skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As far as I can tell, this isn't even in a nice part of New York.
Not really. The article states publishers are doing great. It's the brick and mortar stores that are threatened by digital distribution. I think using HMV for music or Blockbuster for video is a better analogy
Oracle to Build Major Austin Campus
> It's very easy to beat up on vulnerable code and say it's "bad C++", but it's also irrelevant. Of course it was bad C++: it was vulnerable code.

I'm not just beating it up as "bad C++" per se, I'm beating up the overall thoughtlessness of it all. Introducing a red-black tree, to plug a ownership flaw, is a sign things are dire.

> Also, std::set is not memory safe. It is vulnerable to UAF due to iterator invalidation: iterate over a set and remove elements, for example.

If you want to do that, then you shouldn't be using an ordered set. Doing so, for some arbitrary predicate, is O(n). Language is irrelevant.

Why should the library make doing dumb things easy or safe? (Even though it did make a slight concession in C++11, at zero cost, by returning an iterator from std::set::erase). If someones first thought, when they find a library, which happens to not make something easy, is to shrug it off and write unsafe code, instead of spending 30 seconds re-evaluating their own decisions (whether wrt their own design, or using the library), then I'd say they're not a particularly good programmer.

Now if you want to do something sane, like removing a range or an equal subset, then it's trivial of course:

// remove 6 through 10, inclusive.
s.remove(s.lower_bound(6), s.upper_bound(10));

// remove all the 42s
s.erase(42);
I agree with his "fuck startup weekends" slide, but a lot of the other information feels generic.
I love that the game ends in 2038 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem).

Also well-done is the rule that the state of the economy determines the highest zone that can be built, since a zone does no good if not actually populated, and ghost towns benefit nobody.

The rules about how commute times change if you build adjacent to C/D zones or out in the middle of R zones seem quite well thought-out as well. Though that does raise the question of why they can't be brought down again by building a D zone (so more people can live closer to work).

This does rather subtly demonstrate the primary problem: players in this game have to care about goals like "keep small towns small" or "at least 5 R-1 zones in ...", and treat those as having parity with rent and commute times. (Obviously, without conflicting constraints there'd be no tension and no game; that this is a game nicely demonstrates the problem.) Not to mention rules like "Upzoning brings a zone up one level", since within the rules of the game, C and D zones are strictly preferable to R zones, and having more housing is strictly better than having less housing. (And, obviously, repeatedly re-zoning the same area in reality would be more disruptive than changing it once.)

As another commenter said, "the only winning move is not to play". A game like this makes a clearer and cleverer political statement than a pile of ads and protests.
Gamestop is to Steam what Blockbuster is to Netflix, they failed to adapt and now they're obsolete. Not only that, they also have a horrible track record for customer service. The internet is littered with tales of horrible experiences from Gamestop, and the only people who might still shop there are grandparents shopping for their grandkids.
I've used both for hobby games. Corona is user-friendly and it's a great solution with lots of community plug-ins and support. It uses a freemium model, offering features like access to native API's and offline builds at a price, and you can't really use it on Linux. LÖVE is free and open-source and adding support for Android and iOS makes it even more attractive.
> I think we'd all rather be people who digest the message instead of disregarding it because we don't like how it was delivered to us.

That would be good, yes. We should all try to be like that. However, HN has guidelines as well, and I'm pretty sure that textfile's post violated some of them. And the way HN maintains it's status as the kind of place where we care about the message is partly by discouraging statements that needlessly distract with an offensive tone.
They were chemists, not physicists. They were completely out of their depth when thinking about physics. From what I read in Frank Close's book they jumped the gun when they learned about Steve Jones (who wanted to explain Earth's He-3 with cold fusion), and they didn't want to risk losing credit for their major discovery.

Obviously they were no saints and did lie and massage data when it all crumbled. But they behaved far more like blinkered true believers than frauds.
I was looking for another table-as-desk at IKEA a few months ago. I was surprised to find the electric height-adjusting Bekant, and even more surprised to find it on sale for circa $400-420 (about $80 off, IIRC).

Anyway, my father and I (his van, for transportation) spent some time talking with the area's sales associate, who was older and knowledgeable and had been with IKEA for six or seven years as a supplementary career/job.

They explained, particularly with reference to the electric unit, that families let their kids climb all over the floor models. Invariably, they become stressed/loosened up and less stable.

I was actually looking for a Galant table with the four individual angled, height-adjustable metal legs that mount rather sturdily to an underside metal frame. But... they no longer carry that item. (The sales associate agreed to the foolishness of this, asserting, 'If only they would ask us out on the floor what the customers want.')

I ended up instead with a (fixed height) Bekant (for approximately 50% more than the Galant I was seeking). It is not "wobbly" but it is a bit less stable than the Galant, to the point where it shakes a bit if/when I type aggressively. On the upside, its less stable pillar-to-large-feet two-leg design mean that the legs are more out of the way than with the Galant's angled legs, making it more comfortable when two are put together in an L configuration.

Anyway, I was told by a sales person so take with a grain of salt, but apparently particularly customers with kids subject the floor display units to a lot of abuse.
Presuming no stealth edits, what the parent claims is

> There's no democratic element to demand a higher level of service, say with how the US had its environment movement which led to many laws protecting the land, air, and water and ultimately culminated into several state agencies, federal guidelines, the EPA, etc.

So you've very effectively slaughtered that strawman detailed in your claim about the original claim.
I recently looked into notebooks and found Beaker (http://beakernotebook.com) to be especially interesting in its support for passing data across languages.
Could you elaborate on the point you're trying to make ?.
Venture capital firm names an algorithm to its board of directors
Being able to run-time patch an API installed on a device is an entirely different thing than being able to modify and distribute an open source framework.

Both are useful but they aren't the same thing. In one case, you want to able to get your code running on devices that in the wild now. In the other, you want your fixes to go upstream so you can remove any hacks needed to do the former.
Just looking at the source: http://www.datapointed.net/media/2012/10/factor_min.js and then looking at some keywords:

//Link to original minified source code http://www.datapointed.net/media/2012/10/factor_min.js

//Credits to Stephen Von Worley www.datapointed.net

Here there is an expanded version
https://gist.github.com/brianahearn/6032808 and a discussion: https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!msg/mathfuture/yEfAaey6j...
Why does it need access to my Wi-Fi information?
If life imprisonment isn't unconstitutional, why is lifetime GPS tracking unconstitutional?

I'm not saying I support lifetime GPS tracking; just that I don't understand the argument.
If you're developing x86-64 assembly in Sublime Text I suggest this (shameless plug) https://github.com/Nessphoro/sublimeassembly
Oh, I've tried both all right!

There is more mental overhead in dynamically-typed languages, actually .. it's just less visible because it's implicit! It's the overhead of having to "keep all the type information in your head", which dynamic type proponents sometimes seem to be saying is a good thing.

It's not good because it is a tax on everything you do! Whereas in a statically-typed language, sure, you have to do the little extra overhead of putting the types in the program text, but this is quite freeing in the long term, because you can then drop the burden of having to think about what type something needs to be, in most cases.

(It also serves as documentation / literate programming.)

My approach to programming tends to involve rewriting things several times, or heavily modifying them, and as someone who has been programming for 34 years, in a lot of different situations, I find that static typechecking is by far a superior framework when refactoring or rewriting code. It is not even close.
It seems a large amount of GPGPU nowadays is deep learning, and OpenCL is nowhere to be seen. CUDA or rather cuDNN is where it's at.
If you've never seen a diplomatic bag you would be excused for wondering how a Selectric would fit in it ;)

"Bag" (also called "pouch") is a bit of a misnomer. It's not limited in shape, size or weight by the Vienna Convention so it can really be anything that can be transported, including ISO containers.

For example, one of the toilet pumps of the ISS was sent in a diplomatic bag to the US, which is around the same weight as one Selectric https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14017

I remember reading about one incident in the 1980s were a Russian truck of 9 tons was turned down at first at the Swiss border but could pass through later.
I like that analogy
People, I followed on Twitter, kept sharing links mentioning HN or citing from comments. After some time I decided to check it about but it took me some time until I realized what this "thing" was and appreciate the value behind it.
My name is Thomas Helleday, a cancer scientist leading a lab of 70 scientists
You mean Loved to death? ;)
I started using their swarm app again recently. It has a fraction of its previous user base. It's kinda sad. They've added good features and it would be more fun if all my original friends still played.
Background on the Falcon 9 Launch
And for those interested, an article on the subject: http://theantimedia.org/china-just-launched-the-most-frighte...
First,

> some sliver

Second, I for the most part agree with you in the ways that are relevant to the point you're trying to make. However, the knowledge/tool distinction is a vague (in that they may fall on a spectrum) and ambiguous (both words tend to be moving targets), which is why I chose the term instrument instead. Mathematics is a tool only in the sense that it is knowledge that is applied towards some benefit, e.g., efficiency. Also,

> Compare Knuth: "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it."

This is again "proof" in the day-to-day mathematical sense of a convincing argument, not in the formal sense for writing down an expression per line such that each line can be logically deduced from some preceding lines through the the use of axioms. A type checker is literally a search procedure through the space of derivation trees to find a formal proof that this term has this type.
It's interesting that "sound gradual typing" (i.e. static analysis with runtime type checks, AIUI) has supposedly caused large performance problems in some languages. Hack, Facebook's sound, gradually-typed dialect of PHP, doesn't seem to have this problem. And PHP itself, which doesn't do any static type checks itself (you must use a separate static analyser if you want that), only runtime ones, has had limited type checking for eleven years, without apparent performance problems.

Are these systems with performance issues doing something fundamentally different, or more complicated? Perhaps I am misunderstanding something.
Apple Blasts UK 'Snooping' Bill
Oh come on tokenadult, it's not like China's the same place it was in the 70s and 80s! Not only has government policy shifted immensely just since the 90s (start and end of one child policy, WTO joined, passports and international travel freely available for (almost) all citizens, internationalization push for the RMB just to name a few big policies) but honestly, most places are unrecognizable since Y2K!

China's mode of governance, while responsible for some horrible problems and extremely frustrating to be on the wrong side of, is not without its positive points. Hand-waving it off as a "dictatorship" implies there is no internal political change, that political terms are re-granted to the same power-base, that secret police stalk and raid the population with great frequency... something much more aking to Lee Kwan-Yew's Singapore. That's simply not the case, and I know that even my government-critical Chinese friends here on the ground believe that the reigns of power are wielded to some extent differently by different leaders, and that within the communist party exist factions and new ideas.

Almost the only thing Chinese people pretty much ever say when political issues are raised is "the population is too large ... there is no other option!" (人口太多了！没办法！) While hideously frustrating for westerners (consequently Chinese people rarely complain, disbelieving that fighting to leave feedback with bureaucracies has any effect) it is immensely pragmatic from another perspective. Remember, the population which incorporates entirely disparate language families (everything from Turkic to Tibeto-Burman to Sinitic to Tai) now effectively has total literacy and a mutually comprehensible spoken language... Mao and his legacy, for all his terrible failures, did achieve that, and nobody can argue otherwise.

Shouting "dictatorship" when basically China would have been another India without the events of the 20th century, which nobody could have foretold, falls hollow and in fact riles these ears... those without experience in the country hear too much of this fallacious drivel through the media already. You don't need to fuel it.

PS. Before I am accused of being some kind of victim of propaganda, I literally never watch TV or read Chinese government media and my 15 years in and out of the country has been tempered with roughly equal time on three other continents.
The point isn't that memory isn't infinite, but that C's memory model isn't infinite. There are other languages that do have an infinite memory model (for instance, any language with a builtin bignum type).

I mean, if you want to judge ridiculousness, then their explanation of why there are no strictly conforming programs (specifically: even a program with an empty main function cannot be guaranteed not to overflow the stack) is also ridiculous, but it's still interesting.
No. It won't.
I know almost nothing about cold fusion and theoretical physics in general, but as a guy who has read some Popper and Hume I'll chime in with an obviously subjective opinion, and say that after reading all the HN comments and parts of the article the first thought that came to my mind was this: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

Interestingly enough that exact quote is present in TFA, but in a manner that makes it debatable:

> This is not to deny that there is truth in the principle popularised by Carl Sagan, that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We should certainly be very cautious about such surprising claims, unless and until we amass a great deal of evidence. But this is not a good reason for ignoring such evidence in the first place, or refusing to contemplate the possibility that it might exist

Paragraphs like this one remind me of a work-colleague of mine, who I try to convince from time to time during our cigarette breaks that aliens have not visited our planet and that they're not just "about to arrive", impending asteroid apocalypse be damned. At which point she almost always responds to me like this: "paganel, yours are valid opinions, but we cannot refuse to contemplate the possibility that one day they may arrive". This also reminds me of how early Christians actually believed that the second arrival of Christ was just around the corner. Whatever this guy writes about and whatever he believes in, it is not about science.
Classes and modules in almost any other modern language are much easier to read and write. Ruby, python, heck even php are better than JS. That's my real issue with JS. If we had a browser that had lots of languages baked into it, none of use would choose to use JS ;) node.js would never have been invented...
Google is working on a new AI-enabled messenger, its answer to Facebook M
Falsification has also the problem of unknown unknowns. Something that gave LENR or cold fusion this enormous. setback. They simply did not understand the loading ratio at that time....
A negative replication does not lead to dis-confirmation of a process, only that this particular atomic arrangement did not work.
> Why should the library make doing dumb things easy or safe?

Because people empirically do a lot of "dumb things", and it's nice when computers check to make sure that they don't before deploying that code into production.

> If someones first thought when you find a library doesn't make something easy is to shrug and write unsafe code, instead of spending 30 seconds re-evaluating their decisions (whether wrt their own design, or using the library), then I'd say they're not a particularly good programmer.

OK. Let's say you're right and Google (and every other large company, because Google is no worse than any other) is full of "bad programmers" who have no idea what they're doing. What is your practical solution?
Congrats on the initial traction!

I feel like "co-living" is definitely a huge opportunity, and someone will get it right.

Curious what you're going to do differently than Campus and several other SF-based companies that had a similar model but couldn't scale beyond 15-20 locations: http://www.businessinsider.com/campus-co-living-san-francisc...
After 2 decades of programming, I rarely feel creative while programming. While designing an app or UI/UX sure, but rarely while coding.

For me, 90% of coding feels like being a human constraint solver. Take the intersection of tech being used and defined business rules, and figure out the path to implement a feature. It's rare I have to get overly creative to solve a given problem in an out-of-the-box manner.

Maybe I just need to work on more interesting things.
Those are all factors, but I think there's a deeper one: the same pressure to create a temporary solution also tends to keep it in place. On the other hand, when you are at your leisure to search for an ideal permanent solution, you probably have more time to keep changing it.
The argument is that they already served their sentence. They are free to do as they will. This is effectively in addition to their sentence, retroactively changing the laws. Imagine if suddenly there was a law that said you were to have your tongue cut out if you lied, and that it applied to lies told in the past. How would you feel about that?

The point is, punishments can only be applied to sentences pronounced from this point on, not ones that have already been served or are in the process of being served.
Show HN: Bench – A generic latency benchmarking library
What Happens If Two Driverless Cars Crash? Lawyers Drool
I'm an app developer. This change will absolutely break some of my stuff, and it's going to suck. Even with that, I do feel OP is taking an overtly political stance (even using the word "banned".) This change is perfectly reasonable within the already-strict mindset of Swift. Having a less-strict language just to work around potentially buggy Apple frameworks would be setting a bad precedent.

Using "final" also has some performance wins by reducing dynamic dispatch. [1]

[1] https://developer.apple.com/swift/blog/?id=27
> If Wisconsin's law is good, then why not apply it to all criminals that has been found guilty of serious violence?

I honestly don't have a problem with that.

I think we should acknowledge that some people are psychopaths who are mentally incapable of having moral qualms about hurting people, whether sexually or otherwise. They can't be redeemed; the only thing you can do is keep people safe from them.
> although it may not be efficient if the program caches the prime numbers and factorisations

If you watched this website non-stop for a whole year, it would still only take a thousandth of a second or so to factorise the highest number you'd reach, from scratch. Integer factorisation is only time consuming when the numbers are really really big.
Well, we kind of aren't, given Santa doesn't exist. If he did exist, then I'd be quite concerned that a strange man was compiling dossiers of information about my children and breaking into my house to leave gifts for my kids!
So much hype and confusion in this space!
Pretty good article overall, but some of the data is conflicting:

> HubSpot’s fantastic article about decision fatigue included a study which showed customers who were presented with six options instead of 24 were 10 times more likely to buy.

> Sliding scales allow customers to be ultra-specific with their needs and pay for only exactly what they’re going to use. Plus, according to Peep Laja, giving users something to play around with will keep them sticking around for longer and subconsciously soaking in the details and pricing of your product.
I heard the same argument from a certain breed of NoSQL fans (usually pushing MongoDB, in my experience...). "The datastore is schemaless! It's flexible! You can iterate quickly!"

I don't think those claims hold up in practice. In the real world, your data is never schemaless; it's just a question of how explicit you want to make the schema. With the added benefit that we have excellent tooling to help with, eg, migrating explicit schemas.
"However, our privacy commitment does not extend to criminals"

Here, let me fix that for you, Chen: "our privacy commitment does not extend to the accused". No trial has yet taken place in the described circumstances, so the owner of the phone isn't a criminal just yet.

But overall it sounds like Chen is trying to have it both ways ("no government backdoors"), while not entirely pissing off the government so as to cling to the thin hope that some government contracts might come their way and keep them afloat.
Ugh. Stop. Just stop.

That young man doesn't need a master's degree, he needs a lesson on how to find a job. Taking people with a proven inability to make real money and adding another 100k of debt on their backs for an equally bogus masters degree is completely irresponsible.

Speaking as a hiring manager (for jobs that pay more than $50k/year), most of the real skills that get people hired have aren't part of a degree.

- Coding? Most of my guys got their knowledge on the job. I did as well... not saying a CS degree doesn't help, but for many basic IT jobs, you don't need it....

- Sales / client mgmt? Learn by doing

- Project management? Go run projects

- Soft skills? Go work with people for a while, under the eye of someone knowledgeable. Get coached. Coach others.

- Writing? Go write something that gets edited by a pro and published. Feedback is good.

- Product knowledge or big blocks of local history? Here's a book, go read it.

Sure, go set the standard of requiring a master's degree to get hired. Know what? The smart folks network their way up.

Proof.

My #3 guy has an MBA

My #2 has a high school degree

I'm just a BA...

Explain this degree thing again?