skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For some values of "pure", sure. The problem is, keeping this level of purity - that allows to strictly prove theorems about your code - is very hard. And most real code would compromise, while still pretending that they are pure and their results are proven. That's not a road to a good place.

I seriously doubt there's much industrial code made in functional languages that has been proven to be correct. And I'm not talking about halting problem, etc., not that deep, I mean just writing a spec of what the code would do in every situation and proving that indeed it does that. I haven't seen any. Maybe in theory it'd be possible, in practice, it doesn't happen. In fact, if that happened frequently, unit testing in functional environments would not exist - you don't need to test what you can prove to be correct. In reality, it very well exists.

> There is a reason why the majority of proof assistants are implemented as functional languages.

It's not the direction you need to prove though. Surely, it is easier to express things we can prove in functional terms. The challenge, however, is to see if it's easy to prove
that code follows certain specs when that spec is not specially fit for being expressed in functional terms.

> it's that what's new about it (privileging the first argument of each procedure, inheritance, lots of hidden mutable state) is bad

Hidden mutable state is not mandated by OOP in any way. And arguing that inheritance and special arguments are bad would require some more than just saying "it's bad".

> and what's good about it (encapsulation, polymorphism) is not new

So what? Where's the problem if it's not new? Letters we're using aren't new, so aren't numbers, still serve us well. Not everything good must be new, if it's old and still good - even better. I fail to see how "it's not new" is any meaningful criticism - it's like criticizing a math library that the result it returns for 2+2 is not new. Why would we want it to be new?
I think they "forgot" to mention one: users can't block ads.
It really is possible. I have received countless suggestions from my employer that we understand to be merely suggestions rather than orders.

This seems like one of the most basic communication requirements in a company hierarchy. I'm surprised people seem to think it's impossible to achieve, when I would sooner think that it's impossible for a company to be functional without having achieved it.
This is pretty much the reason the research wing of most organizations exist.
Indeed - as anyone hosting pornography knows, it's generally on the people who took the photo, the people who uploaded it, and the people who are hosting it to have proof that their models are over age. If it turns out they're not, there's a risk of everyone who handled the photo being complicit in distribution of child pornography.
Perhaps say exactly that, for starters.
If you ask me what's the opposite of "proving", I'd say it's "testing". You call that "weaker"? It's the weakest form of validation I know of.
99.99% of what people do with Excel does not qualify as "software", unless you classify "A1+C3" as "software", in which case calling it "functional" becomes meaningless.
The key distinction is not variable vs function argument, but rather const variable vs pointer-to-const.

If you have "const int x" (as a local variable, global variable, or function parameter) then there is no valid way to modify x's value. But if you have "const int* y" (as a local variable, global variable, or function parameter), you can always cast away const and mutate as long as the original variable (the one "y" points to) wasn't declared const.
I was about to write the same thing. He's the last guy at the factory. Surrounded by other robots impatiently waiting on this slow human.

I used to think Amazon was great when they sold books. Now I'm not so sure.

but I suppose it's too late. Once humans are removed, they can drop prices lower than anyone with humans could possibly provide. yikes.
Or as Neil Gaiman put it from the opposite perspective:"When people tell it's wrong, they're almost always right. When they tell you how to fix it they're almost never right."
It doesn't change your point, but Ecuador's country code is EC.
Note that I'm talking about results, not effort. Someone could be giving their best effort already, resulting in 1.0 units of output. But babying them might be the emotional equivalent of blood-doping in a marathon, a psychological stimulus that actually partially restores or extends the willpower-resource that is spent internally to accomplish work.

I'm also not talking about a specific kind of person who "needs" babying. I'm proposing instead that your average neurotypical human brain might have this effect built in, such that it applies to anyone and everyone. It would just be an effect that most of the time goes untapped.
That was the plan :) I've done it thought, I pay for my mail now etc.

There is something about not feeling like a product that is so satisfying.
1. register lots of domains

2. send Google cryptic cease and desist for each domain

3. wait for Google to accidently violate cease and desist

4. profit

What can possibly go wrong?
Tutorial Pokemon Go Bot Indonesia
Core problems take months or years, depending on who gets involved. But low hanging fruits are everywhere and you should exploit them to gain credit and credibility. Just don't implement solutions that fix a small issue but then introduce even more technical debt (i.e.: coding a custom access database for non technical users).
The question is will we iteratively destroy each job until 5% of the current workers still can afford an opulent living while the other 95% are crushed by misery and accusations of inadequacies, or will we, as a society, realize that we can suppress the need for work altogether and try to make the smoothest transition possible?

This is not a technical question but a political one. Seeing how most politicians paint unemployed as subhumans that barely deserve to live, I am not that optimistic :-/
hmm... human or context sensitive robot post?
What about where it says "Facebook explicitly revoked authorization for any access"? Doesn't that imply that the exact actions they made don't matter?
The default settings have some noticeable latency (5-10ms), but changing the video encoding from "balanced" to "fast" drop it down to almost nothing. You can additionally plug the controller(s) into your PC to further remove any input delay. I can't vouch for emulated arcade games, but it works surprisingly well with a steam collection.
I hear what you are saying.

Personally, as a contributor to open source, I would like my contributions to go to projects that enable and encourage business. I prefer not to make code contributions to projects that cannot freely be used by all, including business. I consider that to be the spirit of open source.

Sure, some businesses will take advantage of Node.js for example because it has an MIT license, but the vast majority will benefit. Startups that build on open source can be more efficient, for the benefit of the customers those businesses exist to serve, honorably, at a profit.
have you published any white papers detailing any of the following: architecture, instruction set, software availability, benchmarking / application porting and performance etc.

I read a couple of times that you got funding from various govt agencies. Most of these funding agencies publish rfp responses or slide decks unless you insisted on an NDA and was approved. I couldnt find any documents talking in depth about your work.

I am in the HPC space (academic, research) and am genuinely interested in learning more about your work.
How to Use Pokemon Go Bot
HN has an interesting difference between electronics quality and code quality.

When anything electronic is submitted people are interested and encouraging even if the quality of construction is terrible, like it was built by a drunk monkey.

But when some code / script / stylesheet is submitted you get a mix of the same interest and encouragement, and also some really fierce critique. "My god who wrote that css float, a drunk monkey?"

I prefer the first approach, btw. There are ways of delivering constructive criticism and HN isn't always great at it.

EDIT: FEC / Element 14 are sponsoring a bunch of DIY electronic stuff at the moment. So while he could use a $400 electronics microscope it's in their interest to show him using cheaper stuff that's more available to student tinkerers. Those hand loupes and magnifiers are very cheap and handy for students.

(EDIT: And I'm not saying Ben Heck's builds are bad.)
Here's how I usually do it:
Send the email from a domain name that's not gmail, and your new fake law firm has to have LLLP in the company name

I've gotten so much stuff removed from the internet without even touching the DMCA, it's kind of sad actually
> Because their anecdote is personal to them, and affects their decisions.

That's just rephrasing my question. I asked why it affects their decision.

You seem to be implying that it is sensible to operate on your own anecdotal experiences as if they carry statistical significance, but that it is not sensible to do the same with other people's anecdotal experiences.

But the reason anecdotal evidence ought not be treated as statistically significant data isn't that the anecdotes may be lies or mistaken memories. The reason is that anecdotal evidence by definition was not gathered systematically and therefore may not represent the entire set of data.
Amazon Echo is always looking for the keyword, something that is done locally. I think it's the same thing basically, it's a microphone constantly connected to the internet and you have to trust (or verify) it's only transmitting when asked to.
Is it possible to get a Developer Kit for it?

It would be great if there would be some raspberry pi like distribution with a Chip included. I think this could speed up the adoption.
The C99 specification, in §6.7.3¶5, has one sentence just for this:

If an attempt is made to modify an object defined with a
const-qualified type through use of an lvalue with non-
const-qualified type, the behavior is undefined.

This is a separate question than whether the compiler can rely on the function prototype, but doesn't his definition of bar() invoke undefined behavior by this rule?

void foo(const int *readonly_x) {
int *x = (int *)readonly_x; // cast away const
(*x)++;
}

I naively assumed that in the context of the bar() function, readonly_x is "an object defined with a const-qualified type", and that since the function modifies this "through use of an lvalue with non-const-qualified type", that bar() invokes undefined behavior. Or am I falsely equating "declaring an object" with "defining an object"?

The original x wasn’t const-qualified, so this rule didn’t apply. And there aren’t any rules against casting away const to modify an object that isn’t itself const.

Does the original x matter here, or just the readonly_x variable that is in scope of the function? In the language of the spec, are x and readonly_x the same object? Or two different objects of different types that happen to point to the same address? Is it certain that const-qualifiers on function arguments can be legally be ignored inside that function?
Use of Technology to address sexual health concerns
We are using technology to address the concerns of sexual health in India. Please check www.cupidcare.in
Using Little Snitch to run a pirated version of Little Snitch to find an exploit in Little Snitch and notify Little Snith
I don't disagree, but GoogleX is _not_ Google's research arm. Google Research actually produces very cool stuff that's beneficial to the company, and does so at a pretty rapid clip. GoogleX, on the other hand, takes bold, but not really research-worthy ideas and milks them for PR for years before they quietly die.
Divisor in the sense of greatest common divisor is not the same as a denominator. More to the point, we may indeed care about greatest common divisors, but we also care about least common denominators (i.e. least common multiples)
Imagine a world without Muslims
"casting away const-ness is undefined"

No, it's not. That's the whole point why compiler can't optimize it away. You can often see ("char *") casts from static "strings" in legacy APIs and libraries calls, because original authors didn't know or didn't care how to use const correctly (or at all). I, personally, use const a lot throughout my C code, when you get it, it makes debugging so much easier.
With Facebook buttons being on many websites now, wouldn't Power technically breach the cease-and-desist by visiting any web site that has a Facebook button? That's what troubles me about this, websites aren't fixed to a single location like physical locations are. You can 'access a computer' without really being aware of it.
So when Amazon replaced all those cashiers, cleaners and rest of retail personnel with a site they were great, but replacing a few warehouse jobs is sad?
Brexit Blues
Was there really a need for this article ?

What if every Java developer who discovered the immense cerebral gratification in Scala decided to write an article with the theme "Aww shucks... Frick You Java, I wasted so much time on you damn it !!! I am going to Scala and I am never coming back."

Also, the examples the author gives maybe weak. Inheritance breaks my code ? If it's code I don't own I use dependency management. If it's code within the same team then code review before commit ?

The reference owning example for encapsulation assumes references are globally held ?

(PS: Just using Java/Scala here but feel free to vote me down if the experience is different with other language pairs. Oh also that I am having dirty dreams of leaving Java and indulge in Scala's monads as I recently discovered I wasted time on Java)
This is cool. A lot of people tell us how great functional programming is (I can see the benefits of avoiding state not having side effects). But it is rare to see an article that shows how you go about designing something in that style.
How do you know it's a false assumption and not a tested fact?
Deploy React Apps in 30 Seconds
You are correct that we have already taped out, though we haven't made any announcements yet, though will be talking publicly about it in the future with a big focus on the "magic" on the software side.

You can read my comments on the Mill architecture elsewhere on HN (not a fan of stack machines), but my biggest disappointment in them is the fact that they have been working on Mill for ~10 years with a team ranging of 5 to 20 (from what I have heard) and have yet to get to silicon, while we have gone from a complete custom architectural idea to tapeout in ~11 months from closing our first seed funding.

The big technical failure point for Itanium (in my opinion) is the fact that Intel took the relatively pure VLIW research by Josh Fisher @ HP Labs and tried to add a ridiculous number of features (and attempted x86 compatibility) that impacted the ability to statically schedule instructions. The resulting bastard architecture Intel called "EPIC" (rather than VLIW) had a very difficult job in getting the compiler to generate instruction parallel code since Intel added a huge amount of indeterminism into the architecture that goes against the original VLIW tenets. If your compiler has to assume the worst case latency for all instructions and memory operations, you are going to have a bad time.
See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12153672
Can anyone explain why the US is so far behind in this case? It seems bizarre that you have apple/android pay used alongside magnetic strips and signatures.
I had the same treatment with my HTC One M7, £120 charge to fix the purple camera.

That was the last good phone they will ever build though, so I'm not going back for more.
What is OO about React though? You have data, and pure functions. Where does OO come into it?
increase the wages and ROI for robots will look more attractive
Interesting. Can you give me some more examples?
Why isn't offering escort ads by itself sufficient reason to immediately shut down his blog?

Since when do companies have an obligation to offer a platform for engaging in illegal activity?
For a similar interactive experience, chat with a Bernie Sanders LSTM at https://robotberniesanders.com
We'll send an announcement on the mailing list when tools (software based and FPGA based simulation, along with actual silicon) will be available. We will only be getting 200 chips back from this initial test run, so we have to be fairly stringent in who will be getting hardware eval units in the coming months, but if you have a compelling application idea, feel free to send me an email (in my HN profile) and let me know.
It looks like it might've been more of a time delay issue as it seems like they've answered lots of stuff in the intervening hours. I'm not entirely sure how much answering questions late at night actually affects the audience. I do definitely hope that this post stays relevant because it's always great when the authors are around to answer questions on posts.
While I'm normally a fan of Derek's musings, this one is too pithy for me. He is painting with too broad of a brush. There are all kinds of reasons why you might tell an employee to make small changes: maybe one small change will have a big impact; maybe many small changes in aggregate will have a big impact; maybe the employee doesn't want to take ownership; maybe the employee is too junior to take ownership; maybe the employee wants to learn the nuances of the profession in greater detail; maybe the employee is an underperformer; I could go on like this indefinitely as could many other experienced managers.

Now maybe if you're employing a bunch of independent-thinking artistic, creative and intelligent types this generalization makes sense. But I'm sure the global workforce has substantially more than 1 billion members who don't fit this definition. In that light it seems a little irresponsible to put this thought out there like it's a zen koan.
Watch+This+8+Original+Video+Footages+With+Geniuses+Of+Modern+Art
Or pump it in and out as a slurry. That's typically the most convenient way to handle granular solids.
Something somewhere went horrible wrong when simply deleting a person's artistic life is how you play it safe.
I was in the same place, when I started hating the Lollipop release, which turned the great working Nexus 5 with Kitkat into a piece of crap (Google Play Services drain, memory leaks). Being a Nexus, I could downgrade it back, but couldn't disable updates, since they're handled by GPS now. Then I realised what else beside the device I paid my money for Google owns.

>- E-mail

Already had a domain, so found a neat hosting in EU, 10GB of space with ActiveSync, CalDAV, CardDAV, IMAP.

>- Calendar

Email hosting has DAV, which syncs to all clients.

>- Android account, and all purchased apps, games, etc.

This is the only thing the gmail account is still being used.

>- Drive storage (Somewhere around 1TB, although I don't even use 1/10th that)

Using Dropbox (because I can rely on it) and MEGA

>- Google Keep note-taking app

Remember the milk todo app, I enter notes in a Notes list, or even make to-dos directly

>- Blogspot blog

Jekyll blog, hosted on github, with own domain

>- Domain host

Gandi

>- Secondary phone number via Google Voice

Don't have the in the land of dragons (outside US).

>- Two-factor authentication device

Authy

>- Cloud music storage player via Google Play Music

Fuck the cloud, local music in iTunes synced by iSyncr Android app.

At first it all looked like a pain to do, but now I can't imagine going back into the Google silo. The gmail/google account now serves only as Play Store account, YouTube account (when will G+ finally die), Chrome Sync account. The location, web search and targeted ads are paused and disabled.
A private company that is legally mandated to take certain actions in presence of child porn.

Free speech does not apply.
(assuming the hypothesis that this is child porn is correct)
Review of Meteor Apollo Stack Integration Experience with Galaxy Application
People can be impacted negatively without them wilting and pouting over it. Feelings are also very intangible. They might not even realize it themselves if it demoralizes them. Just the same as many people don't fully understand why their boss is such "a great boss". Managing people is also about understanding that your feelings are not a model for other people's feelings, and you must actively compensate for how others may react.

The article is not about affirmation. It's pointing out that opinions of a manager often implicitly mean something more than an opinion, and your objective criticism isn't fully taken as such but rather in some part as an instruction. This is demoralizing for most people, even though it might be small. The conclusion is that perhaps-not-so-important opinions aren't worth the potential negative effect.
> while we have gone from a complete custom architectural idea to tapeout in ~11 months from closing our first seed funding.

To my understanding, the Mill project is not financed. They're enthusiasts working for sweat equity, and are likely going to seek (non-controlling?) investment to finally hit silicon when they're ready.

For the scope of what they're doing, I think it's a defensible enough approach. It's not something that can be created in evolutionary stages; all designs of all parts need to be working together properly for there to be benefit from any part, and it's quite complex while also trying out tons of novel designs.

(and the Mill isn't stack-based or stack-related. It's basically a crossbar of recent ALU/Load results being fed into further ALU/Store inputs in parallel. The belt is just some way to represent the set of recent results.)
Ashampoo Photo Commander 14.0.6 Crack and License Keygen Download
Ceph Object Gateway (RadosGW) Compared to OpenStack Swift and AWS S3
Disclaimer: all personal conclusions (derived from facts).

It's just enough lip-service from the ANC to continue convincing the international community that they are in some way continuing Mandela's legacy.

> South Africans would vote

I would vote to allow it - if such a vote ever occurred. I think the example would be more similar to "Trump providing gratis working visas to Mexicans." The race rhetoric is one of the primary tools of the ANC[1][2], eliminating xenophobia[3] works against that. It is in the ANCs best interests to avoid properly implementing the AU passport if they want their regime to remain in power.

[1]: http://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2016/07/14/Zuma-%E2%80%9...
[2]: http://www.news24.com/elections/news/da-is-the-offspring-of-...
[3]: http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/africa/2015/04/south-africa-x...
UX Career Advice from UXswitch
Great article, but the tips about putting the Pi in a case and using heatsinks seem at odds with each other - especially if the Pi is going to be safely tucked away from danger inside some form of arcade cabinet. I just used self-adhesive PCB risers with mine and stuck it to the inside of the cab.
> 3. To keep very senior employees from jumping ship to competitors.

If I am not mistaken Bill Gates once mentioned in an interview that in the old days, Microsoft would rather pay someone to sit around than letting them work elsewhere.
Child porn is not protected speech though, and Google is not allowed to facilitate it. Your ISP is allowed to let Democrats use the Internet.

You may be making a general point I agree with, but it doesn't apply here, assuming it indeed is child porn.
Pokémon Go, Why Not?