
Its good to see people who were born and brought up in West have such an appreciation for Carnatic Music. Its a lovely music, for me a musical illiterate, Carnatic music is nostalgic. I grew up listening to Thyagaraja Kritis and Annamachari Kirtanas, the most sweetest of the lyrics and music.