skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The discussion [1] below was helpful to summarize the last DDoS attack and new controls implemented.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10998661
In the surprisingly recent past, "science" has declared the lack of sentience, consciousness, or ability to feel pain in any number of groups, from fish to human infants (no, really, they did open heart surgery on newborn humans without anaesthesia. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/17/opinion/l-why-infant-surge...). Often there seems to be no evidence behind these declarations beyond the convenience of the conclusions.
Can you elaborate on that? What do you use Matlab/Simulink for in the automotive industry?
> Less than a decade after test pilot Chuck Yeager first broke the speed of sound, it became the first jet to fly more than twice the speed of sound.

Flying faster than the speed of sound has physical significance, because there are major changes in the way the air and the plane interact as you pass the speed of sound.

If there anything physically significant about twice the speed of sound, or is that just special psychologically?
I am a physician, and there has been a "state of emergency" declared in my province due to a fentanyl overdose "epidemic". Although I use this drug routinely, it is incredibly unsafe outside of a clinical setting. Unfortunately, these are not your stereotypical "bad" people that are dying from overdoses, but your average young people who just happen to experiment. It's utterly awful, and I feel for you. I hope this trend (if you can call it that) ends soon.
Well, the distinction between military and paramilitary is indeed a subtle one. But I don't see a problem dealing with deaths of ones colleagues. They swore the vow, or took the money, and they knew the risks. It would be very hard for me to handle responsibility for those we had killed, however. And that's why I'd never kill except in self defense.
The patent system is full of tradeoffs. Maybe patents should only last for 3 years, maybe 10, etc.

But for all its tradeoffs, patent protection does create an incentive for massive investment in R&D. It's difficult to imagine a meaningful counterfactual scenario.

Of course, bad patent office execution (leading to patent trolling, etc.) is parasitic and harms the system as a whole.

But what about the FDA? The FDA is notoriously overly risk-averse when it comes to approving new treatments. It simply should not be hard to get a competing delivery mechanism approved. It's easy to test, the test of whether the mechanism works can be repeated at nearly zero cost thousands of times, offering substantially more data than the typical drug approval process yields (when the question is whether a drug is safe long term).

If you are an FDA regulator, the only way you can really lose your job and pension is by approving a drug that should not have been approved. Nobody is keeping score of the suffering and loss of life caused by sluggish approvals.
It may be that the information density of inheritance is much higher than assumed, both inheritable dna and epigenetic factors. I am no expert in genetics, but sometimes when I hear about rapid evolution during epochs of high stress, e.g. changes in climate, I wonder whether this rapid evolution is enabled by conservation of past genetic solutions that are currently dormant..—solutions that get switched on (i.e. expressed) in epochs of high stress/strong selection pressures..

It seems that if it is possible to preserve past evolutionary solutions which can get switched on and off, this would increase fitness of a lineage by enabling faster adaption. Instead of waiting for random mutation to do something meaningful and beneficial, allow/encourage mutations to occur in such a way that "uncomments" or "comments" out previously generated code fragments, so to speak.

again, i know little of this field,but i love to speculate.
Not a big enough market to make money making a better product. The tooling is super complicated and there are a limited number of potential users.
> When calling a simple function like this within a large loop, would it make a noticeable difference in speed to inline the computation vs. having a function call?

Maybe. Inlining small functions can reduce cache load, and it means no call/ret instructions and no overhead of argument passing. Moreover inlining allows futher optimizations which can't be done without breaking function boundaries. It may be noticeable. And may be not. Depends on loop.

> what's the best practice for inlining a computation like this?

There are a lot of examples can be seen in linux kernel. Just random example from include/linux/list.h:

static inline void list_replace(struct list_head *old,
struct list_head *new)
{
new->next = old->next;
new->next->prev = new;
new->prev = old->prev;
new->prev->next = new;
}

Keyword 'static' allows compiler to make no callable (not inlined) copy of function at all, and also it allows to define such a functions in header files. Compiler can't inline function call if it has no function definition at compile time. Declaration is not enough for inlining. Therefore such a functions likely to be defined in headers, and 'static' becomes necessary. When defined in *.c file 'static' can be omitted, but probably better not to.

With C++ such a functions will be a methods in most cases, and (if so) "static" would be unneeded and wrong.

And you'll need to turn on optimizations when compiling. Compiler is not inlining when not optimizing.
Peer Routing Table Explained
The fastest LTE service I've seen was in Kempsey, Australia (Pop. 28,000) where I clocked 130 MBit/s down on a prepaid SIM
Fascinating, seems believable.

XSAs are released alarmingly frequently. I've always wondered if KVM is really more secure or if it just gets less scrutiny (certainly there's a class of qemu vulnerabilities that impact both hypervisors).
There's nothing special about the definition. Use any construction you like, but do it over a countable model of set theory[1]. Now you have a countable set of real numbers, although there is no correspondence between it and the natural numbers within the model. The statement that 'there is an uncountable set' is also provable, although the set is countable. It's one of those Goedelian tricks, like the statement that is proven true but is unprovable.

That said, I prefer to say that only real numbers that can be emitted by computer programs exist.

[1] Use the Downward Lowenheim-Skolem theorem to get a countable set theory, and choose something like ZFC as your set theory.
Ah, I guess I wasn't clear. They want to work for a VC firm.

The danger is that they aren't in it for the long haul, are just using this as a resume padder, and are looking to jump ship to a VC firm (or potentially a better resume padder) asap.
One hundred people! That's an epidemic.
It doesn't matter. Ignorance of the law and all that... but I suppose that only applies to us little people.
Maybe you should rethink what a stereotypical "bad" person is.
Pretty neat.

Was just at a water park with my family and the guards there were doing this constant head nodding. Kind of disturbing to watch if you are not expecting it. But I looked it up and the explanation is they are "scanning" - making sure to move around their heads to observe their area better and not rely on just the peripheral vision.

Owls do that as well. Even I do it when getting to an intersection somewhat. I lean into the steering wheel and bob my head up and down a few times. I imagine it might look pretty ridiculous to someone from the side.

Driving is probably one of the most dangerous things we do here in US. Anything to make it safer is a good thing.

One of the tricks I learned from driver's ed in back in Eastern Europe is if you drive at night, and incoming traffic is blinding you, don't stare directly into the beam, but turn your head slightly to the right, such that you'd still see ahead but it would be out of the corner of your eye. Obviously not ideal as you're using your peripheral vision but if the alternative is to blinded and not see anything at all, it is still better. I've used that trick enough times since then and it seems to work pretty well.
One thing I noticed about the references to costco throughout this thread, is that people only go there to buy a full overs-zed shopping cart full of supplies.

Maybe I'm just weird, but I walk there weekly and it's the only grocery store I use. Going early in the morning on weekends or an hour before closing weeknights means I can get from my apt and back with groceries in an hour.
I'm late to this thread but this is definitely not factual:

> The problem with HN for politics and economics is its decidedly Silicon Valley, libertarian and white male slant, often self-servingly pedantically amoral.

There's a cognitive bias where everybody thinks the slant they disagree with is the one that dominates this site. If you held opposite views, you'd be arguing that HN is dominated by liberals or what have you. Perhaps that's not obvious to you, but it is to us whose job it is to oversee HN as a whole. HN's archives are full of people complaining about this from all sides.

The point of view you describe (or, to be fair, caricature) does exist on HN, of course. But the community is politically divided, most claims people make about who dominates it are just a rhetorical device, i.e. to score cheap points in arguments.
Using the male pronoun by default is simply common practice in English, dating back at least hundreds of years. I wouldn't read into it.
Don't know where the parent is from but I live in a largish Canadian city. Using a bike for primary travel is not viable except for short leisure/weekend errands. I even live in the part of town where biking would be the most viable.
Not exactly, I wouldn't be afraid of the data table having both attribute name & value columns. EAV is practically 6NF which would prohibit that. (to be honest that id field was out of habit, the known-keys table should probably be unique and indexed on the key name)
Given information publicly available this seems infuriatingly ridiculous, but Nodevember's official statement in response seems quite reasonable: http://nodevember.org/statement.html

The theories here about sociopaths attempting to exert control are quite exotic and interesting, though :P
Now that flexbox is widely supported, I don't really see a huge reason to bother with a framework like this. Bootstrap and other frameworks had a reason to exist several years ago; now I just don't get it. The main draw for me and my team was the consistent row and column layouts.

Also, the `container-side` thing is baffling. Why is that part of the framework? It seems like such a narrow focus. What kind of content is never visible on mobile? Why does it have to be on the side?
Hehe, everyone's so nice today! Cheers.
It means "Clinton"
I notice a fairly common tactic for trying to change norms is to pretend that the norms aren't norms and then aggressively shame people for doing a normal thing.

This leads to a toxic atmosphere where people can't be secure in their words, social reality keeps being pulled out from under their feet.
Spike Lee's first famous movie was about this.
As an ex-paramedic this really hits home.
I feel there's a knee jerk reaction from people in the tech community to minimize very legitimate concerns about bias and about making people feel uncomfortable and unwelcome.

I think it's easy to look past someone's personal preferences and outrageous comments when you're already part of the club. But respect that that isn't everyone's experience.
I agree with you, I simply call it crony-corporatist capitalism. I agree that there may not be any such thing as the idealized form. However:

- Our system has many biases toward over-centralization, and the idea that we should have one Federal entity completely in charge of drug approvals is pretty absurd. Why not encourage many other groups to make recommendations. Why can't the FDA have its own list, as well as a list made by the AMA, major HMOs etc. Why not also consider the list used in the UK, etc.

When we a) combine effectiveness research with b) a public health mandate and c) risk-averse career burocrats, we end up with our current system. If our government weren't in the business of coordinating regulatory capture games, it would simply relinquish control of absolute authority, and allow respected third party institutions to have a voice.

If your doctor prescribes drug x simply because it's FDA approved, that is very much the wrong decision. The side-effect for Vioxx that led to it being pulled was well known to doctors (and applies to all NSAIDs), and so any doctor who let a patent suffer with Vioxx was at somewhat clueless if not negligent.

So yes, the government is yet another corrupt firm with a monopoly on certain things that it abuses for profit, harming all of us in the process.

> This is the real capitalism

Our economy contains some areas that are heavily corrupt and not very competitive, and others that are under the radar and are highly competitive.
But not eating is even less suffering. that is one hell of a dilemma.
If you want to post on the net that someone is a jerk in your professional forum, you don't NEED evidence, but if you offer it and its complete flim-flam then we all assume you are an idiot.

If someone has to be so careful as to not use normal network terminology around people who are clearly ignorant and use their ignorance as a weapon against you instead of take the time to learn what the hell they are talking about, that's not a community you want to participate in anyway.
Heyif, making fun stuff is important. If we didn't have any fun stuff, our lives wouldn't matter and the serious stuff wouldn't be serious.
Since the voice recognition isn't perfect it means there is a chance it could make false positives and write a bad word you didn't say. Then people complain to Google or sue them. Similarly google search won't auto suggest offensive words or certain libelous statements (e.g. "X is a criminal", even if they are, and even if its a common search phrase.)
If application- and transmission-protocol-level DoS vectors are fixed, then you're left with just the raw "lots of traffic" volumetric attacks, which means your attacker has to have a lot of compromised hosts (or the right compromised hosts with lots of bandwidth). I'd say that's a reality that would be easier to handle, because you raised the bar from anyone who can develop or use a script and deploy to a few low-power systems, exploiting protocol shortcomings, to only those who have a bunch of higher-powered systems.

The smaller hosting companies may still very well go out of the game if the problem worsens, even if most DoS venues do end up being mitigated. I don't know how I would respond to that as of this moment, but hopefully it doesn't have to come to that. It's already tough to find a decent hosting company in my experience.
FLAC Support in Firefox 51
Whatsapp client built on React Native
Maybe it depends on your origins or age, but I'm over forty and attended a conservative religious school, and it boggles even me that anyone considers "he" the current generic/default pronoun.
Clinton took deliberate and illegal action to hide her emails from FOIA. She either told bald-faced lies during a federal investigation, or she was too stupid to deserve to keep her security clearance. And now she will probably be the Commander in Chief of the USA.

It kinda makes me miss Bush.
Site A, insure any writes use odd numbers in unique field.

Site B, insure any writes use even numbers for unique field.

This avoids conflict.
Hella sure
Ruby? Not as far as I know. Matz rejected the Contributor Covenant, and instated the PostgreSQL CoC. Maybe you meant Ruby On Rails? They have adopted the Contributor Covenant.
پکیج تور کیش تابستان ۹۵ ورود ۱۷ شهریور ۹۵
I would be willing to bet an economic externality such as the cost and availability of Starfighters and crews. Especially for what appears to be a US based company.
Lexus' production line, along with Toyota, is based on a "just in time" production line schedule. They don't have warehouses of stock lying around the place. They probably don't even have a day's worth of excess stock on the line, let alone a week's. To expect that they would stockpile one particular component for a year in advance is laughable.
A good article. As a former pilot, I can attest that many things he speaks in that article are analysed and optimised when we are in the cockpit. Using direct vision (scanning instruments) vs peripheral vision (while landing) etc.

Another thing that I think he should extend upon with regards to saccadic eye movement is the phenomena of going around a roundabout etc. in the dark or where external references are not in high contrast - that can start your eyes involuntarily darting around as your inner ear detect an imbalance/change due to the sideways G forces, and thinks that you are turning your head.

I really believe that this article should be required reading for every student who learns to drive or ride on the roads.
I haven't read the book OP linked, but I've been going through Haskell Programming from First Principles for the last 6 weeks or so and it's been fantastic. The price tag is well worth it in terms of frustration and time saved. I'm about two thirds done.

I really like that it builds up from the basics, starting from lambda calculus, and is also very complete in explaining every concept. I don't feel like anything is left unexplained. This is important, because coming from dynamically typed imperative languages, a lot of concepts in Haskell are so alien that you feel like you're learning programming all over again.

The exercises set it apart from other resources. They're plentiful, start simple, but quickly increase in difficulty. A lot of times I thought I had a concept mastered until the exercises presented gaps in my knowledge -- which made me learn the concept that much better.

The completeness means it's a long book (currently 1233 pages). You'll probably need a healthy dose of existing motivation to learn Haskell to get through it.
I believe you're correct - the state of audio recording on the web via browser is still awful. We are just finishing an investigation at work on my team, and find that we cannot avoid the use of Flash to record for IE/Edge/Safari...our only saving grace is that this app is mainly intended for desktop use.

I wish mobile browser vendors didn't avoid this problem - I get that they're all prioriizing different things, but the state of audio/video recording & playback is abysmal.
When the normal thing marginalizes people, marginalized people are hurt. In recent years, they have started to defend themsves in force, the ks to unifying power of the internet.

The insecurity you observe is feeling of the erosion of privilege.
Honestly, the fact that you use the words "in it for the long haul" the way you do would be a red flag for me if I was a prospective hire.

I want to work at a place where the incentives are aligned in such a way that, if I really am some approximation of a rational economic agent, I would have no choice but to "be in it for the long haul", without having that be my intent on day one.

In other words: it is your job as a company to make a prospect stay there for the long haul; it is not their job to come in with that psychological state.

And yes, I'd like to work at a VC firm eventually.
Regardless of the whether Perch's accusations toward Crockford are well-founded it would seem undeniable that Perch is insulting and putting down Crockford: https://medium.com/@nodebotanist/why-i-won-t-be-speaking-at-...

At the time of the post, Crockford was slated to be an attendee. In fairness, this would imply that Perch be uninvited from the conference for violating the code of conduct. Or does the code of conduct have an escape cause in cases where everyone agrees that the victim has really "gone too far"?

Some of Us Had Been Threatening Our Friend Colby
by Donald Barthelme (1973)

Some of us had been threatening our friend Colby for a long time, because of the way he had been behaving. And now he'd gone too far, so we decided to hang him. Colby argued that just because he had gone too far (he did not deny that he had gone too far) did not mean that he should be subjected to hanging. Going too far, he said, was something everybody did sometimes. We didn't pay much attention to this argument.

http://jessamyn.com/barth/colby.html

It's a fantastic story, and while I'll concede that it's only tangential to critiques of codes of conduct, reading the story would almost certainly be more enjoyable than spending time thinking about the inherent contradictions of tolerating intolerance. If you prefer video, I was amazed to find that a couple years ago someone (Chris Rubino) remade Barthelme's classic story as a short film: https://vimeo.com/149832821
Even if this article were correct that math isn't necessary for employment, it would be wrong that math education is unimportant.

It isn't even correct on the employment front, though, because it is attempting to unimaginatively extrapolate from the current state of employment.

John Nagle's comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12422307 probably expresses this better than I can, but if you're going to make an advance in a scientific or engineering field — any advance — you need math. If you're planning to spend your working life as a button-pusher, carrying out algorithms that other people have designed, or proceeding blindly by trial and error, you don't need math.

But those button-pusher and blind blunderer jobs will be automated in five, ten, or maybe twenty years. And the article's comment section suggests that even today they aren't nearly as common as the article asserts.

There are other categories of work, such as child care, elder care, sex work (which, defined broadly, includes trophy wives, Hollywood, and a substantial fraction of secretaries and maids), sales, and family counseling. So there will probably still be employment that doesn't require math as long as there are humans, even if it's not the kind of employment the article discusses.

But the bigger question is whether education should be directed at employment. Is being an employee what you aspire to in your life? It is very good to be useful to other people. Allowing other people to employ me has benefited me greatly, and that's true for most people I know. But being used by others is not the only or even the primary good in life.

Education is what makes us human. Education is a process of personal evolution from a dumb beast into a human being. Education gives us control over our impulses and prevents us from being suckered by predatory salespeople, politicians, lawyers, preachers, and others. At its best, education makes democracy possible despite such predators, although democracy is rarely possible because the people is nearly always sufficiently uneducated to vote it down unintentionally. Education begins before schooling and doesn't end when schooling ends, but I, like many people, have found that schooling can speed education up considerably.

And mathematics is fundamental to education in all of these senses. Even if mathematics isn't necessary for someone else to use you — which is all this "Math Myth" article tries to show — mathematics is necessary for you to judiciously choose when and how you will be used, and mathematics is necessary for citizenship.
True, but the Mylan ones come in a two-pack because so often people screw up administering it or require a larger (or backup) dosage. So the bar seems to be fairly low.