skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is really cool! I have been thinking about the possibility of this for a long time.

How much hardware experience do you have? I'm curious to know how much effort there would be in porting a Haskell library consisting of pure functions, like the Elliptic Curve Cryptography library [1]. ECC is fairly CPU intensive to verify (the best hand-written assembly implementation takes 0.5 ms per signature). This makes it a bottleneck for some operations, like verifying the Bitcoin blockchain, which contains millions of them.

I can't wait for high level libraries to start forming on top of the Clash library. The only thing left is more competition in the FPGA market, I guess, but perhaps this won't happen until non-hardware folks can actually program an FPGA?

[1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/eccrypto
The last line of this piece is:

> And become a goddam profession.

Hurray? What do we gain by becoming a profession? I guess we get 9 to 5 work, conferences, meetings and boredom. Sounds like we're a profession already, but I guess not. Honestly, I'm not sure I'm a big fan of professions.

Shiny things, those are what children like, and I guess children aren't professional so we should get rid of shiny things.

And since we're getting rid of childlike things, let's get rid of:

- The joy of discovery

- The feeling of creating something from nothing

- The empowerment of solving our problems in new ways

- The utter joy of entering a new community of amazing people

I guess we lose all that, because it's time to be a goddamn profession.
The title implies this is a list of books that YC somehow institutionally recommends (like their "how to pitch" articles). When I first looked at it that way it seemed strangely uneven in terms of quality. When I realized this was actually "some personal recommendations from our staff and partners" it became a perfectly reasonable collection :)
It's possible for there to be platform-specific bugs / quirks even in the same engine.
Show HN: Find songs from any TV Show
I mostly read nonfiction and usually do it "marker and pencil in hand" so I try to read carefully and soak up new ideas. I commute by train and read about a midsized book/week that way (sometimes I sleep instead of reading, sometimes I do other stuff etc.). For the commute reading I usually pick things that aren't very meaty like popscience (the Ariely books on behavioral economics or Fooled by Randomness are good examples) or intro/overview type of books like Secrets and Lies.
Most fiction I read is SciFi, the occasional fantasy and some horror and thrillers/crime.

My reading is a bit odd since I tend to read 3-5 commute books at a time picking the one that I feel like each day.

At home I enjoy the occasional comic book (some superhero stuff but mostly things like Transmetropolitan, From Hell or Criminal) and grind out more meaty books, mostly mathematics or physics and work related stuff (programming, algorithms etc.). Basically anything that involves exercises or long/hard thinking. The pace is rather slow, I aim at one good non-programming related book per month and sprinkle in the work related stuff.

tl;dr I read a lot and enjoy it :D
> Nothing in my comment as it stands now is false. Nothing in my responses to you are false. When I noticed something incorrect, I modified it, noted it, and accepted responsibility.

But you didn't go back in time and read the article before your comment. That's the point.

> The fact that my comment is similar to the article doesn't make it false. The fact that I didn't notice the similarity immediately doesn't make it false.

That's not what you lied about and you know it. It was this statement you made (which I directly referenced):

"The rest of my points stand quite well on their own and have nothing to do with Milo except as an example."

In your original comment you stated:
"I refer of course to the Milo Yiannopoulos situation".

You describe the situation in the first para, and then say it's Milo Yiannopoulos' situation. So you talk about his situation in the first paragraph, and then in the second.

Your first paragraph (of the first post) is 117 words. The second is 71 (according to some word count web site). That's well over 50% of your post.

And you say that it's true that your post has nothing to do with Milo except as an example. I'm starting to think you didn't read what you wrote (as well as the post!).

> Even if my comment is of lesser quality because I didn't read the section of the article on Milo, which is a matter of opinion, that does not make me a liar.

I made reference to that to show that someone not reading an article before commenting is relevant. It had nothing to do with my position on your honesty. It was a reply to another comment.

The rest of my points stand quite well on their own and have nothing to do with Milo except as an example.

> Most importantly, the opinions stated in the last two sentences of the comment are positions that could be addressed on their own merits even if everything I had said up till that point was a lie, which it was not.

It wasn't your original comment which was a lie it was your defence of (supposedly) not reading the article in its entirety (the second comment).

And the last two sentences are a tiny fraction of your entire comment. Most of the comment was on Milo.

You like your strew men.
The rich certainly do engage in their fair share of irresponsible behavior, also - it's just that they're generally better at managing appearances and externalizing consequences. In fact, quite often that's exactly how they got to be wealthy in the first place.

So while people in the lower economic brackets might engage in overtly self-damaging behaviors like smoking or eating poorly (in disproportionate numbers) -- or simply be too depressed to look for work in an economy that basically has no use for them, or to go to college for an advanced degree in their 40s or 50s -- folks in the bulge brackets will end up doing "responsible" things, like voting for the political class that brought us the invasion of Iraq (including 500k+ killed and the bloodshed we are seeing up to the current day), climate change denial, and the (artificially accelerated) deindustrialization that killed off the middle class jobs those (now) in the lower tiers might have had access to in the first place, a few decades back.

In the world of work, while exceptions exist, I've always seen a strong correlation between position and competence.

In a sense this is almost a truism; one simply has to ask "competent at what?" In many organizations, unfortunately, it isn't technical or domain knowledge, or even interpersonal skills that merits promotion -- but simply the art of "managing up."
So it's one job you wouldn't mind the robots come for?
Anathem is slow to start (very), but the end is absolutely mind blowing. It was my first ever Stephenson book. Not a decision I regret at all.
In theory he could just have people pay him the lower price and go through the eBay/Amazon "return" without actually shipping it back. I'm sure there is something against that in Amazon ToS though, and since the eBay resellers aren't actually doing anything illegal it could bring him legal trouble from them as well.
I always figured that most people that know of the Kardashians know of them as just some amorphous blob. I know the name, know they are famous for being famous, but couldn't tell you anything in particular about any of them. I don't even know how many there are, and until reading your post, didn't even make the connection to the OJ case.
What's ironic is that most longtime fans hate the late career Howard Stern.

I've been a daily listener since 1997 and enjoy both pre-Sirius and post-Sirius shows immensely.
It is for the same reason that I do not visit the beach and attempt to hold back the tides with my hands.

You cannot get elected here as a third-party or independent. Period. If you had a notion to buy your way in, it would be cheaper to pay off the second-place major party to run you as their candidate than to run in your own right. The only place you will ever see a third party on the ballots here is the line for presidential electors.

And for a variety of reasons, in a manner similar to Comcast and Time Warner, the two major parties often choose to not compete in certain areas, to the ultimate detriment of the residents. I write in because when I see only one name on the ballot, that is a mockery of democracy.

If the vote counters hate me, that is exactly what I want. I hate how they support a system that pretends to be democratic.
Howard Stern went through a very expensive and drawn out war with the FCC, of which most of the lawsuits were fought around content that is commonplace in mainstream media today. I think the battles he fought in the 90s went a long way to reducing government censorship in the US.

In addition to that, I think he's an incredible interviewer. Maybe one of the best ever.
> Except for mobile devices

That's a pretty big exception. But even on traditional computers, photo/video libraries going back years can take up terabytes. Now with stuff like this (e.g. iCloud Photo Library), you can access that entire history from any device of any size.

And don't forget, it handles offsite backup too.
Minimum Decent Housing, Not Minimum Wage
> Thinking is a form of emasculation.

In particular, I've observed that one hallmark of fascistic movements is an obsession with "emasculation" and condemnation of any society or part of society deemed "effeminate".

You can see it in the writings of Julius Evola. While Evola never described himself as a "fascist", it was only because he felt that Mussolini and the Fascist Party didn't go far enough. He was an extreme right-wing nationalist, and it's not uncommon for modern Neo-Nazi groups to quote his writing as if it were scripture. Evola was obsessed with the idea that healthy societies are masculine and degenerate societies are effeminate, and he wrote at length about how he felt that Jewish culture is both degenerate and effeminate.

It's also common in modern far-right white nationalist groups. You'll notice that many such communities describe men they don't like as "betas" and "cucks", and they blame society's problems on women becoming more and more prominent in society (and on feminist men, too, for letting women in; they especially get called "cucks").

And it's not just the white supremacists; I've observed the same obsession with "emasculation" in extremist Asian identity groups, which are typically dominated by unsuccessful Asian men blaming the fact that they can't get laid on a conspiracy of Asian women and white men to emasculate Asian men.
Never mind that Samsung has marketed their Galaxy brand so hard that people think is Android...
As Snapchat has.

The big strength Facebook has now is very similar to Google's. They can rake in cash without having to spend a bunch of money to generate it. Unlike Apple they don't need to produce extremely polished and innovate hardware every single year.

Secondly it was very difficult for any other party to aggregate as many advertisers as Google had; Facebook pulled it off but it took a long time. Someone else may be able to do that too, but once virtually all ad revenue is digital there will be plenty of room for a third participant. There are other business models, but the ad revenue one allows companies to really laser focus on just growing and keeping their marketshare.

AI and post-mobile platforms are going to change things in ways investors aren't predicting. Facebook knows this and they certainly are demonstrating it, between wit.ai/messengers "bots" and Oculus. This larger generational shift may well open up gaps that directly threaten Google's core model more so than Facebook's.
Facebook managed to beat out it's competitors to the top spot, and maintain that spot long enough to the point where it has just become a constant in people's minds now. Every other attempt to dethrone has been too technical minded I think. There was that Diaspora that gave users privacy, only to find people didn't care about that (the majority). Then there was Google+, who again introduced a whole lot of lingo and looked complicated to use and why bother? Everyone's on Facebook after all, and Google = Search, everything else is just riff raff!

Once you stop talking to developers and programmers, you find that people don't give a shit about things remotely technical, and just use stuff because 'everyone else is using it'.

Saying all that, these days my FB feed has gone advert mad, and I find I mainly use it for event organisation instead. I do get the feeling it is slowly dying though despite being profitable, but whether it will be replaced by a new social networking site, or a set of separate apps with specific functions instead, remains to be seen.
See IBM and Microsoft whose market caps both collapsed after they lost control of their respective markets.

Oh, wait...
Twitter has rather famously been a means of real time communication during times of political turmoil/important current events. See The Arab Spring or the Ferguson, MO protests.
I've yet to meet a requirements document that was good enough for both parties to agree that the contract had been fulfilled. It's almost always come down to browbeating or going unpaid.

What that requirements document is is a license to withhold payment until the contract obligations are met, no matter how ruinous those obligations are because of inattention to detail and the customer's complete lack of ability to state clearly what they want.

I think one of the biggest things us developers misunderstand about Agile is that it involves a contract that says you pay me every month for a month's worth of work. If 8 months into a 12 month project, the customer decides they don't like us, we've already cashed 8 checks and are free to pursue other projects. At worst I have 8 months of money and I have to scramble to find new projects for my team.

With the typical up front big design the customer just refuses to write a check until you've fulfilled their handwavy interpretation of the requirements, which mean whatever they want them to mean this week. We could easily be on month 20 still hoping to get our second check for 6 months' of pay. Essentially we're chewing people up and bankrupting the company in the process. It's a sucker's bet.

Lately I've gotten even more cynical. My new thesis is that companies that know how to ask for what they need and can break problems down into reasonable and measurable parts don't usually hire out work. They have all the necessary skills to just open job reqs and get their code written. The people who hire contractors seem to almost universally do it because they don't have the faintest clue how to spec and write a piece of software. Including doing the requirements. Especially the requirements. Be sure to quote them a rate that represents hazard pay, because there's gonna be drama.
Because they plan to produce as many batteries in it as the world production was in 2014 all together.
I was thinking carbon-neutral oil, because we have all the infrastructure already.
Now that's yet another marketplace they have to deal with. And when he was selling on Amazon, his product was in the Amazon warehouse. It wasn't until later that he began shipping things himself.
Rocket Internet's Afrikan Investments May Be Suffering from a Failure to Launch
And marketing. Leave a TV on between shows, and an Apple ad is likely to crop up more often than not.
Also this interesting note about "games" and irrationality and how they relate to Eco:

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-real-umberto-ec...
Combat Hearing Loss
Not the OP but I'd highly recommend "Zoo City" by Lauren Beukes. Brilliantly written, gritty, bonkers-but pulsating plot set in a grimy version of Johannesburg. Loved it.
So basically, it's magic.
What did Howard pull out of Phil? Coincidence?
Preliminary price tag on SpaceX's Red Dragon mission: $300M
> If we didn't care about being there first we wouldn't have patents, and without patents, why would companies bother spending any money on R&D?

Yeah, it does seem like we're on two different sides of the barricade. Patent-related discussions never seem to end once they get going (even more so on HN), but I just wanted to add that I was surprised to read recently that James Watt himself was being criticized during his lifetime for holding patents for too long and for too important an industry.

Can't find the exact quote right now (it doesn't help that the book I read it from was a 500+ page Italian translation of a history of the Industrial Revolution, originally written in French - https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_9CEeAAAAIAAJ), the closest that I could find was this, which is a contemporary view on it: https://fee.org/articles/do-patents-encourage-or-hinder-inno...

> By patenting the separate condenser Boulton and Watt, from 1769 to 1800, had almost absolute control on the development of the steam engine. They were able to use the power of their patent and the legal system to frustrate the efforts of engineers such as Jonathan Hornblower to further improve the fuel efficiency of the steam engine. By way of contrast, and fortunately, Trevithick did not patent his equally innovative high-pressure design.

> Ironically, not only did Watt use the patent system as a legal cudgel with which to smash competition, but his own efforts at developing a superior steam engine were hindered by the very same patent system he used to keep competitors at bay. An important limitation of the original Newcomen engine was its inability to deliver a steady rotary motion. The most convenient solution, involving the combined use of the crank and a flywheel, relied on a method patented by James Pickard, which prevented Watt from using it. Watt also made various attempts at efficiently transforming reciprocating into rotary motion, reaching, apparently, the same solution as Pickard. But the existence of a patent forced him to contrive an alternative less-efficient mechanical device, the sun and planet gear. It was only in 1794, after the expiration of Pickard’s patent, that Boulton and Watt adopted the economically and technically superior crank. The impact of the expiration of Watt’s patents on his empire may come as a surprise as well. Far from being driven out of business, Boulton and Watt for many years were able to charge a premium over the price of other steam engine manufacturers.

And I'm pretty sure that our industrial past includes many such cases in which the greater good was sacrificed for the interest of the few, like it happened even in Watt's case.
I thought he got famous by having an audience of many millions over the course of 30 years.
Given the number of homes in the Bay Area, yes there is a shortage of people making more than that. What there isn't a shortage of is wealthy speculators, a significant percentage of whom don't even live here.
There's actually a pretty good argument that North Korea is a lot closer [1] to early-20th-century fascism than to Communism.

Soviet ideology tended not to glorify the nation as such but rather a class; tended to glorify underdogs as long as they were fighting capitalists; and tended to be very ashamed of lies and very insistent on the internal consistency and intellectual credibility of its propaganda. "Promise of vengeance", I agree, is pretty generically associated with any revolutionary movement.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy1iudsIKa8; the book is quite good.
Yeah, you can definitely have your buttons look less like buttons if they are in places that people expect to see buttons.

For example at the bottom of dialog two short bold text items are move acceptable then text-only buttons in other places.
And surely, as long as Win32 is still making the real money, it'll still be supported. But UWP, while nascent, is at the very least, far more secure than Win32, which is something any platform should strive to aspire to.

In almost any other topic on HN, if we were discussing moving to running things in secure containers, people would agree it makes sense to move that way and that the additional layer of security is worthwhile. But because it's Microsoft doing it, and Microsoft is changing their software from like... the same way they've been doing it for the last twenty years, people are upset about it? I'm confused.

When we talk about UWP, it shouldn't be "UWP is inherently evil", we should comment on and criticize issues Microsoft may have with the development of UWP. Initially, UWP was very hard to use outside of the Windows Store, and so it's fair to criticize there. And arguably, they've been working on improving this. They demonstrated Steamworks running on a UWP app at Build this year.

We should definitely criticize if Microsoft does something specifically to lock down UWP. But we should not inherently decide UWP is evil because it's new.
Yes. Over a career - one will learn lot of frameworks, languages, technologies, tools - before jumping to code - there is sometimes dense documentation to go through. At time this can be daunting as things might be poorly documented (eg mongoose documentation).

A handy trick is to make small diagrams of your readings - it can be as simple as writing a timing diagram of calls while reading documentation. This kinds of expands on what one reads - I found them really useful. Also, first search in google images - eg: you want to understand "angular architecture" - usually first few of images will be very relevant to grasp things in a abstract way. By doing this first you get component names and how they are connected (by seeing the image) then you read documentation - you kind of know what documentation is trying to tell now.

Understanding meaning of words are important if you are non-native speakers. Say there is a word you have never come across eg: convolution neural networks. One needs to know 'convolution' means then 'neural networks' before going any further.

So the key takeaway I feel is how quickly can one abstract new concepts or relate them to what is known or build new models of understanding.
Edward Snowden refused to trust them for a reason - he knew they would probably refuse to vet anything that could damage the US, and just dump everything they were given.
> I said that most employers would love to have employees where the salary is not the first (or even top 3) factors in their decision to take a job.

In any publicly traded company, this is an unacceptable viewpoint.

How is it in any way reasonable for an employer (who has a fiduciary responsibility to return maximum value for its shareholders) to take this stance and then admonish their at-will employees for it?
The beginning of infinity is a good book by I actually found his previous book "The fabric of reality" better, in terms of what scientific thinking really is. Specifically, how important criticism is in weeding out theories that are likely to be inviable before you even start to experiment.
I'll always listen to an interview by Howard Stern. They're fantastic. That said, I can't listen to his regular show gags, songs, and bits for more than a few minutes before turning it off out of cringe-inducing disgust. His brand of low-brow makes my skin crawl for some reason.
Easy: Spend less time on HN/Twitter/Facebook/etc :-)
Any specific interview you recommend? The few I tried listening to were not worth finishing... simply un-interesting. I'd like to hear one or two of the memorable ones that his fans really enjoyed.
Except for the fact that the transaction becomes a permanently public record.

You could also get looped into tax evasion if the person you paid doesn't report the bug bounty income. You can still maintain anonymity by not announcing the person who found it, but it's not a good idea to give money to anonymous people for work.
That's true client-side. The push here seems to be Chakra for Node, and if Chakra is more performant for certain Node workloads, then you could see Chakra on Node being adopted on that basis alone.