skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is actually perfect for a library on algebraic structures I've been trying to make in Haskell. For example, how does one distinguish between elements in the Dihedral group of order 10 vs. Dihedral group on order 16 when obstensibly, they have the same representation. For now, I think Haskell programmers use type-level arithmetic libraries, but this is a much better solution.
But you need to have the page open in a browser on your phone, no?
That theory makes no sense. By that logic I should be innocent if I go out drinking, get behind the wheel and drive, and kill someone in the process.

I am not here to argue morals, ethics, or whether the use of force in situations is warranted or not. All I can say is that it is easy to arm chair quarterback a situation until you are placed in that situation and asked to make a split second decision that in end you know someone will always be second guessed.

My point was simply that taser statistics are deceiving to some extent. Sadly the statistics only show incidents where someone was killed by the use of a taser. If you compare that to the number of times tasers are actually deployed around the globe, you will find that tasers are in fact not as deadly as you think. In the vast majority of cases where a death does occur you will often find that there is an outside factor such as drugs that resulted in said death, not the taser.

The comment about police "serve and protect". Unfortunately to "serve and protect" does not simply refer to the individual the police are questioning and/or arresting. To serve and protect, first and foremost, refers to the officer's own safety. Second it refers to the safety of the community as a whole. Finally it refers to the individual at hand. At every call for service an officer must make determine exactly how to "serve and protect" to the best of his or her ability all three of these groups. This decision often has to be made in less than a second with the officer knowing the wrong decision can end up being grave to one of the three groups. The best decision is no harm to any of the groups. The second best option is that the officer and community are safe. Regrettably, to reach that second option usually results in the injury or death of a party. But if that injury or death served and protected the larger community than in most scenarios it is considered justified.
Re: his articles on Trump. I'm not sure if he's right, but I do appreciate that he's been willing to make very specific predictions about the future. So far it seems like he's been pretty good at predicting how things will turn out for Trump. Maybe he's entirely wrong about why, of course.
I reported a huge problem in Google Maps for years and it wasn't fixed. A bunch of POIs for downtown Seattle were transposed to downtown Kirkland. Search for directions from Microsoft campus to the Seattle Federal Building and it would send you to a residential area off 85th west of 405 in Kirkland.

(I reported it multiple times over the years)
I am commenting news and its impact on my personal decision that I believe are representative for a large section of the Hacker News community.

I would like to be cherry-picking, but a large minority of friends who have lived in the US have similarly frightening story of abuse of power, or excessive force.

One thing that also makes me less likely to come to the US is to be physically confronted to people as curt, visibly aggressive and lacking self-criticism as you. I do believe that that prosecutor’s attitude and your response share something, visibly more common in the US: something that is often described as having a “cow-boy attitude”.
The is very cute! Well executed too.

But if you're banned from taking a reddit/HN/tumblr/FB break at work, maybe it's time to look for a job that values what you produce, not how you produce it.
So when someone tries to enter a property where firearms are banned, persists until the police are called, and then gets in the officers' faces while weilding a firearm, that doesn't seem like a problem to you, but gunning down children with toys is essential?

Interesting.
Not only that but you can arbitrarily encode constraints. Want to check something silly like whether there's an even number of elements in a list? Yea you can do that, and pass it along. I can do stuff like, okay, I know the max size of the files we're going to accept is 1mb.
You're missing the corruption of the game angle as well. Fantasy sports is worse than most forms of gambling because the scope of stakeholders is so broad.

With lots of legit, liquid money in play, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you can corrupt players and coaches to massage the stats, or those same players and coaches can participate through proxies.

With horse racing, which is the closest thing to this stuff, there are a few different sets of stakeholders with different interests. Owners, trainers and jockeys who are cheating are pretty easy to identify.

End of the day, you're better off trusting the dice.
Intent is not magic.
Guess that explains why some random payments showed up on my credit card (used for recurring billing) and I just had to it cancelled and re-issued.

There were only a few other payments on the card - NYTimes, DigitalOcean. Are there any recent breaches at those companies?
This sort of problem won't apply for driverless cars though, as they must honor road signage. The first time your one-way street is encountered by a driverless car, the discrepancy between map and reality will be identified and corrected.
> Who cares about knowledge of city streets?

Me. Being stuck with a clueless uber driver when the GPS is misfiring for whatever reason is the worst.
Release notes is Marketing
Do you have any evidence for either of these answers? They don't match with the reasoning for market circuit breakers I've read in the past. I also don't understand why a collapse in bond markets would cause an equity markets spike that could trigger an upside circuit breaker. Or, for that matter, why a down bond market would cause an equity market crash.
Global Oil Prices Fall to 11-Year Low
Strange that you find the CEO utmost sincere but the company utmost suspicious.

If I were you, I'd question the intentions too. The arguments have been laid out against "Free Basics" but Facebook has refused to engage the community. It continues to push its agenda forward by running dubious ad-campaigns and surveys.

This is the second time Facebook has tried something similar, after having lost the first round of battle that led to many Indians uninstalling apps and boycotting websites that supported/participated in its "internet.org" initiative.

Zuckerberg has managed to PR himself as sincere, honest, noble, altruist and what not... but that PR hasn't worked in India. He, personally, holds no sway unlike, may be, in SV.

"Free Basics" let's not kid ourselves is a move by Facebook to take control of the Internet. It already controls 4 of the most popular apps on mobile in the English speaking world (Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger); with "Free Basics" they're taking steps to ensure that dominance stays intact.

You even see Google trying to do that in a more subtle way... googleweblight, subsidized Nexus line of products, "free and open source" Android with tightly controlled ecosystem, Chrome with properiteary plug-ins, Fiber, Fi, and OnHub to quote a few.
Preach it, brother. That would get this former Microsoftie back to the fold.
So I can beg Facebook for permission to be on the Internet. Wow, wonderful!
I actually mostly followed the US news, check the New York Times: Trump daily dose of blatant racist, Obama apparently the only one who wants to curb gun violence, some cop murdered a African-American women and gets away with a slap on the wrist, a story about systemic rape from a football team at a major US university…
The explanation usually offered by those instituting these circuit breakers is that they don't have any problem with people who want to trade at some price eventually trading at that price, they just don't want people to have to trade without thinking it through due to extreme time pressure.

For example, there might be a rumor (perhaps started by an unethical competitor or market manipulator) that Company X was just caught in some sort of scandal. Those who panic most and sell soonest might get a better price than those who take the time to find out the truth, providing a potentially serious financial motivation to panic. Panic, and rapidly falling prices on something large, can cause sales of other assets as a hedge against others selling assets as a hedge...and it can cascade out of all proportion to what is actually happening in the economy.

The idea of the circuit breaker is that it stops everyone from trading but doesn't stop the news or analysis. Let everyone catch up on the news--what's really going on in these companies and their markets--and then let people trade based on facts, not panic. After more is known, and known by all, those who still want to trade will be allowed to do so.

Whether it really works out that way in practice is a different question. A circuit breaker that doesn't stop trading long enough for anyone to learn anything beyond additional rumors might merely allow the panic more time to spread, but the above is the usual explanation given by those who make the policies.
Seems you are arguing that it is with 100% certainty not true, because nothing has happened thus far. You don't know what will happen tomorrow though, so you cannot be that certain.

Blatant negligence and human factors seems to me to be what to expect, rather than rare exceptions. — Well, not for nuclear plants. But for the power grid for example, and trains and cars and the water pipe system perhaps.
Anyone raping anyone is horrendous and a tragic atrocity. It should never be allowed to happen!

However, we don't live in Minority Report. You do not and cannot know if someone is going to commit a crime, regardless of their past actions. Discarding "innocent until proven guilty" is also an atrocity, that shouldn't be allowed to happen.

While difficult to accept, it really is impossible to compare two atrocities and declare one is more important than the other.

On a different note: Improving realtime safety, inside of an Uber, is something you will get unanimous support for. If what you're looking for is Uber combined with http://www.companionapp.io/ that is worthwhile and I hope Uber prioritizes this feature next over all others.

Infact, if anyone reads this and has the appropriate connections to get this idea into the hands of Uber's executives, it is really worth Uber's time to get safety right. Allowing women/children(even men) to opt-in to pre-set a designated "Companion" on trips taken between 8pm-8am(configurable) is worth investing the three or so dev months it would take them to build this out.
This resonates with what a good Taiwannese friend explains to me, that the population is very immature compared to the rest of the world, hence the censorshipe issues being nesscary for example. The cultural revolution for example being complete immature and setting the entire country back 50s years, not to mention the destruction of heritage that took place. Quite insightful, and I'm sure it applies economically as well.
Bitcoin didn't explode in during any of the latest economic crashes (greece comes to mind). I don't see why this one should be any different.
I think it will be a while, if ever, before we're able to handle passing types around as values, in Haskell, the way we do in Idris and Agda. Dependent typing isn't just some feature. It touches a whole other way of thinking about things.

If you go all the way with Agda, you have significantly constrained recursion to the point that the language isn't turing-complete anymore, but in return you get termination checking and other nice things. As it turns out, most of the code we write doesn't need unbounded recursion. Seriously, can you think of the last time you wrote something like that?

And I think that'll be a hard pill for people to swallow, much like how it was really hard to sell memory safety to C/C++ guys back in the day.
> The braces didn't do anything for a human until indentations were added

Having explicit delimiters (I don't care if it's {}, begin...end, or whatever) provide several benefits that I have often used.

1. (by far the most important) They trivialize the recovery of indentation that has been trashed by a bad/misconfigured/unfamiliar editor or coworker who inserted "\t" characters into the file. Just run indent-region or send the file through indent(1).

2. Moving code is easier. Just kill/yank it to where you want it and let indent-region or whatever re-indent as needed. Without delimiters I have to either re-indent manually or use an editor with a feature that changes a region's indent level. Even with such a feature, I still have to tell the editor "move this two levels deeper". With delimiters, I can leave that work to the editor.

3. The movement advantages you mentioned.

As for the extra work of having to close blocks (including the infamous LISP ")))))" motif), that's what features like electric-pair-mode is for.

Even better, delimiters can convey more information. Color cues have proven to be very effective at conveying important information; syntax highlighting is very popular, even when showing code outside an editor (such as inside a <pre> tag). I find extending these color cues to also show nesting[1] to be almost as useful as basic syntax highlighting. (I'm using rainbow-delimiters[2] in that screenshot).

[1] https://i.imgur.com/xS4y6rT.png

[2] https://github.com/Fanael/rainbow-delimiters
OK so where are all the folks who always say regulation is bad, the free market self-corrects, and that insurance is the way to fix these kinds of problems? Because anything not already proven to be toxic isn't E.P.A. regulated, meaning tens of thousands of chemicals aren't regulated at all. The company knew it was bad 40 years ago, but nothing happened to prevent them from eventually getting it into the entire global environment, in everyone's blood, in all the water, and in animals everywhere. You can't get this kind of insurance. This should destroy the company and all of its incompetent shareholders (owners) who kept on ignorantly accepting dividends but not actually bothering to have the company run by ethical officers. We'd have to claw back profit from every shareholder for all time, pierce the corporate veil and take even more money from the shareholder in the form of a fine, and that still wouldn't be enough.

Free market doesn't need regulations. Right. Too much regulation. OK well maybe in some cases, certainly not in this one.
People resent being regulated, even if that regulation has no practical effect on their behavior. Most people who are nice are nice because they choose to be. Having someone come in and tell you "you better be nice or else" is kind of insulting and robs you of a bit of agency. I think that's a natural human reaction.

That being said, I'm generally in favor of Codes of Conduct because I think the good they do outweighs the bad. But I don't buy your argument that it's a totally neutral document and people should just not vote because it's "already there".
Heh. Pretty good title for it.
It applies in both directions, however it has only existed while the market was going down fast.

Also, I very much doubt China is going to start disappearing traders who make their stock market go up 5% like they're doing now :

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/china-arrests-197-authorities-pin-b...
.Net CLI, so ... powershell?

This looks pretty cool. I wish powershell were slightly easier to set up and use, and that there was a repo for extensions other than "google it and then download".
>customer’s public key

The general public has no concept of what a ‘public key’ is.
That opens you up to any active attacker simply stopping traffic. You're usually safe against passive attacks if the network has no glitches, but completely vulnerable to active attacks.

Then again, if you don't use https on the whole site, active attacks could already simply change the url of the iframe to be http and intercept that with sslstrip, and passive attacks could already steal cookies.
but can also be impossible if the author doesn't approve the derived work

But the right to refuse derived work is just as essential to justice as the right to royalties on creative work. For example, Kurt Vonnegut had (and his estate has) the moral right to say "no!" to a neo-Nazi that wants to "remix" Harrison Bergeron into a new story promoting racism.
1ML doesn't really unify the type and value languages. First-class modules are syntactic sugar over System F-omega, which means that the elaboration/type-checking phase of 1ML duly splits modules into type and value components, which live in separate worlds.

Personally, I find 1ML's approach more pragmatic, or, at least, easier to digest for most programmers - including Haskell programmers. Dependent types are more powerful, but they aren't free from complications. For instance, unifying the type and value languages willy-nilly can cause trouble if you want your value language to be Turing-complete, because now type-level computation can diverge too! In a language based on System F-omega, type-level computation is guaranteed not to diverge, because its type level is the simply typed lambda calculus. Some use cases might warrant providing more powerful type-level computation facilities (e.g. calculating the shapes of multidimensional matrices), but it isn't clear to me that the full power of a Martin-Loef-style dependent type theory is needed.
And a promising & affordable cure for cancer too. I don't know where we have reached on that.
> with "Free Basics" they're taking steps to ensure that dominance stays intact.

It is not just that. The worrying thing is that they are violating net neutrality by making sure that "FB and friends" is the only thing accessible on this free internet. If Mr. Zuckerberg is that altruistic, why not provide proper full internet? Even a limited (say 500MB per person/month) internet for free is better than nothing.

But no, they want to violate net neutrality by disallowing everyone else. They don't want to provide HTTPS security, but again snoop around their user's data so monies could be made out of that. Is this altruism, Mr. Zuckerberg?
> If an attacker is able to gain root access to your proxy, or inline with a TAP where your proxy is sending intercepted traffic to, you probably have much bigger problems.

Bigger problems than an attacker being able to decrypt and modify all of the TLS sessions in your company? If you have bigger problems than that then they've presumably spilled out of the realm of IT problems entirely and you're dealing with some kind of government lawyers or maybe a large uncontrollable fire.
Didn't realize that--neat!
It's also important to remember that an author dying does not prevent him or her from capturing the value. If the copyright survives them, they can sell the rights to someone for a higher price before they die.
I deleted it.
I've never actually used such a feature, but my understanding is that this is not strictly true. I think that the compiler can generically understand that this function adds two vectors and their lengths.

I'll see if I can contrive an example. Supposing you have a list L1 of vectors of length 5. You also have a vector V1 with user input, with length x (unknown at compile time). You then make a new list L2 by taking each vector in L1 and append V1 to it. L2 is now a list of vectors of length (5 + x). Even though x is unknown at compile time, the compiler still knows that all vectors in L2 are of the same length. It can make restrictions based on this fact.

It seemed strange to me when I heard this concept, I thought the compiler would need to consider infinite possibilities, but apparently similar things are possible even in Haskell. For instance, you can define a list as a recursive type that holds a value of a Null type (not just a null value of the list type) or another List. Apparently it can still reason about this.

However, these are things I've heard. Hopefully someone with more experience can chime in and let me know if I'm right here.
I've been working professionally with Java for 19 years. I've only worked "semi-professionally" with Go for 3 or 4 years, as a secondary language for a few niche applications at work and some personal projects at home. So I may or may not be the most qualified person in the world to represent Go here.

All that being said, the longer I work with Go, the less I really see its lack of generics as a significant shortcoming. Go simply doesn't emphasize object-orientation to the same degree as idiomatic Java. Given the choice, I'd prefer to have that tool available than not have it. However, I haven't yet personally run across a real-world scenario in which lack of generics was an actual big deal.

I am QUITE comfortable in asserting that Go's error handling exceeds that of Java's, not lags it. The "try-catch" concept is still there (as "panic-recover"), albeit discouraged in many of the cases that an experienced Java developer would want to use it. The convention of having every function return a possible error struct, and the compiler's insistence that you do something with that that returned struct, pushes Go developers into a much more disciplined mindset of approaching exception handling.

The two points above are subjective, of course. Reasonable people could argue them either way. The third response is a bit more objective. Regarding the notion that Go is "absolutely not designed for Android" and its memory constraints, I must point out that neither is Java! As a matter of the Java language's syntactical suitability, the obvious observation is that Java PRE-DATES Android by more than 12 years. Considering the laws of physics and space-time, it was clearly not designed by James Gosling with Google's OS in mind. Secondly, the memory constraints of carrying a built-in garbage collection runtime also apply to Java. The only difference is a matter of maturity, and the level of resources that have gone into developing a custom Java solution for Android. There's no reason why Google couldn't do the some with Go (or almost any other language), and given Go's comparative simplicity it would probably take far less time to get there.
Amir Najam – REI on lead411.com
Snag, Yukon is officially the second coldest place every recorded in North America at -63C / -81F [1]

I've been into Snag in the summer, a fascinating place with a ton of history and crumbling buildings to poke around. Living in the Yukon the best I've seen is -48C / -54.5F, and I've ridden my bike to work at -43C / -45.5F.

Experiencing those temperatures is like being on another planet and I'm constantly in awe every time I get to go out and experience it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_weather_records#Lowest...
Classifying a worker as a "contractor" instead of an employee is not a technological innovation.
Aren't the plans for AOT to work only with WinStore apps?
"The Americans are so natural. Far superior to us,” - Joseph Goebbels [0]

The Yankee propaganda machine is smooth and suave so we hardly realize it exists. It makes the Chinese look heavy handed by comparison, and our Overton window is much wider than theirs. But don't confuse that suavity and width with the absence of propaganda.

[0] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/16/hitler-in-holly...
I'm shocked to think this is a minority opinion. Please give us certificate pinning because this type of interception is completely hostile to the end user.
> Furthermore absolutely no viable public purpose can be served today by backdating new rules to past works. We didn't create any new works from the 1950s by passing laws in the 1970s.

This is a really good point. I don't know why I've never thought about that before.
Whenever I've used Uber, it seemed to be Google Maps.
They are limited in both directions now. See LULD. And somebody please update the Wikipedia page for Trading Curb as I just read 13 replies here repeating incorrect information.