skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I see you've been downvoted. Interesting, you said that you haven't found a reason to switch and someone looked at it and thought "How dare you not find a reason to switch, here let's teach you a lesson".

But in large I agree. 3 hasn't provided enought of a carrot and 2 hasn't been enough of a pain for many people to want to switch. Especially when it comes to existing stable code bases. For new development, yes, many can and should pick Python 3. But if say Python 3 brought even a 20% speed improvement overwall, the move would have been a lot faster.

I find people are ok with accepting some breakages due to re-writes if either existing stuff is very broken, or new stuff is so much better.
Imo AskHistory can be boring as hell because of the heavy-handed moderation. I get the effect that they're going for, and it works, but it's frustrating to go into an interesting topic to see every comment deleted and a mod warning at the top.
I would assume they are including the tv audience as well.
So you're Ok with, say, Putin deciding to launch his arsenal in a first strike and wiping out the US and allies with no retaliation?
i think the problem is link-focused discussions over two hours rather than people- and comment-focused discussions over time (same as hn). The true experts aren't writing blogs, they are busy building. A four sentence HN comment from a recognized expert is more valuable than a hundred blogs from a hundred nobodies. We need to figure out how to extract content from those experts. Give visibility into the identities of the participants. Identify the experts and give visibility and longevity to their content. Moderate the shitposts over to a peanut gallery below the fold.
I wonder if there's a crossover between celebrity reporters, and people who update Wikipedia on celebrities?
So... did you read the article?
> and is said to be a ruthless business man.

Rockefeller reduced the price of kerosene by 70% over the years he ran SO, thus (literally) fueling the industrial expansion of America, and making cheap kerosene available to everyone.

To say that benefitted nobody but him is ridiculous. Read "Titan" by Chernow.
>Any C level person should at least be [GP]PG or S/MIME signing all their email, if not fully encrypting it. Email impersonation is just too easy.

i wonder what security policies and practices were followed by one well-known Secretary of State Department of a largest nuclear superpower ...
> I am yet to experience an enterprise customer that has jumped into Git.

My company recently did (1000+ employees), though from what I've seen, many of my coworkers familiar with only svn are still using git like svn. We also have a lot of legacy code still within svn (various reasons outside of my team's control), so the transition is pretty messy IMHO.
Why is revenge pitiable? If your enemies are ruthless (and they are), then they need to believe you to be ruthless as well, so they believe you WILL launch a retaliatory strike and destroy them if they launch a first strike.
The demo is nice. The other thing is that a mapd server with 8 nvidia k40s for 3000 dollars each costs around 30000 (with CPU and main memory). For 30000 you can also buy a 4 socket server with a terabyte of main memory. Even though the GPUs can access their 300gb of memory much faster and have more cores, that won't help you because database workloads (filtering, grouping, joining) is not compute-intensive enough to give the GPU an advantage over CPU cores.

My bet is that a main memory database optimized for modern CPUs will do better on even larger datasets at the same server costs.
I'll make the politically incorrect sacrifice for you:

The internet was not built to be, or should it ever be, a safe place for every single human being on Earth. Contradictory and radical ideas are a necessary part of progressive discourse and they will make people feel uncomfortable and angry. Deal with it.
Interesting. Don't know if it's just me, but progress in battery research often seems to happen accidentaly.
Sigh. Certainly the human brain is the most optimized (so far!) for being a human and the elephant's the most optimized for being an elephant. Clearly you need more neurons than a few to get higher functions, but above some (probably tiny) threshold structure dominates. It's like deriving function and performance by counting the number of transistors on a chip.

We see Apple's A9 is currently the peak performer ($/W, $/FLOPS) for a mobile device with a big screen... but is still very very far away from Intel's general purpose chips. Does that mean one is "better"? No, they just picked different optimization points.

Far more interesting is why a chihuahua with a walnut-sized brain is just as smart as an irish wolfhound that has a brain that masses about as much as a whole chihuahua!
The knowledge that launching a first strike will invariably result in most of the nation being wiped out in the enemies retaliation is knowledge enough to prevent a first strike from being launched in all circumstances.
Canada Weather Scraper
I pretty much agree with this position, although I find the "fill ... together" and "bring ... together" metaphors silly.

For example, if you have two jars containing 50 plutionium coins each, putting all of them in the same jar will have some unforeseen consequences. However, this does not change the fact that there are 100 coins altogether.
I think this sort of thing will improve once AIs are trained using the human's enjoyment of the game as the primary utility function. This could be as simple as asking users to rate the preceding game at its conclusion.

It could be as subtle as using the player's apm or other activity metrics as a proxy for enjoyment, if correlations were shown in play testing labs. This could allow for more training data, and less annoyance to users, who might be reluctant to provide manual ratings.

The next step after that is adaptive AI, where the computer learns what you find enjoyable personally.

I give it ten years before this is how every game works.

Edit: Google has said that negative signals are extremely important to its search. A user bypassing the #1 result for the #2 is hugely bad for #1, but only a mild boost for #2. Similarly, perhaps minimizing "ragequit"s is a valid objective!
If you read "In Search of Stupidity" by Chapman, you'll see that most of his competitors ruined themselves all by themselves.

It's not easy to run a successful business. My own, Zortech, would have been far more successful if I'd had half a brain instead of only a quarter of one.
Be careful, that way lies ultra-finitism.
Thanks for explaining! I just can't understand how such 'solvers' can help with crypto, when strong crypto-algos are not reversible and hence there is no point to approach them backwards?

If any algorithm can be weakened by such 'problem solvers', it wouldn't be considered strong? For instance, can SHA256 be reversed (i.e. collision found) faster with such a solver? I guess not..

I realize that with crypto, solvers can optimize the flow of the algorithm, make it more efficient and omit repeating some code parts, but a good bruteforcer written in assembly can be as optimized..?
The reason this "LTV" notion doesn't work is because "Lifetime" doesn't mean anything if your own "lifetime" depends on customer lifetime. These companies calculate "LTV"s based on the assumption that the companies themselves will be immortal and end up learning that that isn't the case.
Tried to check out the lambda tool as I want to use AWS Lambda for something I am building. Having a real hard time knowing what problems that it solves for me.

I am not going to download it, spend an hour or more figuring out how to use it only to learn it really isn't helpful for what I have planned. A video would have been extremely useful.
This comment is confrontational and, putting myself in OP's shoes, would sound as if you are questioning my intelligence. Can a moderator please flag this?
Could be adapted to an Amiga 1200 ?
The US has never been bombed? That's patently false. The American Philippines? Pearl Harbor? The balloon bombs? Attu & Kiska? None of that rings a bell?

At the time of their introduction, nuclear weapons were not yet understood as qualitatively different from an equally powerful amount of conventional weapons. The qualitative difference observed after Hiroshima and Nagasaki helped establish this qualitative difference in the minds of people.
Yes, and not only that. It also inherently insecure, while JSON is together with msgpack the only fast and secure serialization format out there. The problem is the encoding of objects and code without any checksumming, so it can be trivially tampered with, leading to very nice exploits, mostly remotely.

See e.g. https://metacpan.org/pod/Cpanel::JSON::XS#SECURITY-CONSIDERA...
I need to add ion to this security matrix.

YAML does most of those and does more and can be made quite secure by limiting the allowed types to the absolute and trusted minimum, but this e.g. not implemented in the perl, only the python backend. By default YAML is extremely insecure.

There are more new readable and typed JSON variants out there. E.g. jzon-c should be faster than ion, but there are also Hjson and SJSON. See https://github.com/KarlZylinski/jzon-c
C doesn’t cause buffer overflows, programmers cause buffer overflows
> act like a retard

Cut it out.
I would argue that languages evolve when someone needs to express a concept and reaches for a word, finds nothing, and improvises. The first person who does it always stands out, but if other people around them have the same need, the word catches on. Eventually, the perception of arrogance mellows and it becomes an ordinary word.

I don't like artificial pronouns either, they stick in my mouth and feel weird, and I'm lazy so I use they. But other people have other preferences or needs so I try to tamp down any unproductive instinctive reaction in myself- who am I to say in a hundred years we won't be using them? After all, our post-singularity AI offspring won't have the same idea of gender as we do...
So... the assertion is that physical things are real and numbers are not? It's alluring to accept this axiom, but when challenging a platonic view of mathematics, I don't think that we should accept that without discussion.

In other words, I'm supposed to entertain that math is a fictional tale with fanciful characters called "numbers" that don't exist outside of the story, but the boundaries of so-called physical objects are so apparent that they shouldn't be questioned?

Most physical boundaries are arbitrary, part of the stories that we tell ourselves, and not meaningful in a deep sense. I'd like to know how mathematics, and numbers in particular, are different.

[As an aside: Is it possible to convincingly argue that "this is larger than that" without using numbers?]
> lost progress

Actually, MS-DOS was the first more or less standardized platform across diverse computers, which enabled software developers to develop for a market several orders of magnitude larger than what had existed before. The result was an explosion of software being developed.

I don't see how this retarded progress.
Why would you want to know/ask about their cache engine when it's not clear they have one, or even have a single user?

Did you, by any chance, configure the site's cache engine... :)
> I don't think reddit's problem is harassment,

I think the problem is that anything good on Reddit gets copied elsewhere, has advertising added and makes money.

Reddit is BuzzFeed and BuzzFeed-esque sites' biggest subsidy. This site isn't going to do anything about that.
I'm not sure what the "left" or "right" are these days. Certainly these definitions have changed in such a way as to leave the impression that there's only one axis and that there are only 2 sides. I have plenty of ideas and beliefs that now would fall on the right of the political spectrum.

I don't deny that there are people on the "left" going against free speech. As somebody born under communism, I have a similar level of disdain for extremists of all colors.

That said, you know that old saying "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins"? Well, I think this also applies to freedom of speech. No freedom should be absolute, not when it goes in conflict with other human rights that are just as important, like the right for fair treatment and for being innocent until proven guilty. This is why the constitution of many countries, including my own, grants the freedom of speech only for as long as it's not hate speech targeted at groups based on race, ethnicity, nationality or religion. And I happen to agree with that.
I don't know the exact timeline, but my understanding is that there were reports of a death in the area where Prince lived before it was known that it was Prince.
My problem with Reddit is not not that COC and heavy moderation enabled group think and promotes censorship (both regular and self kind) is that it's conflict resolution model promotes segregation of ideas rather than discourse.

Reddit is the place that instead of having /r/redvsblue you get /r/red and /r/blue 2 gated communities that simply live in their own little world happy with the perfect echo chamber they've created and that anyone who strays to post in the other camp's subreddit is automatically classified as a troll.
We heard of it and we despise it. It's the most horrible structured data format out there in the wild. Even worse than XML, and this is quite something.
Come on, you know that's the exception and not the rule. No one should use a revenue generating site as a basis for how the web works. Unless they want to compare it to a similar native product.
"Disney’s standard is quite clear: No kid will be harassed, even if they don’t know they are being harassed."

"We thought it was the perfect solution, until we set our first 14-year old boy down in front of it. Within minutes he’d created the following sentence:

I want to stick my long-necked Giraffe up your fluffy white bunny.

KA-Worlds abandoned that approach. Electric Communities is right, chat is out."

http://habitatchronicles.com/2007/03/the-untold-history-of-t...
English is a hub language. I travel outside of the US, I meet the locals, I meet other foreigners also visiting, and chances are we all speak English.

Learning a foreign language is a time consuming and expensive endeavor. If you are not blessed to have English as your native language, and you are struggling financially but interested in upping your skill level or marketability, which language do you study? Which language makes the most sense?

In many cases, the answer to those questions is English. I also pity students of English. It's a horrible, horrible language as a student. I say this being a native English speaker with moderate literacy in Japanese and Chinese.
Yes, but that's different than that being a scenario which is remotely feasible (it's not). Not renouncing a first strike during the Cold War was a measure to counter massive Soviet conventional numerical advantages in the European theater. France also does not guarantee no first use, because it wanted the Russians to know that crossing into France would necessarily mean nuclear retaliation on their cities (as if the Russians made it to the French border, the conventional war would essentially be lost for NATO).

In short, there are no realistic circumstances under which the US would launch a first strike with nuclear weapons. The political cost is too high, and the benefits could never outweigh the costs.
that's understandable
It sounds like that's what he wants. A "clean" site.
> How then do we assess the extent of the vulnerability?

It's already a critical vulnerability. Unless you want to assign numbers to the infinity, which is ridiculous.
Heavy moderation also creates a meritocracy where reputable users who post a lot will have their content passed through the filter seamlessly and new contributors will be walled off completely in order to support the status quo. Let's not forget reddit has a deep history of moderator abuse.
Personally I like David Brin's solution from the Uplift novels. Most of the things we want to say have nothing to do with sex and apply regardless of gender, so if we aren't going to let the same words double for male and gender-neutral usage, keep the traditional, simple words for the latter usage and move the former to something else. Thus, in Brin's novels, 'man' refers to any human with no implication of gender, and the words for a specifically male or female human are 'mel' and 'fem'.
Another irony to this is that both this and the new university line run north and south. It is relatively easy to go north-south in Seattle, the hard part is going east-west because of the way the hills and lakes are arranged. But for the same reasons, it is also harder to get a rail line built going east-west.
Nazi science sneers at your bad analogies.
> patent trolls

Microsoft has probably been the least aggressive of the larger software companies in the use of patents. While Gates ran it, I don't recall them ever using patents to shut down competitors. They did collect a "war chest" of patents, but as a defensive "mutually assured destruction" strategy.

Microsoft was famously sued by Apple over "look and feel" copyrights. After that, who could blame them for amassing a large patent portfolio?
Journal publishing itself is awkward. It's bad use of experimental data - often you have to look at printed graphs to figure out data values not reported in the paper. Statistic power is almost never mentioned. Tons of data that could be useful to other researchers is discarded. Discussion sections tend to be overly biased. There is so much research output, it's almost impossible to refute anything and possibel to support almost anything. And so on and so on. What we need is accurate databases of research results, not more publishing.

We should be rewarding scientists for the volume, integrity and significance of their data output, not for what they claim themselves in their papers.
The section describing strong typing is pretty weak/vague, and seems to actually be referring to static typing
What's the latest word on native ES2015 module support (i.e. the import keyword) in V8 or Node.js? Every ES2015 comparison table I know omits it, but it's the big one that could significantly reduce the modern JS toolchain complexity.
What Happens When Baseball-Stats Nerds Run a Pro Team?
Swipe right until you get a match
> I don't think reddit's problem is harassment, I think it's groupthink, extremely low quality/uninformed discourse, and brigading.

HN isn't immune to these. It suffers just as badly as Reddit. It's just that the cultures are so different. HN is elitist and thinks technology will improve our lives, Reddit is racist and thinks pictures of cute kittens and in-jokes will improve our lives. Both are filled with ignoramuses who get upvoted to the top of a page for catering to that website's niche the most (HN = most elitist comment, Reddit = funniest comment). Anyone else barely sees the light of day, and get downvoted to smithereens. As long as there's an upvote button, I don't think any website can truly solve this. HN tried to fix it by using more algorithms on top of upvotes, but it just doesn't work.
>My secondary forum about the Wario series has a very upbeat atmosphere without too much in the way of disagreement

...but that is a niche topic about a fictional universe. When a discussion forum must deal with real universe topics, like funding community projects, dealing with violence, etc., the forum will import all of the existing viewpoints, many of which may be at odds with each other and/or not "positive" in relation to each other.
I found a few references to stories about a 'medical situation' at Paisley Park that came out before TMZ's report—I'm assuming it was those reports.
I see "warmer, fuzzier" and then I go to the site, and the example thread displayed in the mobile image has the following responses in it:

* "The best evuh"

* "hell yeah"

* "Speechless, it's F*cking beautiful"

It might be a more positive site, but it doesn't look like they are going for high quality discussion.
A couple reasons. Look at these as something HTTP/2 does well, but maybe not the best:

Head of line blocking is mostly solved. You can interleave sending big messages with small ones. You can send control messages (like "Hey, I'm shutting down soon, don't send any more traffic this way") along with other messages. The alternative would be using multiple connections, or reimplementing your own version on top of HTTP/2.

The above is much more useful in the presence of streaming. H2 has first class support for bidirectional streaming. It is now feasible to do a stock ticker, or chat room, or whatever over a normal H2 connection, and not have a whole extra protocol or browser work-arounds. Web sockets work, and hanging GET request work, but they are extra burden. It would be great if the standard protocol supported it out of the box.

TCP Keep alive is not good enough, especially in the presence of Proxies. TCP Keep alive only goes over the first hop. It is possible to work around this, but wouldn't it be nice if this was part of the spec? Also, for what it's worth, TCP Keep alive only works over TCP. In the case of not using TCP (like Unix Sockets), what do you send to check round trip time? What about over shared memory? Other transports?

H2 Header support is pretty useful too. Sending repetitive headers (like user agent, referrer, auth tokens) is wasteful in H1.1. Huffman encoding allows you get get back the size of base64 encoded strings pretty easily, so the penalty for having to only use safe characters in your headers.

Some people have mentioned that this protocol was designed for making advertising faster. While this is possibly true, Google is planning on using HTTP/2 as its new intra/inter-Datacenter RPC transport (See gRPC). The protocol is good enough to support browsers, mobile, and servers without having to transliterate between protocols.
Bangladeshi professor hacked to death by ISIS in anti-atheism attacks
I'm... halfway. When I try, I can generate images, but I only do so occasionally. Most of the time, my thinking is exactly like the author describes. Facts, ideas, connections, hunches, intuitions, etc. The images are kinda like a serialization of this, no more: they have exactly the data I put into them, and not really any more "detail".

But what really blew my mind was when I realized that people think with words. Its always "have an idea, then attempt to serialize it into some approximation in the form of linear sentence or words". I mean, I can chose to speak a sentence in my head, but it is strange and artificial. But from what I hear from others, apparently people actually think about things with words, and which words they have both enable and limit their thinking. I still don't exactly know how that works, but apparently its common?
Do you really think that anyone ordered that? Do you think the President, or Governor of Ohio said, "You know what? Shoot the peaceful protestors!" Of course not. A few Guardsmen panicked and started shooting in a stressful situation (you really shouldn't use the National Guard for police work unless they're MPs). I'd bet money no one above the rank of Corporal was involved in the decision, and probably no one above PFC.
Anyone else get reminded of Eugenics when hearing about stuff like this? It's not entirely a history of violence, but of keeping the "undesirables" out and congregating people with attributes they agree with in order to strengthen those attributes in the general population.

I'm just saying slippery slope and all..
It's not a perfect echo chamber as you can browser /r/all and see and contribute content from/to both communities.
People who live far enough away that I don't see them with any regularity and whom I have no emotional or social connection.
I'm seeing an exponential curve, isn't it what we should expect ?
I wonder how much information brain can store, especially in context of people with "photographic memory".