skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A note on the name: "fail-safe" in engineering doesn't mean that a system cannot fail, but rather, that when it does, it does so in the safest manner possible.

The term originated with (or is strongly associated with) the Westinghouse railroad brake system. These are the pressurised air brakes on trains, in which air pressure holds the brake shoes open against spring pressure. Should integrity of the brakeline be lost, the brakes will fail in the activated position, slowing and stopping the train (or keeping a stopped train stopped).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_air_brake

Fail-safe designs and practices can lead to some counterintuitive concepts. Aircraft landing on carrier decks, in which they are arrested by cables, apply full engine power and afterburner on landing. The idea is that should the arresting cable or hook fail, the aircraft can safely take off again.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fail-safe

Upshot: "fail safe" doesn't mean "test all your failure conditions exhaustively". It may well mean to abort on any failure mode (see djb's software for examples). The most important criterion is that whatever the failure mode be, it be as safe as possible, and almost always, based on a very simple and robust design, mechanism, logic, or system.

From the description of this project, it strikes me that it may well be failing (unsafely?) to implement these concepts. Charles Perrow, scholar of accidents and risks, notes that it's often safety and monitoring systems themselves which play a key role in accidents and failures.
WW3 OBAMA GETS PALACE READY FOR RETIRING WTF FINS PICK FIGHT WITH EU PARIS
Upvoted. Was going to make the same point.
>Why not just create a Reddit account and avoid seeing the default subs on your frontpage?

I do have a reddit account, I have had several over the past 10 years. I look at my subscribed front page as well. However plenty of times there is a subreddit I didn't know about suddenly trending. If I just look at the subs I'm subscribed to, I'm kind of limiting myself to my current interests, I won't learn about new things in new subs.
Great thoughts. I have had similar ones from a theological perspective.

Probably the most famous words of Jesus, from John 3, say that "whoever believes in [Jesus] will not perish". The word 'belief' here is from the Koine Greek root 'pistis' (1), which is also translated as 'faith' in its noun form. It absolutely carries connotations of trust, relationship, and fidelity. To the point where it is nonsense to have faith without personal consequences such as changed behavior (see James 1). So I believe your last definition fits the ideas of the Bible better.

Anyway, both Christians and non-Christians in the English speaking world tend to use the word 'faith' to fit your second definition, something more like wish/hope/belief/feeling. So I can understand atheist's offense when Christians say atheism and science are each expressions of faith, but I think a lot of it comes from the sort of 'linguistic gap' you talk about.

Anyway, it's a shame we don't more words to distinguish between these overloaded ideas: faith, facts, love, etc.

(1) https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?str...
That makes sense, but I think there will always be people who want to tweak ESLint rules or enable new Babel features, but would still like to take advantage of improvements to this project.

Perhaps exposing a subset of those tools' configuration options would be sufficient.

Alternatively, you could imagine a pretty simple system that allows you to pull newer versions of the "ejected" code and handle merge conflicts using your version control software.

I'd also suggest reducing the amount of non-configuration code that's generated by "eject". I think basically everything in "scripts" could be put into a package ("openChrome.applescript" seems like it should be a feature of opn anyway). That would also reduce the number of devDependencies that need to be added to your project's package.json (rimraf, chalk, opn, etc)
Not sure if these are for realsies, but there are some API keys in the webapp repository:

https://github.com/wireapp/wire-webapp/blob/master/app/scrip...

https://github.com/wireapp/wire-webapp/blob/master/app/scrip...
Overview of all Amazon AWS APIs
I think modern journalism is like application development at a startup, except with even less QA. "Get it out!!! Get it out!!!" And since people will forget about the article in a few days anyway, as long as nobody who knows better and knows how to make the right noise about it and has enough energy, time, and incentive to actually do so reads it and starts the correction ball rolling, it's just, kinda... there. Archived to be read by no one but Google and someone doing a long tail search some years to come, hopefully with no more important purpose than writing a paper for school that again, will be disposed of, this time more thoroughly.

We just create so much crap for consumption. Even public broadcasting is full of the 24-72hr news cycle. I've written code that I was employed for where I was like, why are we doing this. I assume journalists are the same.
That's quite simple, really. If you've carefully tracked your past projects, by comparing tasks from the planned project to those you've done of similar complexity you can make more realistic estimations.

It works best on a long-running project. When you plan a new feature, you can gauge really accurately at what speed your current team developed a feature of comparable complexity, so as you go forward you get better and better estimates.

Joel Spolsky explained it there: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/10/26.html
Do we need two "Intel"s in the post title?
1) There is still always the question of where to start when looking at evidence. In terms of the question that started this thread, different people find it worthwhile (or not) to spend time considering particular questions based on past experience and assumptions. For people wanting a good place to discuss various topics, is that really what you want or do you want people who don't value that discussion to value it? What prevents people who want to discuss the topic from actually doing so? Possibly that many more people are willing to offer a piece of their perspective than spend much (or any) time considering alternatives? That is basically what I have to offer on religion.

I looked at your site and a few things I didn't see are a discussion about how identifying as Christian affects your daily life, how you came to consider Christianity as an option, how "cosmic coincidences" are evidence of any god, or even if so how those cosmic coincidences translate into your particular religious actions such as quoting the bible.

My perspective is that most religions have been spread primarily by violence and these violent interactions explain the overall picture of religion in the world today independent of the truth of the deistic claims of any particular religion (but potentially related to effectiveness of particular religions as a psychological hack to enable optimal violence for spreading that religion).

2) Why do you consider "a creator" as helping with that question? I am not particularly interested in "why something rather than nothing?" because I can't even imagine what a satisfying answer could possibly be.
"Light-to-moderate alcohol consumption has been shown in several prospective studies to reduce the risk of all-cause mortality and several cardiac outcomes, including cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in men "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3140194/
As noted, pandoc. Using pandoc-markdown(5), you have footnotes/endnotes, and can export directly to latex and PDF:

pandoc -f markdown -t latex -o foo.pdf foo.txt

A footnote is indicated in text as [^tag], say [^1].

[^tag]: Is the footnote denoted by the corresponding tag.

[^1]: Is the footnote '1' above.

Multi-line footnotes may be designated by indenting subsequent paragraphs 1 or more spaces.

I've created long (70+ page) documents using only these elements.

At other times, exporting to LaTeX and adding additional structure or elements may prove useful.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandoc

Example: a markup of Dugald Stewart's "Account of the Life and Times of Adam Smith, LLD" I did a few days ago:

http://pastebin.com/LdKXpHdR
To what extent? What if you do something on accident that ends up messing up their stuff? Just the first example I can think of: you figure out a way to reboot an instance which lets you exploit a race condition in some auth code, and don't realize that the instance you're killing is critical for some other function (let's say billing) and you end up causing some real monetary damage, even though you had no idea.

Are there any legal precedents for this?
I think he accidentally the whole thing [1].

[1] http://de.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Accidentally
I was thinking more on lines of (a) does JSON handling need hash tables and (b) if do, do they have to be open addressing or something vulnerable to DOS? A No on either can lead to an implementation with better DOS resistance.
Don't know if you've seen it, but different versions have been added.
Is it, though? If "Hi, I'm the author of the ONLY tool that does bundling based on how ES2015 modules work, and applied that to your codebase, which made it both more useful to future developers and made it smaller as bundle" is an ad, I'd like to see more ads everywhere. Other than rollup there are no bundlers that perform ES2015 module bundling, which means there is no efficient tree shaking, no load-order independency, etc.

I suspect the reason it went through is because it _actually_ modernized the codebase: unlike previous ideas, just swapping ES5 notation for a newer slightly more efficient ES6 notation, this refactor actually changes the load, parse, and bundle efficiency of the codebase, from a non-standard module style to what we've now collectively agreed on JS-native module should look like; something that before ES6 simply did not exist. There were choices made by individuals or organizations (commonjs, umd, etc), but only as of ES6 are modules _actually_ a formal construct in JS, with an official spec that formalizes how imports work. Any code changes that bring older codebases in line with the new spec are fantastic: this codebase just got massively future-proofed without any impact whatsoever on its integrity.

(the one example that didn't run turned out to be a bug in the current example, not in the refactor)
I think we'll reach that point in 50 years because we already have computers with certain types of intelligence that exceed ours. Translating a human intent into machine language does work with coding, but we have to admit that it's not ideal. There are too many mistakes and vulnerabilities. Even the smartest people create bugs.

This like the shift in transportation. A lot of people love driving and mistrust autonomous vehicles. But the tech is almost to the point where it's safer than human drivers. In most situations, it already is.

Another comparison would be SaaS. For a lot of companies, it's about risk mitigation. Moving responsibilities away from internal staff makes business sense in many cases.

This is a criticism of the idea that we need to make coding a basic life skill that everyone should focus on. It looks a lot like denial to some people.

Let's go back to transportation. Imagine if people were pushing the idea that commercial driving needs to be in every high school because driving was such a big employment area. Some people might say that the autonomous vehicles look like a big threat to job prospects, so maybe it's not such a good idea to focus on those particular skills.

Coding is great, provides a lot of opportunities to the people that it attracts, but it's a pretty specialized skill that's going to be increasingly displaced by more natural and automatic interfaces this century in all likelihood.
> is there some solution to the problem that will allow us to communicate ideas without the offense and without the verbosity?

I'm not sure we can get there in one HN thread, but consciously addressing linguistic gaps would be worthwhile. When particular words have enough overloaded meaning to cause confusion and conflict, we need to find new words.

For the record, I'm for healthy (respectful) dissent. A lack of dissent is poisonous for all parties. But outgrouping is also poisonous.
No. Peer review is more than that. It's a vetting process. 90% if everything is crap, and so if you don't vet it, you'll get 90% crap.

Also, by conflating a forum full of lay people with experts in a specific field is a bit absurd. Simply put, not everyone's opinion should be given equal weight.
interesting comparison, people::food <--> companies::people

in some companies I've worked for it's quite accurate
A MESSAGE TO PARAMOUNT PICTURES
If you think of 1.6 as 1 + 1/2 + 1/10, then multiplying by it is pretty easy. For example, 34 x 1.6 = 34 + 17 + 3.4 = 54.4.

The exact conversion is 1.609344, so to two places it is 1.61. That's only slightly harder than 1.6. Think of it is 1 + 1/2 + 1/10 + 1/100. So for my prior example, 34 x 1.61 = 34 + 17 + 3.4 + 0.34 = 54.74.

The operations needs, taking 1/2, 1/10, and 1/100 of the original value are generally easy in your head. The hardest thing is just keeping track of the running sum as you do that.

If you want to go one step farther, you could add a -1/1000 term to bring it to 1.609 but that is probably overkill in most circumstances. Even 1.61 is probably overkill.
If you know enough to be able to pull off hacks like this, you surely know enough to get more of this kind of thing than you'd have time to watch in 10 lifetimes. I doubt that such a "reward" would be very appealing to those who participate in the bug bounty program, and it'd honestly be a sleazy business proposition, which would harm the professionalism of operating a successful bug bounty program. And yes, I'm completely serious.
Oh I know. I'm a drinker myself. I'm just predicting that our society, becoming more and more health conscious, will start to look down on alcohol. Articles like this are the start.
The "situations" in the first part of the story, I felt like he was just acting strategically and smart (impressive even, I'm not quite that forward-thinking). Because he did't know yet if these people are helpful or just trying to screw him out of as much $100's as possible and then let him hang.

But after the rest of the story, those guys helping him, drinking with him, showing him a good time (probably because life can be boring there and hanging out with a foreigner was an enervating experience for them too?) and greasing a few wheels for him (the "lenient judge" and possibly some other things he doesn't know about), I felt a bit different.

He was carrying $160 all the time, while Irlan paid for everything (probably not very much in dollars, but still). Some guy needed a spot for $6.5 to carry him to the end of the month, that says something about how far $160 goes in that country. At the end when Irlan said "it's gonna be boring without you", he knew he was free and could have wired himself another $200 later with relative ease (or maybe not? I'm not sure). I think at the very least he could have given Irlan some money/tip for all the effort, lunch, coffee, drinks? I mean, now that you know you're no longer in a complex negotiation / bribing situation with this person (so the cards are more open), he did go the extra mile, spent his own money even (while in the end, the author spent .. $0 ??? or did I miss something, he did say he got the $100 back). Say $50, that he'd otherwise spend on a single night out in SF, would mean a LOT more to this guy, so why not just do it? He'd earned it yes?

Could be some kind of cultural differences though. The author seems to know the culture of the area really well, so maybe it's something obvious. Maybe Irlan would be insulted getting such a large sum for just being hospitable. OTOH maybe Irlan hoped all this extra effort would earn him the $100 deal he couldn't fulfil earlier. Or maybe during all the "bonding" the author had been hinting he was a stranded student with zero money left and therefore they felt pity on him, so he didn't dare to break that character and suddenly producing $50 cash to give away (but Irlan knew he still carried that $100 at least).

Or maybe, the author's bottom-line thinking about this was, I did my best to stick to the (admittedly, draconian) rules, bad shit (aka adventure) still happened, so I really oughtn't face any consequences at all (except the part where he got free lunch, drinks and a tour).
I wonder if the new regexp code in Ruby 2.4 would address some of that
It's easier for arbitrary values to multiply by 1.6 imho. That's easy. Take the original value and divide by two. Then right-shift the original value by one decimal place. Add the three and there's your answer. To go the other way, multiply by 0.6 (add the half and tenth values above).

Example: How much is 37 miles in km? 37 + 3.7 + 18.5, or 59.2.

If you don't mind a really rough guess, multiply by 1.5.
Learn. Know there is a next step, elsewhere. Prepare and be pro-active.

Nothing like seeing some of what you don't like and don't want to accept, to help you define your own boundaries and what you do want.

Good luck!
I was not aware of this. Thanks for the link.
True. Although nicotine is a stimulant and I'm sure it helped folks get through some of the wars, long working hours and journeys.
Like numerous other memes, this too originates from 4chan. A poster on /b/ back in 2008 wrote:

"I accidentally 93MB of .rar files” and the rest is history.
Very nicely done -- I was expecting something bare-bones, like the original. Just bought it.
How is this the same thing? The JAMA article is a factually correct article clearly presenting a specific viewpoint. There are pieces like that in journals all the time, and there should be.

The original post here is talking about the misrepresentation of what is a viewpoint / opinion piece as a scientific study in the mainstream news media. They have nothing to do with each other.
Because Reddit was written by young undergrads in their college dorm who haven't had the decade of experience with vote manipulation that Slashdot had by that time, let alone experienced the rise and decline of Usenet.

Indeed by 2006 the mature Slashdot moderation system - after a deluge of invasions by trolls and agenda-pushers - already had a lot of the tools that Reddit is still missing or eventually reinvented badly - limited number of upvote points, meta-moderation etc.
In Africa, Birds and Humans Form a Unique Honey Hunting Party
> Living with mom and dad is now the most popular housing choice for 18 to 34-year Americans, according to Pew Research. This is the first time that has happened since the U.S. Census started keeping records about living arrangements over 130 years ago.

The US economy starts to look more and more like other ho-hum economies. Nothing really special.
Yep; most likely you don't have Romero and Carmack on your team, who can make a great engine and a fun-to-play game, and even they switched to making engines to power multiple games (id Tech engines). Unity and things like it are great if you're serious about actually making a game and bringing it to market. Engines might be fun, but that's not what sells games and gets them into the hands of people who would enjoy them.
The Madness of the Planets (2013)
Don't economists empirically test mathematical models of the economy? How is this not science?
> Always have the next task ready and divide the work up into little chunks. The next time you find yourself with a bit of spare time you're all set and ready to roll.

This is a great technique, but takes some discipline. Reminds me of GTD.
For me, the red flags that this is a BS study are:

1) They're comparing countries like India and, say, Denmark (Source: Indian here). In India, about 60% of the population shits on the streets, and injured (lame) cows and dogs hobble around in middle of the roads in cities (where they get food and water from is a mystery). In India there are hundreds of cities with over a million people in them, and with not a single public toilet maintained by the city government. I have a cousin who is a lawyer in a big, supposedly "modern" city (Gurgaon). I once went to the courthouse with him. There was 2 inches of standing water every where in the building. You simply cannot compare India and, say, Denmark.

2) The reference point effect. Kahneman talks about this extensively. If the local police are constantly harassing me so that they can be bribed (India), and one less policeman harasses me to be bribed, my well-being is considerably more "bolstered" than if I'm living in, say, Denmark, and instead of 0% sustainable electricity being fed into my home, I now have 10% sustainable electricity being fed into my home.

3) Boston Consulting is going to fund studies (and shape outcomes) that make bureaucrats in rich countries go, "hmmm... maybe we should hire them to 'bolster' our well-being".

Sorry for being so cynical. But consultants are not exactly neutral parties in my opinion.
On the assumption of the the parent believing that over the internet on-demand delivered video content will completely replace broadcast TV in 10-15 years, I am asserting that broadcast radio will also take at least that long to disappear, as on-demand radio appeared at a similar point in time. Just because radio is older does not mean that its potential successors, like Podcasts, are older.

I am really unsure of where your '50 years ago' timeframe is coming from. If there were interactive on-demand radio services back then, I certainly have never heard of them, and they definitely did not reach a level of accessibility where giving up traditional broadcast radio in favour of on-demand programming could be a realistic option for most of the population.

To add to that, audio is not necessarily consumed the same way video is. People might be completely happy to have a non-interactive previously scheduled radio broadcast ready for them when they hop into their car, for instance, while not accepting the same of their screen in the living room. Just because he thinks that non-interactive TV will soon be dead does not mean he believes radio will reach the same fate.
Thanks for sharing...
ehhhhh, a real answer here dictates whether I sign up to hackerone on TOR and request bitcoin payouts, or if I do it on clearnet, fill out 1099s with my real/entity name, and link my bank accounts
I'm not saying you misunderstood; I couldn't know that. I'm saying that in your reply you muddled them. When you say "it is A, not B", you're suggesting that one excludes the other. That's not the case; they're different things.

If you don't like his language, I'd suggest you critique the language instead of contradicting him on a point of analysis.
Leave.

It's that simple. Don't work for a company that isn't ethical. It doesn't matter if your team is great if you still have to get up and help do something unethical.

Also, be real. There are many great teams in the world, your current one is not the only one, find one at a company doing worthwhile things.