skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What the?

"When I was discharged from the hospital late the next day, the cabdriver asked me, “Where do I take you?” I couldn’t remember the name of my street. I handed him the discharge paperwork with my address on it, arrived home and slept for a long while."

How does someone who just had a stroke get discharged from hospital the next day, to a taxi?
I am pretty sure the only way to send feedback to the Chrome team, other than the Chromium bug tracker (which is pretty much the same people), is to send feedback from within Chrome.

Obviously, I don't have Chrome, since my issue is them pestering me to install Chrome. Which I'm not going to do.

On the other hand, if Google wants to prevent their reputation from sinking to the level of "install the Ask Toolbar", one of the Googlers on the Chromium bug tracker will see that it is dealt with.
I wrote numerical code for a while, it simulated a magnetic material. It would take hours to run a simulation long enough to be able to verify that it was correct. Make a change, wait five hours, check if the change worked.

I eventually started keeping a journal of every code change I made, along with the hash of the binary that it created. I could use this to make several independent changes and run them all at the same time. When one run finished, I would verify its behavior, look at the binary's hash, and then know that my code change was safe. It was a very slow process, but effective. After doing this kind of development for a while I'm weary of claims like this that imply that feedback with a latency <10s is actually a good thing. High latency feedback forces you to be more methodical in your development and think about the changes you're making.
> At some point trading the loan securities and fishing future contracts starts paying more than humble fishing

This analogy relies on the financiers being either good speculators and arbitrageurs of risk, or charging high fees, ie: they need to get their high "fish salary" from somewhere.

Point is that the two reasons the financiers are being well paid are either that they're good at their job (a good thing), or that they're bilking the fishermen out of their output (which relies on the fishermen being conned into paying for overpriced financial services).
Yeah, but he doesnt have 15 years experience with react.
I've tried those books and found the examples were out of date and it was very hard to learn from. I own > 25 programming books and this was one of the only ones that didn't click.
They'd probably look at us (for food) the way most people look at food currently coming out of China. Polluted garbage.
I once had to fix TogetherJS where the proceed button was broken:

https://github.com/mozilla/togetherjs/commit/ced91da4bb53bea...

Clue: what is the problem with this code?
It's unfortunate that valuable and useful privacy enhancements were combined with "wishlist"-level changes like "disable the tab close event in Javascript".

While many may not like the uses of that event, it taints what otherwise could have been a "purely about privacy" fork of Chromium with non-privacy opinions.
The fact that it had the ability to listen to audio shouldn't be the issue, since it wouldn't do that unless you explicitly enabled it. Your grammar is kind of ambiguous there. Certainly it was downloaded without permission, but it wasn't listening without permission.

Any web page can listen to your microphone if you allow it to, and the code for it can be downloaded without your consent, even if you have JavaScript disabled, if it's embedded in the HTML code.
America’s Lost Boys: Men who choose video games over work
Median income remaining flat is entirely consistent with productivity being absorbed by the high end.
That was the idea behind tag-wikis at one point ( see http://stackoverflow.com/tags/scala/info ) and was the utopian ideal of what Documentation would become.

Organizational and writing skill don't necessarily correlate well to programming skill. And when one adds gamification to that allowing for material curated by the masses without the corresponding community investment by those who _do_ have that skill set... well.
Reminds me of Trifacta. It has a similar spreadsheet + objects used for ETL.
>acting like there aren't any is blatantly ignoring many types of workloads.

I agree in principle, and if you have the knowledge and means to understand/mitigate the risk, this warning isn't aimed at you ;)

It is aimed at the ignorant, not the negligent e.g the engineer I was 15 years ago - who didn't know what he didn't know and would've chosen BDR simply for its master-master promise without understanding what I am really getting myself into.

I nearly ruined a business by choosing MySQL + NDB few years ago.
I don't think it's hard to give credence to the thought that there perhaps is a natural boundary for responsiveness that, when crossed, results in vastly increased productivity. That's the idea here. This works for people with short or long attention span. The paucity of short term memory is perhaps made worse by attention span issues, but that's not the core issue.
Actually-and perhaps surprisingly-a sizeable swathe of doctors are directly in the firing line for automation and have been for some time[0]. Medical and legal expert systems have been an AI research goal from the very beginning. Economically speaking, it may make sense to automate high cost labour sooner than low cost.

[0] https://www.google.co.uk/search?site=&source=hp&ei=uGnoV6-AC...
Not having the life insurance to cover a long term stay?
> It's unprofessional for a company to refer to its users like this.

You have to consider that this term is used by the community. That includes meta-discussion between the community and SO staff in the course of doing their job. So in a sense he is acting according to his profession.

What you call "calling names" is merely categorizing people according to their observable behavior. We categorize things and people every day. You could replace the term with another one, the underlying aspect of assigning a label to a cluster of behaviors remains unchanged. You would just end up treading the euphemism treadmill.

You cannot stop people from assigning labels to categorize negative patterns where someone else might end up offended by that label due to the negative connotations that the word will accumulate.

So why bother? Why not relabel it as "colloquial, but there's a story behind it" in your mind instead of asking everyone else to change their minds?

>abusive mod behavior and a culture of intolerance that's chasing away high value users.

If with "mod behavior" you mean downvotes and close votes, that's a large fraction of the user base that can do that and they can also be undone. While sometimes they might be doled out on a hair trigger it looks to me like there usually is some reason behind that, a reason which could be addressed by some changes to the question.

If you see it as a trade, haggling on a bazaar to provide a good question (that may serve future users) in exchange for a good answer (that may serve you) instead of draconian mods cracking down on you then those downvotes are nothing more than a "your offer isn't good enough" statement.

So maybe it is just a communication issue, to make it clear that users should have the expectation that they may need to refine their questions?
I feel it's somewhat a deeper change. Older developers are getting kids and have very limited / no time to allocate for open source development (unsupported financially).

Younger developers are chasing the golden goose on the web/mobile, or banging frameworks until sunrise. They feel like old c++ codebase etc. are like old ruins, in deep dark caverns. They wouldn't touch any of it. They're anti-mailing-list and pro-slack. There is a huge gap between the two.

It's as if new generations come in and they want to make their own mark. And there is what's sexy ("getting rich yo") and what's completely unsexy ("let's pick up grand pa's code and move it forward on my mac book pro").
I always Google with the timeframe set to "last year"
Anyone who is unhappy with that decision might consider using Eich's browser, Brave.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)

https://brave.com/
Don't forget the maintenance on that apartment, which is at least 1500 a month. 650k is extremely low, even then. I've only seen that on properties with a large tax abatement that is set to expire, or the land isn't owned by the building and the lease on the land will expire in 10 years. I wish you were right, but New York isn't that kind, even compared to SF.
You could at the very least make it your mission statement to provide correct answers, and remind all of your moderators of this, instead of having them maintain the "spirit of the poster" on answers that are wrong and on locked questions.
I agree. The problem is trying to do this at scale. I don't want to do it myself as it would be too time consuming and messy.

Without having the funds for injection/pressure molding, I haven't been able to find a good solution. Maybe there are cost effective services that would work like PCB potting or overmolding.

One service that I found that looks promising is Cavist:

http://cavist.com/

But I haven't gone down this route or found someone that has. I might do this later on.
I work on Firefox compatability for a major website, and while obviously I agree that we need to stop building websites that only work in Chrome, it isn't always as easy as you suggest.

A large web app is almost guaranteed to run into one of Firefox's many long-open bugs. But the biggest reason in my experience is performance. Gecko's rendering engine is poorly-optimized, to the point where I regularly see a DOM modification take 10ms in Chrome (easily within a single frame) and 1000ms in Firefox (locks the UI and causes the page to flash white).
> High latency feedback forces you to be more methodical in your development and think about the changes you're making.

So does not having tests.
Money needs to be classified into two types- money derived from financial transactions and money derived from stuff - the exchange of goods/services. 'Financial' money should only be used for stuff. Only 'stuff' money should be used for finance. This would avoid the uncontrolled feedback loop that leads to financial money revving itself into a massive force that exceeds the real world on which it should be based.
Paging cstross.
Twitter revealed an unmet need for global stream-of-consciousness and lowered the bar for online participation to the lowest currently known setting.
If you RT something from a banned/deleted account it stays in your "tweets sent" but isn't visible in your feed.

Source: ran a very popular (and later, banned) Twitter account
Thing is, there's a number of job types in IT. There's the frontend jobs that everyone can "easily" get into (but that means they aren't good, unfortunately the frontend devs market definitely suffers from lemon law syndrome).

C++ backend jobs have a number of great properties: devs are scarce, because of the difficulty interviews will definitely reveal good vs bad, it's an absolute necessity to have these devs, and the products they produce outperform. Ergo mucho dinero. And NOBODY goes to a C++ dev with a photoshop file asking for things to be moved over a few pixels. Nobody. That, by itself ... And to top it all off : because C++ is a mature language the tooling is actually passable to good. In frontend, VSCode+typescript is the only thing I know of that has passable tooling. Passable meaning that editing code is good to well done. Debugging, performance measurement, deployment, monitoring, ... very much not solved. And there's a lot of things that are adding insult to injury.

Performance programming also has the advantage that there's problems that just can't be solved by anything that's more than 5% or so removed from optimal performance. And those are really interesting problems : from machine learning to gaming. When I say "can't" I don't literally mean can't, just that a company like Google or Facebook simply can't risk the other one using C++ and not using C++ themselves, due to the risk that it results in the other one getting a 50% faster stack, as they would fear that would be an overriding advantage (and advantage big enough that nothing else matters. Working with a double as fast stack, a mediocre data scientist can outperform a good one, resulting in more advancement, resulting in first-to-market, resulting in). And this applied not just to machine learning, but it applied to games, to databases, to OS, to ... C++ has conquered the machine learning stack, and it's never letting go. The point is that this is not C++'s first rodeo so to speak. C++ has conquered many markets that will never go back to non-C++. And those are exactly the ones you want to work in.

But yes, it's pretty serious in the learning curve. And a subtle language results in subtle problems. That generates a ton of hate. One last advantage though : if you're an expert in C++, you're not far removed from being an expert in a lot of different (imperative) languages. C++ has options to do anything, so learning a new language is figuring out how some new language maps onto C++, and getting past the frustration that lots of things just aren't possible in the new language.
It is amazing to see the number of projects based on Postgres mentioning that they are trying to achieve multi-master with their own restrictions:

* Postgres-R is not multi-master, got discontinued in 2010, and lots most of its meaning after WAL-shipping has been added in-core with hot-standby. http://www.postgres-r.org/

* Postgres-XC, that says to do multi-master, the first project based on PostgreSQL that I heard of doing sharding (term not used at the beginning of the project, and that I first heard in 2010). The project began in 2009, got discontinued in 2013. There are limitations like non-support for triggers and savepoints. XC was designed to be good for OLTP workloads, sucks for long-transactions and data warehouse type of workloads. The design of the project has been done in coordination by NTT and EnterpriseDB. https://sourceforge.net/projects/postgres-xc/

* Postgres-XL, that forked from Postgres-XC, and enhanced the data-warehouse case with improvements for data analytics by introducing a communication protocol between Datanodes. The project is still being maintained by some folks at 2ndQuad. http://www.postgres-xl.org/

* Postgres-X2, which has been an attempt to unify Postgres-XC and Postgres-XL efforts under the same banner. I don't know where this is moving to but things look rather stalled. https://github.com/postgres-x2/postgres-x2

* Postgres-XZ (look for PGXZ!), which is something I heard recently, based on Postgres-XC, and developed by some folks in China. Visibly this has its own limitations, and is used in production where the constraints induced by the scaling out are thought as acceptable.

So, that's cool to see many efforts, BDR being one. And all of them are trying to address the scaling-out problem with their own way. Now each application should study carefully what to use and if the limitations and constraints used are acceptable or not.
Show HN: Finding puns computationally
> editing is open to all users (some need approval).

Technically true, factually false, since correctness of an edit does not trump "spirit of the poster".
Exactly. If you don't believe finanicialization is a problem, you have a tendency to believe more financial instruments are a good solution in all cases. You have only a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
> What? No, if my colleagues and I all decide to use ${CLOSED_CHAT_SERVICE}, the user experience is generally going to be consistent.

But even in email, if a group of people decide to use only Gmail web interface for example, the user experience is going to be consistent for them as well.

The underlying detail about email being an open protocol will be transparent to them.

In fact, an email client could be designed to implement instant messaging — by sending messages as emails — and if two people both use that same client, the experience would be indistinguishable from an IM service!

You'd still have a conversation history, you'd still have offline delivery, you'd still be able to send graphics and animations and audio attachments and anything else that HTML can render.

(I get that current email protocols may not be lightweight/efficient enough for rapid delivery of a large amount of short messages though.)
So you want low rep users who don't understand the expected quality for the site to be answering questions while the high rep users who are familiar with the duplicates and expectations are prevented from helping?

Preventing high rep users from answering _good_ questions from low rep users means Jon Skeet and Eric Lippert won't see them and be able to give their often spectacular answers. You're suggesting cheating low rep users who do a good job of reading the help documentation first from getting the best possible answer... and encouraging people who ask and answer poorly to continue doing so.

How many more answers to How do I fix a null pointer exception in Java ( http://stackoverflow.com/questions/linked/218384?lq=1 ) do you want to have on the site?
I think there also needs to be a highlighted difference between an open source product, and an open source repository which is NOT the product which is distributed.

Chromium is open source, but the supported product where the developer cares about the quality of the experience is Chrome. Android is much the same, where the platform almost all apps and services target requires Google Play.

I can't expect Google to properly address my needs in either of these open source offerings, because the actual users are almost exclusively using the proprietary version.

When Google looks at what the browser needs to do, it can either make the solution proprietary or open source, and then just tell the open source users that it's unavailable unless they switch to Chrome. (See things like browser syncing, or Google Cast support.) But when Firefox implements such features, they have to do so in an open way, which is why you can run your own Firefox Sync Server.
I Let Facebook’s Algorithms Run My Life for Weeks
Maybe the problems of today will be solved with the technology of tomorrow.

As far as nuclear bombs, we don't really seem to be using them much anymore. They are just trump cards in the mutual assured destruction game.
I assume a group within the city unilaterally decided to confiscate and destroy the tiny houses. They seem to think that if you make being homeless more uncomfortable, then the homeless people will just eventually give up "slacking" and go and get a job and rent an apartment.

When the people who raze homeless camp sites or "tent cities" do it, they usually say that for their safety and public health reasons, they have to destroy everything.

With that usual behavior, I wouldn't be surprised if a random employee saw the sheds with the solar panels and said "It'll be a shame to let that go to waste" and took them off before the sheds were supposed to be destroyed.

I hope the guy running this project finds a good place to keep the tiny houses in the future. I'm disappointed in LA for passing the laws to try to prevent homeless people from having semi-permanent structures rather than tents.

What I don't understand is how it's legal to park a trailer on a street, but not a shed on a trailer frame.
I found myself a little incensed at this article, rather than by it. Yup, there are limits on new users' privileges. Yes, there are users that play The Reputation Game. Yes, there are many questions that don't get answered to one's satisfaction. Yes, there are trolls. Yes, there are disillusioned users. Yes, yes, yes.

Even so, I also find all of this to be Perfect-As-Enemy-of-Good whinging. Instead it could've been a plea full of suggestions. A Call To Action!

So let's do that now, though I may come off as a prick here because I kinda think all of this whining is the real problem of the internet.

> The privilege limits

IMHO they're are rational and reasonable, but your specific use-case was about new folks not being able to leave comments. So how could we solve this? Perhaps new users ought to be able to, but only the author'd be able to see them. When either the Q or A author upvoted it, it'd become visible to the world?

> Troll responses to your bad/incorrect/misleading answer

That sounded like a bummer. You know you can flag these comments already so... punish these bad actors in the provided way and move on.

> Respond to comment that says my question is a duplicate (it’s not, which I clarify to avoid “closed as duplicate”)
> [...]
> Another issue with this is that duplicates show up despite the crotchety moderators complaining about it.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. It's casual, usually-helpful internet folk doing their (usually) altruistic best to help. Most of the time, this works great. Blog posts like this point out the exception, and are valuable, and they're very enticing clickbait. But when they offer only boo-hoo's and no ah-hah's, move on.
Automation is also going to hit white collar jobs. Tax attorneys, paralegals insurance agents and many such jobs will be effected. Self driving cars and trucks are just the tip of he iceberg because of Google more people are aware of it but machine learning and automation now is going to start hitting white collar jobs not just blue collar jobs.
Right. If I would have worked on this again, the first thing I'd do is come up with some way of automatically testing the code.
I would really like to see someone write enough code to do anything (or even compile), compile it, and interpret the results in a useful manner in less than a second. Continually, over a significant period of time. The tooling is certainly available, but the biological part of that process would seem to be superhuman.
My thoughts exactly. How do we even define "Artificial"? Heck, we can't even define "consciousness" properly.

Is a turtle artificially intelligent? What if a Chimp had titanium atoms instead of carbon? Would that make it AI?

Overall I think it's an absurd question because right now the definition of "AI" is something that we/humans have created. Everything else is natural intelligence.

A question of vernacular.
Punishing outliers too aggressively, however, will result in stagnation because no novel services will be invented that might require more bandwidth. Then the lack of those services' existence is used as proof that more bandwidth is not required.
Yes, it would be like the ants on the other side of my yard waiting for me to come over and have a conversation with them.
Ok, how about this. I have a bunch steel in by vault. Steel is worth something and can be used to build things. I loan you this steel in order to build a factory (perhaps even a steel mill!), on the hope that your project will be successful and you will pay me back even more steel.
It's way too hard to have a career in research or even get into a decent PhD program at all for the "finance brain drain" to matter. Research salaries are low, the conditions are hit or miss and yet, somehow, a faculty job is one of the hardest positions to get. We can worry about that when mid-tier universities stop getting hundreds of resumes for tenure-track positions.

For now, the fact that technically minded people can have a backup plan that pays well is most definitely a feature, not a bug.
Alas, all attempts at answering a question are deemed valuable by some contingent of the active user and diamond moderation base. Correct has nothing to do with it.

There is no mechanism for removal of incorrect answers other than the person being too embarrassed having it still visible and deleting it.

One has to hope that the best and correct answers get up voted.
Having the pendulum swing to another opposite (requiring 100% of the loans to be kept on books) creates two problems I can see. Only wealthiest institutions can participate, so in good times rich get richer. It also creates a monopsony of loan buyers, likely increasing the costs of borrowing.