skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It was originally written in Ruby , then they rewrote the API in Go. I guess they can't opensource the Go code for legal reasons. Maybe the parse-server written in Node JS was an experiment they did before when they were still choosing a new technology for the rewrite.
Flying Spaghetti Monster help anyone writing Roman fiction. The romans only used about a dozen or two dozen first names[1], and not too many more variant nomen. Keeping who is who straight when studying Republican Rome is hard.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praenomen
Guerrilla guide to CNC machining, mold making, and resin casting
I find it odd that so many people seem to have trouble accepting this explanation. Light travels at a finite speed, ergo anything far enough away(adjusted for expansion of space) is invisible, because we've only existed for a dozen billion years. If the universe were infinitely old, then we'd have something interesting to talk about.
I think your analysis is spot on. Improving is a slightly more complex cycle. Improvement looks something like this:

Do -> analyze strengths and weaknesses -> try to do better.

That middle part is way more successful with the help of a good coach. Really quick learners ("talent") can fill in that middle step on their own, but would ultimately benefit from a coach.

When your work cycle is:

do -> do again -> do again -> do again

you'll improve a bit, but pretty quickly plateau.
How we keep harmful apps out of Google Play [pdf]
One of the things I've started doing is having a generic title for a post/article on the actual website (Facebook Offices - Menlo Park) and then using a more editorialized title for social media sharing (Tour of Facebook's Sprawling Menlo Park Campus).

Because I do all of the editing on the site, I remember a time when I just felt hollow trying to editorialize every post title published when some just didn't need to have any particular aspect of them highlighted.
Here is the pdf (downloadable form) of this fascinating paper: http://signallake.com/innovation/DysonMaxwell041989.pdf
“This state of affairs is known technically as the "double-bind." A person is put in a double-bind by a command or request which contains a concealed contradiction...This is a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't situation which arises constantly in human (and especially family) relations...

The social doublebind game can be phrased in several ways:

The first rule of this game is that it is not a game.

Everyone must play.

You must love us.

You must go on living.

Be yourself, but play a consistent and acceptable role.

Control yourself and be natural.

Try to be sincere.

Essentially, this game is a demand for spontaneous behavior of certain kinds. Living, loving, being natural or sincere—all these are spontaneous forms of behavior: they happen "of themselves" like digesting food or growing hair. As soon as they are forced they acquire that unnatural, contrived, and phony atmosphere which everyone deplores—weak and scentless like forced flowers and tasteless like forced fruit. Life and love generate effort, but effort will not generate them. Faith—in life, in other people, and in oneself—is the attitude of allowing the spontaneous to be spontaneous, in its own way and in its own time.”

-Alan Watts, The Book on the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
And conversely what would it mean if we never detect gravity waves? Are there any reasonable theories that posit that gravity waves don't exist?
Like it or not, Yahoo still runs several extremely popular services including Tumblr, so I don't think its that disingenuous to call it a top tech company.
Another potential issue with antirez's argument:

"""
If you read the Redlock specification, that I hadn't touched for months, you can see the steps to acquire the lock are:

1. Get the current time.

2. … All the steps needed to acquire the lock …

3. Get the current time, again.

4. Check if we are already out of time, or if we acquired the lock fast enough.

5. Do some work with your lock.

...

The above also addresses “process pauses” concern number 3. Pauses during the process of acquiring the lock don’t have effects on the algorithm's correctness.
"""

What if the process GCs for 2 minutes between 4 and 5? Then the lock times out, but the process still does its work with the lock, even though another process may think it has the lock as well.

This is a specific example of the criticism that you cannot rely on clock checks for correctness that has been made elsewhere.
I thought the actual reason they don't care is that the Careers program brings in much more revenue?
The basic idea is brilliant. Put an anonymous resume out there, and get approached by companies who already agree to your salary expectations...

I do agree though that something is not very enticing about that homepage and wording (or lack thereof...)
You are right, the <blockquote> seems to have been replaced by a <img> tag.

Also, I can indeed imagine how this would be caused by improper parsing of double quotes and angled brackets.
As stated in the full comment thread here we limit ads for users above 200 reputation. That puts it right between "Vote down" at 125 reputation and "View close votes" at 250.

Funny enough, we often get asked to implement the opposite: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/273653/229741
A CocoaPod that simplifies creation of particle effects
So that it's web-scale, obviously.
Remember parallel plate capacitors from Electromagnetics class? They're infinite in size for a reason, to get around not having to worry about the inverse square law. An infinite amount of stars would produce an infinite amount of energy...
If you don't want your diff so fancy (pun intended, and I'm sorry) but you still want the inline highlights, the script comes with git (https://github.com/git/git/tree/master/contrib/diff-highligh...):

ln -sf "$(brew --prefix)/share/git-core/contrib/diff-highlight/diff-highlight" ~/bin/diff-highlight

and add to .gitconfig

[pager]
log = diff-highlight | less
show = diff-highlight | less
diff = diff-highlight | less
Well, I'm looking to relocate if I was to change jobs so my current location is the question they implied/asked for and the target location is a different city.

I could change it but then people would be unaware I'd need to relocate. Basically, the only reason I'm looking for a job is because my current employer has blocked me on relocating to one of our other locations.
How ING Increased Software Deployments to Twice a Day
How does the automatic lag compensation work?
According to Sowell's "Conflict of visions" theory, the primary difference between people with right wing vs left wing views is their intuitive assumption about the span of human nature.

If you believe that human nature is malleable, perfectible and essentially good, then you tend to assume that the span of human potential is very large, i.e. the gap between the best of us and the worst of us is large. Sowell shows how this leads through basic logical deduction to left wing views.

On the other hand if you believe that human nature is essentially fixed, unchanging over time and flawed, then you assume that the span of human nature is not very large, and the gap between the best and the worst is not that big. This leads by logical deduction to right wing views.

So it's perhaps not so much that right wing people are more "afraid" per se, but rather, that they tend to be quicker to assume that as there's no way to fix 'enemies' by raising their human nature to a higher level, you may as well put in place systems that protect society from them. Whereas people with more left wing views may tend to assume that you can in fact negotiate and debate people away from being your 'enemies' and thus, they appear to be less fearful.

The above description makes left wing views sound superior to right wing views, which was not my intention. In fact Sowell's book lays down an extremely fair and balanced description of both right and left wing beliefs and assumptions, with IMHO no discernable bias between them.
Doctor Fink Interview Part 1
It doesn't make much sense that I've provided you with anecdotal evidence, as I have not provided you with any evidence at all. My suggestion was that you do real research on the topic. You've made a number of generalizations that you should really research. Factor out just one of your statements and describe each item in it. 'These people HAVE TO HAVE MONEY' - who are these people and how much money should they have? How much are their jobs paying them and how much tax payer money is making up the slack? What is the slack? How do health care and food stamps go away with higher wages? What are 'higher wages' in this context? How are we giving money to the corporations? Who is we in this sentence? Once you start to answer those questions with real evidence, then you can come up with solutions to each of those problems, create models for how those solutions will impact other problems and existing solutions. I won't tell you what you'll find, and I doubt you'll actually follow through, but it is unlikely that you'll persuade anyone with the current form of your argument.
Nylas N1 – The extensible, open-source email client
Show HN: A Friendship app connecting you withonly one person anywhere in the world
I'm not particularly happy that they didn't openly say that subscription is for participation in closed beta. I'm glad that I read comments before signing up. Almost all websites with closed beta subscription clearly tell you before you sign up.

Interesting fact: This woo.io is posted right after "the woo guy", on Super Bowl sunday, who screamed "woooooo" every few seconds near CBS TV camera/microphone for everyone on the nation to hear.

Edit: Beta invite bypasser is posted somewhere in the comments.
Thinking more about it, this is a fundamental weakness of having self-policing processes, which I suppose is the OP's main point. It can be mitigated by having infinite lock TTLs, at the cost of risking system deadlock on process failure. Thank you to GPP for spurring me to think more deeply about this.

As I stated, though, if the resource being protected is either a distributed system itself, or a system that cannot support fencing logic, this failure mode is difficult or impossible to prevent. The frequency of failure should be kept in mind here: most services can probably guarantee 99.99% uptime against the likelihood of 5 minute GC pauses.
They do definitely profit. They either gain referral fees, or they refer to themselves (Play Store) and thus get effectively free advertising (that would cost them money otherwise).

When you click a link to Amazon for a specific book from a third party website, Amazon pays that website money for that referral. It is no different here except that one Google department sometimes sends it to another Google department.
"asked digital measurement firm ComScore -- which uses calls made by Facebook's apps as a proxy for time spent"

How does ComScore go about measuring this? Do they run background processes on devices that can detect network calls by other applications? Do they detect the traffic elsewhere in the network? Both of those seem unlikely, so I'm confused.
People who use AdBlockers already have that button. Seriously, they have very non-intrusive ads; If you want to block those you'll definitive be wanting to block others.

People on SO can be reasonably expected to know how to get that button (i.e. can you google how to install AdBlock).
Interesting. I'm no statistician but the blog post states that the authors of the original paper (Lo and Mckinlay) claim the test is heteroskedasticity-consistent. So what are you saying? Are you saying the original paper is wrong? That his example was wrong? (This seems more likely) And if the example is wrong, is it wrong to say it is heteroskedastic AND wrong to say it is a stochastic volatility model? Or just that it is heteroskedastic? As far as I can tell stochastic volatility simply means the variance itself is randomly distributed which looks consistent with his example? Just trying to clarift. Thanks.
The source is available but it's not "open source", more what Microsoft would call "shared source".
Seth goes short. Buffer goes long. Here’s what you should do with your content
Doctor Fink Interview Part 2
Perhaps he means test and set?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test-and-set

Or the more efficient test and test and set?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_and_test-and-set
I do not see how the sources support your claim. Would you please explain?
The problem with selectively un-blocking individual sites is that it poses a management problem, plus it wouldn't take many bad ads to come through to cause me to go back to just blocking everything.

I'm sorry, but this really is a case of "this is why we can't have nice things." I would rather give up all premium Internet content than to have to actually manage the problem or any of the purported solutions to the problem.

YouTube would be the hardest to give up, but most of my favorite producers have Patreons and their own video-hosting sites anyway, and I might even be able to eke out a profit helping the rest move too if they needed it. I can simply curate individual "super-premium" content creators and patronize them, leaving the likes of Wired and WSJ to their fates.

I already use TheBrowser and use their micro-payment service, but I only ever put $5 on it, there just isn't that many paid articles. The content industry is extremely insistent on forcing advertising on me, sorry but no. Especially for high-volume news sites, the PITA factor far outweighs whatever insight I get from the news articles themselves.
In "Inherent Vice", the VC firm is Voorhees-Krueger (think 80s horror movie characters).
Add securtiy testing to your continuous delivery repertoire
>So in this situation, all that matters is the law.

This is literally never true.

>The question was "what is rape in the Swedish sense, and how is it different from rape anywhere else".

The question I responded to was "did everyone consent to sex." That is not true regardless of what legalese you wrap it in.
The 18 Mistakes That Kill Startups(my Score)
The 18 Mistakes That Kill Startups
1. Single Founder. Yes.
2. Bad Location. Ohio.
3. Marginal Niche. No way it does more 100m in commisions.
4. Derivative Idea. Uber for...
5. Obstinacy. Like the idea of a marketplace.
6. Hiring Bad Programmers - .net programmer
7. Choosing the Wrong Platform - see above
8. Slowness in Launching - working full time so
9. Launching Too Early - don't have to worry about this one too much.
10. Having No Specific User in Mind - Small businesses
11. Raising Too Little Money - seems likely
12. Spending Too Much - all the extra money from my paycheck
13. Raising Too Much Money - no problem here.
14. Poor Investor Management - no problem here.
15. Sacrificing Users to (Supposed) Profit - still building prototype
16. Not Wanting to Get Your Hands Dirty - have a job, wife and kids..do the best I can.
17. Fights Between Founders -ha, not a problem.
18. A Half-Hearted Effort- heart in it too bad my time isn't available.

Final Analysis -- I'm screwed yet I keep chugging along.
Please stay on to... Oh. Well, carry on.

/me goes off to explore hyperlinking.

Why yes indeed, that is to ... um, um, something for.
Targeting is pretty difficult unless you have a well-defined audience or type of content.

My site matches office furniture ads against photo tours of office spaces - fairly is easy to see why they would work. StackOverflow attracts a specific type of person so it seems like the targeting is built-in.

I don't envy a general news site like CNN where you're trying to target specific types of people who read CNN as opposed to an industry vertical.
I really like SemanticMerge, it makes total sense, although the diff experience is unlike other diff tools in terms of immediacy. But I think it will be another great tool to add to the arsenal when you need to pull out the big guns on crazy diffs.
Aside: I'm not signed up for the site (not interested in tying that login to other accounts), but I wanted to comment that luisb's explanation of Eq. (13) seems to miss the point a little. That equation doesn't need to be derived from Eq. (4). Instead, Eq. (13) is just a statement that any antisymmetric 3x3 matrix can always be recharacterized as a (pseudo)vector "times" the totally antisymmetric Levi-Civita symbol epsilon_{ijk}. As the text says, Eq. (13) is the definition of H. Only after we've defined what H is can we then use Eq. (4) to provide a definition of E.
Occam's razor makes me think it was slipped in by some web developer.
Yes, that's the most obvious flaw in his argument (amongst so many others). I'm surprised he (and his friends) didn't spot at least that one.
Long blocking syscalls will return with EINTR when a signal is received, at which point the interpreter should be checking the signal flag. The real problem with this scheme is if you call into some long-running C extension code, in which case the interpreter doesn't get a chance to check the signal flag.
> No, it never goes to zero,

It never goes to infinity either. Zero and infinity are the limits.

> An infinite number of small numbers adds up to infinity.

Well, no. It depends. For instance the sum of 1/n goes to infinity, but not the sum of 1/n². And since the luminosity of a star decreases with the square of the distance, I incline to believe the sum does converge.

But again, that would require some serious, albeit probably not very hard maths. I've never seen anyone discuss this. Instead everyone seems to immediately assume the sum would diverge. That's not obvious at all.
So if I understand this right, Tim's main issue is that "s" is just going to lead users to think "oh, it's secure, I'm good right?" when really web security is a continuum, even on the level of certs - the browser doesn't meaningfully differentiate between domain validation, identity validation, and extended validation (EV), and less so on the technical characteristics of the cert (signing algo, ciphers chosen, etc.)

It's not that encryption is bad, it's that the https method encourages lazy thinking.

Call me pessimist, but I think that any method which relies on "user education" is doomed from the start. Any UX designer can tell you that users do not read error messages and just click by them ASAP to get back to what they were doing before the computer so rudely interrupted them.
Ten years ago the stack was much smaller than it is today.

If this is the "new generation", they probably have little experience. And you want "full stack" developers -- that's a really tall order, most people will work in a team where some people do one side and others do the other.

So you're looking for people who have little experience, and are still more about all aspects of this huge stack than just how to use it. It's not realistic.

Also, you're both blaming them that they are dependent on tools, and only asking them questions about various tools.
An infinite number of small numbers does not always add up to infinity! Since the apparent brightness of a star is an inverse-square law, if you assume there are an infinite number of stars, each 1 light year further away from you in a line and all the same brightness, you end up with that area being only 64%[1] brighter than it would seem with only the first star. Seems like a pretty simple resolution to this paradox to me.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particular_values_of_Riemann_z...
How many people can you feed per square-kilometer of farmland?
I never understood this sentiment.

I doubt that there is a way to build a webmailer without processing the emails content at some point. And as it is processed anyway; using it to adjust your ads doesn't appear to me as something significant.
The first client is more than welcome to offer that team a compelling reason to stay put.
Here is an invite: https://woo.io/eng/useinvite?token=1085A2AA0E9B89D90AF94BCD0...
At the risk of going more-pedantic-than-thou, this entire thread of nitpicks (and indeed, most of the posts I see right now to this story in general) is(/are) mostly irrelevant. The argument is not particularly sensitive to the exact way in which the universe is not steady state, including redshifting all the light until we're not staring at the sun in every direction. Olber's Paradox disproves the Steady State hypothesis, it doesn't positively prove anything in particular. Popular treatments of Olber's Paradox are not obligated to come attached to a complete course in cosmology. I'm sure at least one of "Steven Soter and Neil deGrasse Tyson" are fully aware of all the issues raised in this entire HN page.
Language corpus: feed a large collection of texts into database, sort by word frequency. The lower the frequency, the rarer the word.
That's kind of the point of the names in that book! They increase the dreamlike atmosphere.
Wants mean little. I want to marry Taylor Swift.
What about "Your message was categorized fir Bayesian spam filtering and may have contributed to eventual upstream rules" for all those installations that historically ran SpamAssassin?

If you're using Gmail or sending to a gmail address[1], you know what you are in for, and if you don't you should at least know that anything you send to someone else is no longer in your control and you have very little control over who sees it.

1: Google Apps for business accounts are not scanned for ads.
> That said, my few wishes for a C replacement would be generics, methods, and namespacing.

I think my pet language (Myrddin) actually has you almost covered. It doesn't have methods, but it does have traits, which allow similar things at compile time.

https://github.com/oridb/mc

You have an example of generics and traits here, in the std namespace:

https://github.com/oridb/mc/blob/master/lib/std/htab.myr

https://github.com/oridb/mc/blob/master/lib/std/iterutil.myr
It's also a culture of no training.
So I'm confused about this. Do Google actually own all of the books they've scanned? If I scanned millions of other peoples books and kept the scans, wouldn't I be in breach of copyright?
An AI-powered Super Mario and Luigi can now learn from each other
Who isn't? :D

I rewrote most of my old linux projects (for home use, most of them) in Scheme48 just because I like scsh so much.
I've seen this at the Franklin and it's a wonderful machine. I'd like to see it running some day.
A Fan of Fans: Reconsidering Malcolm McLaren's Opera Album
Moscow shared MH17 radar images
I hope the Uber drivers do unionize.

The concept of uber: use your own car to make extra cash is an interesting one. The business execution deserves to be buried.
Sorry to hear that. Bushing was awesome. Many of my IRC friends in the Nintendo DS hacking scene knew him well.
You're forgetting not everyone could game the system like that. Not everyone is as motivated as you, either. These tests (even if they are contrived, unrepresentative of real work, and gameable) give desirable results.

A test who's only flaw is that motivated individuals with good problem solving skills could "game" if they worked hard enough?

That sounds like a good tool for finding strong candidates to me.
I was reading a reddit post the other day that looked like it was produced by a markov chain using martin amis and michel houellebecq as source material. Unexceptional except they used the name, "Gortibole Blubbet" for a fat old prostitute. My immediate thought was, "That MUST be from a Pynchon novel."