skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm curious how much power you believe a programming language conference can exert on someone? You've called it "incredible unchecked power", but what does that mean here? Power to do what? Ask someone not to speak? Is there some other "power" being wielded that I'm not grasping?

You seem to be making a "slippery slope" argument; I guess on the basis that you're afraid any unpopular opinion can get one ostracized. But, slippery slope is generally considered a fallacy, and this is a great example of why. The conference organizers themselves have gone to great lengths to talk about all of the various and wildly differing beliefs held by participants that no one considers controversial and worthy of mention; right, left, religious, atheist, gay, straight, black, white, brown, all of these things are OK with everybody (by some reasonable definition of "everybody"). No one is suggesting Republicans/Libertarians/Democrats/Socialists shouldn't be allowed to speak or participate. We can all agree to disagree on those concepts and have civil conversations about other subjects without it being a big deal.

Civil people can disagree without suggesting some people are genetically predisposed to being slaves and that others (conveniently, the person making the suggestion among them) are naturally predisposed to be their masters. And, there's where the problem lies. One can't reasonably "agree to disagree" with someone who considers an entire race to be subhuman; at least, I can't. That's, frankly, a person I want to be as far away from as possible. I certainly don't want to be a participant in a community that welcomes that person.
Sorta related: "All Circuits are Busy Now: The 1990 AT&T Long Distance Network Collapse": http://users.csc.calpoly.edu/~jdalbey/SWE/Papers/att_collaps...
Chatbots have been around for fifty years. Getting them to say dirty things has been a sport since 1964.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA

Launching this on the open internet in this state was pure stupidity. Doing it on Twitter during an election cycle borders on "career-ending."
I sometime use the term magic to highlight code that is out of the current context/scope.

That ICA, FFT or MLP module is magic...

The module maybe complex but it is not magic. However it is something that I probably don't _need_ to understand to solve the problem I am currently working on.

Now I think about it, normally only very reliable code is called magic - the stuff that always goes wrong has some other choice descriptors.
Cold logic. The advertisement defines life as something that is not doing chores. Therefore people who do chores are not living. Whether that makes them "subhuman" does involve some interpretation, but if you call someone "not alive" you aren't exactly complementing them.
Running a Scalable Application on Kubernetes and AWS
I tend to use the word magic for those situations when you can not easily examine the source code and follow the control flow. For instance, you are in some part of the code and you have a User object and you see the code calls the .babble() method on the object. You go to the User definition, and there's no babble method. You follow up the superclasses, and there's no babble method. Where did the babble method come from? Where is it going? Who created it? Where can I find the documentation for it (if any)? Even if I do find something that seems to implement it, can I be sure that some other code didn't fiddle with the babble method in another way?

Languages permit varying levels of this sort of magic, ranging from the Ruby extreme of dynamically rewriting classes and inheritance hierarchies on the fly, to the pretty-much-no-magic of C. (C qua C anyhow. Preprocessor can get fun.)

I think this is one of the worst sorts of magic, and I've generally tried to arrange my code so that even when I'm using a dash of magic, the pathway back to where everything came from is still fairly clear. (Usually this can be done just by dealing with the fact you may need to use a few more keystrokes to leave the breadcrumb trail back to the implementation. Sometimes simplifying a bit of functionality down to zero bytes in the source code is going a step too far.)

I'll also observe that having used a number of both high-magic and low-magic languages, in terms of costs/benefits, I am generally underwhelmed by the benefits of the magic, and find the cost generally go up more quickly than most people realize as source code size goes up. I generally prefer low-magic languages. With just a bit of thought, you can still get a huge amount of power without the costs. (For instance, believe it or not, Haskell is a nearly-zero-magic language by this definition. For all the crazy stuff it seems to be able to do, you can always see what's going on just by following back the symbol definitions, with the exception of just a finite bit of syntax sugar implemented by the compiler, the most important of which is generally tutorial-level.)
Seems like a complexity explosion.

Un-forgeable references can be created using crypto. In a way things like Bitcoin addresses or cryptographically authenticated network endpoint addresses might qualify.
Here's an experiment:

Person A: A 6 ft man

Person B: A 5 ft man

In basketball, even if person B trains for 23 hours/day more than person A, he is impeded because of his height.

Is there a guarantee that person A will do better JUST because of his height? No

Is there a guarantee that person B will do better JUST because of more hours invested in training? No

But person A can train and become better whereas person B cannot change anything.

Such is the nature of physical differences.

Person B would be better served playing a sport that doesn't require height...aka, Basketball is not "Optimal" for person B.
The point of solitary confinement is to protect inmates from attacking each other. Putting two attackers into one cell makes the problem even worse.

After the first inmate murder there is no consequence for further murder, you're there for the rest of your life anyway. It doesn't matter if you kill one or twenty cellmates.

For the prison this is probably a boon because their overcrowding problem is "solving itself".
Bitstrips was nothing but a fad.[0] This is an amazing cash out for the creators.

[0] https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitstrips&cmpt=q&tz=...
It's Lisp code, more particularly Lisp syntax, and I mean that in the most general sense in which Clojure is Lisp syntax. So are Common Lisp, Scheme, Racket and Emacs Lisp.

S-expressions: fully parenthesized prefix notation.
Buy Traffic
Seems like you should just accept the risks and isolate your systems as much as possible, i.e. depend only on ephemeral data and restart frequently.
3D driver system: A-EON announced Warp 3D Nova and OpenGL ES 2.0
Are there any relatively cheap cameras with global shutters that work with these boards?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin
> Sorry. This form can only handle ASCII Text

Do you honestly think that's a good idea? IMHO, 95% (yes, this a guess, but I think a conservative one) of people will have no idea what that means. It will only confuse them and leave them feeling stupid - don't make users feel stupid.

This is not to say you don't have a valid point, but end-users need error messages that tell them how to fix the problem, not a diagnosis.
I have Blather configured to do various key-presses and so control pentadactyl and so control firefox.

It could be set up to provide whatever signals a button can provide.

http://www.jezra.net/projects/blather
This was my experience as a grad student (physics), both writing new code from scratch, as well as modifying existing code. I got a stern talking to from my adviser.
Yes, but check out Bitmoji. [0] I don't know anyone that uses Bitstrips, but everyone I know uses Bitmoji. And every week they have new ones promoting the latest movies, and it's honestly the main reason I know what movies and shows are out.

[0] https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitmoji
Vbcc is a highly optimizing portable and retargetable ISO C compiler
Good luck explaining the point of unit tests to technology illiterate managers - they don't understand and really they shouldn't have to.
My last name has a space in it as well. All the airlines helpfully remove the space for me, making it not match my passport, leading to me always being flagged by the computer for the 'reject line' at the US border.
Most academic code won't get repurposed. If a rewrite is necessary for commercial use, so be it.

I once did a job like that in 1996. I was building a collision detection engine for an animation system. I had Lin's "I-Collide" to look at, and the paper that goes with it. This was one of the first fast many-vs-many collision detection systems. There's a bounding box layer for culling, and then a detailed layer for precision collision detection between pairs of objects.

The code was in C, but written strangely for C. Everything was lists, handled with raw pointer manipulation. When I saw something being appended to a list by reversing the list, adding a new member at the head, and reversing the list again, I realized that this had been written by a LISP programmer. As I found out later, it was originally in LISP, but had been rewritten in C to speed it up.

So I started over in C++, using classes for the geometry (Face, Edge, Vertex, Polyhedron, etc.) and collection classes (Microsoft's, this was pre-STL) for all the links between the geometry objects. This is one of those problems that maps well to an object model. I used a standard library of inlines for all the geometric calculations, added lots of checking for geometric inconsistencies, and commented the code properly. I noticed that the original implementation used a bubble sort when starting up the axis-oriented bounding box level, which made for a slow startup. I replaced the original separating vector algorithm with GJK. (I think mine was the first collision engine to use axis oriented bounding boxes with incremental GJK, which is fairly standard now.) I wrote a different approach to managing pairs of objects, so that pairs were created when objects got close together and released when they were no longer close. (I-Collide generated pairs, but never released them, which was a memory leak.) I added code to detect fast fly-throughs, so that a fast moving object couldn't get through another object between frame times.
I hooked the system up to QHull to generate convex polyhedra from input geometry, and OpenGL so I could see what was going on. The end result was faster and much more robust than the original.

That's the difference between academic proof of concept code and production code. Having the I-Collide implementation to look at and run was very helpful for insight into the algorithms, but in the end, the job required all new code. Making academics do this is inappropriate. Really, very little code needs to undergo such a process.
> we've made it difficult or impossible to build places that aren't auto-dependent. This is often done at the behest of car owners without regard for the negative impact on those who would rather not be car owners themselves.

Yes, there are places where this is true. There are also places where planning is done at the behest of mass transit proponents without regard for the negative impact on those who would rather not use mass transit themselves.
БУГОР – Фулл валид Фулл Приват Фулл игровой
The only interesting sounds are the sync and line measuring tones. Actual data, I mean the QPSK or QAM modulation sounds like white noise to us.
> They could also be legitimately sorry that something they created said some racist shit

Just to be clear, it's not merely the corporate statement. It's a lot of the comments here, and not what they say directly but the assumptions they make. A thousand little nothings that make up culture - this concept is also part of the argument against casual use of slurs, right? What I'm calling out is the subtle yet pervasive idea that the content on Twitter, or otherwise subject to mass media exposure, is real serious business that must remain completely free of heresy. It's effectively a guilt-by-association that seeks to attach responsibility to the conduit of speech.

> I find it amusingly ironic that your post is the most I've seen someone offended over this whole situation.

Mea culpa. The phenomenon of feeling marginalized and repressed is certainly at the root of the sensationalist mess we are in, from all sides.

Meatspace situations cannot be generalized, and there will always be some injustice. There are people who are legitimately grieved and lack recourse, just like there are people who are are persecuted over fabricated allegations. Each group will react to the injustices against their group, with social media magnifying the frequency to seem much more common than reality. And the only way the disconnect can be bridged is through talking and better application of situation-by-situation justice.

But you know, there is such a thing as objective reality. And the objective reality of the Internet is that the absolute extent of harm that can be done is someone having to walk away. That is the Shelling point of pure communication. If one is exposed to the Internet (the single-most individual-empowering creation of humanity) and their reaction is to continue applying victim mentality to communication itself and seek to police content, then they are opposed to the very mechanism by which understanding can be achieved.

And while you may be tempted to apply that characterization to my complaint as well, there is a key difference - despite the usual contemporary aim of ranting, my goal isn't to convince people to convince people to form a virtual pitchfork mob or whatever. It's to directly address like-minded people who are in the position most able to create change, by writing code that fosters decentralization instead of the monetization-driven clusterfuck of the past decade. Microsoft, being a corporation, will always be subject to rule-by-groupthink. But that does not mean us individuals must also continue being beholden to those arbitrary whims of centralization.
"We're sorry we held a mirror up to Twitter, and then you saw what lurks in that morass,"
I don't think the mirror is the problem.
It's funny because I'm in the camp that has been impressed with Microsoft lately. And of course it's ok to make mistakes, even really big ones.

But I would not say that this failure was a successful outcome, at least not nearly as successful as it could have been. They had to shut it down within hours and all we really learned is that people on the Internet like to troll with incredibly offensive stuff. Most of us knew that, I'm pretty sure. If they had actually prepared for abuse we might have learned more interesting things.

What really gets me though, is just the obnoxious spin on the press release implying that they had prepared so well for abuse but a sophisticated coordinated super-hacker attack found the tiny vulnerability.
All humans are capable of horrific acts. It is a part of our humanity, we are apex predators who organize socially. The evolved algorithm in our brain that manages that dissonance is extremely complex and will necessarily fail at times.

We can't tolerate or condone antisocial behavior, but it is a mistake to feel safe in the thought "we" are better than "them."

We are they, they are we.
My apartment has two different apartment numbers, the right one and the one that Royal Mail made up for their database. Makes it interesting to match things up on different accounts
Bitstrips existed for like 2 months. I haven't seen one in maybe 4 months now.

What a blind waste of money. This is Zynga buying Draw Something all over again.
I'm not making some cute comment about the intolerance of tolerance.

I'm pointing out that someone apparently personally offended about a culture of outrage is the only one outraged over the whole thing. There have been no widespread condemnations of Microsoft, just a lot of mildly amused people.

> That it just apologized for these things in the same motion makes them offensive.

You're assuming motivations that you have no insight into. If I had made Tay I would apologize too. Any assumption you make is on you.

So what is ironic is that there are people waiting with bated breath for the merest hint of something so they can express their righteous outrage on the internet, making demands for thought policing and handwringing over word choice, which wouldn't have existed at all if they had just said, "well, that's a corporate blog post" and moved the fuck on.
Διεθνή Φιλικά: Πρόβα Euro το Γερμανία – Αγγλία
I wanted to get back into using Sorcerer, but the authors website has gone down (looks like for good this time)..
sad

sorcerer.silverice.org
That should work if you "orange cloud" (activate) the cdn.rainbowgardensinc.com CNAME entry in the CloudFlare DNS control panel.
I don't think that Microsoft need to feel bad about this at all. I think the technology that they demonstrated was pretty amazing ... and I look forward with excitement and anticipation to the next outing. I'm sure that this is going to be an iterative process that will probably take the best part of a decade to complete, and that isn't a bad thing. It just reflects the fact that this technology is hard to master.
I don't know, name systems seem to quickly betray their origin in little sentences of specificity in the languages used at the time, before they became systematized according to common western practice (if that even happened, depending on culture).

John? John who? Oh, "John the Smith" with time, the is dropped - the name is carried forward despite people's profession, people post-facto come up with systems for "First" and "Last" names, but the order remains.

In Japanese, grammar flows the other way, "Ken of the mountain field" is written "Yama no Ta no Ken", "Yamada Ken" because of grammar though, the surname still comes first.

And the biggest one is Patronymic names that maintain the untouched grammar of specifying who you mean based on who's kid they are "Ori, Eric's daughter." = "Ori Ericsdottir", "Mateo's Luis" "Luis de Mateo", "O'Connor" "ibn `Amr" etc. etc.
There's a section about it in TFA:

"Another conundrum with the modern camouflage design seen during China's Victory Day parade is that the vehicles feature bright blue painted blocks. Why? Some experiments have been done with bluish tones to break up the shape of vehicles against the sky on flat terrain, or for use in icy or snowy areas. “If the vehicles are amphibious then they might have some concealment during their water-based maneuvers, but the trade off for being highly conspicuous on land is not worth having it permanently,” believes Guy Cramer of Hyperstealth Biotechnology. In this case, the blue scheme is likely there for decoration. It certainly made the parade a spectacle, but further muddies the murky world of military camo. —JS"
I completely agree. It reminds me of this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/your-money/student-loans/2...

I think we need to do a far better job of informing students in high school about how their choice of major in college influences their income. At the very least, we need to discourage them from taking on large amounts of debt for majors where their expected income will be low. Even if we could convince them, many students probably don't know how hard it is to live off of $30-50k per year, and at that point in their lives (17-20 years old) they might argue that they would rather major in Women's Studies or Philosophy.

Unfortunately, I doubt colleges would allow substantial guidance in this area during "Introduction to College" classes that students take their Freshman year for a variety of reasons. Some professors would argue that college is not meant to prepare people for the workforce (it makes you a better citizen and more worldly), but that really hasn't been true for many years.
I am never an apologist for the Indian State, but to say, India would be better under British rule, is a NO - NO for me. In spite of its failures at many levels and mostly falling short of expectations, India is a miracle. There is no other way to put it. The population of entire Americas, north-south and central is lesser than population of India. So, if you are seeing grotesque poverty and violence, well they are still there in Americas.

Xenophobia is really not a phobia if you read the history of Delhi. I mean this city has been sacked since 10th century and regularly had its population obliterated.
I love your optimism and motivation to make life better for others. You are a true leader and an inspiration!
I bought an ODROID-C1 about a year ago. I was very frustrated that it wasn't supported in mainline Linux kernels - only a vendor kernel that was fairly far behind, and didn't support what I had intended to use it for. I'm not sure what the situation is now with that board or Hardkernel's newer boards.
Yes, but scale is important too https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=bitmoji%2C%20bitstri...
I am from Brazil, when I was young, I pirated HEAVILY, and frequently without being even aware of it, there was legal legit stores selling pirated stuff and even paying taxes for it, maybe unaware too that it was pirated...

For example, I paid what is equivalent today (inflation corrected) 17 USD to get the DEMO copy of Wolfenstein 3D.

And to me, paying 17 USD for the DEMO of Wolfenstein 3D, was the coolest stuff ever, because I could play it in first place!

When I heard of "doom", the "legendary game that is wolfenstein 3D but with green floors that cause damage and bloody monsters", I wanted it badly... All I could find about it was hearsay, no legal copies, even of a demo existed, no pirated copies existed either! The few people that played it was only on someone else computer, they described it to me, and I really wanted to see it, they described a technical marvel, something awesome!

My dad is a engineer, he was hired by Kia Motors to do some contract stuff for them, he found out that the CEO (or president, or some other extremely high level executive, forgot the details, I was just a kid) of Brazil Kia Motors had a imported legal copy of Doom, and Doom2, he mentioned to the guy, and he made a copy for me, 20 floppies.

I took care of them like if they were the most precious things ever, because floppies that I had were easy to corrupt, and Doom, and Doom2 was too priceless to lose, and it took too much work to get it (I ended visiting Kia motors with my dad several times, and helping a bit when I was allowed to, the total effort to get the thing was something like several months of visiting Kia a lot, nagging people, paying attention, helping install steel cable structures...).

And it was worth it, Doom was legendary as I imaginated in my head (even using PC Speaker audio, because a real sound car costed here about 20 times the monthly mininum wage), I wanted to make it too, I wanted to be a programmer able to create my own Doom, I needed to learn C, and whatnot, the game was fun, and working a lot to get that pirated copy was very worth it.

Then I wonder, what would have happened if Doom and Doom2 had some strong DRM that prevented the Kia executive from making a copy for me?
Okay, I'm assuming you can comment now, but we already know.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11346947
Help on this new language please
Is there support for hardware video decoding on the ODROID? The Pi almost makes for a reasonable media center thanks to the hardware decoding, but I would like something with a little more oomph for the selection screen. This looks like it should be great for that, but I don't want something that's going to fall on its face when you try to decode video.