skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The time you're spending reviewing warnings, determining warnings don't make sense, and individually suppressing warnings sounds like it could be considerable.

It can be. The thing is, I still spend more time debugging than writing code. The question is: Does this category of warning save me more time in bugs prevented that I don't need to debug, than it takes to review and suppress false positives? If not, I can disable the entire warning category. But otherwise - the considerable cost saves an even more considerable cost in debugging!

Now, the time reviewing warning categories also takes some time, but it's been absolutely worth it in my experience. Even warnings which don't make sense to leave enabled globally can be useful - there are times when they make sense to force-enable locally.

Clang can generate warnings about these two structures:

struct foo { char c; /* 3 bytes implicit padding */ int i; };
struct bar { int i, j, k; /* possibly 4 bytes of implicit padding */ };

Totally worthless for 99% of my code. But if these structures need to be exactly the same memory layout between multiple compilers with different implicit padding rules - because they're memory mapped, or serialized as a simple char[] blob, or whatever else, it's a very useful warning to enable around the struct definitions! (I'll combine this with static asserts about structure sizes to seal the deal. No, just because they're the same size doesn't mean they were padded the same between compilers!)

I've spent weeks tracking down issues that eventually turned out to be serialization mismatch related. Yes, it can be that subtle. I assume I saved at least a week between the multiple times I or a coworker triggered the warning-as-error modifying the structure. It took maybe a minute to look up the right warning, and to wrap the code in the relevant pragmas to force-enable it just for those structures. Worth!

> I wonder if the argument for/against -Werror is really the difference between the beliefs "a compiler warning is probably a problem in my code" vs "a compiler warning is probably a problem in the compiler"

For me it's "I want to review every warning type, and decide how to handle it".

Some of them are probably a problem in my code. These should remain errors - I need to fix them.
Some of them are probably a false positive, but catch big issues that make it worthwhile anyways. These should remain errors - I can suppress them.
Some of them are probably a false positive, and don't catch big issues, and just waste my time. These shouldn't even be warnings - I can disable them.
From $0 in profit to $1 in profit. $1/$0 = NaN. My growth rate is so big it breaks calculators. Make the checks out to "K. Winker"
Edward Snowden is a US counter-intelligent agent used to evaluate the public response to "uncovering" already known programs and to take steam off Assange's case.

As far as conspiracy theories go, I prefer this one. I find it strange that Snowden has not been the subject of character assassination.
I'm not sure what's de facto, but I most commonly see other Rust/Linux users reaching for valgrind (callgrind, cachegrind, etc). I've recently used massif (part of valgrind) for doing profiling of heap allocations, as well. In the past I also used oprofile because it gave me a nicely annotated source dump of sample rates in different statements.

I am growing to like perf a lot, though. It seems (haven't measured though) to impose less runtime overhead, and the reporting and source annotation tools are top notch.
A lot of financial systems are running COBOL on mainframes (which can look very pretty, check out the z13: https://www.google.com/search?q=z13&tbm=isch )

There was a talk last year at DefCon that went over mainframe vulnerabilities, and it was like a playground. The biggest barrier to entry is getting a mainframe to experiment with.
CuratedAI: A literary magazine written by machines, for people
Although I don't know if there is a time limit, it is possible to exit the same station as you enter for no fee with the standard BART card. e.g. in case you realize you've forgotten something in your car after you pass the turnstiles. Therefore it should be possible to save 100% of fares for people leaving/arriving at opposite stations, respectively.

System-wide savings would then be proportional to directionality on a station by station basis - optimizing by zeroing out trips by longest first.

Dunno if this works with the clipper cards though, so everyone might need a magnetic card writer and blanks...
I didn't see that example, sorry. (I did Ctrl-F and found the swim team example first.)

It's pretty bad stereotyping, I agree. But for the LGBT Finance Director to say that - why do you think it is egregiously, lose-your-job-on-the-spot bigoted?

The linked Reddit discussion has a pretty wide range of views, but even there I don't see anyone calling him bigoted. The closest is "It's an vicious joke. I don't care whether the joker is gay. He's a duplicitous prick.", and the author of that comment is getting quite a lot of push-back on it. They later qualified their comment to say:

You missed my point which I approached a bit too indirectly, perhaps. I don't take offense to jokes. My point: the question of whether the joker is gay is irrelevant to the ethical status of making a joke about being gay

It's relevant for PC bots, sure, but I'm not bound to their code.

Edit: but, yeah, the guy is still a duplicitous prick

I don't really understand this explanation, but it doesn't really sound like an accusation of bigotry.

"Bigot" means "a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions". How do you get that from that particular comment?

I'd be disappointed if we couldn't find a position we can both understand. I completely respect your anger over these emails - they are nasty and unprofessional, and I'm not endorsing that or the behaviour they represent in any way.

But I'm not surprised they aren't "under 24/7 emphatic media coverage" - like someone said in that Reddit thread - it's like a bunch of office gossip.
This is a very long and very good blog series that I highly recommend. (One note, it's from 2013.)

The funniest part is this post, which complains about code duplication: https://ayende.com/blog/162853/reviewing-lightning-memory-ma...

In the last two screenshots, there is a subtle difference with the indentation, which breaks MDB_PREV_DUP. It wasn't noticed until over a year later: https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/commit/bfe297da47beb31debee48f0...

I'm still a big fan of LMDB. It's been hugely inspirational for me, and I think it's the best low-level key-value store out there. There is still lots of room for improvement though!
How is self-medication handled in the study analysis?
To me, it sounds like men who are hurting start self-medicating early, which supports the social stigma hypothesis. They often use this as their sole resource.

Women wait much longer to self medicate, it sounds like. This may be from women being given other social support options, or because they face a larger stigma around handling their problems themselves. Nevertheless, women who are hurting do begin to self-medicate as a last resort.

It sounds like men have more opportunity to develop a solo coping mechanism, with women not developing this because they aren't isolated early, and instead have other resources to try first.

Disclaimer: I've been a functional daily cannabis smoker for 7 years. I use it to cope with loneliness, depression, and social anxiety. I work for a major cloud and ISP company.
I always love seeing implementations of Logo that I haven't run across yet. Logo was my introduction to coding, back when I was in third grade in the mid-90s.
It's been a few years since I've used it, and that was only a couple of times between going between a couple of stations, but that's not how I remember it. Some stations had ticket scanners at the entrance to the platform but some didn't.

I remember the Palo Alto station very clearly because I got on once thinking I had grabbed my ticket from the vending machine when I had actually grabbed the previous person's receipt because I was in a hurry. I got on the train and once I realized I was worried about the fare inspectors coming on and catching me, so that station definitely does not require a ticket to get on the platform. Maybe that's just classism with respect to Palo Alto?

Edit: never mind, it was Caltrain not BART.
tl;dr:

Don't rush to get your daily dose of rapamycin yet. It is untested in Humans for aging purposes.

Instead, reduce your calorie intake. This has a similar effect to what Rapamycin stimulates.

Eat less and prosper.
I have a rhetorical question here. When you say that anonymous feedback gives manager the idea of what working with me is like to my coworkers, do you think this information is useful for and should actually be allowed to share with potential employers and recruiting managers? Shouldn't they have a right to this information? For example: when a candidate mentions "references" on his resume, they are always meant to give positive feedback about them which is why again its broken. However, imagine of a platform allowing users to get anonymous 360 feedback from former and current colleagues and this information to be only shareable with recruiting manager of jobs they apply on. If a user shows certain transition and improvements ij their qualities then that would mean they're really working on the feedback they receive and as a hiring manager i would definitely want to hire that guy. Problem with that is a lot of people would never want this information to go out and made available to the hiring comitttees as it will reveal too much about them. However, that's the only way i find this fixable!
Great leaders don't give orders
I recently went to a talk where the researcher was able to derive the location and size of starspots (a.k.a sunspots here on the sun) from the Kepler data [1]. It just amazes me the amount of information you can derive from a single pixel of light dimming in and out.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gf7jsYA6oJ8
The RX480 w/AMDGPU-PRO works pretty well in most cases for desktop/gaming/OpenCL use.

AMD's Linux team is in the middle of a big push to modernize the driver and software stack. It seems they consider it a mostly working preliminary version.

You can choose-your-own-adventure with the totally open amdgpu+mesa stack or use the proprietary AMDGPU-PRO. You can follow development of the open source parts on this mailing list:

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/

I do agree with others that NVIDIA is a better choice if you want something that just works and you don't care about proprietary vs. open source.
Dead relevant comment in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12156328
That's Caltrain, not BART.

Caltrain is POP.
Tolerance extends to the understanding of a culture and abstaining from deriding someone based solely on that culture.

The joke, which reveals a deeper personal value judgement on behalf of the person telling it, speaks of a "good gay" as if to stereotype gay men by a particular behavior, denying the possibility that you can be a "good" gay man but have a different cultural outlook. That, to me, is unquestionably a form of intolerance. Making light of someone can be a form of intolerance, depending on what property it is by which you make light of them and whether or not it is based in a harmful generalization. Another way to say it is: you can't claim tolerance if you're happy to propagate harmful stereotypes or generalizations.

Emphatically, it is crucial to dive into the language deeply. The urge to say "it's just a joke" is precisely the kind of let's-sweep-this-frat-house-bigotry-under-the-rug-and-go-back-to-thinking-everything's-nice rationalization that allows such bigotry to perpetuate.

Re: your last line that it's like gossip:

Except that this is our political process. It happens rarely (once per four years) and is a matter of passion, contention, and deep moral conviction. We have every right to expect it to be held to far higher standard than some bullshit gossip.

Let me be clear that I do not believe it's merely gossip and I'm not offering any credibility to that stance. It's not mere gossip. It is harmful, derogatory language about gays, as well as at the very least an amazingly insensitive and offensive simplification of American religious beliefs (e.g., that some particular Christian people will see "a Jew" differently than "an atheist" and that could be worth a few polling points, and that all three belief groups are nothing whatsoever but sources of polling points, to be engineered and manipulated with audience plants, etc.)

But even if it was "mere gossip" [it isn't] it would still be outrageously flagrant that the primary administrators of one half of our most important political process essentially view their jobs as a frat party. That's not some kind of let's-roll-our-eyes-but-boys-will-be-boys-and-move-on kind of thing, as you seem to think it is, but rather it is a let's-eject-everyone-from-this-Neanderthal-administration-and-hire-people-who-actually-give-a-damn issue. It's not boring nightly news to be eye-rolled and skipped for the sports section. It's our goddamn political process. It's frankly shocking to me that someone would suggest it's just boring gossip to be unconcerned with. I cannot reconcile that with any notion of caring about even the tiniest component of civic duty.
I have a lot of questions about payments on WeChat:

Do you need someone to verify your ID to get a WeChat account with a wallet? I don't think it would be legal to implement something like that in North America without ID checks and a money transmission license, no?

What are the fees? If non-zero, why do people prefer it to cash? If they are zero, how does WeChat make money on the feature? How is it connected to the banking system and how much does WeChat have to pay the banks for that hookup?

I honestly don't see any innovation here, the tech is dirt simple. It's just too difficult to do in the US because of the PATRIOT act, greedy banks, and overzealous AML regulations.
So is Nintendo saying that they had already calculated the success & revenue from Pokemon Go and its side effects, or are they saying that their original projections are falling short and Pokemon Go saved them?
The government still is the only entity that can silence dissenters. All the entities you listed are limited to merely kicking you off their platform. Facebook can't 404 your posts on Reddit, and none of them and none of them can stop you from standing on the sidewalk with a sandwich board.

Saying that social media platforms should be subject to "scrutiny" (which is pretty vague and non-actionable), or are somehow beholden to public opinion, is nonsense. They're beholden to users, at most. And it's not like Google shut down the blog of of someone saying "GOOG's target price should be about $12". Let's see how much backlash they gets from their users over this, ha.
So could whatever create-react-app is delivering be substantially approximated with an npm-based solution?
I don't have a question, but an observation, and some unsolicited advice.

You said "AMA" hours ago, and haven't returned (as of my comment timestamp) to answer the questions that have been posted here. On HN, the story may fall off the homepage before you have a chance to come back, which would limit the audience that would see your answers.

I've upvoted it, because I think it's an important study and the conversation that could be had here in the comments may help someone. But I'd urge you (and anyone who says "AMA" on a popular site) to check in every 5-15 minutes for a few hours, just to keep momentum going.

Good luck, and thanks (in advance) for any answers you may offer to the other comments!
China's about to rewrite human DNA using CRISPR for the first time
I believe you are thinking of Caltrain, which is a proof-of-payment system. BART does not go to Palo Alto.
I still think if it incentivizes users in a very straightforward way then this is useful to them. In my reply to drakonka, i mention how it can be used in the career to be a super useful thing not only to them but to the companies where they work or intend to work as well. Do you think it should be done that way?
The lymphatic system is specifically for removing toxins, so naturally it's function is implied
You may be thinking of Caltrain, rather than BART.
I think he shouldn't have made the source available. Now it's really only the (apparent?) uncloneability of the Clipper cards that stops someone.
As the author said, Clipper Cards aren't cloneable, so this is impractical because it would require physically swapping BART tickets. It's just a theoretical mental exercise, not some kind of anti-government rebellion. And given the number of people I see each day simply jumping over the fare gates (very common in stations where there's no station agent booth next to all of the gates, and not uncommon even in stations where the agent is right there) this hack is hardly the biggest threat to BART revenue.
CRDT notes (2015)
This supports "universe is a simulation" arguments, no?
To play Devil's advocate, these platforms help people engage in discourse, but much like HN, has its own set of rules. HN shadow-bans and moderates with gusto, but I suppose it doesn't qualify as big enough?

Google provides more walls for people to hang their art, but they aren't required to hang yours and I'm not sure compelling them to is a good thing.

The same voices calling foul on Google raise hell when Reddit shows what truly unmoderated platforms look like.

Just because you (the colloquial "you") call yourself an artist doesn't compel the Met to hang your art and neither does it compel Google.
There's zero proof of this assertion in the article... But hey whatever deflects blame and attention from the corruption in the DNC.
> an otherwise idle phone only checking in once an hour or so

The phone network has to know which cell tower you're nearby in order to send a call to you. If you're driving, you could get far away from your original cell tower in one hour.

If your phone hasn't checked in for an hour and you've traveled a great distance in that hour, how does the phone network know where to send the incoming call for you?

I can think of only two solutions: Either your phone checks in much more frequently than once an hour, or the network tries pinging you on wider and wider concentric circles of cell towers in order to locate you. Which is it? (Or something else?)
That makes sense, and explains some other memories I have about transferring trains. I did not realize they were separate systems.
Some feedback for discussion - some of the FP stuff is sort of blurry to me after a point but here is what I sort of feel scratching this at the surface as a scala dude. Not trying to be critical - just whatever is off of the top of my head a la review.

Lazy:
I feel like the definition of lazy needs to be demonstrated in contrast to eager evaluation.

val x = {println("evaluating x"; 5)}

lazy val lazyX = {println("evaluating lazyX"; 5)}

this would print ("evaluating x) to the console. lazyX would not be evaluated because it is not invoked. Here the eager definition of x demonstrates that it is evaluated immediately. lazyZ is only evaluated when invoked.

Monads and higher kinded types.
The informal vs formal definition of some of the higher kinded types is worth noting. You're either describing the most formal definitions (identity/associativity laws) or you're describing the informal defition (has flatmap, processing things in a series as described in the wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_(functional_programming) )
Monad seems to be the informal definition, otherwise associativity laws should be included maybe? Eg in Scala Try is not a formal monad as the associativity laws don't hold true. https://wiki.haskell.org/Monad_laws
Also why is it "of" and "chain" here? Isn't it traditionally flatmap that indicates a type might be a monad, and then the identity laws the truly confirm it? Maybe this is js land? If so, should the doc say "this is js" as flatmap is pretty descriptive of map+flatten. It's hard to talk about - It's not at all clear to me what people mean when they talk about monads either - just throwing thoughts around.

I think you should outline how Currying and Partial Application are related maybe? Eg currying is taking a function with an arg list and making it take multiple arg lists (the act of making a function take multiple arg lists), and Partial application is the application of an argument of a curried function more or less? I think the relationship between these should be highlighted possibly to sort of draw out what part of the life of a function we're talking about if trying to illuminate the subject for someone.
Doesn't BART have onboard ticket inspectors? That would easily foil this.
In the real world performance review is useless. Would you trust Trump's reviews of Hillary as a cabinet leader or Hillary's reviews of Trump as a businessman? In the real world people just go through the motions of performance reviews and management doesn't care about feedback until they want someone gone. I have seen people completely delusional that they are so far ahead of everyone else and are uniquely qualified to pass judgement on everyone but not receive any. Their ability to maintain their belief is amazing. It's part of their identity and their need to have power. People cannot be trusted to give impartial feedback about their competitors. I had to leave many of those people behind to advance my career. They continue on in their low paying middle management or developer jobs.
And also the original formula has to be changed to "improve" the benefits, since the patent of the original compound expired. The changes were more cosmetic, preserving the working core of it that was present in the original formulation.
If you enter/exit via the same station, BART charges $5.75 (Search for 'excursion' at https://www.bart.gov/guide/faq) unless you talk with a Station Agent.

I've never understood why they charge this fee when it would be possible to get a lower fare by going a station further, exiting, and entering again but I haven't had a problem if I talk with the Station Agent.
Yahoo.com is the 5th ranked domain in the U.S., and the world, according to Alexa. http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/yahoo.com

That's pretty good.
Searching by type signature is very useful. I think searching by example input and output pairs would be a great addition to Haskell as well, especially for beginners and the base libraries.

A technique I use for poorly documented libraries is searching in github '<some keywords> <optionally library name> language:<language>'. Unfortunately there are some serious limitations in github search, no way escape certain characters.
They have a new, soon-to-be-launched kickstarter company at http://kniterate.com. I really, really want a machine as described that works.
The book I read is actually One Second After by William R. Forstchen. I looked up the "Lights Out" by Crawford, and it looks like it was published about 20 months after, at least according to Amazon. I'm not sure who copied who when, just saying that that's the book I read, and it's a pretty good story, if probably technically unrealistic and a little full of standard prepper tropes.

Thanks for the real-world info, though. You're saying that modern cars are pretty much unaffected by EMPs, in addition to trucks, locomotives, and other major infrastructure? Does this cover all realistic strengths of EMP effect? Are we talking like the only way the EMP effect could hurt anything is if the bomb is close enough to physically destroy it anyways? So no realistic likelihood of damage from the orbital nuke scenario, no matter the power level of the bomb?

FWIW, I associate "prepper" with wildly impractical and poorly thought out levels of preparation for wildly unlikely disasters. Being prepared for things that are realistic and have actually happened in the recent past is just common sense.