skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I love the crap out of CSS, but a lot of these points are just opinion, and I would not recommend this guide to anyone who wants to write more maintainable CSS.

Things like calling it "the best" and having "right" and "wrong" in the examples are really just arrogant and not grounded in anything solid. In CSS, there is no right/wrong, thats the point. CSS is not black & white, it's flexible.

It's not all bad, of course; things like the spacing between the colon of a definition I thought were self evident.

> CSS rules should be comma separated and leave on a new line

Wat. Ok, sure, you CAN do that. And if you have complex selectors, you should. but for "a,img" theres no clarity gained by new lining them.

> Rule declarations should have one property per line

Generally yes. But there are times when a one-liner is clearer and easier to comprehend.

> Do not nest elements.

Do not listen to this! The author is correct that this can lead to over specificity, and that is certainly something you should be aware of. But it also lets you do things like not have to put classes on everything, and focus more on what makes semantic sense in the HTML. Personally, i go two to three levels; still allows for flexibility (like moving an article to be within a div) while letting you easily scope out everything having to do with a particular element and it's children. and code folding!

> You should use single quotes as it is visually clearer that the string is not a selector or a style property.

I agree with this; you should, it's clearer, and allows for syntax highlighting to make it easier to spot.

Anyway, the best CSS is CSS you can understand, refactor, and expand upon. What CSS and CSS processors allow for is a lot of flexibility that can be abused if you're not careful, or very powerful if you know what you're doing. We are all students of CSS, still trying to figure out what is a good idea and what is not. Take everything with a grain of salt.

Take what is useful from this for you, discard the rest. But don't count it as gospel. For those of us who've been around CSS, this is probably obvious; but for people just picking it up, I would discourage latching onto this as definitive.

If I was the author: i would actually give this a name. like "super totally awesome CSS" or something. then you can make sweeping right/wrong judgements and any other style declarations you want, because they are contextual to a specific philosophy and school of opinion. Like google's material design does.
ZeroAccess 3 Analysis
There's more joy in giving $2 to a person who needs it.
I think you're answering to the wrong comment. I'm saying calloc doesn't actually take milliseconds (which would have been absurd), so feel free to use it always.

Calling calloc/free on a 1 MB buffer seems to take about 50 microseconds on my computer (with no optimizations), and I consider that an unusually large allocation.
In the official documentation for the feature that critics never want to read.
I guess jsprogrammer didn't learn much from their comments in that thread either.
grow a goatee.
Thanks for the details. Yeah that makes a lot of sense. I was looking at it from a home automation perspective. I have both a photon particle and a raspi. The raspi just opens so many more doors for me, but power consumption is not an issue since I always have it plugged in.
I'm 29 and apparently have been an adult for about 3 years.

Sounds about right.
"The same effect is noticed with GMO foods. They're better in all regards, yet there are people who are afraid of them because "not natural"."

No. People are afraid about GMO because they expect private companies incentives not being healthy food but economic benefits (for them).

That means for example, that if they could flood our food plants with "Roundup" because the plants are resistant to it, and the pesticide ends in our food, and we start getting cancers 10 years from now they don't care at all if they can profit now from it.

"sometimes they rest on the idea that natural is better."

Well, natural is usually better because nature had millions of years of adaptation to the environment. You can protect yourself against natural sunlight or natural nuclear radiation because nature created mechanisms against their bad effects, but you can't protect against manmade Pultonium or xrays or cosmic radiation not protected by Ozone.

Day after pill for example contaminates water with estrogens that are not easy(cheap) to filter.
So time to build McCarthy-era-esque censorship systems?

History tells us it will go something like this at the beginning:

"We promise it will only be used against evil terrorists and not be used for shutting down any future political dissent we may arbitrarily determine undesirable."

Fortunately we now have secret courts that McCarthy could only have dreamed of. So the latter won't be a pesky public political issue that citizens need bother themselves with.
This is hilarious. But do you realize you're implying that women can't be adults?

The discussion sounds a lot like 'when do you become a man' than it does 'when do you become an adult.'

For instance, most women throughout history were financially dependent on their husband. They would not make independent decisions. They were not solely responsible.

Did that mean they weren't adults?

The 20-30% of women who still become stay at home moms... they can't grow a beard... they are dependent on their husband or parents for money...
"ones that can deliver software" would be the constraint at my organization.
No. Just no. This is like running a corpus of Ada code through a Markov chain and trying to base a Unicorn on running the results.
So stay at home house wives can never be adults?
The US government just announced that for the last dozen decades it has been wrong and that cholesterol is not a nutrient of importance; so eat all the eggs you want.

People aren't sure because they aren't equipped to do the science themselves and have a well reasoned distrust of being told things are safe, that then turn out not be (or vice versa).
Should I treat gratuitously unpleasant people with more respect than other people?
For an stupid, arbitrarily chosen definition of consumer. Microsoft primary business is selling enterprise licenses.

Complaining that the professional license doesn't have all features available in response to my own analogy with VS makes me think you have no interest in the actual truth and just want to argue for its own sake. Is that accurate?
Make that $5. $2 doesn't even get them a sandwich anymore.
Spent: $100 Won: 0$ Win/Loss: $-100 Balance $0

ROI: ~1,000,000%
Buy a $2 ticket for entertainment, not "investment."

Spend 10 minutes imagining what you'd do with $496M. It might be fun.
I.e. the Lloyd Christmas bucket (Dumb and Dumber). "You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?" "More like one in a million." "So you're telling me there's a chance!"
Well, kinda: http://www.fox5ny.com/news/63367774-story
It's 10 o'clock. Do you know where your time zone is?
Those things aren't mutually exclusive
There is also Unmade using an interactive Canvas to let customers modify (not create) their designs. I was pretty amazed by the quality of the realtime rendering.
A few examples:

1.
Dragging the pattern around (note the deforming):

https://preview.unmade.com/knitwear/jumpers/studio-moross/kn...

and

https://preview.unmade.com/knitwear/scarves/studio-moross/pa...

2.
Modifying the pattern with some physics:

https://preview.unmade.com/knitwear/scarves/moniker/pied-de-...
There is a big difference between helping someone and taking responsibility for something. If walk over to help my neighbor take his lawn, he is still in charge of the lawn.
> but you are still responsible for other people.

I couldn't disagree with this any more. I've spent years and years of my life trying to be responsible for other people, trying to make their lives the way I thought they 'should' be -- helping people find jobs, encouraging them to do x/y/z. I'd come into people's lives and it'd be like I walked into an old house: "Let's just fix this here, and that there, and pretty soon you'll be so much better than you were before."

What an utter waste of time for both parties. Turns out I don't know anything about what's best for other people, and hardly what's best for myself. My life has been much less stressful since accepting that. I'll gladly lend a hand to a friend who asks for it -- but the 'responsible for other people' phase of my life is over.
Free YC 2016 application:

Build website to crowdsource $292,201,338. Buy all the lotto tickets. Pay back investors 150% of their investment. Make ~ $69.5M.

(assuming lotto tickets are a $1)
(someone else can figure out the break even point after taxes)
'Focal things and practices' as antidote to our increasing deviceification
the country's been in perpetual bankruptcy since 1787. What did you expect to happen?
> Leisure time isn't valuable unless you have something to fill it with.

Soylent gree^W^W Socializing is people!
When it's a "summit", you know the tech companies have already agreed to it. It's what happened at last year's "Cybersecurity Summit", which was basically most of the major companies agreeing to CISA-like legislation, before the legislation was even up for a vote.
The cash payout is ~$500 million, and after taxes you may end up with $309 million.

So, yeah, probably not a winning strategy.
Individual ants do not. The colony as a whole, however, does, through virtue of the shared stigmertic responses, which is forgivable because those responses have been selected for because they result in that structure.

People, of course, can do better - we can map out the terrain, come up with a plan, and then follow swarm methodologies.

In this kind of situation, swarm methodologies look like recursively applied minimum-viable-product development: Look at the situation. Determine the smallest unit of change to produce meaningful results. Make that change. Repeat.

Do this at all levels of the organization and code base: from the top (the people making the map and the plan) to the bottom (an hour's worth of code).

The essence of stigmertic coordination is that I respond to the situation as it is, rather than the situation as I desire it do be ("the plan" - how I desire the situation to be in the future), and that when I finish a task, I re-evaluate the situation as it is, rather than proceed along a set path ("the plan").
And that argument by itself is not enough to restrict anything. Less hats floating around, less potential for abuse. Less televisions floating around, less potential for abuse.
You could. Lamentably I don't have 300 million lying around.

I think there is a limit on # tickets purchased.

When there are cracks in the lottery games there are people who do find ways to exploit them.
Hope someone else didn't win cutting the prize in half.
Hiring tens of thousands of people is a very high level strategic decision. No one on the ground-level would have any special insight into it. The people on the Android team probably didn't know why Eric Schmidt authorized hiring a bunch more employees after returning from an exciting Apple board meeting, they were just happy to hire help.

A small fraction of Google's employees are responsible for all of its revenue.

They use those profits to help ensure their longevity. One way to do that is to keep people from competing with them, so they liberally hire and attempt to acquire anyone that's a potential threat.

It's not the only reason they hire so many people. Wall Street rewards headcount and tech companies have such great profit margins that it actually makes a lot of sense. What else are they going to do with all those profits?
Get a $1 lottery ticket mailed to you in a nice cardboard box every month for only $11 dollars a year.
When will there be a summit with auto dealerships over how criminals can buy getaway cars?
#ifdef _MSC_VER
#error "Do not use Microsoft compilers."
#endif
Mixpanel starts 2016 with layoffs: 'We just overhired'
While both of those statements are true, Pluto is too small and its atmosphere is too thin for either of those approaches to slow down a probe enough.
also, tickets are $2.
Don't forget the risk that there may be multiple winners, which would require splitting the jackpot.
Conceptually, who would fund the spin offs?
That's a pretty reductive way of saying it.
It was attempted before:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/25/us/group-invests-5-million...
Why does everyone overlook that Roosevelt invoked the "Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917" in order to declare taxpayers (the people) to be enemies of the state that they must conduct trade with?

Why does everyone overlook the ramifications of this action?
Each ticket costs $2.

Splitting the pot and paying taxes on the lump sum or taxes + time on the annuity means that you likely take a net loss buying all the possible numbers.
More people buying doesn't change your chances - it potentially lowers your payout.

Makes me wonder if getting more people to play higher jackpots ends up evening things out in the end.
> They have a built-in, knee-jerk revulsion to drinking anything that came from sewage. That might not be rational or useful in 2016, but it has been tremendously useful over the past hundred thousand years of human social evolution.

That's not necessarily true. First-world capitalist society focused on intellectual labor does a great job of mentally dividing the world into 'clean' and 'unclean', where everything unclean moves invisibly through a series of subterranean pipes.

If you go to any farm, this division is much more vague. Farmers dump horse manure onto soil, from which your vegetables grow. Bruised and almost-rotting apples are picked, crushed, and pressed to create apple cider. Milk comes from the teats of a cow into a tin pail that might have some bits of hay that are later strained out.

The notion that humans have "built-in, knee-jerk revulsion" to sewage is a trained behavior arising from an ignorance or a visceral distance from production processes.

Many humans also probably have "built-in, knee-jerk revulsion" to the sight of animals being slaughtered, with their blood draining into a pool, yet will happily devour a plate of barbecue. Why would we consider that recycled water from sewage would be any different?
"Sorry, I'm travelling, so all my email has been flagged as external lately."

I'm not saying that this doesn't require a lapse in critical thinking ability; just that kind of lapse required is a pretty common everyday one, which non-technical people make all the time.
I'm not sure sympathy is quite the right word either. Pitying someone is not very productive; I typically find it quite patronizing.
I'm saying that the construction "indeterminate" is only a statement about the knowledge of the person making the statement. Are you proposing that the universe doesn't act unless you are considering it?
This seems like an extreme interpretation of "responsibility for other people." There are people in my care whom I'm completely aware I cannot mold into shapes of my choice, but for whom I accept the responsibility of keeping them off the street--and therefore, primarily, of keeping myself in adequate condition to keep them off the street. And I agree with GP; that to me feels like a key element of my adulthood. [Edited for grammar]
A lot of crossfit affiliates use the same software to do billing and manage membership logins. ZenPlanner and Mindbody are the most popular. You might have better luck going through them instead directly contacting the gym.

Also, how do you modify the data that is on there? There's incorrection information for my gym.
> we're already drones. If i wanted to be an ant, i'd join the military.

Author is talking about ants as they are (which are really awesome!) rather than ants as a poor metaphor for mindlessness.

> lifestyle preferences of the extreme programmer

As my job duties have gotten more intense and I've needed to become more productive (I say while arguing on the internet at work...) I've really come to appreciate the utility of preferences. As you need to do more, better, faster, you start figuring out the little things that maximize yourself so that you /can/.

When I see SCRUM "fail" in that productivity goes down, it's not that teams produce less, it's that they fail to produce what's actually valuable. The 10x engineer doesn't write 10x the code, they write the code that's 10x the value.
Yes, but the reason you do is that it's merely (and extremely) unlikely, not impossible. The third law of thermodynamics has its own arrow of time (the one in which entropy increases), but the basic interactions of the universe don't need to change to make that happen. They work symmetrically (mostly, with some tiny exceptions as detailed in the linked article).
Lenovo gets rid of 86 year-old Motorola name to make way for Moto
You certainly are not responsible for other people. If you can't see others as beings with equal rights, meaning you don't naturally treat people the way you would like to be treated, you are a sociopath. You are a danger to others and you are why we have a justice system to take such people out of our society.

You should not live for other people and other people do not have to live for you. For me being an adult is more about that balance.
I imagine you'd have to crowdsource the purchasing as well. Asking a clerk to spend several days printing tickets might put them off.
>"Uber for dogs", "Taxidermied pets as drones" etc.

Obligatory (previously posted here): http://www.aviato.com/quiz
I believe the Internet Archive is much less clear in this regard than public search engines. IA doesn't even have a clear takedown policy and no webmaster tools in place to give owners control on the archived content.
Their crowler does obey to robots.txt rules but if you want content to be removed permanently you have to ask politely by email and in my experience they simply block the site urls from being searched but they don't make clear at all if content was actually removed from their servers.
Is there a pure Python version of Argon2?
Indeed. The link is broken, and it isn't listed here: https://github.com/vektorlab/slackcat/releases
Nobody feels like an adult. It's the world's dirty secret. — quote from Liberal Arts.
I came away wondering the same thing. Makes no sense.
Pycoders' Weekly – Top Articles and Projects of 2015
>If people who claim to be MSG-sensitive are eating typical dishes (the kind where MSG is buried in the label as "yeast extract") and reporting symptoms, but aren't responding to a blue cheese burger with mushrooms, something's wrong wth the reporting.

This was the point of my comment: there is far more free glutamate in (some) foods containing powdered MSG, like Zatarain's, than there is in naturally high glutamate foods like mushrooms and parmesan. I'm talking potentially an order of magnitude. This is partially because of the way people use the powders, and partially because the processing of MSG involves freeing bound glutamates. As someone who cooks with powdered MSG, I'm speaking from personal experience here - I don't have a sensitivity to glutamate, so I cook with a lot of it. So do many other people I know.

>The question is whether you get a roughly equivalent dose of glutamate from common umami-forward dishes than you do from dishes where umami is added through MSG.

The answer is "not at all" for many types of food (like a typical corner Chinese restaurant, who uses powdered MSG a lot like I do).
May be peer to peer lottery tickets as service. I have heard friends/colleagues used potlucked money to buy tickets and if they win share the prize. Have a service for it with nice Web 2.0ish dashboard :P
It would be great to see a list of known/anticipated compatibility issues. For example, I notice that when compiling `String.set` with OCamlScript, the generated JS ends up trying to set/mutate a character in the JS string, which has no effect because JS strings are immutable. (I'll file a github issue). I imagine there will be several small issues like this and it would be good to get a sense for how much work it would be to solve that long tail of compatibility work. In the process, I think the community can help determine if this approach could ever practically match the near-perfect level of compatibility that js_of_ocaml has achieved via byte code compilation - and whether or not it matters. To me, compatibility is very important, but so is debugability. It might be clear that it's okay to compromise the readability of OcamlScript in order to achieve more compatibility without compromising debugability (for example, using a `new MLString("xyz")` wrapper that uses a JS `String` by default for performance, but then swaps it out upon any mutation. (Or perhaps you can limit it to programs that have disabled string mutations in later versions of OCaml).

The good news is that if you can achieve perfect compatibility with this approach, then I believe that runtime performance becomes less of a concern and OCamlScript's job gets a lot easier. This is because, if you've achieved perfect compatibility, you can easily compile your project with another toolchain such as js_of_ocaml, that has equal compatibility, but (in this hypothetical scenario) had chosen to focus more on performance instead of debugability - without changing anything in your program.

This would free you up to not have to worry about applying any optimizations in this readable/debuggable mode - you get to focus entirely on whatever makes the development flow faster/easier. (You'd probably still want tail call optimization because order of memory usage could be considered a key part of compatibility).

Similarly, I wonder if the existence of a fully compatible, (hypothetically) slow runtime performance, but perfectly debugable compiler backend, would then free up js_of_ocaml from some of the constraints/work that is required to make their code output reasonably simple/debuggable. Does the existence of a fully compatible OCamlScript mean that js_of_ocaml's job gets easier?

I'm excited to discuss how the two projects could potentially become an asset to each other.

edit: I started a discussion on Github here: https://github.com/bloomberg/ocamlscript/issues/12
No, the same amount, but also try to spend less time interacting with them if possible.
People often spend months or more on their own before they can raise external funding, become profitable or give up.
Sugar is just a single example. Similar policies exist for milk, for instance.

To add insult to injury we also have export subsidies for milk, so not only do we pay the price of higher milk at home we also pay for world prices to be lower.
Do Pregnancy Tests Really Need Bluetooth?
To be fair, wouldn't the odds of QuickDraw picking the same numbers twice (even if there weren't a built in limit against that) be the same odds as winning the jackpot in the first place?
Yahoo's troubled advertising business
why not both
To put it into perspective, a bookmaker in the UK offered odds of 14 million to 1 for Elvis Presley crash landing in a UFO on top of the Loch Ness monster[0].

[0] A quick Google returns a number of sources, but I'm going to use this one: http://www.elvisnews.com/news.aspx/gamblers-give-up-on-elvis...
This is the epitome of sarcasm.
> However, once you do accidentally have a child, the results are often not pretty... Regarding programming, I can't see the relationship you make at all.

I have two words for you: MAINTENANCE PROGRAMER.
old HN comments ( 3 years ago ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4367933
Pretty sure this would be illegal, but as a resident of a state where I cannot buy a lottery ticket, I'll buy.
Not the GP, but I imagine the more charitable interpretation is that s/he is referring to a level of psychological/emotional development, not to a specific fiscal arrangement. One can be an adult and as an adult arrange one's affairs in a way that increases one's dependence on someone else, but if one makes that decision from a studied, mature evaluation of the circumstances, knowing and accepting the risks thereof, it's not the same thing as making it as a child, or making it unknowingly. [Edited for grammar]