skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's really distinguishing the logical structure of a sentence from the grammatical structure.

The explanation for why "The present king of France is bald" is the example Russel gives, where it might be hard to say this statement is false when there is no current king of France.

Another interesting example is "The average woman has 2.2 children." If you intuitively think that noun phrases refer to things (rather than sets), you'd have to admit the existence of some sort of an "average woman" and the property of having 2.2 kids.
Where Do Engineer Salaries Pay for Highest Standard of Living?
Thanks!

I'd guess less than 10% are pre-accelerated.

A much larger percentage have raised some (usually a small amount, but not always) capital.
New Open Source Linux Ransomware Shows Infosec Community Divide
In San Francisco you aren't so far whole a whole lot of farmland
I love your work on #2, it's a really interesting avenue, but I wonder if both approaches are close to the point where reasoning about the sentence and its meaning becomes necessary anyway if we want to go beyond the current state of the art.
It's usually a good idea to leverage other platforms, at least as the start, as long as you're not entirely dependent on one.
I've visited both, but lived in neither. Yeah, SF itself isn't even a million people, LA 3.4 million. The bay area gets up to 7 million, but greater LA is 18 million. SF did feel much denser.

The sort of standard answer is just build more housing, but the cities are already so congested. Building up would surely lower prices in both cities, but i think it'd make bad commutes worse.

I dunno. If there was an easy answer, people would just do that. For a long time the easy answer was just drive farther. That's becoming less of an option now and it's not clear what, if anything, should be done.

In any case, it's easier to convince 100,000 people than it is to convince a million, and it's easier to convince a million than it is to convince 10 million. Whatever the answer is is going to take some serious politics.
Exactly. HN is not a fanboy driven community usually, so it's where rational and educated conversation can take place. On the contrary I find criticism helpful in this kind of context.
This comment is flaming on Java and Objective-C, seemingly without having the experience to back it up.

For instance, nobody uses Objective-C for iOS development any more (see: Swift). And modern Java is a decent language to develop in (with Rx and the like). You can even develop for Android in kotlin, which gives many of the advantages of JavaScript, but with a static type system and deep IDE integration.
It depends on the particular situation for each founder--people we fund apply for lots of different visas.

We try to help as much as we can.
Ratio of highest/lowest doesn't have much to do with distributions. This is about having blocks of people paid more than others.
These seem to be non-interactive (text with occasional videos). Free Code Camp is fully interactive coding, with test suites, in the browser.

Also, this is 35 hours including projects. Free Code Camp takes closer to 2,000 hours with projects.
That wasn't my experience. In fact, this:

> All SO aims for is having the most questions/answers. Nothing else.

Is demonstrably false. If that were the only aim, questions would never be closed and there would be no need for a moderation system. They fact that they do have moderation system and do police questions and answers is the proof that quality is part of the equation.
Insurance is a very bad example because it is predicated on not knowing who will be the outlier. If you know who is the outlier you can just charge them more money directly.

The numbers matter here but when I say below cost, I mean that the average price paid by the outlier is less than if they were paying their weighted share.

Example: Let's assume I'm selling something such that by selling one unit at $1 I make a reasonable profit.
If I have 100 subscribers and 95% of those subscribers use an average of 5 units per/month but 5% use an average of 50 units per month, I have to provision for 725 units/month (955 + 550).

If I charge everyone the same monthly rate, I would charge $7.25/month per person to get my $725 of revenue.

But 95% of the people are only using 5 units. They are paying almost 50% more than actual usage would justify. This is because they are subsidizing the 5% who are each getting 42.75 units subsidized for 'free'. Their monthly rate is 'below cost'.

I doubt the real-world data is bimodal in exactly this way but I think this illustrates what I was trying to communicate.

I did find this interesting quote from http://www.techhive.com/article/2055502/why-your-internet-se...

> According to Comcast, the current median monthly data usage for its customers is roughly 16GB. AT&T claims that the top 2 percent of its users (in terms of data consumption) eat up 20 percent of its network’s total available bandwidth. Telecom analyst Teresa Mastrangelo, principal at Broadbandtrends, suggests that the 80/20 rule applies, in that 80 percent of the data is going to 20 percent of users. “It may even be closer to 90/10,” Mastrangelo says.
I love this how people compare the US system to say Russia's. "The press isn't owned/controlled by the government, but it might as well be!" But in reality, this is just a red herring to prop up crappy despots.

Nobody from the state department went to the 60 minutes crew and said: "If you don't interview Pussy Riot, we won't give you stuff." No, no, Russia solidified Pussy Riot's fame when they threw them in jail for...wait, what "premeditated hooliganism performed by an organized group of people motivated by religious hatred or hostility". Ya, because they criticized the church for supporting Putin?

It's like China and the Dalai Lama: the popularity of the DL is completely related to the vitriol of the Chinese government. Whenever the Chinese government criticizes the DL, he becomes more popular, simple/easy.

Russia makes its own bed, the US media requires no pushing from the state department at all to make these stories interesting to the American public.
Places like Portugal - and Italy, where I spent most of the last 15 years - would certainly be helped more than harmed by people moving there with high-paying jobs and paying into the local economy.
Well, the top 2 comments are dismissive, but after that there are lots of positive comments.
I miss 68K coding and quite regularly wish I could be paid to do it again. The 020+ days with even crazier addressing modes was a lot of fun. x86 just doesn't cut it.
Fair enough, we'll end it at this, then.

My sincere thanks for your patience. I'm sorry we couldn't reach an understanding, but I do appreciate you taking the time to discuss this with me today.

It's truly not my intention to misrepresent what happened nor your own words. But I honestly can't form a definitive answer based on what you've been willing to say. Nor do I feel this is an issue that can just be ignored.

Several of your points did reach me: I will try to take your advice and be more explicit in future replies on this topic that I make, and I'll certainly link to your own comments here if I do. But I'm really hoping this situation will stop coming up in every other Mozilla story on HN, so that I won't have to.
- New L.Tooltip class for all your dynamic labeling needs.

- Flyover animations (zooming and panning in a curve with map.flyTo).

- Fractional zoom level support (map.setZoom(12.34)).

- Much better tile loading algorithm with less flickering.

Seems like a lot of features come straight from Mapbox GL
What is the minimum stage the product should be in to be selected in yc ?
The real ethical issue is that you're giving "performance enhancers" to babies. We can't test this stuff in vitro or in adults, not really. So any baby born this way is, in some sense, an experiment.

And crucially, so are all of those babies' children and their children, because they will inherit some or all of the genetic changes.
What’s Holding Back VR?
I noticed Musk tentatively mention nuclear - I think that's because it will be the only logical way to generate enough power to support a city in such an inhospitable climate. There is going to be a huge and ongoing energy need just to survive.

Unless we build a battery/solar panel factory there is no way solar is going to cut it.
To be fair, that's normal, if unfortunate, competitive behavior. "We meant to do that" is the rule until there's running code correcting the initial mistake.

Less forgivable is training a couple generations of developers that all the other mistakes they made are the Right Way...
Yeah, but they went to fertile land.

A space colony would have much more need to get supplies from Earth.

Once we've learned how to run a space colony on the Moon, building a second one on Mars would be much easier.
It's a pain if you're relocating from said farmland, even if it's only in Modesto or Fresno.
A Health Benefit of Roller Coasters
> What is likely to have an effect on democracy is when governments analyze data for political reasons.

What if companies analyze data for political reasons?

> Where that happens, people will simply stop volunteering so much private information. They don't need to be banned from doing that.

Except that they don't. Heard of a certain Edward Snowden, maybe?

Except that they can't because the data is already there and isn't under the control of the affected people?

Except that the nature of data is that people don't know how it's being processed?

Except that there are network effects that limit people's actual freedom to decline using a quasi-monopolist's services?

Your argument could pretty much be applied to the Stasi in the GDR: Do you have an idea what the consequences were when individuals simply stopped providing more data?
Any time you have a closure that captures the hoisted variable. Most often, this happens with loops. Say, someone might start with this:

for (var i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
foo().then(function() { bar(i); });
}

Then when they realize why this doesn't work, try something like:

for (var i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
var j = i; // this is inside the block, so it's scoped to it, right?
foo().then(function() { bar(j); });
}

And then that breaks too, and it's not at all clear why.

It's not that other languages don't have similar limitations - Python also doesn't have block-local variables, for example. The problem with JS is that is uses syntax that strongly implies that it does have block scope, but then quietly makes it do something unexpected when you try.

Ironically, the only other language that I know of that has the same exact problem is VB (pre-.NET one) - its "Dim" statement can similarly be used anywhere inside a function, including inside loops and other block constructs, but the scope is always the entire function.
> but nobody held a gun to anyone's head

This is not what you asked, though. You asked if something were voluntary (and assumed optional meaning disjoint outcomes for the given action). You used "had zero control". Again, the range of possibilities is bigger than "zero control" vs. "gun to head".

Enough with the false dilemmas, already!

If you are serious about talking 1:1, DM me on Twitter.
I was exaggerating, but the point was that the other app development languages aren't without their flaws.

I won't argue with you on how good the languages are. It's a matter of opinion, and I'll never change your mind.

Besides, establishing one langauge as better than another was never my point.
I did not create this process.

I also don't think companies should dismiss years of experience. That is valuable. It's not everything -- you can, of course, have bad but experienced engineers. But experience is certainly valuable. It makes you a better engineer.

If a company entirely relies on coding interviews, they are making a mistake.
Yeah. That said, there's certainly prior art here (Farmlogs)
> As of 17 September 2016, there have been 310 manned spaceflights [...] 8 of which were sub-orbital [1]

There have been 302 manned orbital launches according to [1] and from adding up the successful launches in [2] there seem to have been a total of 5057 orbital launches so far, in the 70 or so years of spaceflight.

Apparently the Mars fleet needs from 3 to 5 tanker launches per manned craft, so this program will require between 4000 and 6000 orbital launches, so around 5000 - which is about the same number as the total number of (successful) human rocket launches to date!

Looking at the table in [2] we can see that the best success rates for manned launch systems are 97% for both Soyuz and the Space Shuttle. using this as a worst-case estimate, out of those 5000 launches we can expect 150 to fail. Assuming one in five are crewed, with 100 crew per vehicle, that means 3000 deaths over the life of the program.

I guess that we can expect improvements in reliability with a program this size, and using a mass-produced vehicle which is re-usable is not something we have safety data for in the space-flight arena yet. You would hopefully expect reliability and safety to improve, getting towards the standards of modern aircraft, or at least experimental aircraft or military systems perhaps. But even three nines (99.9%, or one failure per 1000 lanches) is still multiple orders of magnitude better than we can achieve with spaceflight right now, so SpaceX are setting a pretty tough goal for themselves here. Still, I really do hope they succeed, and it will be exciting to watch them try...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_spaceflights
[2] http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/logsum.html
Also, see this graph: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jOLa-LdidQU/V-qV2oJn1aI/AAAAAAAAB...

On French > English and English > Spanish it's almost indistinguishable from human translations. On the rest it still gets greater than half the distance between the previous best method and human quality translations. This is a massive step forward.
The probability of a civilization-ending asteroid impact on Earth and Mars at approximately the same time is a lot less than the probability of a civilization-ending asteroid impact just on Earth.
MacOS tip: Switch between SSIDs when connection drops
The first chart has a graph of power, and rates Python as the least powerful among C/C++, Java, MATLAB, Go, Erlang, and Julia, besting only Mathematica.

I don't know how you define "power", and the article doesn't explain the methodology, but regardless of how you measure it, I would strongly argue that unless you are discounting any contribution from available libraries, the Python numerical processing ecosystem makes it the strongest of all of these. You state Cython is another language, and appear to give no credit to numba, which can be invoked in many cases for huge speedups with a simple decorator. You can't evaluate Python, or any language for that matter, without looking at the capabilities of its ecosystem.
Probably the same reason we can't build a space elevator :)
Mars has plenty of Nitrogen, it's in the atmosphere (2% of it). That may be at low pressure, but once you have a few hundred tonnes of industrial equipment on Mars you can start doing things like fractional distillation of the atmosphere, and then you're just pumping Nitrogen out of the atmosphere and using it for whatever you want.

2% of a very low pressure may not seem like much but in total that's about half a trillion tonnes, or half a million cubic kilometers of Nitrogen. It'll be a very long time before that resource is depleted. Additionally, Mars has nitrates, which can be mined and exploited.
UBI is exactly what I thought of. Another reason why those who are in control would want to avoid it.

It seems like it will still require a lot of money to publish quality journalism in sources that people actually look at.
Autocorrect Correct: Never Text “Ho” for “How” Again
I'm a huge fan of PureLayout over using Storyboard or calling the AutoLayout APIs directly.

https://github.com/PureLayout/PureLayout
Manual memory management: It's all fun and games until OOM errors come knocking, or- Segmentation Fault: Core Dumped.

I rest my case. There's a place for manual memory management. It's not in application code.
How bigoted I am is completely irrelevant as to how terrible the Salvation Army is. I'd much rather learn why you think my beliefs about the Salvation Army are wrong, or why you think my beliefs about what constitutes "good" are wrong.
Tagged unions are indeed pretty helpful for Redux reducers. One thing
to note is that you can actually skip some code here as well. Specifically,
the constant definitions:

export type INCREMENT_COUNTER = 'App/INCREMENT_COUNTER';
export const INCREMENT_COUNTER : INCREMENT_COUNTER = 'App/INCREMENT_COUNTER';

These aren't necessary, you can use those type strings directly:

export interface IncrementCounterAction = {
type: 'App/INCREMENT_COUNTER',
by: number
};

In vanilla, untyped Redux the constants are a good idea because they
give you some safety and IDE-ability. With Typescript they're just
a waste of code, since TS is going to check those type strings for you.
Cut out the middleman!
That vendor-integration (and vendor-relationship-management), rapid task-switching, ops / support description sounds exceptionally familiar. It's what I view as more a dev/ops role, though it's also somewhat the old-school Unix-class sysadmin model. Someone who's familiar with compiler and scripting tools, and writes a fair bit of glue, but who is mostly building systems out of component parts, rather than coding them up from scratch.

It's the task-switching and firefighting elements of that position which tend to dominate, and which I've found increasingly untenable (at least to my own personality) with time. I need the long, clear timeblocks in which I can actually think.
I disagree with this. You can get rid of bad hires easily. A single great engineer can transform your entire business.
What I'm saying is that JS actually has a small amount of quirks compared to other dynamic languages. Just think about PHP's named functions, which are always in the global scope. Except when they are in namespaces (oh hi another concept), and then its kinda weird because namespaces are relative. There are no first class named functions, but function expressions can be assigned to variables. Which must be prefixed with $. There are no real modules, or proper scope; JS in turn implements modules cleanly on top of closures with lexical scope and objects.

In ruby, blocks are like lambdas except when they are not, and you can pass a block explicitly or yield to the first block implicitly. But there are also lambdas, which are different. Modules are again uselessly global, and cannot be parameterised over other modules (without resorting to meta programming). Oh yeah they are also another syntactical and semantical concept. Why not just `Module.new`? And there are classes, with private variables, which are prefixed with @.

The above examples are just scratching the surface

So yeah, I'm tired of people claiming that JS has the same amount of quirks as PHP. Boo hoo, its so horrible: no large ints, and implicit conversions. Compared to that, Ruby, PHP or (god forbid) Perl < 6 are total disasters. Pre-ES6, JS had the greatest power-to-number-of-concepts ratio of all current mainstream dynamic languages (1). With just prototypes, closures and objects, it manages to provide features that other languages do not with a dozen of base concepts

(1) cheating a bit here, because you could argue that Lisp or Lua are mainstream enough.
It's because YouTube has a partnership with the record labels.
Software updates in general are just getting sloppy, this isn't limited to Apple. The Windows 10 anniversary update had issues as well. Makes me long for the old MS service pack model.
Loved visiting those places, but could never live there. Last time I went people were smoking in pairs in the grocery store. WTF?
> why does it need to be on Mars? Just build it on earth

The point is to make humanity resilient to what would otherwise be an exctinction-level event, such as an engineered superplague, weaponized nanorobotics, or a massive asteroid impact.
That just weeds out the questions that would make SO look obviously bad.

It does nothing to affect the quality of answers that look ok, but are actually problematic. And in those cases "spirit of poster" always trumps correctness.
what makes you believe you have a better idea of what a good allocation of resources (and Elon Musk's / SpaceX's skills) would be?

Same reason as anyone else I suppose. Not really sure how to answer that without sounding like a douche.

If you're so smart and good at allocating resources, what prevents you from pursuing that other project instead of demanding from other people to follow your lead?

I mean that's exactly what I'm doing...
How do you assess the "quality" of founders that have no startup track record?
In the 5 vs 5 multiplayer game Dota 2, a given team's composition in the game is roughly broken down into two categories (pretty big over-simplification but let's run with it), carry and support. Carries are meant to "carry" their team on their back through perfect execution in their actions, leveraging the raw potential of the character they're controlling in that particular match. Being a professional carry player demands a very high level of mechanical skill and moment-to-moment tactical awareness.

Support players on the other hand, are relied upon to support the carries by getting supportive items, maintaining control over the map (fog of war is in effect), being in the right places at the right times so as to provide their carry with space to work, and generally staying at a higher level of awareness in order to make more of the big picture calls. Most teams' leader will play a support character.

I suspect something similar may be at work here, in that he is very good at choosing and supporting "carries". There are probably very many people in the world who are very perceptive, empathetic, and can achieve a high level of understanding, making them well-suited for leadership positions, but without luck in addition to giving it their best effort, are never put in a position to shine. Just because someone will never be a top-tier carry, doesn't mean they can't ever be a top-tier support, but our society tends to demand the former before you're trusted to do the latter.

Or not, just thinking out loud here. :)
This is a limited line of thinking. Eventually humans who are capable of living in a self-sustained colony on Mars will also be able to live anywhere. In space using asteroidal/cometary resources, for example. On the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, etc. The jump between being able to live on Earth and then Mars is actually much greater than the jump between being able to live on Mars and anywhere. At that point humanity no longer would be planet bound. We'll be building cities that house billions of people in, say, the Earth-Sun L4/L5 lagrange points, or wherever we feel like it.
Python was built to be simple, yes. But it was built by people who understood that simplicity means things like "explicit is better than implicit" and "there should be one - and preferably only one - obvious way to do it". So it's a language that takes an inexperienced coder, and makes things easy for them, while also gently guiding them towards the safer (if possibly longer) path.

This is in stark opposition to "just let me quickly do stuff, and I don't care if the resulting code is buggy and unreadable" - the VB6/PHP school of language and framework design. Which, unfortunately, seems to be a rather popular approach in the JS ecosystem, as well.
PPS: And not surprisingly I messed up the math but here are some real numbers: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-v_budget
The sociological difficulty is as big as technical one. He hired one of the best engineers available to solve technical problems. Probably the same work should be done on the sociological part of the project. Otherwise, we may see bad events unfolding on mars. Would be interesting to see open source project taking sociological issues as target.