skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Far Manager is the first application I run in Windows. Always.

Lately I've noticed that my Far and plugins set diverged slightly on different computers, so I decided today to create kind of bootstrap script, so I could easily recreate them.

It's maybe not the cleanest script and lacks a bit of scaffolding to even further ease adding plugins, but it's already usable.

Currently following plugins are added:

- Integrity Checker
- Regular Expression Search
- Renewal
- Renewal-supported plugins, i.e. FarPlugs:
- Audio Player
- CoderCalc
- Disk Menu Editor
- File Unlock
- HashCalc
- Hexitor
- Hunspell
- Image Viewer
- JClassInfo
- Media Info
- Name Editor
- PE Analyzer
- PortaDev
- Sniffer
- Sqlite DB
- Sudo
- TextConv
- Torrent Info

I've created also topic for it at Far Manager forum:

http://forum.farmanager.com/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=9835
In comparison to... (?) can traditional hosting scale vertically AND horizontally (worldwide)? can it downscale when there is no load?
>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".

What have you been smoking?

Heroin is several orders of magnitude more similar to antibiotics / chemotherapy drugs than LSD.
>I think you are not understanding the nature of the CPU to GPU shift.

I do. It's just not a general way to bypass the Moore law slowdown because there are domains that are inherently non parallelizable, and there GPUs don't do much.

Besides, I'll already covered GPUs in a sense when I talked about the need to make software to work well in many cores. Part of the work for that translates to GPU computing too.

But there's no general "shift" from CPU to GPU computing, as in "here's a new paradigm that will solve the Moore slowdown". It's, and will remain, more of a special purpose thing, for graphics, rendering, number crunching and yes, neural networks.

>So GPUs are certainly not a diversion CPU makers get into when they can't make progress on CPUs.

GPUs in general might not be, but for integrated CPUs and especially those from Intel, they are.
Why healthcare price transparency initiatives are failing?
I really didn't get the article. I mean, I've got that we have some mapping f: R -> R, or equivalently f: (x, y) \in RxR, so we could represent it by drawing on 2d plane, but no further...

Author claimed, that he had been missing something essential regarding that stuff, but I wonder what exactly does he talk about?
Because non-transparency is a multi hundrend billion dollar industry -- with the financial, media, and political power that comes from that?
I recall that there was a plugin for SoftICE called FrogsICE, which would block programs from detecting whether SoftICE was loaded. But, FrogsICE was itself able to detect whether it was already loaded (to prevent loading multiple instances).
The improvisional stuff is definitely more what I was looking for.

Does this style of singing have anything in common to Qawwali? To my untutored ear it sounds not dissimilar to the Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan I've heard - but I'm assuming that's closer to Hindustani music (at least geographically speaking)?
The article spends a lot of time talking about how "Complicated" abstractions are, and about how abstractions come with a complexity cost. IMHO, the opposite is true.

> Whenever I work in Rust, I find myself having a good time mucking around with the abstractions.

Good abstractions, the kind you use in Haskell and (presumably) Rust are simple, non-leaky, and exist to enable simple, correct code.

It's true that abstractions, even good abstractions, take time to learn. However, once you've digested them, you'll see them everywhere, and you can continue to use them for the rest of your life. Functors, for example, are a foundational abstraction. They are extremely simple, extremely powerful, and will relevant forever.
I just recently discovered that modern C actually has syntax for forcing sized arrays as function arguments. You can do:

foo(size_t n, char arr[restrict static n])

The static qualifier here means "no really, I actually want the compiler to complain if the passed array isn't the size indicated". (because C doesn't have enough different meanings for the word "static" :( ). I haven't seen this in the wild yet or checked if gcc and clang actually implement it usefully, but it seems like it could be quite useful.
Does anything like this exist for LLDB?
"Because creating an environment that mimics the societal advantages white men get in the US and most of the western world is infeasibly expensive"

White men. And brown men (of Indian descent). And yellow men. Or is yellow the new white?

One of those lovely orwellian sleights of pinkos every where: People of Color that for all practical purposes is a monochromatic proxy.

But yeah, racism. And all that.
US Constitution Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Probable cause must precede the search & seizure of "papers" (presumably electronic messages are included by extension).

US Constitution Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

A reasonable interpretation includes ubiquitous monitoring of an individual without actionable cause. (As in: the "quartering" referenced has historically been used in part to monitor the home's occupants.)

US Constitution Amendment V

No person shall ... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself ...

Preemptively gathering (including tapping information storage for access on demand) broad-ranging evidence, before a criminal case is justified, is not justified. The enumerated right is moot if the government has preemptively aggregated everything that otherwise could be protected by this right.
Just an FYI, there is a similar TUI built in to GDB: https://sourceware.org/gdb/onlinedocs/gdb/TUI.html
That's true for history, as well. Archeological digs in the US have rewritten colonial history, and even Civil War history. I've often wondered how much we "know" about history is completely false.

For one small example, some years back, an office building had a natural gas leak, and at one point the roof blew off. (I was a witness.) The fire trucks came, the news choppers, and the reporters on the ground. That evening, I taped each of the local news broadcasts.

Every one of them got the fundamental facts wrong (such as calling the office building a warehouse), the timeline was wrong, etc. But those news reports are probably the only record of the event, and will go down in history as what happened.

Not that what happened there mattered, but it has made me suspicious of the veracity of news reports ever since. It doesn't even have to be malicious, the errors were just sloppy work in their desire to be done with it and move on to the next story.
> Yes! Just like a typical desktop app!

A typical desktop app has the application logic in an application language, not the backend DB (if it even has a backend DB.)

> What we've done here is just simplify the web architecture down to a typical desktop architecture.

Relational DB backend + declarative front-end (HTML or otherwise) with no application logic in an intermediate layer between those isn't the typical desktop architecture, either.

> All us desktop application developers agree.

I mean, specifically, the RDBMS back-end with all business logic, generic middle-layer (possibly built into the database), and HTML front-end architecture for web apps has been proposed and provided before. But not really taken off.
First, reCAPTCHA's purpose was to digitize books, not digitize them for public domain. If the work was copyrighted, it was returned to rightful owners.

Second, if Big Mac got 2000% tastier every year, and while at that, 2 billion people got to eat dinner for free everyday, it sure will make the world better.
edit: I didn't mean for this to be disparaging remark: I am genuinely impressed by how wise he is about so many topics, given that he is only 30 years old.
> Is it likely to happen?

It's hard to estimate, but nonprofits in the West have OK long-term track records and the cryonics double-organization model has worked well since it was created in the aftermath of Chatsworth (which demonstrated why the commercial side must be separated). Arguably, it only needs to work for another century, and it's not like it's that hard to keep some funds conservatively invested, pay rent regularly, and react once every few decades to a problem.
Ask HN: What research areas would you consider if you were to start a CS PhD?
and why...?
> Which ALCOR etc don't attempt to cover.

Maybe you should reread my comment.
That's strange. With all those polish jokes going around, I figured poles would be a belligerent and resentful underclass. Strange how that works. Same with asians. Or is yellow the new white?
Is he kidding with that title-text-as-an-image? I was going to C&P it into an IM, but nope.
Live demo has been posted! Go to the envelope.xyz website or click here:

http://demo.envelope.xyz/

I apologize for the certificate errors. If you want the cert its here: https://demo.envelope.xyz/certificate/index.html
cancer is the halting problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
I will suggest you read a few biographies. Bill Gates and Madonna are both college drop outs. It doesn't appear to have hurt either of their careers. On the other hand, looking around me, it seems to me that more educated people tend to have a somewhat smoother experience of life. Those who were born with talent seems to take it really hard when the run into situations they aren't innately well equipped to handle.

That doesn't make college the automatic right answer. I think you need to find some historical or public figures that you can identify with in some way and see how the handled it and see if you can infer if which path seems like the better fit for you personally.

I can argue it in either direction if I care to (for college or against college). But that doesn't answer the question as to which is the right answer for you in specific.
Glad to be getting some thoughtful responses rather than idiotic down votes.

1. Basically yes, although I would centralise the breeding of mice and then farm them out to researchers as they developed each of the different cancers. Another option that we are not making as much use of as we can is natural cancer in human pets. We have millions of dogs and cats developing natural cancers that we could use.

2. Yes sequencing has not shown the promise for treatment that we hoped, but that is because the treatments we have were not developed with genomic data. It doesn't matter how much you know about a cancer if you don't have any tools to actually attack the weaknesses identified. We need to use the genomic data to indentify weaknesses, then use these identified weaknesses to screen for new treatments.

The best targets will be those genes that are not normally expressed in adult tissue that are expressed in cancer tissue. When I was an academic I had a student look into this area and there are literally hundreds of genes that are regularly expressed in cancer that are not expressed in adults. These are perfect targets for immune treatments provided you have enough of them to draw on.

3. Actually most newly diagnosed patients have deceptively great treatment options. For most cancers most of our treatments are just delaying tactics, not curative. Anyway for those few cancers where we have great curative cancers treatments are not the areas that I would start on.

4. Many people have tried to get funding in this area without success. You appear to know something about the funding process so you would know that any such grant would fail to get funded. Because of the needs for a proper animal model infrustucture it would not be possible to do anyway. I would rather concentrate on getting the animal models right before working on any new treatments.
I loved working with F# for windows development but it wasn't a viable option for most of my projects.

Ocaml is also a great language but it had problems with poor standard libraries and concurrency support.

I consider Haskell a beautiful language, but the most challenging for me to reason about and understand.

Scala has always seemed like an abomination to me, but I haven't used it enough.

I now use Go for most of my professional projects. It is just simpler than the languages you listed.

The learning curve is smaller, and, I am typically working on projects with other programmers, most who have never used a functional language and many are openly hostile to that paradigm.

Also, most of the projects I work on don't need the more power features of functional languages.

If the project's complexity is high, for instance, a derivative pricing library, or if I am working with a small team with previous experience with functional languages, or doing a personal project, then I would consider using a different tool.
Have You Ever Seen Batman Fighting Deathstroke. Watch the Epic Battle
Patterns of Successful Modern Social Apps: Synchronous vs. Asynchronous
Seriously. I mean Hitler left the pilot light on and look what happened to him.
Now factor in the sheer population of the earth by the time science reaches such an implausible point and realize how little one life matters to anyone living or remotely "in charge".
> Not to mention that realtime traffic data and intelligent routing around congestion is only workable by tracking individual vehicles on the road and recording how long it takes them to get from A to B.

Wrong. There is a better solution, used for traffic lights that adapt to traffic:

Use an inductive loop to count every vehicle and its speed at ever lane of every intersection and exit.

Far lower cost yet, and provides far better data. (Also is totally anonymous)
OLYBET SÜGISENE €5000 REIGIRALLI 14.-28.SEPTEMBER
Notes from 2015 WebRTC Conference Co-Hosted by Google
What's the problem, you got TRIGGERED?
It's not quite as expansive as HTTP: The Definitive Guide, but I highly recommend High Performance Browser Networking* by Ilya Grigorik. Very well-written, with good coverage of not only HTTP, but only WebSockets and WebRTC. I highly recommend it.

*High Performance Browser Networking: What every web developer should know about networking and web performance 1st Edition
Show HN: Interactive Linear Transforms
The pessimists are hard to tell from the realists in this particular case.
In Germany, where Google famously lost, the law is also simple: From eyelevel, you can photograph everything. Above eyelevel, you need permission, or it has to be only imagery that could have been seen from eye level, too.

One reason for this is that people might build a 2m tall fence around their frontyard and walk around naked, but Google with a 3m tall StreetView camera could obviously photograph that.

Google ignored the law, and hoped it would be easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission, but, as Germans are, everyone asking for forgiveness will be punished even harder to prevent such business policies.
Actually, you will find it is asians as a percentage of population who are over represented.

Good thing mitch is Mr money bags. With her math, she'd run a 7-11 into the ground.

It's kind of like my hebraic friend who conflated the UVA rape hoax with slavery by exclaiming on his Facebook page: "you don't reform a plantation you burn it down." I guess that's what 10 years of African studies (or diversity training) gets you.
syntax. of the dozen languages i've taught myself, (which is a super-set of the half dozen i've used to write significant things), Haskell's syntax has been, and remains, the largest barrier for me (and this includes perl!). For example, just a clear equivalence, like this one given by the very helpful linked article here, would've helped enormously ("sugared form" for monad):

do { a <- f ; m } ≡ f >>= \a -> do { m }

Sometimes i think the authors of Haskell had a completely different glyph set. I'm sure some of you folks can read this like a book, but this sort of thing still throws me into the ditch:

M2 :: (Monad m) => (a1 -> a2 -> r) -> m a1 -> m a2 -> m r
OneRent – Automated rental management with a human touch
In Haskell you can get most work done without the advanced concepts, but you can always choose to dig into the meaty stuff and get even more leverage from the type system. Easy to start, hard to master, keeps things very interesting for a a very long time. By the time you think you've mastered most of what it has to offer, the next version of GHC comes out with new goodies, now you can learn even more superpowers.

Btw, the title says "when", not "before", big difference.
It takes a while to master reading math notation or music notation. Mastering reading Haskell isn't that different. Some people are served well enough by just learning guitar tabs, others feel they're better off mastering music notation.
I wish I had the time to evaluate everything that is out there but I don't. There's simply more important things to focus on for my company than choice of language: sales, hiring, fundraising, etc. Therefore, I had to choose the best option for me with the limited information I had at the time. But that doesn't mean I can't be convinced to adopt another language. :) If someone ever surfaces a highly persuasive point-by-point argument for OCaml or Haskell or F# or Scala that applies to what we're doing, then I'll reconsider. So far, I haven't seen such an argument.
Hm, the wikipedia article contains a similar quote at the very bottom.

> When asked about the use of symbolism in his work, and particularly in the most recently published Old Man and the Sea, he explained: "No good book has ever been written that has in it symbols arrived at beforehand and stuck in...That kind of symbol sticks out like raisins in raisin bread. Raisin bread is all right, but plain bread is better....I tried to make a real old man, a real boy, a real sea, a real fish and real sharks. But if I made them good and true enough they would mean many things. The hardest thing is to make something really true and sometimes truer than true."

After reading the wiki more closely, I think there's a middle ground. It seems the Iceberg Theory operated on Hemingway's omission of explicit symbols. Hemingway never outright mentioned the larger themes in his works. But the holes left were suggested by the context.

I think it's like instead of painting a mural of a deer in a forest, he'd paint a mural of (what appeared at first glance to be) an empty forest. Except on closer inspection, there would be a trail of disturbed vegetation, accompanied by fresh deer tracks.

The deer clearly exists somewhere in the scene's vicinity even though the audience never sees it. Similarly, I think Hemingway let the themes influence the story, but never let those themes manifest themselves as symbols the reader could easily point to. Instead, the themes manifested as a vibe the reader couldn't explain on a conscious level, or manifested as a series of convenient coincidences. Maybe we can compromise that Hemingway achieved symbolism without the symbols.

-----------------------------------------

I suspect much of our disagreement concerns the definition of "plot". In my mind, I can't see a short story or novel without a plot that would be very interesting. It would be equivalent of watching a film which showed nothing but paint dry for the entire duration. Even if there's no physical action, any halfway interesting movie is bound to have at least some sort of psychological action.

If there's no plot, then I would probably classify it as poetry (which "Hills like White Elephants" clearly isn't).

Maybe a better idea would be to point me to an example or two of successful stories which omit symbolism.
Others have provided examples; I was actually making the opposite point with respect to the US. "Death panels" was a phrase used by politicians to drum up hysteria around a hypothetical single-payer system refusing to pay for a treatment. My contention is that such hysteria would make it nearly impossible, politically, for a US single-payer system to refuse to pay for any treatment, no matter how expensive or ineffective. This would of course drive up demand and therefore prices even moreso than the already distorted third-party payer system that exists today.
The article mentions that dolphins are the only species known to use names in the wild, but that's not quite true:

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/07/dont_call_me_polly_parr...
Is it too much to ask social justice warriors to refrain from nonsensical gum flapping like "intersectional feminism?" It the kind of thing stupid people say to sound intelligent and a complete giveaway
I'd argue that progress is slow because the research community is spending too little time on lines of work that can address many or all types of cancer. If you look at most cancer research it is highly specific to the molecular biochemistry of one subtype of cancer with a tiny percentage of overall patients. Yet that work is rarely any less costly than any of the possible paths forward to broad cancer therapies.

Examples:

1) Telomere extension interdiction, either via disabling telomerase in some way, or more cleverly disabling the effects of telomerase in a targeted fashion in cancer cells only, as has been demonstrated in early stage research.

2) ALT disruption, for the minority of cancers that abuse ALT to extend telomeres rather than telomerase.

3) Chimeric antibody receptor based immunotherapies. Still to soon to tell how broad these might be in their application.

4) CD47 targeting coupled to any discriminating cell destruction system. CD47 seems to be a very broad marker for many types of cancer.

But disruption of telomere lengthening is definitely at the top of this list. It should be possible to suppress it globally (both telomerase and ALT) in a patient in the worst case and wait out the cancer's withering before turning it back on. This would be considerably less harmful than chemotherapy and much more effective. It would require no targeting, no cancer specificity, and just work. A number of research groups are working on slices of this technology, but by no means enough.
> And there's no strong sense of design and elegance. It very much comes off as "here's a bunch of ideas thrown together with the restriction that they all must somehow compile to C".

But C is Turing-complete, so there is no restriction here. It's also not a "bunch of ideas thrown together" anymore than Haskell or Scala or Rust is. Nim focuses on 3 things:

* Metaprogramming via a hygienic AST-based macro system.

* An effect system to make the type system simpler to use. (The compiler infers an awful lot of useful information for you, the docgen shows the results for everybody to look at.)

* GC'ed thread local heaps where each GC can comply with soft-realtime requirements. Hard realtime is being worked on.

Any modern statically typed language also needs to have generics, closures, inheritance, exceptions or workarounds of the same complexity, so yeah Nim also has these making Nim instantly a big language. That doesn't mean it's a "bunch of ideas thrown together".

> It doesn't have memory safety as a core goal.

It does and it is reasonably safe (yeah yeah yeah we don't check for 'nil' properly yet, give me a break) with quite some improvements in the pipeline.
>Far lower cost

Um, what? Lower cost to dig up a street and install infrastructure inside it, than to use the cheap and ubiquitous internet and GPS connected computers that are already in every car?
Prosthetic robot arm lets you actually feel what it touches
Safely trades shoes and win prizes – Sneaker Connect