skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So the peak was in 2007. I think I know why.

In 2006-2007, there was an organized push on Wikipedia by pro-Israel editors to make Israel-related articles favorable to Israel. This provoked some major controversies, especially because at least one of the pro-Israel editors was a Wikipedia admin and abused their authority. (Eventually, they were "desysopped" for that, but it took years.) For a sense of this, see [1], including all the archived talk pages.

Wikipedia dealt with the problem by strictly applying the "reliable sources" rule. It became the practice that every single fact in Israel-related articles must be cited to a reliable source and properly footnoted. Anything that wasn't was deleted as "uncited" or "synthesis" by one side or the other. Until that time, articles often had text which wasn't cited to a specific source. The tough citation requirements anchored the dispute to factual information, and, though the process was painful, worked. The controversies settled down and the edit warring slowed to a crawl.

Those strict standards gradually spread to the rest of Wikipedia. Now, everything had to be footnoted like a doctoral thesis. Few people outside of academia write that way. This results in a big hammer coming down on someone new wanting to write an article about their new favorite DJ. Does he have mainstream press coverage that isn't from a press release, and did you cite it? If not, he's out of here.

Until you learn to write in that strict style, you can't contribute much to Wikipedia. For people used to blithering on blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, this is hard. That's what's discouraging new editors.

Writing for Wikipedia is now like contributing to a major open source project like the Linux kernel. There's a big body of code, and your changes have to fit in well and be justified. That's necessary. Wikipedia faces a constant incoming stream of PR, vandalism, and general crap. (Check out the ever-changing list of recent changes.[2]) The petty vandalism is mostly reverted by AIs now; ClueBot, driven by an ANN and trained on known vandalism, is quite good. The other problems take human attention, by volunteers tired of seeing similar annoyances over and over.

For the other extreme, of writing about anything with no quality control, see 4chan.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Israeli_West_Bank_barrier
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges
>> The paper is not the point. Producing a likely-looking one is not the point. Actually knowing the subject is the point.

Tell that to the people handing out the grades/scholarships/acceptance letters. Students today see assignments as hurdles, not opportunities for learning. At school today the first and most relevant question is always "But will this be on the exam?" If no, then the activity is dismissed as a waste of time.
Amazon starts offering loans to customers with pay monthly option
They are both used for building UI applications on Windows, because there's a lot of existing C++ code, .NET used to be (not sure now) a major PITA to deploy and was slower to boot.
It also allows one to expand to other platforms and operating system in a way that C# never could, in spite of toolchains like Mono, and the recent open sourcing of .NET.

I would absolutely not choose C# for building a UI app even today.
For reference: https://github.com/mgechev/angular2-seed
A very nice project which goal is the same as this project, to relief the dev from unnecessary hassle.
That's a strong and not-at-all obvious statement. Can you elaborate?
What the fuck? You just casually throw it out there -- "Oh, drugs may have been involved" -- based on a Twitter feed that's somewhat incoherent after the person just went through a traumatic experience?

Please, don't "venture a bit" and "go a bit further" - if you have nothing to say, keep mum.
I already granted you that.
The backend is distributed Actors. Instead of bringing the data to the (web)request, the Actor model brings the request to the data (which may be on another server). Actor objects are loaded in memory and kept there while needed, so its very fast by itself and there's no need for caching at all.

Storage can be very simple, it is possible to use SQL but I'm using Table Storage which is cheaper and more scalable. For searching we use ElasticSearch.

This server model fits very naturally with websockets.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Microsoft+to+Alert+Users+to+Suspec...
It's not meant for it. Python is similar, there are hacks (such as eventlet) that have their own downsides. Use the right tool for the job. We are currently rewriting an eventlet-based part of our stack in Go with much better results.
I think that's the best you can do with crowdsourcing. To go beyond you would need a structured community. My bet is, however, on an AI that will build the articles automatically.
Why would it improve latency? At most it would reduce it by half; i.e. Free-space propagation vs traces buried in FR4.
thanks for sharing! :)
Any suggestions for a better graphical diff tool for OS X?
Novelty Seekers: Using Instagram for Learning and Inspiration
Yes that's exactly what I experienced.
A knowledge repository built upon who fights harder and who gives up first (in most cases due to lack of time arguing for every sentence) is kind of broken.
I rely on wikipedia like everyone on hacker news but I can't help thinking that changing their status to benefit corporation like Kickstarter would improve the structure and also their finances. Non-profit closes a lot of doors, especially growth opportunities. A renewed status could bring new mobile apps, tie-ins with media companies, perhaps an open API available to third-party developers etc.
I think the reason for decline (and bureaucracy) is actually a lack of democracy. For example, there is no way to recall administrators. Also, opinion of majority is sometimes dismissed as not being good consensus, which only helps people in established cliques. Democracy is a rule that ensures fairness, but senior administrators do not always want it.

Secondary problem is IMHO the caste nature of administrator privileges. I think if the privileges were more separated and it would be possible to recall them, this would reduce the ossification of the hierarchy.

I also think Wikipedia could benefit from having a stable branch into which the changes from unstable branch could be regularly reviewed for addition. It would be nice if unstable branch could return to the idea that someone can add things even if they are not perfect or immediately sourced; IMHO experts can always add sources later for content that is already present, and it would give them some incentive to contribute.

That being said, Wikipedia is amazing! I would really like to thank to people who put some work into it.
As I said.

>Indeed I do not believe that such a design is even possible.

>Would love to be proven wrong though.
An Honest Way to Make a Buck
I do not think you are at all lying. However, why in the name of all that is holy would I ever do that? Literally, cleaning my toenails is a better use of my time than that. Doing my neighbor's taxes is a better use of my time. Getting high and watching the news is better use of time. It just seems so utterly hopeless and pointless to even try from what you say.

Why do you do this?!
Getting back to ck2's comment, ARM Holdings (the company spun off from Acorn to do ARM development) is in Cambridge, so you can count it as a UK success story. It's interesting that they don't make any chips themselves, but are purely an IP company.
I think you fail to realize the implications of what you do when you go out and not only embrace but advertise your failures. It looks like attention-seeking behavior and it won't be good for your company.

I understand why you may think it is a good idea. Heck, even I considered it before. But it's not. What is the net benefit to your employees worrying about their next paycheck or your customers worrying about their data when you post something like this? Not much, if any. But it sure got you a whole lot of personal advertising for free.
I know exactly what _pmf_ means. I used deal with a self declared Asperger who was top class in his field. The thing is whenever I asked him do you know how to fix this problem. The answer was invariably, 'sorry I don't know how to do that'. Of course I should have phrased it as, I am having difficulties in solving this problem and was wondering if you would advise me on finding a solution.
A lot of students don't care about critical thinking, but I think that really underestimates these students. What do we offer them, after all?

All I had to do was advertise some research opportunities and 10+ students were interested in doing work for no pay and no credit outside of class. Sure, they have no idea what they're doing -- but they know they want to be doing something interesting, and they took the initiative to follow up with me. What is so special about my students? They're pretty career focused, and not in a "learning-for-learning's-sake" kind of field. And yet they want to use what they learn in class to do meaningful analysis on extracurricular topics.
At the current 1MB block size, Bitcoin can only process seven transactions per second. If everyone were directly connected to the the BlockChain ledger, it could not become a global real-time payment processing system. However, if there were middlemen involved to take the transaction processing load off of the Blockchain...

As points of reference, Visa processes 2,000 transactions per second and PayPal does over 100. Those are averages, not max capacity numbers.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
Right. I didn't have a Coyote Point unit. Many other sites did, and they all appeared to be down to my web crawler until I figured out the problem.

(Current web crawler problem: sites that won't let you read their robots.txt file if they don't like your user-agent string.)
An interesting paper that basically says that the number of editors is declining due to the difficulty in keeping and retaining new users. Any person who has tried to edit Wikipedia will know that aggressive rule-wielding wikifanatics immediately try to kill newcomer edits using whatever tools they have to hand. But it's important to realize that Wikipedia's ambiguous rules and arbitrary decisions are not a bug, but a feature, giving power to incumbent editors. While most new editors just give up, the ones who do stay on and fight become the same kind of fanatics.

Many people say that the toxic community is the problem, but the community issues IMHO are actually a symptom of poor software design. The wiki's open structure and article-based format, which allows the most powerful groups of editors to "own" pages, gives power to people who are interested in keeping and retaining control, rather than those who are interested in sharing knowledge. The power is centralized in these gatekeepers, leading to all the problems we see on the site.[1] This is also the reason the Gender Gap exists.[2]

The solution is to redesign the software to devolve power from entrenched groups, but this will never happen because there is no leadership, and the people who have the power are the survivors/fanatics that actually like the current system. Because they write the rules they will not give their power up easily.

As for the quality arguments below: without new users and continuous evolution in software development, content presentation, and editorial review processes, the site cannot maintain quality. I believe that it is impossible for any wiki system to maintain a high quality anyway: the amount of time to improve articles to high quality is exponential, while the number of editors and work available is linear. Even in the best circumstances, something has to give. If the number of editors is actually declining then quality problems may also increase exponentially.

[1]http://newslines.org/blog/wikipedias-13-deadly-sins/

[2]http://newslines.org/blog/the-sexists-at-the-top-of-wikipedi...
They get ignored mostly. If the intent is pro grade, treat the room.

Otherwise, that is what the sweet listening spot is all about.
'founders helping founders'. Not to make fun of a terrible disease that is depression, but a better name must be made. It's is just SO techy sounding and first-world-problem-ish. I like the idea, but then again, not a soul on earth is making you be a 'founder' other than the one in the mirror.

Maybe go book a fly fishing trip in Montana?
These animal experiments were done because they were convenient, not because there wasn't an alternative.

Oooh, I realize, that 19th centure statement about this being 'necessary for the advancement of the human race' is just you trolling (or sarcasm?), and I fell for it. Doh!
You started off your replies by implying progressives are communists with this little nugget

> Progressives think it's 'fair' that everyone pays what they can afford.

Which is not what progressives believe, and then you went full on communist with this little nugget

> Some people also thought "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was fair.

And then you started pretending only you knew history.

I don't care what you position is, I'm replying to what you say, not what you think; I can't read your mind, only what you write.

> Do you know me? Yet you decide to attack me.

I don't have to know you to tell you you're behaving arrogantly, and I haven't attacked you, if you think I have, you don't know what attack means. I've criticized your bad behavior, nothing more.

> I'm not a kid, I'm 30

Still a kid to me bub.

> Again, just 1 question: What do you think my opinion on taxes is?

I know what your position is, you stated it

> I'm all for progressive taxation, wealth and inheritance tax, all of it. But I'm also not ignorant of history...

But that's not what we're talking about anymore because you can't stop being arrogant and have derailed any conversation to the point that I no longer care what you think. "But I'm also not ignorant of history", please, grow up, your superiority complex is disgusting.
Symlinks would make copying and archiving the node_modules structure more problematic.
Was Kuhn an Internalist? (2012)
That said, Sidechains is VERY COOL technology, and the Blockstream developers make VERY COOL new features that could be added to Bitcoin. Unfortunately, by building a company on Sidechains and looking for profitable applications of it, they have become attached to a single technology that's only useful if Bitcoin itself slows its pace of improvement.
The foundation has no say whatsoever in the project.
A lightning rod for what? Terrorism blowback?
In a way markets and governments aren't really that different from one another. I think people often forget that neither exists in a vacuum. Politicians, like you say, are part of the market too! They want money (like everyone) and they have power and influence to sell. Supply and demand are there, and so the trade happens. To stop it completely we'd have to staff our governments with alien beings that would not desire anything we could offer them.

(And no, disbanding all governance will not make power spread itself evenly among everyone - it's not a stable state. We'd be back to having warlords instead.)

RE Tesla, they took some DOE loans (inb4 someone pops up with "evil Musk eating taxpayer money" again - loans which they paid back in full and way before the due time) that were important to their growth. It's a textbook example of why those loans, and other grants, exist in the first place.

I agree that all the problems you mentioned are real and important. Governments do create nasty issues. But they handle some things well. Markets too have issues, just different ones, and also have terrible failure modes in other areas (which include bribing governments into changing laws to benefit them instead of the general population). Personally, I'm advocating for dropping the ideological approach and just evaluating every problem on its own, whether it is solved best by top-down governance, bottom-up free market work, or some combination of both.
In this "growth above all else" ecosystem, do you think profit sharing could possibly be just as bad? I'm not sure how those deals are usually set up, but unless you set aside a portion of revenue to share I could see people losing out here too.

Do you know of good examples of this working? I'm interested in how it might work with a typical startup.
>Exercising risklessly is safe

It may be safe, but it isn't free. As with most other things, you pay a risk premium -- in this case, in the form of failure to qualify for capital gains tax treatment on the resulting gain, because you didn't exercise in time to hold the underlying stock for more than one year. Depending on the amount, this difference can be quite significant.

You do your own taxes so probably know all this already, but here's a simple example[1] anyway. Let's say you "risklessly" exercise options with a strike price of 100 and a FMV (tax-lawyer speak for fair market value) of 1000. You have immediate gain of 900 -- and because you didn't hold the shares for >1 year, all 900 is Ordinary Income, generally taxed at higher rates than capital gains. (Top federal OI rate is something like 39% last time I checked vs something like 17% for cap gains.) Assuming the OI rate is 39% and the CG rate is 17%, you pay tax of .39 * 900 = 351, for total post-tax cash of 900 - 351 = 549.

What if, instead, you had exercised speculatively, more than 1 year prior? You'd still have taxable gain on 900, but because you'd have held the stock for more than one year (and met some other qualifying factors I won't bother explaining here), your tax bill would be 17% -- meaning that you'd pay .17 * 900 = 153 in taxes, and keep cash of 900-153 = 847.

Not a huge difference when we're talking about gain in the hundreds, but adds up quickly if you're in line for tens or hundreds of thousands or more.

It's really just a question of how you evaluate different kinds of risks, and what you want to pay to hedge them. If you want to balance your tax bite against the risk that your company goes under or otherwise fails to deliver, you may still want to exercise early, but only partially.

[1] I'm eliding a few things and making some assumptions. Not legal advice, talk to a real tax attorney before making decisions, etc.
Actually most of the popular articles for readers and editors are news-based. However, the site, while barely adequate as an encyclopedia, is terrible for news presentation.
"Students rarely think that they are in math classrooms to appreciate the beauty of mathematics, to ask deep questions, to explore the rich set of connections that make up the subject, or even to learn about the applicability of the subject; they think they are in math classrooms to perform."

Where will you find the instructors to teach the students to appreciate the beauty of mathematics, etc.? And assuming that you do find them, will they be able to squeeze into the available time the instruction in everything from basic arithmetic through algebra?
Huge blind spot.
If nothing else speed of light delays mean there are likely to be multiple AI's vs one really huge AI. So, we can just pay some cop AI's to watch the others ;)

PS: The idea of one true AI, seems to be a holder over from the early computing days when computers where mammoth things vs distributed networks.
Core is not Bitcoin, it's just one of many clients that follow the Bitcoin protocol. There is no such thing as an "official" client or anything else in Bitcoin.
Dude thank you these are incredible! Especially since I know I'm more of a visual learner, these vids look primo
A space could not be allowed in numeric values in runtime input (fscanf, <<).
You're totally right! Without that guy who builds everything your company will do just fine...doing nothing and having nothing to sell....

just wow

...

Also, what risk? There has never in history of history been easier access to money than now, and never better terms. Hell, tell a stranger in palo alto you're an MIT dropout, and have a Stanford dropout friend, and they will practically write you a blank check.
trouble is on some articles where the science is still up fo debate or sensitive you run up against the older editors whose word is law. Got to love a source being rejected as not credible when the same reference existed elsewhere.

It is a great site for facts or information where there is no ability to debate or need too, like top 40 songs, videos, and anime.
Sorry to be negative but one of the things that I hate more than anything in my software development work is typing "npm install blah" and almost always being hit with wave after wave of errors typically related to dependencies. I don't know why it happens and I don't care I just wish they'd fix it. So many, many errors.

Go on, try installing X packages at random using npm - did they install cleanly?

The baseline outcome for using a package installer should not be reams of errors, it should be a cleanly installed package. Installing packages works fine with other language ecosystems, why not with npm?
Because you want the truth on Wikipedia, basically. When I want something to be written there, I am willing to push it through, dig up all the necessary references on Google Scholar (ultimately, references to papers are the best munition you can have) and argue about it.

But it isn't for someone who just wants to write a bit of his knowledge and let it go.
Also stack allocation and pervasive use of value types help C++ a lot in practice. This reduces overhead of heap metadata. There's also the overhead of .NET wrapper objects for OS resources--compare a .NET window object to an HWND, the latter of which is just a word-sized opaque ID describing a kernel managed resource.

Though GC has its own advantages too--the ability to compact being the main one.
Yeah, I think that examples were my weak spot here. I'll probably roll some examples into the companion article yet to be written: how to agree effectively.
More details on that Israel controversy here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict-of-interest_editing_o...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Accuracy_in_Midd...
People used to buy DVD machines and DVDs, now they have Netflix and set top boxes.
It may be a fine way to hold officials accountable for stupid remarks. Now if only stupid remarks were the major source of our political difficulties...