skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, that's accurate! I'm glad we finally know the running time for parsing with derivatives.

Let me add some more background, about stuff that I would expect to be covered in this paper's related work section, except that it doesn't have one...

Most well-known parsing algorithms that handle arbitrary CFGs run in cubic time, so this paper's O(n^3) running time is about the best you would expect. Some other parsing algorithms that also handle arbitrary CFGs in cubic time include CYK[1], Early[2], and GLR[3]. I used to be excited about parsing with derivatives because of its simplicity, but CYK and Early parsers are both actually simpler than parsing with derivatives, once you've thrown this paper's optimizations in.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYK_algorithm
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earley_parser
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLR_parser

[EDIT: Previously, I stated "CFGs, in general, can't be parsed in better than cubic time.", which is incorrect. Thanks, pacala.]
NP, it's so common an occurrence on HN, I think it's self reinforcing. :)

(Using 'i.e.' when meaning 'e.g.' is similarly frequent.)
So, if applicable here, what do you parsing experts think of GLL parsing?

http://dotat.at/tmp/gll.pdf

It mentions retaining easy implementation and debugging of LL parsers while knocking out limitations with some LR-style stuff. A hybrid of sorts. Result is cubic time.
Chears will have to have a play with that
Top startup accelerator worth quitting the best job I ever had?
I've been granted a rare opportunity to join one of the top startup accelerators (think Y Combinator) in San Francisco, and I need to decide whether it's worth quitting the best job I ever had.

I always wanted to do a startup and this feels like the perfect opportunity for me to experience working alongside some of the smartest and hungriest entrepreneurs in the world. Not to mention the endless opportunities to expand my network of mentors and VCs.

There are several factors that are making me reconsider.

- I have serious doubts about the product and the team.
- I'm one of three co-founders with a minority stake in the company (no control).
- I'm in a great company with good work/life balance and an amazing boss (corporate life).
- I'd have to take 20% pay cut with no benefits and higher living costs in San Fran. I live in a rent controlled NYC apt that saves me a lot of money. I'd have to give it up!

The team did manage to raise $1mil in funding.

I'm 30yrs old and the window of living startup life may be closing down on me as I begin to think about marriage and kids over the next five years.

I'm wondering if the experience and knowledge that I would gain from this accelerator is enough to take the plunge, even if I'm not passionate about the team or the product. I consider myself very lucky to be granted this rare opportunity and I don't want to make a foolish decision just because I'm comfortable.

Any advice/thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
Exactly, trade war. Which comes to show how much of a clusterfuck is this Brexit. Who would've talked about trade war a week ago? What about Spain make any bold moves towards Gibraltar?

People laughed when others mentioned potential confrontation and war. I don't think it would happen, but it has just become a bit less improbable.

By the way, the UK can easily win a trade war against Spain; but Spain is part of a bigger trade organisation which is called European Union - does it ring a bell?
The UK is dead in the water against any EU country, because they'll go all together, specially against the UK after Brexit because they're willing to make an example out of the UK.

Either way, this is a fucking shame and I hope after a few years the UK population can take to court all the liars that tricked them into voting Leave. Voting Leave is a right, lying to people so they vote Leave or Remain should be a crime.
The original article is full of insults. MrZongle2 pointed this out and said this doesn't promote understanding. How is this "like"?
Here are some polities that had to use violence to achieve independence from Britain:
US
India
Pakistan
Kenya
Egypt
Burma
Sri Lanka
Malaysia
This is such a true statement.

I still remember being at a conference about 6 years ago. We were on lunch and talking shop with several other front-end developers. Of course jQuery comes up and people start asking if they should learn "vanilla" JS first before using jQuery.

Still remember one developer blurting out, "Yeah, jQuery is so easy to use, you just cop/paste the code, you don't even really have to know JS. I don't see any reason to learn the basics of JS." The crazy thing is there were a lot of heads nodding in agreement at the table. That's how it used to be, if a developer needed to do something with jQuery, they'd just look for a plugin and use that.

Today? No way can get away without knowing the language. Too many frameworks, too many options to mix/match languages to get a really good workflow process. You can't just jump in and not know how Angular directives work or Backbone collections work without knowing exactly how these things work.

IT's a different world out there nowadays.
I work in a major bank SecOps. Here we use RSA Security Analytics for aggregating packets and logs from all over the network, fire alerts and do our analysis.

I would like to know if someone here has used both RSA Security Analytics and Security Onion, and what they think about how they compare against one another. The last time (which was about 2 years ago) RSA Sales people came to our site and showed the capabilities of their product, it seemed to exceed the capabilities of Security Onion, but I am still a junior guy in SecOps and I still have a lot to catch up and learn, so I don't have the sufficient knowledge and expertise to determine how they compare against one another and what the pros and cons of each product are.
To expand on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics
GlowRoot: Java Application Performance Management
Text parsing for programming languages is NOT a difficult problem. It is very easy actually, much easier than most academics would have you believe.

What they are doing is trying to write theories and build conceptual systems about how to do things. That is their job. But when it comes to practical matters, the best route to take, as someone who wants to build a working compiler that gives good error messages and where the parser does not hamstring the rest of it, is to ignore almost all that stuff and just type the obvious code.
Did you actually read the paper?
> Along with the daily fish, does it makes sense to provide some sort of vocational training that an otherwise healthy person can take advantage of?

The two things have little to do with each other.

A universal basic income has two primary purposes. The first is that it can act as the safety net for people with no other options, without the administrative overhead and errors inherent in means testing or the disincentive to work of welfare benefits you lose when you get a job. The second is that it's inherently redistributive across the whole wealth spectrum, so it allows you to simplify the tax system because you're doing the redistributive part on the spending side, allowing you to use a single universal tax rate that can't be avoided with shell games and accounting tricks.

Now you want to offer vocational training on top of that, but this is the usual "we should help people by giving them food stamps" fallacy. Give people the money instead. They know more about their own situation than you do. If their best option is to use the money to go to school, they'll do that. But maybe their better option is to use the money to move somewhere else, or pay down debts, or go to rehab, etc.

The people know better than the government what the people need.
well fwiw, I'm a staff member, wouldn't consider myself rich, and that culture is what keeps me wanting to work there--I'd be pretty bored if it was more like a traditional VC firm.
Schengen has nothing to do with free movement. Schengen means no borders and the UK has never ever been in Schengen.
SANS has a slightly dated paper ([1]) about setting up this sort of thing that gives a flavor for how it can work.

I think AWS's VPC Flow Logs are the foundation for better tools (disclaimer, my company develops these tools - [2]). I hope Azure and others follow suit.

[1] https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/cloud/security...

[2] https://observable.net/blog/vpc-flow-logs-virtual-private-cl...
A concept like universal basic income is 100% thoroughly a political concept in every respect. There's no such thing as a successful program that ignores the aspect of its political appeal.
If you want to write a lexer from scratch, this is IMHO not trivial. If you use a generator it is much easier, but so is also using a parser generator for the CFG parsing stage.
Combating Hunger One Click at a Time
I tried really hard to find papers by Elizabeth Rhodes on basic income but I could not.

I was just wondering if she did lot of research on the topic that made her the most suitable candidate for the job.
Fair enough. They're not rocket science conceptually - but I have to relearn the tools each time. Not a huge deal - a couple of hours - but I was thinking that you were claiming I needed to have it down as cold as when I got out of CS 202 (or whatever that thing was).
Bloggit!
I was refering to alkali-silica reactions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkali%E2%80%93silica_reaction...
> So if you practice being a new you, you will become good at being that person.

Yes and no. According to my subjective perception of life you only know in hindsight whether you were practicing or not. Sometimes you feel really enthusiastic about something and decide to work very disciplined at it (and really do it) but you get no results and are no wiser as to why that is. Other times you don't even intend to do anything about something you want to change but your subconsciousness practices "for you" so to speak and all of a sudden you do the right things in the right moment without understanding why you're able to do it.

In fact, for many areas of my life I feel like I improve most when I can afford to do nothing for weeks and all of a sudden I get hit by one or two massive insights. It's sort of like all the information required for a change is already there but my brain needs massive amounts of thinking capacity to compute and suggest the right actions.
It's interesting to watch the dichotomy here, and how the FDA can't win for trying. When something slips by, the FDA is fast-tracking dangerous drugs. When Europe gets a new "miracle" drug before we do, the FDA is killing people.
No, he didn't. This stereotypical depiction of welfare is a racial dog whistle. The whole point is to say "black" without saying "black".
From my understanding the new chip cards are, in effect, smart cards meaning that after the first use, the information collected is useless. Whereas with a magnetic stripe the CC #, CVV #, expiration date, and name are all transferred plaintext.
That's his point. Although it wasn't a blue collar job like his dad originally had, it was still enough to keep him mentally healthy. Being completely unemployed sitting home harmed him psychologically.

His point was that having any job will create enough benefits to offset the supposed harms caused by having a job that one would consider himself overqualified for.
Basic income would help people do all sorts of things including having money to spend while you're getting your education.

Meanwhile, providing vocational training is a great thing.

Tying them together assumes you're a better judge of someone's needs when you don't know them. They may have a smarter way to spend or invest the money.
> I think that's exactly the other way around.

Precisely correct. Like you, on my desktop, I counter the user interface deficiencies of infinite scrolling by opening links in new tabs. This prevents the very real and very annoying problem of not being able to return to the infinitely-scrolling list view at the position I left it. Tabs prevent that loss of page context.

On a mobile device, tab-based workarounds are possible but more cumbersome, so I usually choose to open one item from the infinite scrolling list traditionally. If when I return via the back button, context is lost, I usually concede defeat by this bad user interface paradigm and leave the site.
> If recipients are living in public housing, collecting food stamps, accepting federal student loans, or any other form of indirect government aid, then it skews the results.

Depending on how much money it is, the extra income might disqualify them from receiving most of that stuff anyway, especially if they also have any kind of a job.

That's going to be the real thing to watch out for though. If the basic income isn't enough to disqualify you from welfare but basic income + job is, the study is going to be useless unless you prohibit the subjects from also applying for welfare.
No, because Switzerland is not part of the EU - What would be the point of that?

The new economic hub will be Frankfurt.
I don't find any of the rebuttals convincing.

>1) Yep, so just put it in the fixed sidebar.

Who said the site has a fixed sidebar? Why create a design that necessitates one?

>Not really, if you've developed this the right way - which is render only items that are currently visible and derender the ones that are above the current scroll canvas.

So change the list constantly under the user, and thus the scrollbar and relevant position. Plus, the extra coding complexity, and what for?

>5) As other people here suggested, this depends on the content. If you work in e-commerce there is quite a habit people to scroll infinitely with a huge amount of products

Even in commerce, choice paralysis is a thing, regardless of if people tend to "scroll infinitely" if they are shown a huge amount of products. That they scroll doesn't mean they don't feel the choice paralysis.

>6. The scrollbar becomes unusable and untrustworthy

FB wants to be immersive and keep you lost deep inside to show you ads, not to do what's best for usability.
Great feedback!
A couple of questions as we are new to

* What are the risks of unmasking a hidden Tor

* Planning a schedule to turn on tor will be a good solution for the resiliency problem ?

Thanks !
How to Keep Stack Overflow from Turning into a Landfill
Hey, again, I totally agree with you. You are right, no single answer is sufficient. It was obvious before, and it's still obvious. The new lines show the specific conflict between 0^x and x^0, but there is no one answer.

Your re-iterating your point makes me wonder if you're actually hearing and understanding the part about choices and definitions trumping logic. If we define 0^0=1, then it doesn't matter what arguments we have, it doesn't matter that there are 3 or more right answers. The right answer can be, and in other parts of math, is what we define it to be, not what makes the most sense.

0^0 is defined as 1 (sometimes) because that has utility and consistency for some other expressions, formulas, operations, etc. It's not because it's right. It's not because it makes sense. It's because we decide to set 0^0=1. It's for convenience.

Now, some sources online say that 0^0 is indeterminate, not equal to one. Other sources online say that 0^0 is 1.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Power.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminate_form

https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/~alopez-o/math-faq/mathtext/node14.h...
https://www.google.com/search?q=0%5E0
https://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-exponents...
In Canada we use what is called limit states design and it handles the sudden failure vs gradual failure already. Essentially if you want to use a member or a material that suddenly fails you must design it to fail one tenth as often. In practice engineers go even more overboard because nobody wants blood on their hands and gradual failure greatly decreases the odds of that from happening.

In terms of construction materials in condos failing (glass and piping) I actually put the blame for those two failures on the individual testing companies. Engineers in Canada don't understand statistics properly because most aren't taught materials testing properly in university. But we don't live in a utopia either. It is expected that things will go wrong sometimes and that we'll have to update our building codes to address those shortcomings. My issue with Canada is that we don't have a (or at least I'm not aware of there being a) structured materials testing code.

Sure we'll regulate materials and connections for our main structural elements, but there will always be that last mile where someone will want to do something weird (like build part of the building under railway or if someone over bent some reinforcement bar and you need to authorize them rolling it back) and you're pretty much out on your own once you come to those scenarios. It's doubly unfortunate because most of the engineers that just look things up in tables are basically helpless because they don't remember or use the basics day-to-day. So they end up being extremely conservative - unnecessarily wasting money and material for all of us.
"As you travel down the tail of the probability distribution, rogue waves become ever stranger. Not only can their size and direction be unexpected, but they can appear in some unlikely places."

I realize that next to the privations and risks of long sea voyages in ye olde days, the risk of a truly catastrophic rogue wave was slim. Still, the notion that you could have spent a lifetime on the seas, truly an expert with the right supplies and equipment... and you could still face a monster like the ones described in the article.

Terrifying. Who needs Krakens when you have that?!
Is it bad I'm still turned off by anything hosted on sourceforge? Even after the recent changes.
It does, though its effect is usually small with respect to other ones like electromagnetic interactions in chemical reactions. But I forgot without gravity there are no traditional convection currents.
No. Why would anyone think so?
I agree completely, but it seems a lot of others (unfortunately) don't, as this rather saddening link shows:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28256/equation-expression...
Yes, the thing about the inability of a given programmer to produce a recursive descent parser is that it generally comes from an actual ignorance of a what an abstract language is rather than from a particular technical inability. Especially, coming from naive object orientation, a language seems like it should just be a thing, an "object" and so you should be able to define a "language object" and go from there. But actually an abstract language operates on a "whole other level" than the usual hierarchy of members and methods described in simple object-oriented design.

Anyway, hopefully the derivative idea is to have constructs kind-of like regular expressions but actually reflecting language-structure and able to general good and understandable parsers.
I don't see this framework going anywhere. The repo owner is the sole contributor [0], and is singularly pre-occupied with benchmarks and GitHub stars. The owner's entitlement about copy-pasted code, use of the royal "we", quickness to close issues without discussion, and pattern of editing and deleting issue comments are also discouraging.

[0] https://github.com/kataras/iris/graphs/contributors
That's part of it, but mainly roman concrete holds up much better because they never used reinforcing rebar. Volcanic ash improves longevity further, but if they had included rebar (volcanic ash or no) all those structures would have rotted away a long time ago.
How many of us actually read the documentation and the source for the systems we use? All the options and flags for jq, wget, socat, ssh, rsync, etc. I am trying to spend about 5 minutes a day just reading man pages, esp about things I THINK I know but actually don't.
Can they not? I had at least two undergrad classes (Programming Languages and Automata Theory) that taught how to do efficient CFG parsing.
They did default even if nobody calls it a default.
For points 1, 2, and 4, I do agree that solutions exist, but I found myself agreeing with the author that they're an issue simply because I run across enough sites that continue to have these problems despite many good sites demonstrating how the pages should operate.

I think the article's point would stick a little better though if the author focused more on the implementation than on the ∞scroll itself, since it's inconsistency across user experiences that causes frustration with ∞scroll, not so much ∞scroll itself. The only reliable constant across implementations of ∞scroll is that you'll be able to continually scroll; how it interacts with static content on the page, how it interacts with the back-button, and so on depends completely on how well it's implemented. It is very frustrating to come across sites where you follow a link far down in the page and hit back, only to be taken to the very top of the list and having to scroll and reload everything again. It's not even so much a performance issue; my old iPhone4s handles most ∞scroll just fine, but it's still just frustrating to go through pages and pages of scrolling because hitting Back didn't return me to where I was. This is particularly bad on mobile where fat-fingering links is pretty easy/common.

Edit: not sure why you're getting down voted - I think your comments are fine and worth discussion; I also think they're wrong, but that's the point of discussion...
This misses the even more important question: while these baiting tactics work long term, or make users hate our guts and our site and jump ship the moment something more respectful emerges.

The increased adoption of ad blockers happened for a similar disrespect for the user -- and an over-embrace of "baiting"
They don't even mention some real disasters:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide
Video of a 50-foot rogue wave from The Deadliest Catch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_8hOai9hGQ

Video of the Lego pirate being capsized in the wave tank (mentioned in the article).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayd1rvuqBzU

Sneaker waves (on shore) are also very dangerous.

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

http://videos.oregonlive.com/oregonian/2016/01/sneaker_wave_...
How transactional DDL in your queries can kill your throughput. Postmortem
EU referendum petition signed by more than 1.5m
I'm sure the EU wants to make the UK pay, but it can't afford to.

The EU is too reliant on exports to the UK to play hardball.

I think you and the UK public are mistaken. The cost of another country leaving the EU far exceeds the cost of punishing [1] GB.

Think about it. What if GB gets nice deals for nothing? I assure you that within two years the EU is over. There are many countries with a large fraction of people that are anti-EU. I think the EU will rather loosen sanctions on Russia than giving the UK a good deal. Im wondering how the US government is thinking at this very moment.

One lesson we can draw is that the EU should advertise their benefits in a better manner. And "wir schaffen das" is a sure way to blow up the continent.

1. actually punishing does mean nothing more than to give no special benefits to the UK. They had it, they will loose it.
Where "intent to make them not secure" can also be written as intent to make them easy to use without thinking about security.
src https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/4pshdj/how_the...

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/maintenance.h...
The FDA is explicitly trying to avoid regulating things like smart watches. They're all but begging companies like Fitbit to be careful in their marketing to avoid forcing the FDA to act on the claims.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/24/8836049/fda-regulation-hea...
I've taught undergrads CKY in a half-hour, but only when limited to Chomsky-form grammars. This is still a general parsing algorithm, but the restriction is very annoying in practice. Turning a grammar into Chomsky form is quite annoying, too.