skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>...and Health Care is how one stays alive, therefore health care should be a right.

Non sequitur. 'Right to life' means that no one can interfere in a normal functioning of your body without your consent. It does not mean that someone has to interfere in order for you to stay alive.
This point should be understood very clearly:
The article isn't wrong that an ArrayList has O(n) for a single insertion. However, the article misses that amortized analysis shows that the same structure can be made to have O(n) for n insertions as well. In effect, ArrayLists can be thought to have O(1) insertion time in practice meaning that all you are comparing are the differences in constants between the two structures.

I think the biggest takeaway from this isn't that big-O can fool you (which it very well can), but that misunderstanding analysis can lead to poor decisions.

A better argument for big-O fooling you can be found using Quicksort and any proper O(n Log(n)) sorting algorithm. Quicksort will outperform most in practical cases, but is technically O(n^2) in the worst case (average case O(n Log(n)).
Before we talk about forcing people to go on drugs they don't want, let's get to a place where society lets everyone who could benefit from treatment at least have the option of receiving it.
> No it doesn't, the sense of increasing a preexisting quality is not what -ize does. It just makes verbs.

I didn't mean to imply that it started with some non-zero amount, but I thought "make something X" wasn't as clear. At any rate, I think it's fair to say that something fossilized is more like a fossil than it was before it got fossilized.

> "burgle" isn't the normal verb, both "burgle" and "burglarize" emerged at about the same point. Two different ways of turning an old noun "burglar" into a verb.

One of those ways matches the pattern used for any profession word ending in "er" or "or" (swimmer, actor, etc). The other is a silly exception in a language that already has plenty. All I'm saying is that every other English speaking country did it the sensible way, and I like that way better.

I've never heard anybody say "beggarized", so at least we did the sane thing with that one.
Good catch: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=aurynn.com. Added.
Medicine is but one of many areas where you can do everything right, make all of the right decisions, and still end up with the bad outcome. I've never accepted it as a good reason to not try to achieve a goal that I otherwise think to be a good one.

The other obvious example is law. Everything can be done correctly and you may be right, but nobody commands the jury. Yet there it is, the 6th Amendment (if you're in the US, that is), with that right to a lawyer in instances where you may be deprived of life or liberty!
That seems like a "doctor it hurts when ... " scenario, and I don't see why it's specific to protobuf. Any IDL managed that way would have the same problem.
> If you bluff in poker and are called, you lose your chips. That doesn't make it less of a bluff.

I'm not sure you understood my point at all.

What if the shrimp genuinely thinks he can take the big guy, because he's just so angry he gets stupid? That's not a bluff, that's a suicidal threat.

"Bluff" has a very specific definition, and it requires that the person bluffing knows they cannot successfully follow through on the bluff.

And from reading this, I'm not sure the researchers accounted for that distinction.
Well, this probably isn't the right place to complain about startups that are trying to make money, and I don't have any experience with NumPy, SciPy, or Conda.
I agree with everything you say, but I think it all boils down to "it's the PVP, stupid."

Imagine if the actual Pokemon games never had trainers outside of gyms. I don't know about you, but after a while it would start to feel like a repetitive chore.
Thanks for the link to Wallabag, I had never heard of it. Looks very interesting.

I use Pinboard, and pay for the archiving option. I even periodically request a tarball of the archive for my own backup. Pinboard archives the entire page, not just a readable version of the content. For archival and reference purposes, I like this. It would be nice if Pinboard also provided a readable option. In fact, a number of the apps that work with Pinboard add support for readable versions.

I will look into adding Wallabag into my workflow.
Surely the main point is that

O(n) + O(n) = O(2n) = O(n) = O(n + 1) = O(n) + O(1)

and the constant factors left out of O() often dominate execution time.

Cache performance is just one example of a constant factor, right?
At that point what do you gain versus porting all the C stuff to the host language so it can be JIT compiled?
Because then you get to spend $300 on an Epi-Pen compared to (an already outrageous) $80 or so in the UK due to "patents"

you may say that patents are crimping the "free" market but who is really going to vote to delete those from health care ?

And even if they were removed, there are many other ways the big companies will stifle competition to keep profits high.

Sometimes something bigger than a corporation needs to step in and this IMO is one of those times/places
It is Foursquare on steroids.
Thank you for making my point for me.

Things do happen to you, things you can't control. You can however control your reaction.

You are choosing to be scared, or not enter therapy, or talk to somebody about that.

Maybe you don't have enough money to talk to a therapist, or you have other things on your plate, or your social anxiety isn't a huge problem, something you can deal with.

The onus is still on YOU to deal with your anxiety, not on the world to treat you with kid gloves. Internal rather than external locus of control.
Interesting link, thank you.
Was a bit dissapointed that it was just music... i guess that doesn't make me much nostalgic.

It's not like those hits aren't still being played to death.
> Many SaaS companies I know do encrypt their data.

You can encrypt backups, but in many other cases you can't do it (sending emails, generating invoices) or it's too much work (error/log aggregators that can leak personal data).
When I reach the "Shut. Up." section the article feels more like a re-expression of its subject than an overcoming. These tendencies are harder to overcome than they seem. They're slippery, and there's good in them as well as bad.
statistics. statistics is the difference. Somebody's gut feeling(WAG) vs. actually observed frequency.
How about "Trying to replace other emotions with happiness often winds up decreasing it"?
Maybe you should look for someone to proofread the website, especially the front page. Too many typos and grammatical errors will drive users away.
'Right' is probably too strong a word.

Does a person have the 'Right' to be rescued from a car accident that would surely kill them without help when it is in other people's power to do so?

No. BUT at some point I think it is fair to expect certain behavior from others living in civilized society.

A Right? Probably not. But Reasonable Expectation doesn't have the same punch as a slogan.
Portugal, as we have seen in Greece have not options.

In the case of Europe, the CEB is acting as enforcer. When you don't control your central bank you have very few options. In fact, you have surrender your sovereignty.
As with any platform there are strengths and weaknesses. In my mind, the greatest strength of the .NET framework is the sheer number of ways you can leverage your .NET knowledge to create various types of products. For example:

1. Desktop GUI applications. WPF is in my opinion the best GUI framework for Windows, and many well-known Linux GUI apps have been made with Mono + GTK. You can even create Mac GUI apps with Xamarin.Mac (with commercial support!).

2. Server/web software. ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET WebAPI, NancyFX, Suave...the list goes on for various frameworks (most of which will run on Windows, Linux, and OS X).

3. Video games. Unity is very commonly used.

4. Internet of things. You can run .NET on a Raspberry Pi, and on various other embedded devices (again, with commercial support!).

5. Mobile apps. You can write iOS and Android applications using Xamarin. In my opinion, it's the best tool to write native, cross-platform mobile apps (when considering tooling, enterprise support, etc.).

Some other great points:

1. C# and F# are generally considered to be very-well designed languages that support a variety of programming styles.

2. .NET has very broad adoption in enterprise. We hear about Rails, Go, Node, Clojure, etc. here in the HN echo chamber, but in any town beyond the big cities you're far more likely to find a C# or Java job. In the next big downturn, you'll be happy to have .NET on your resume.

Now of course, .NET can't do EVERYTHING. It's VM-based platform, so of course there will be applications (very low memory, for instance) for which it isn't suited. That said, from a bang-for-your-buck perspective it's a pretty tempting offer.
Hah, Thanks. This is great feedback :)

The website is not really likable by google crawlers but I will try to think on it.
The question is, would the factual probability go up if the perceived probability goes down? ;)
Citations requested for:

* "2500watts (including heating)"

* "That may be only 25% of the time, with the lesser being the norm"

* "US electricity consumption per person = 13,246.27kwh"

* "The real number is perhaps triple."
> In today's day and age, most people expect not to send or receive emails

People who don't care about your shit expect not to send or receive emails, just easy to digest posts in an infinite timeline while they're on the toilet.

But people who care about what you have to send them (e.g. your grandma when you send her pictures of you and your boyfriend on vacation, your dad when you send him pictures of his grandchildren, a close friend when you tell her about your new job) are very happy to receive what you have to send to them and reply to it, no matter the medium.

Yes, if you want to address 99% of your social network email is probably not as good as Facebook, but if you only care about the 10% that's closest to you, the technology doesn't matter. One of my best friends from high school still sends me paper letters, and I am ecstatic to receive them when I do.
It's a Non-technical argument in a technical discussion.

Is a framework necessarily better/good because it was picked by the SE team at a large company?
The difference is one is true and backed by logic and statistics while the other is false and rooted in emotion?

It's an important distinction because it's impossible to have a discussion about how to manage risk without first having a true understanding about what the real risks are.
I'm cool with the idea of providing a readable option in Pinboard, since I already do something similar to get the text out of the page for indexing. Any library for this you particularly like?
If you want to go a small step further you might consider using exiftool to rename all your photos by date. I do this to make sorting and identifying them easier. If you assume fewer than 999 photos/day, this command will rename JPEG files to YYYY-MM-DD-NNN (where 'NNN' = 001-999 in strictly chronological order). Run it in any parent directory when you want all photos there + all subdirectories renamed accordingly.

exiftool -fileOrder DateTimeOriginal -recurse -extension jpg -extension jpeg -ignoreMinorErrors '-FileName<CreateDate' -d %Y-%m-%d%%-.3nc.%%e .

Make sure those camera clocks are set correctly! Just like with servers, it's easiest if you always use GMT/UTC time.

This is especially cool when you have a collection of photos from an event taken by multiple people, because you see everything in the order in which they were takes regardless of which camera took them (again, assumes clock was correct).
This. This is the crux of the issue in discussions such as this. Of course we all want Utopia. Just because some of us have disagreements about how to get there doesn't mean that we're heartless bigots.

(I'm not implying anyone in particular here has said this, but this is often where these discussion end up).
First of all if I could get oceanfront property for $700K in this area (Block Island or Cape Cod) I'd think that was a bargain.

And anyway, yes, I would still feel that they're beautiful. There's something deeply satisfying for me when natural resources are harnessed in this sensible and attractive way.
This article strikes me as tone-deaf.

> People need a lot of things. You’ll die without food long before you’ll die without health care, and yet few people say we need to “take the profit motive out of farming”. (...) Why is health care special?

Why is healthcare special? Because juicing someone's wallet when they are down on their luck is one of the worst things you can do.

Yes, healthcare is not cheap. And the resources we have to pay for it are finite. We don't understand everything, and ultimately we will all lose the battle to death.

So why do we fight? Because we want to live. And most of us want to see those whom they love live too.

The money argument is especially bad though, because in terms of outcomes (whether you measure longevity, or not dying of preventable diseases, or not getting more messed up during treatment), the US scores pretty bad. Yet we spend the most of any country (per GDP)[1]. Other countries such as the UK, France or Germany spend less, do contain costs and have better outcomes.

What making it a business does is reduce overall efficiency. If the major actors have the ability to take advantage of the final customer's weakness while maintaining a fiduciary responsability to generate profits, then money that is spent for the purpose of getting well gets diverted into pure profits.

Exhibit A: drugs. In France drug companies negotiate a market price with the payor (government). They are still able to turn a profit in that market alone. Not a huge one but decent. They then take the same drug, patent it in the US and sell it for 4x to 6x the price. Keep in mind the R&D was already paid for. So that is pure profit (minus marketing and regulatory compliance costs).

[1] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?year_high...
I guess . . . read the article. The study showed the perceived risk varied depending on moral judgments about why the child was left alone even though the facts of the case were otherwise identical. Moreover, it showed significant tendency towards negative moral judgments even in cases where events were completely outside the parent's control.
ARM Puts Some Muscle into Vector Number Crunching
Pretty disappointing for a web host offering secure and reliable storage to have their blog taken down so easily.
For scientific work, I find it worth the effort to compile from source using Intel compilers + MKL (or a compiler + math library that can optimize well for your particular hardware platform).
That problem can be avoided without monorepos. You primarily need a way to declare a dependency from one package on another at build time, such that the appropriate release gets pulled in. For example, maybe you've depended on version 2 of the interface definition; and in that case the build system fetches the artifacts for interface 2 at build time when building the client. Maven for Java works this way.

Ideally this system would also allow the package owner to release updates within an existing version if they wish. For example, backward-compatible changes to the service interface can be released while keeping the major version 2. In this way, clients automatically consume safe updates, while incompatible or risky changes can be given a major version bump (e.g. to 3). Consumers who want to pin the interface to a specific version like 2.5.1 could do so, in some build systems, though dependencies this specific are rarely useful or a good idea. In my experience it's best for the contract between producer and consumer to be explicitly versioned at the "major version" level, and only implicitly versioned (meaning updates are automatic) at the minor version level.
I went on a backpacking trip a few weeks ago with 2 friends in the White Mountains. We summited Mount Bond at around midnight, 2 days before the new moon. It was such a beautiful experience, I've never seen the Milky Way like that before. Despite being exhausted and still over a mile between us and the campsite we were heading to, without a word we all took off our packs, laid down on the rocks, and spent almost an hour looking at the sky. There's something very humbling about being able to see so clearly how minuscule our place in the universe really is.
That's good, but we prefer to use language from the article itself when possible.
Blizzard Entertainment Recovers Following Another DDoS Attack
I'm not sure what you mean - you gain not having to port anything, which sounds pretty great to me.

And for the Ruby C extensions we tried not only did we not have to port them from C to Ruby, they actually ran faster than either the compiled C version or the pure Ruby version because we can inline and optimise between the two languages.
At a minimum, it's much better to have a wind farm near a beach than a set of high buildings.
19 Free Apps Every College Student Needs to Stay Motivated This Fall
A lot of the focus in the HN comments is on ArrayLists, but I'm curious why the author chose to give linked lists an O(1) insert time. In some implementations (doubly linked list, inserting at the head of the list) I can see the O(1) time, but when appending to the end it also is O(n) because one has to traverse the entire list of elements before updating the link at the end of the list. Might just be nitpicking here but that might also be affecting the author's results.
Exactly. My parents shied away from looking into ADD/ADHD treatment for me because of the blowback about overdiagnosing, instead ascribing to the more regressive and I daresay petulant "kids will be kids" outlook of my behavior and educational issues growing up. I didn't last one semester at college, and my life was a mess for close to my first ten years of adulthood, at which point I finally overcame the "this is just the way you are" mindset and sought treatment. Started on medication and my life turned around overnight.

So while it's certainly important to keep an eye on pharma, it's also wildly irresponsible, unfair, and unscientific to claim "it's mostly made-up because I don't like the implication that a lot of people have a mental problem". Particularly disgusting is including the anecdote about the person who faked ADHD symptoms to get stimulants, then killed himself when his supply was cut off: prescription drug abuse/addiction is a serious issue, but one that is completely separate from the proper diagnosis of a medical condition.

There's rightfully been a backlash against the "better living through chemistry" postwar mindset that every problem should be medicated. But I think in this case it's ultimately less about medicating and more about fear of and unwillingness to address mental issues.
Well no because "the pattern you describe" in that context was only implementing stuff on types you own/control, which is basically a function declaration in Go, the problem is that doesn't extend to types you don't control, Go only lets you define methods on local types (types from the same package).

By comparison the code pcwalton shows has more upfront boilerplate, you need to explicitly `implement $Interface for $Type`, but it works for both local and non-local types.

That's what e.g. Rust does, you can implement a trait on a type if either the trait or the type is local (in theory you could also do so if neither is local but IIRC that's not allowed so conflicts don't have to be handled). Which means you can do this:

trait Do {
fn do(&self, req: &Request) -> Result<Response>
}

impl Do for hyper::http::Client {
fn do(&self, req: &Request) -> Result<Response> {
...
}
}

impl Do for MockClient {
fn do(&self, req: &Request) -> Result<Response> {
...
}
}

There's a higher up-front syntactic cost (in that you have to declare the trait and you have to explicitly implement it even on the local MockClient type) but in return you also can implement it on the non-local "actual" http client.
Worth re-reading Marco Arment's blog post about selling Instapaper 3 years ago:
https://marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation

"Instapaper needs a new home where it can be staffed and grown, but I didn’t want to give it to a big company that would probably just shut it down in six months."

Oof.
And I avoid being outside when there's a thunderstorm nearby.
Big O isn't fooling you, it's giving you a one-function explanation of how the algorithm runs on an idealized system as the size of the problem increases. There's other systems you can simulate for big O, but the math is much harder and you wouldn't generally use it unless you're doing something complex like a cache-oblivious algorithm.

If you're using solely big O to decide on an algorithm, you're fooling yourself. If performance is an issue, profile, benchmark, study, don't guess.
In the case of python, we already have Cython that allows the porting of Python to C. Why do work creating the inverse (with potentially much harder semantics to JIT) when we can already go from Python to C.
May be I'm stupid, but how hard it is it to reimplement it as 64 bit unsigned ?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12343890
> the vision of the Python ecosystem as Python-only packages with occasional lightweight C libraries integrated with cffi looks very nice to me.

I have the opposite view. I'd rather have all of the important libraries written in a language with a safer type system than Python's. C's type system has some safety issues, but it's still safer than Python's.

If Python 3's optional type hints could actually be enforced at runtime, I'd be sold on using Python for pretty much everything.
Pinstapaperist?
Of course. Hell, I'd pay extra for a view of Deer Island here in Boston. Yes it's a sewage treatment plant, but it is an exceedingly beautiful one.
If you're the boss, you'll be blamed either way. This should not be part of the decision process. The loneliness of being the boss...
Yes, I look at them and see we're collecting power from our environment in such a simple and direct way in comparison to other fossil fuel paths.
Here's an interesting survey you can do to see how the statistics work.

Ask people you know if they know anyone who's been involved in a plane crash, however minor. Most people are at least two degrees away from such an event even if they know a lot of people. It's rare to know someone who knows someone who's been involved in a plane crash because as traumatic as these events are, they impact a very small number of people, under 1000 per year world-wide. There are significantly more people that win over $1M in the lottery in the same time period, and most would agree that's a huge long-shot.

Now ask the same people if they've personally been involved in a collision. Most people over 30 have been involved in at least one, and it's not uncommon to know someone who's been involved in two or three. You probably know at least one person who's lost a friend or relative to a car crash.

The need for seat belts and air bags is absolutely real. You'd know this if you did even a cursory amount of research.
There's a third option: analysis and understanding.

This seems to be entirely forgotten by the "measure, test" crowd - the scientific method requires a hypothesis to test for measurements to be meaningful, and separately not all things that are produced are "tested" in every aspect, since many things are well established, and the application of that existing theoretical framework makes measurement and testing a waste of time.

Having a theoretical understanding of the thing you care about is far more important than the "measure, test" step - which is certainly important, but by itself of really limited power.
Too much homework? Not in this class. None at all. None all year