skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with you. And I also have a tendency, based on a few personal experiences, to associate self-proclaimed visionaries, with narcissistic personality disorder. And it is also my experience that, besides being very active in taking credits for other people ideas, design and work, they are typically lazy and a hindrance.

However, somehow, they're alway seems to be able to find people who will do the job for them, from bench work to CEO work, so they can call themselves successful.
> (1) Your ISP and employer know which sites you're visting (modulo virtual hosting) by inspecting your IP packets and doing a reverse DNS lookup. It's the price you pay for someone routing your traffic: they have to know where to send it.

You have a point, but as a webmaster there's surely no requirement for me to create a PTR record, right? As long as there's an A record somewhere, surely things will work? This is perhaps what you were getting at with "(modulo virtual hosting)" I guess (though to me that would suggest SNI-based certificate serving from one IP)?
C89 standard does not.
Eiffel has design by contract build in, as does D.
Bulgarians repainting Soviet era monuments to look like American Superheroes
Python has definitely been a much better way forward for my work!
I don't think you understand what I mean. When I say car it doesn't include SUVs/trucks. The difference used to be cars (unibody) vs SUVs/trucks (body on frame). A lot of SUVs are now unibody including my Grand Cherokee.

There are many types of SUVs and trucks with 4wd in the US. I guess in Europe you only have Land Rovers or G-wagons. I don't think GLs or MLs are common in EU but you can get beefed up off road packages in the US.
I will be there. We are working on Cloudron. It is a platform for self-hosting web apps [1]. I am hoping to network with people who have similar interests (i.e self-hosting). It's my first Startup School, so I am quite excited.

1. https://cloudron.io
Ask HN: Accuracy of ip to geo location?
in regards to ip to geolocation mappings like the one from maxmind?

how accurate are they?
BTW if you went around and asked a bunch of software engineers how they finangled there way into working a sub-40 week and collected that into a e-book. I would buy the shit out of that. And judging from other hacker news posts there are lots of other developers who would as well.

I would do it myself but I don't have the extra day to write books :) and I'm a terrible writer.
There is at least one mechanical design which (claims to?) solve this problem, Wavetrac.

Don't want to embarrass myself trying to explain it, so click "how it works" on this page:
http://www.wavetrac.net/technical.htm
Real life Suicide Squad transfer program
How full of crap is Zuckerberg?
In the end, Facebook is about showing you advertisements, but Zuckerberg spreads this rhetoric about making the world more open and connected. It's quite annoying, and it kind of blows my mind that he believes it too. I know he's been doing philanthropic activities lately too, and those are good.
Whenever you attach an event handler on scroll, it can impact page performance because the javascript needs to be evaluated before the scroll event can continue AFAIK...going from some old Paul Irish talk on performance.

The #1 killer he found responsible for "jankiness" (that horrible scroll feeling where the page scroll is unresponsive and not 60 fps smooth) is by people attaching event handlers on the scroll event that take more than a few ms to complete, thus reducing the frame rate of the page.

It seems like this library is throttling the evaluation of the event handler but you still need to be careful as to not solve one performance problem and create another. I know I personally hate slow scrolling web pages.

This seems like something that should be implemented in some as yet unreleased CSS selector. But that still won't stop people from abusing it.
Sure, we could argue over multiple possible sources of blame and maybe we will conclude that Excel is not the most important. It seems nearly impossible to have that debate in a rigorous way. In any case, "the evidence will be ignored anyway" is not a good argument to use a tool that will produce bad evidence.
I work professionally as an applied mathematician and I'd love if more people were to embrace proof assistant tools. That being said, I've worked with Coq a fair amount in the past and I find it really hard to prove things related to my primary field, optimization. Some of it is getting more practice with the tools. However, how proofs are generated in these tools is different than how I was trained to produce proofs and I don't find it to be a simple process to just learn how. If anyone is curious about these tools, I recommend the Coq'Art book (https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783540208549)

As an additional, somewhat controversial comment, I think these tools are important because there's quite a bit of corruption with publishing. In short, if you're well known and liked author, you often get a pass on your papers and they're not well checked for errors. I've been yelled at by editors for questioning proofs of famous people. I'm not the only one. No. I will not name names or publications. Also, although it's not universal, when some journals say communicated by so-and-so, that means that so-and-so vouched for the paper, so they published it immediately without other peer review. Is the paper right? Maybe. However, I find the practice unsettling.

Bringing the comment back to proof assistant tools, I believe they would remedy some, but not all of the problems described above. We don't have to worry if a paper got a pass because the author was well liked. When can just run the proof through the tool and check that it's correct.

Anyway, if someone has some references or tutorials for people using proof assistant tools for applied math kinds of results, I'd love to read them. Things like stability regions for ODE solvers or convergence results for stuff like Newton's method. Or, honestly, anything that helps understand the tools and methodology more easily.
Security catastrophes are unlikely to be sufficient to make companies take security seriously. After all, the PR damage seems limited (it's hard to blame someone for not understanding something you don't understand yourself), and the damage is often largely to third parties (i.e: customers). The people taking the risks aren't the ones paying the costs. And those paying the costs can't really tell who's taking the risks, nor judge well how it impacts them.

It sort of reminds me of CO2 emmisions - and look how brilliantly that battle is going.

This shorting is much better, actually - it impacts metrics companies actually optimize for, so it may actually affect behavior. Not only that, it allocates money to security research, creating a virtuous circle.

But it's not all roses: it's only going to work as long as there's a stock market impact; and that's eventually dependent on security risks actually affecting the choices buyers make. That is uncertain. Most successful software has almost no competitors; software (well, and IP law) makes it trivial to create lock-in and software is trivial to mass-produce, so underdogs have a terrible time. For example: if you can effectively choose only between iOS and android, then you're likely to make that choice based on just a few of your top priorities (in CS terms: there's at most 1 bit of entropy here). Security may matter, but it's not going to have as much impact as it would in an actual proper market where there's sufficient choice for real competition to emerge.
Excel is the de facto standard for my STAT 301 class.
> really gain something ubuntu doesn't offer me?

Native ZFS!
Not sure what you mean? Asm.js was defined a couple of years before Web assembly
There's always Antergos which is essentially Arch + magic (installer + scripted updates). It just works with little configuration. Problem with Arch or any rolling release is you will download a gigantic amount of updates every day it felt like I was rolling dice with my system stability everytime.
> Why does the bootloader use EFI variables

Because that's the right way to do it (for non-removable discs), and the way that you mention is the wrong way to do it.

* https://jdebp.eu./FGA/efi-boot-process.html
The CA system is so broken. Even if you pick a trustworthy CA, you're at the mercy of the weakest link (any random other CA elsewhere in the world).

I feel we would be better off if CA tasks were limited to the registrar responsible for any given domain. For non-EV certificates, this removes the need for fragile ownership checks. Also, a technical measure could probably be put in place on clients so other registrars/CA can't spring fake certificates on your domain, by cross-checking that the CA is also the actual registrar. This would stop the race-to-the-bottom for both registrars and CAs, since if you pick a highly trustworthy CA you could be more confident no other CA would be able to wrongly issue a certificate for your domain (edit: or that your own CA would betray you). If you want top notch security, you could pay a premium, but actually get value for your dollars by picking a "more secure" registrar-and-CA service - instead of today's wildly varying prices for non-EV certificates, where expensive CAs bring zero value for their premium.
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12370605
Maybe I've just been self-employed for too long. In this mode of existence, one has immense schedule flexibility and yet is always working, all at the same time, in some weirdly paradoxical way. It's a lot like the life of professors; they don't have to be in the office except when teaching or having office hours, yet they're always busy.

From the vantage point of that mode of existence, an extra day doesn't do anything for me. Nothing I'd take a pay cut for, for sure. I can take a random Wednesday off anyway if I feel like it. On the other hand, I am working at least some time every day, and some days a lot.

I guess if I think back to when I was W-2 employed my butt had to be in some cube farm at 9 AM every day, a Friday off might seem more valuable.
...include the potentially biasing factors as features...

Who decides what the "potentially biasing factors" are? How is that decided without somehow relying on subjective societal values?

Factors that no one thought were biased in the past are considered biased today; factors that no one thinks are biased today may be considered biased in the future; and factors that you and I consider biased today may not be considered biased by people in other parts of the world. I don't know how one would go about finding those "potentially biasing factors" without relying on subjective societal values that are different everywhere and always evolving.
"statistics don't lie quote but liars use statistics"

Well, the similar can be said about authors of that article (don't know about newer version of Excel though).

Basically they are saying
"Of course, it all appears only to old versions of Excel but there were sooo much problems with them".

So, what?
> If - and only if - the base of trust is there and continuously honed through communication, this is an amazing way to work and learn.

This is the key, and something narcissist don't do. It's against their nature. They thrive at hugging communication and controlling the flow of information.
The incompleteness theorem says that there exist some (paradoxical and self referencing) true theorems that you can't prove (i.e. "this sentence is unprovable".) Neither humans nor proof assistants should be able to prove them.
Longest living human' says he is ready for death at 145
Ask HN: Why was my submission flagged?
I thought it would interest HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12373496
We need to start just de-trusting CAs that do this crap. Yes, websites will break. That will put pressure on site owners to only choose responsible CAs, and that market pressure is the only thing that can solve this problem.
From my perspective it's the threshold effect: in every endeavor there is a threshold which is hard to reach, but it gets easier for one to replicate similar things after passing it.

It is hard to find an important problem and create a viable mass market solution for it. By accomplishing this once, you get important skills such as time and project management, marketing and engineering skills etc. Acquiring those skills are hard work, but once you master them, you can apply those to everything you do. So naturally it gets easier to create new solutions.

There might be a network effect too. Creating a great project might enlarge your network with other people who are creating important solutions. I think this would set you in an interesting position; people would come to you with their most important problems they wanted to see solved since you have a proven track record. Ideas breed ideas. This might help with finding another important problem worth solving.

The most common thing about those creating great things time after time, is their production/consumption ratio. Humans tend to lean on consumption side and since the world is full of distraction we are wasting most of our valuable time on consuming info-junk. The over achievers I had a chance to meet were always skewed towards the production side. They almost always learned new things with a purpose. Also the threshold effect might be the cause of this high production/consumption ratio. Creating one great project might have created an emotional and hormonal concoction, a high, that motivates people to focus on creating things.

Accomplishing one great task, those people has the confidence and swag that they can achieve another one. People around them would cheer them up instead of hindering their motivation by reminding them how hard that task is. They would not remind them that they might be wasting their time by tackling that huge problem. They would find eager help and funding when they need.

Those are the first few things that came to my mind when I think about what factors might create multi-project programmers.
The White House announces new steps to attract  international entrepreneurs
This article is careless with physical terms. What it means to say here is that rotation (or energy) goes to whichever of the four wheels has the least grip. The torque of all the wheels is basically equal [0]. The ones that are gripping are creating linear force, but not enough to move the car. The wheel that is spinning freely has its torque going into dynamic friction and rotational acceleration. When that wheel has accelerated to as fast as possible (which happens awfully quickly because a wheel isn't that massive), the engine's rev limiter kicks in and cuts the total torque down to 4x the dynamic friction.

[0] Assuming ideal naive differentials.
It's not clear that it would give much of an advantage nowadays. English has become the de facto international language for now, and so currently the difficulties of learning English, such as spelling, are also being inflicted on students around the world.

For most of them English is a second language and thus they have to deal with the spelling on top of the difficulty of dealing with a foreign language. I think that makes it so English spelling is a bigger hinderance for them than it is for students where English is their first language (such as the majority of the US), and so spelling reform would help them more than it would help US students. In terms of competitive edges, spelling reform would lessen the edge of US students.

Of course, that doesn't mean that would be bad. As you note, less time on spelling is more time for other subjects. If spelling reform led to US students getting, say, 1% better in science or math, and led to foreign students getting 2% better, yes that worsens the US position relative to the foreign students, but looked at another way everybody improves.
> What seems to be missing is a more sophisticated understanding of risk and a legal framework that substitutes the risk assessment of individual patients (or parents) for a one-size-fits-all decision by a bureaucracy.

I guess I disagree that this understanding is lacking, in fact, I find that medical professionals (including those in regulatory bodies, of which there are many) have an excellent understanding of risk/benefits.

> We are hearing stories now of people going with fewer EpiPen's because of the cost. Is that a better situation than Auvi-Q's sometimes in-accurate dose? I don't know but it is a question that comes to mind.

It is unacceptable to market a device that does not work as designed, especially when the malfunction is unpredictable or results in uncertainty that makes treatment more complicated. Why should Auvi-Q be different?

> The government apparently requires purchase of two EpiPens to reduce the risk in case a single dosage is insufficient, but this doubles the cost.

The government makes no such requirement. NIAID guidelines (http://www.aaaai.org/Aaaai/media/MediaLibrary/PDF%20Document...) recommend that a physician prescribe for two auto-injector doses as a part of first-line treatment. Two doses makes sense, especially with a device like this: as the saying goes, two is one and one is none. A package of two auto-injectors doubles the BOM cost, but that is a small fraction of the average transaction cost or retail cost. Mylan smartly switched to selling in packs of two to capitalize on the updated guidelines, I suspect to make their cost increases more defendable. I don't like their profiteering, but I can't fault their marketing decision.

> Should pharmacists be able to substitute the AdrenaClick with the patients approval? The law prevents that. Perhaps trusting pharmacists (a highly regulated profession already) to make that decision would be better than patients purchasing fewer EpiPens due to cost.

Generally speaking, I think pharmacists in the US should have an enhanced role in patient care, similar to their counterparts overseas. They are highly trained, as you rightfully point out, and they generally have a better understanding of pharmaceuticals and interactions than their MD colleagues. In this case, they are already able to point out to a prescribing physician that alternatives like Adrenaclick exist, they just cannot modify the script on their own. Actually, this might be a case where electronic prescribing systems make things worse by limiting the physician/pharmacist interaction.
Cubicles for 4 people, with high partitions.
As I explained in my other comment - I forgot that in US, "car" and "suv" are two different things. You could have a Ford F150 or a Chevy Escalade here and it would still be a "car" , just like a car without roof is still a car but of a subtype "cabriolet".
It really sticks out in the launcher, next to a pile of material style icons it just looks... old
So Nexus6p or Galaxy S7 support?
I think children should program, and I think they should do it as early as possible. It's a form of mental calisthenics that when coupled with the right parent/mentor will prove invaluable in development and beyond.

In the same way that child gymnasts(or insert appropriate example) get the benefits of developing physical strength and range of motion I think child programmers can reap mental benefits.

I think most education is focused on data accumulation as opposed versatility. Usually, it is when you get to some level of advanced education that it starts to teach you how to think. I think that is backwards, but perhaps a different conversation. For example, my lawyer friends are quite proud that their law degree "taught them how to think."

What I find most exhilarating (yes, exhilarating) about programming is the problem solving aspect, which forces you to think differently. Finding comfort in patterns has a certain pleasantness to it, however, my experience is that you will eventually run in to situations that challenge your experience and expectations. For me, that's not just a benefit of programming, but a metaphor for life.

The more modes of thinking, or perspectives you possess the better you understand yourself, how you think, your strengths and weaknesses. Then you can hack yourself to improve or leverage each.
Harper Reed gave a fireside chat at 1871 in Chicago a year back where he said that he's yet to see any meaningful data opportunity that can't be addressed by Excel. Most are just trying to build a solution where there isn't a problem.
"GE soon began hiring US software engineers at a number of designated centers where they were segregated from the rest of the company."

That still seems to be the plan: "The San Ramon complex, home to GE Digital, now employs 1,400 people. The buildings are designed to suit the free-range working ways of software developers: open-plan floors, bench seating, whiteboards, couches for impromptu meetings, balconies overlooking the grounds and kitchen areas with snacks." There are pictures on the GE Digital site. What you don't see are workbenches with electrical products hooked up to computers. They're not doing embedded software.

This has an impact on product design. The GE Digital site says: "One million terabytes per day … that’s how much data Predix will process by 2020." They're thinking "big data", where all this stuff is shipped to the "cloud" for later analysis. The alternative would be digesting it near the source and only sending in the interesting stuff. They're going to collect gigabytes of "Bearing 22 temp 18 C", which is only important if the value is out of normal range or shows a trend.

The alternative would be some smartphone-sized device which listens to the data from your turbine or jet engine and finds the good stuff. But that wouldn't justify expensive cloud services, fees, meetings, etc. Even if it did exactly the same thing, GE couldn't collect huge fees for a smartphone-sized analysis device.
My apologies. I used the wrong term. It's not "parody" but "satire".

No, satire isn't an "absolute defense." I never claimed it was. Nor did I say they were opposites. I was making a comment about a satire defense specific to the Tom Cruise and rape scenario you presented.

You wrote: "If they make statements about people that to a normal person's understanding are not clear parody, they can still be sued"

That is not the criterion. It isn't a "normal person's understanding", but a viewership who is aware of South Park's history of satire, including straight-faced satire.

Yes, Comedy Central/South Park could still be sued, but to win it would need to be a scenario where it's not understood as satire even to South Park's audience.