skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll rephrase that - if you want to hire ME, you need to take this stuff seriously.

I wasn't delving into the merits of diversity - I believe in it; I'm seeing it put to the test every day at my company, and I like what I see.

> it doesn't follow that maximizing diversity is therefor an imperative for companies that want to have world-class teams.

Diversity isn't about addition/subtraction, nor is it calculus; it's not even sociology, macroeconomics, or socioeconomics.

Diversity is about adaptive systems.

> In fact diversity seems to be orthogonal to competence.

I'll concede this point, but only with the substitution of "productivity" for "competence". Homogenous teams can outperform diverse teams, IN THE SHORT TERM.

Diversity may lead directly to inefficiency and conflict. In the short term, these are painful inhibitors to productivity.

In the long term, diversity of backgrounds, capabilities and perspectives - properly aligned - can be a huge asset.

If you are building a new company, and you want to beat the world, you'd be foolish to hire a bunch of people who think about things the same way that you do.
See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11185009 for a convincing argument about why this isn't a good topic for discussion.
The compiler is very fast, and in absence of interactive development that's good. The cross compilation is also a thing I guess? I just use docker anyways.

But no... I mean... I can get a lot of editors to do a better job of formatting. Other languages I use offer true interactive development. And go build requires a Zigguraut Of Filesystem around it to function properly. Go get provides no realistic versioning other than "this is what I grabbed RIGHT NOW and I hope you don't need bugfixes because good luck with figuring out the hash I got."

The lack of reproducible builds and better tooling for versioning is a pretty damning stroke against the ecosystem, because I nearly lost a project when my HD crashed. I had my repo checked in AND go deps set up and it still took me a solid day of wrangling to recover a project.

For all my kvetching about bower and maven, when I set them up they tend to stay set up and so the right thing. Go projects decay.

Add that to the language's total punt on error handling and sync semantics so crazy that the ecosystem got a basic race detector before a basic interactive execution tool...

I just don't get why this ecosystem has adherents.
It's not immediately clear what this does do your HTML/CSS files. It's sort of hinted at in the logo image, but the (many) examples would be much more helpful if some sample input and output text were provided.

I'm not convinced the use case of sticking CDNs in front of URLs is broad or complex enough to justify bringing in another tool (e.g. I'm pretty sure Rails does this out of the box). That said, I could see this growing into a general-purpose URL transformer.
Ask HN: What's the best way for an engineer to pick up basic finance knowledge?
Great to see you're willing to spend money on bounties.

https://hackerone.com/resources is advertising for their service but a good introduction on how to run a bug bounty program. Maybe using them also solves the marketing issue (how to tell security hackers that you have bug bounty program in the first place?)
Racket is a good one to reach for :)
Need somebody to shed lights on this: my understanding is Ethereum started with pre-farmed ethers and opened for sale in bitcoins.

My two questions:

1) Any info on how many ethers the founders/founding company had farmed and holding in vault?

2) If Ethereum takes off (financially), and these early members start to dump the ethers for cash, will it crash the Ethereum economy?

Bitcoin could have exactly the same issue, but I feel the difference is most people then wasn't sure if crypto currency would fly, and it is fair to reward on the risk for those who trusted and held bitcoins.

Ethereum sounds like a more refined and polished business endeavour, and I feel it gets too much hype lately.
Not all languages with VS support or even VSC support have "great tooling." It's a very complicated set of balances and acceptance criterion.
Do you mean personal finance like balancing your household account, or professional finance like hedge funds or trading?
IRS says hackers accessed 700K+ taxpayer accts, not 334K, will notify on 2/29
Has anyone here had this happen to them? It is hard (and scary) to imagine a situation where I was dealt with in this way and was still OK with having the investor on my board.
Did you miss the entire "Sleep disruption in mental illness" section?
Gitolite's domain was snatched up
ZFS has a considerable number of very useful features that Btrfs doesn't have. For example, under ZFS, you can delegate administration of a filesystem (subvolume in Btrfs terms) to a normal user. In doing so, you can, for example, set up each user's home directory as its own subvolume, allowing for per-account snapshots, and their own sets of subvolumes which can have differing properties as-needed. ZFS also has support in-driver for sharing volumes, which means nfs shares, and smb shares (unfortunately not under FreeBSD yet) work natively with the filesystem, and can be exported there, instead of needing to muck around with config files and then kicking things in the proper order.

Btrfs is still Not There Yet for a lot of the advantages ZFS has over traditional filesystems. It has a some, and some are half-baked, like its offline deduplication, but is still missing a considerable number. Maybe in five years Btrfs will catch up, but it's not here now.

Rearding licensing, the Linux kernel devs could also relicense to allow for cddl co-existence. Unfortunately, the petulance from such groups as the SFLC makes that very unlikely.
> He has his reasons for the cddl,

What are those reasons, concretely? Would he be better served by choosing e.g. a BSD variant? There's a non-trivial cost to choosing a "not-completely-understood" license. Or, equivalently, there's value in choosing a well-known "standard" license. While the CDDL should probably be classified as "well-known" at this point, its interaction with other licenses isn't, and -- unless you're actively working against GPL-ish licenses -- it's to be avoided. You can get what what you want by chosing a BSD-esque license instead.

I think I agree with many of your other points, though. As I say, I'm not a lawyer and not overly fond of licensing in the first place. (Still doesn't mean you can ignore this concern, unfortunately! If only ignorance of the law were an excuse!)

EDIT: If you're going to downvote, please explain. I don't care about the numbers, but I would like to know why my argument is wrong/misguided.
The Original Wagner
"The separation of structure and formatting is not practical for serious media of any kind."

The separation of structure and formatting is not practical for serious advertising platform of any kind.
You're confusing the statement

"The Kolgomorov complexity of all strings is zero"

with

"For every string there exists a definition of Kolmogorov complexity in which that string has complexity 0"

The first (which you claim as a Theorem) presumes an already fixed definition of complexity, and is therefore false,
while the second is what you proof, and which is not interesting.

Here's how I would fix the definition of Kolmogorov Complexity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_lambda_calculus
OAuth of Fealty
Cosmic rays aren't neutrons, they mostly electrons or muons (and maybe gamma rays). For stopping gamma rays and electrons, 10 feet of water or dirt is a fine for stopping them. So is about 7 feet of concrete, 2 feet of steel or one foot of lead. So is making sure you are closer to sea level. Muons will pass through all of those fairly easily but the flux isn't that high. You might have a few events per year where the flux is high.
This article would have helped tremendously back when I was struggling to wrap my head around the purpose of interfaces. Great visualizations and certainly a very unique but also a very logical way of looking at interfaces. Great article.
Compiling against headers is a fairly standard autotools technique for writing portable software. It avoids the mess of doing an `#ifdef` on the kernel version, which allows people to build against arbitrary git commits to Linus' tree and also kernels where things where API changes were backported. In either case, you can have different kernel headers than what your kernel version suggests.

That being said, the actual number of kernel header API checks is 63. The duplicate use of ZFS_LINUX_TRY_COMPILE occurs when the code explicitly checks each version of an interface used in different kernel versions. It is basically an if-else chain. If one does not match, another is checked. Ideally, we should explicitly check each version (rather than assuming that on failure, an older API is in use), but not all checks do that yet.

We could reduce them to 0 if we just went by kernel version, which is what just about everyone else does, but it is not as good. That being said, this inspired me to think of a way to reduce all 63 checks to 1 check based on the kernel version unless something turns out to be wrong. I put the idea into the issue tracker:

https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/issues/4375
Yahoo open sources AI software CaffeSpark
Yep, and Twitter refuses to give API access to their newer features like polls, information shown in the connect tab, group DMs, etc.

So they're pushing new features that heavy users will never see, because 3rd party clients are vastly superior.

It's a marvel their product managers and executives can get out of bed unassisted in the morning.
How Apple's fight with the FBI will hurt our privacy
Arguably, if your code is hosted by a third-party, the legal document is the least of your problems. If someone modified your legal documents without your knowledge, you are likely to be able to fight it as having been a victim of fraud yourself, and you wouldn't be expected to abide by fraudulent contracts created by a third party impersonating you, right? (I don't really know for sure, you are the attorney, but I'd be surprised if you were liable for forged contracts)

On the other hand, if your code is modified, it can exfiltrate data that you are never getting back, no matter what the legal system says. Even credit card numbers are not the worst, since in theory you can end up reversing every single fraudulent transaction made, and insurance might cover your liability. But in the case of Medium, it could, say, leak the real world identity of a blogger or citizen journalist in a place where doing so would put their lives at risk. So if you are already trusting a third party with the lives of your users who are trusting you with their lives (whether they should or not), is having the text of your EULA swapped by the lyrics of "I am never gonna give you up" really a worst case scenario?

At this point, given how many people use it as the authoritative source for their software, GitHub is already critical infrastructure, on par with GPS and the electrical grid of many countries. So if GitHub goes rogue or is compromised, the damage can be pretty catastrophic. Brave new world, ain't it?
I report a lot of bugs and I am not a fan of hacker one or bugcrowd. I also triage bugs through h1 sometimes at work and I really don't enjoy the quality of bugs or the platform.

If you are a smallish company my advice is to have a security page and a specific security contact with a corresponding gpg key, offer smallish reward, and respond quickly. 100 is plenty, even though a lot of people will disagree with me and it's way way better than most.
The Magical Tech Behind Paper for iPad's Color-Mixing Perfection (2012)
Seen a lot of this in the advertising field, particularly with creative teams. (Art directors, designers, copywriters)
With all due respect, for the purpose of what we are arguing here, this pisses me off. Why do I even waste my time trying to make an argument when you spew this.
That's likely because with C#, the debugger can use deoptimization and on-stack replacement to get expressions evaluated in the order they happen in the code, as long as the instruction re-ordering happens only in the bytecode to native code compilation. Even though the debugging symbols just have line numbers, the debugger could potentially regenerate they bytecode to figure out which operations correspond to which expressions.

In C++ optimized builds, you might be jumping back and forth between lines due to the compiler re-ordering instructions, and there isn't an easy way to get back code that's in-order.
If go is such a fantastic language, then why …
I installed it in Chrome, and the "Loading Spritz" balloon just stays there. Trying to use it in another tab just gives a balloon with a frowny face. What am I doing wrong?
Will no one actually argue the topic at hand? Are you really taking time out of your day to post this!? Iq is a proxy for intelligence, it's not perfect, but it is a massive predictor for success in life. The largest predictor in fact. But even if that wasn't the case, you know I'm referring to intelligence. So why are you posting this? Is this really the most intelligent thing you can think of?
Git's hashing is not cryptographically secure.
I don't even have a lot of apps, though. And using an web application is just as much work: logging in, bookmarking, etc.
asking to make sure that i somewhat understand. The point is that licenses can allow for literal readings or equity readings, ie. the spirit of the law. On its face, debian is fine as it makes it easy to set up zfs but is separately distributing two binaries. Canonical is distributing one binary with the zfs linked inside of the kernel, which a literal reading can allow. However the equity reading disallows as although all source code can be released, it must be under gplv2. Therefore, we are in a holding pattern to see whether stakeholders will take the literal or equity reading of the license and will proceed accordingly?
Can somebody explain how this works? It says unemployment is at 7.4% but only 42.9% work more than 30 hours a week?

So they are employed but part-time? What kind of jobs account for the 57% of America that work less than 30 hours a week?

This is the first time that I hear of this and I don't understand it at all.
iOS X Concept: Advanced Control Center
It's quite possible to catch random errors, with checking CPUs. Some IBM mainframes have dual CPUs running in lockstep and compare the results. Intel Xeon CPUs have checking on the on-chip memories [1] (caches, TLBs, etc.) but not the ALU.

Duplicated ALUs, instruction decoders, and retirement units checking each other are rarer than they should be. It wouldn't add that much cost, since most of the chip real estate today is memory cells for caches. If you fault the CPU on a compare error, rather than trying to recover, it doesn't slow down the CPU at all, or add much complexity. Backup and retry is tougher, but may be unnecessary. The important thing is to detect failure, fail fast, and move the work to another CPU.

[1] http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/...
The telecoms are masters of destroying competition through legislative means. They utterly destroyed DSL competition during the dawn of broadband (my first company sold to independent ISPs; I watched them all wither and die within the span of about four years, as broadband took over and they were prevented from competing by shady behavior by AT&T and Verizon), and now they're trying everything at their disposal to continue to deliver poor service at high prices without effective competition.

The difference this time is that Google is bigger than they are, and not quite as much of a pushover in the legal domain. It's still an uphill battle, and consumers are still going to be the ones to suffer under pathetically poor quality and expensive Internet service (the US is something like 14th in quality/speed/price in the world for Internet service, despite it having been invented here, and despite having vastly more infrastructure investment at all levels).

The best thing that could possibly happen for the Internet in the US would be the swift and total annihilation of anti-competitive companies like AT&T, Verizon, and the major cable companies, leaving room for innovators to step in and fill the void. But, that won't happen...they're too good at stacking the deck to remain in leadership positions in the market, despite delivering terrible service on nearly every front.

Not that I'm bitter, or anything.
>> Arguably, if your code is hosted by a third-party, the legal document is the least of your problems.

It depends on who you talk to. The legal dept would say that code can be replaced. The coding people similarly look down on contracts as paper anachronisms. Which matters more depends on the situation. The one that matter in any moment is whichever has been attacked most recently.

I would say that errors in a contract are more expensive to fix than code. A change to code can be patched once detected. But drop a key line from a contract, perhaps the limitation on jurisdiction or arbitration, and you might be stuck with costly litigation even if you make a change asap.
I've read about this incident before, and as someone who transitioned from the 'hard' sciences (specifically semiconductor engineering) to the 'soft' or social sciences (specifically education and economics) it has been a bit disquieting.

First, for Dr. Sokal, I am a bit...bemused or surprised I guess I would say...at what seems like a quite childish simplification and overall process. This was not a peer review journal, as is implied in most coverage of the incident. Further, I strongly suspect (as I have seen from my former colleagues when I discuss my new field with them) Sokal showed an enormous amount of hubris (as Robbins and Ross note "What Sokal’s confession most altered was our perception of his own good faith as a self-declared leftist...On the other hand, we recognize that professional scientists like Sokal do feel that their beliefs and their intellectual integrity are threatened by the diverse work done in the field of science studies"). To attempt to speak ill of a field you know little about and yet still find to be trivial or unrigorous is puzzilingly tactless and embarrassingly presumptuous. It is a bit as if Sokal found himself laughing at the naked emperor, unaware that it was a mirror.

Second, I have always wondered what about what this incident, and its references, says about other disciplines understanding and approach to social sciences and fields like philosophy and psychology. We tend to have a natural search for truth as scientists...one of the fundamental questions though is what is meant by truth and, further, what is the interrelationship between a truth and the context in which it is observed? Engineering colleagues I have look at the fact that things are rethought, changed, dismissed, in conflict, can't be confirmed, etc. is seen as a flaw whereas I see it a reality. Much of the social sciences is closer to the quantum domain. True social experiments are difficult or legally/ethically untennable. When they are conducted, they are often conducted in ways that try to minimize outside variables...but reality isn't that simple. Human beings don't share a universal 'ground state' from which decisions or behaviors emminate.
I know that a lot of people like to use different kinds of flux libraries for their React apps, with Redux having a lot of traction, but you should definitely look at Mobx.

We've introduced it to one of our project 4 months ago and our state management became as simple and easy as it should be with React. No boilerplate subscriptions, no helpers that modify normalized data, no endless re-renders on every state change and very easy to understand concept for new developers.

We literally stopped worrying about the state though it took some time to rewrite the app.
On supercomputers, you're often doing some big, tightly coupled numerical job. That's what you buy supercomputers for. The unit of rerun is perhaps hours of computation on thousands of CPUs.
If you're doing a large number of transactions, you have big clusters of relatively ordinary CPUs. The unit of rerun is one transaction.
Ah, lovely! You just arrived exactly where I was trying to get.

> I'm saying the meaning behind statements are different.

Yes, exactly! And, just like a single C program can have two different meanings under two different implementations, the same axiomatic system can have two different meanings when deducing its consequences (proving theorems) using different rules of inference.
Fair enough, but do you have an argument against what I am saying?
We've been doing this for a while at Clever: https://github.com/Clever/policies and got some other folks in the EdTech world to join us: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-04-08-edtech-companies-ope...

(Privacy policies are a hot topic in EdTech these days!)
Haha I guess it isn't a surprise when some Americans make true-Scotsman claims like this. They shouldn't be jealous of other nations' extensive histories, rather they should enjoy those histories.

When the shogunate emerged in Japan to govern in place of the abdicating, distracted Heian imperial court, USA was populated by various neolithic tribes. Akihito is a direct descendant of the emperors who ruled then, and speaks the same language in his court that they did. I haven't heard much pre-Columbian Algonquin spoken in the White House.

Civil wars don't switch to a different "civilization". (The one in USA didn't, did it?) Japan's remarkable post-WWII recovery from the devastation of war and poor governance in the 1940s to economic success in the 1960s-80s (which IMHO is more impressive than the Meiji restoration to which you refer) is compared by Japanese themselves to earlier recoveries such as that during the early Edo period. The culture, language, and society that exists in Japan today descends directly from those that accomplished previous impressive transitions.
The issue is that I had a mental disorder that screwed up my grades so getting accepted might be a little iffy, unless I apply for math which ups my shot, I want to be a probabilist.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the missing piece for the crypto-anarchist spiritual lineage of fintech to take off is a business-level transaction protocol (and associated open source server) that is generic enough to embrace all of the different settlement mechanisms and transaction types out there, as well as incorporating an adequately comprehensible means of markup for risk models. Not "send <amount_of_bitcoin_portions> to <bitcoin address>", but rather "invoice X for service Y settle by datetime Z, available modes of settlement ABC, after which service Y (or good G) will be rendered. policies for various types of transaction failures are DEF. proposing node's risk model: R.".

The idea is not to supplant Bitcoin/Ethereum but in fact to give them more market share by enabling them to be considered on a properly equal, pragmatic basis with conventional financial services or assets. This would encourage their selection (automatically or otherwise) versus some defined risk model (temporal, legal, etc.), over conventional financial services or assets.

Things that come for free or almost for free when you adopt dynamic financial routing include settlement path redundancy, multi-path settlement, RFQs/bids, multi-hop routing, financial system reliability, etc. Something like real world aware IPv4, for money. I've already suggested an endpoint identification scheme - https://sites.google.com/a/ifex-project.org/wiki/our-proposa... - which is the native account identifier at Kraken.

If anyone would be keen to work in this direction, I started https://sites.google.com/a/ifex-project.org/wiki/our-proposa... years ago, but had to give it up due to competing concerns.

I'm ready to jump in again but don't want to go solo.
Well some third party client can, by pretending to be the official client. This by allowing you to insert the ID strings of said client yourself.