skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Edit: I partially misunderstood the parent comment. See below.

Your viewpoint is antithetical to open intellectual discourse. You specifically call for censorship on political grounds, not even because of something that could be construed as an attack. To quote:

> but their views only come across in the content they post here, not as a form of attacking other groups on the site or off the site

Fringe political ideas should not be suppressed, especially if they aren't even attacking anyone. HN's decent level of open discourse is not a "problem", it's one of the things that makes this site better than e.g. Reddit.
One could argue that the Java ecosystem was already pretty fragmented and weird anyway: Java Card, Java in the browser, all the many versions of the JVM on every platform, and open source JVM "forks"... right?
TTL = transistor transistor logic

This is the technology in the common 74' series integrated circuits that became popular in the late 1960's and 1970's. You can get basic IC's that perform AND, NOT, XOR operations but also more complex IC's that perform as multiplexors, buffers, registers and so forth. You can find these in computers like the PDP or VAX series machines.

They are not used as much today and so less of them are still manufactured.
Last time I was playing with 74 series chips I kept wishing there was a Verilog or VHDL library with impementations of all the common 74 series chips (complete with the proper pinouts and timings etc), so one could do a full working simulation of the circuit before going ahead and breadboarding it or laying out a PCB.
Fewer chips.
I believe grandparent may be referring to the first example. It's a fair bit of reading to get to the good stuff, and if you're skimming it can look complicated. Personally I think the approach of building up the solution is instructive.
I forgot about that. Was an interesting concept. Question, how can one tell if a UN*X newbee came from VMS ? You get a question from them "How to I change an environment variable for the parent process ?" :) That was allowed in VMS but forgot which type of VMS variable that was.
Thanks for joining the conversation. I wanted to steer my comment a little bit more to the last point you made about how racism and misoginy, no matter how subtle, does create a toxic culture which silences or intimidates others, but saying that REALLY riles up the "freeze peach" crowd here and I was concerned that making such a statement in an already upsetting comment would get me hit with the flaghammer. More to the topic at hand (and the parent comment), this is about the role of a site making active and aggressive steps to remove content or clamp down on the posting of content that is focused on organizing and attacking outgroups openly, something that does not occur here on HN. You are going to get comments colored with implicit racism or gendered bias, but nobody is grabbing pitchforks to intentionally attack anyone here.

HN, despite carrying all of the more socially regressive actors of the meatspace tech community is remarkably civil and kind
Yeah, and once Apple decided to sell their own watch, the hope that anyone else would be able to successfully integrate their smartwatch with the iPhone went out the window, unfortunately.

I hate these stupid ecosystems. There are times I want to use Prime Video on an Apple TV and then stream from a PC or something odd like that. Maybe I want to use an Apple watch with an Android phone..
It would be better to have simple, coherent rules against these things, rather than unstated rules that require enormous amounts of effort to enforce.

Would it?

It would certainly require less effort, but we know from other places that blanket rules are pretty easy to game (eg, see the games people play on Wikipedia with the 3RR rule).

Once people know them, the rules themselves become weaponized.
Ah, I might have misunderstood then. That makes sense.

Do you have any suggestions for rules, just off the top of your head?
Unfortunately, "more coherent" doesn't mean "better", it just means "more fleshed-out". The problem with formalizing rules of human behaviour is that the latter is generally too fuzzy, so you either end up with a very complex system of rules, or with a simple system that has tons of edge cases (like the one in the post).

I think you were attracted to the improvement of writing rules down, but that has a host of other problems, including the fact that you are then forced to enforce the rules, even where they don't make sense (e.g. you have to remove some comment because of the letter of the law, even though it wasn't actually inflammatory, it just ran into an edge case).

I moderate(d) a large reddit community (millions of subscribers?) and you pretty much can't win. If you don't have rules, you're "murky" and "wanton". If you have rules, you get "these rules suck" or "you're only enforcing the rules whenever you feel like it" when you try to go by the spirit of the law rather than the letter.
I think a better take away is the reverse. If you are rewarding children in your class (or your kids) and one is not enthusiastic then you should take note there might be a problem (essentially the first sentence of the article).
They go on to say this, however...

statements such as “migrants are dirty” are allowed, while “migrants are dirt” isn’t

So I'm not sure the rules are quite as simple as outlined. There's other oddities, like one area says " the term teenager does not enjoy special protection", then another area where they specifically say it does get protection. Argh.
holy cow. mind blown. did not know that wasnt his real name either.
Thanks for clarifying my statement!
Simple -- those are the programs that have been contributed.

https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html
How to Use Git Hooks to Automate Development and Deployment Tasks
> Some people's freedom of speech silences other people.

While this statement might be somewhat true, the idea that someone would be censored for having an opinion that others find offensive is extremely frightening. Obviously if someone attacks a group based on a stereotype, or advocates discriminatory or harmful behaviour towards a group, that's one thing -- but suggesting censoring people because they may hold views that others don't like isn't a road you want to go down (who makes that judgement?)
How to avoid the stupid errors of Yahoo in enterprise security
I never called for censoring groups, I was just outlining the problems faced here. If you read back up to parent, what I'm trying to get at is saying that despite HM harboring these regressive actors, at no point are they mobilizing or openly attacking others, so Facebook style content removal or moderation does not cross-apply here. I think we may be more on the same page than you realize
Isn't it invite only?
"That's not to say I think it's a lost cause: I think it works great for short, 5-10 line programs. Once programs grow larger it becomes very hard to reason with, like with most VPLs."

Interesting comments. I'm not sure about the failure on larger programs. The idea of these visual languages is to allow different learning styles and a quicker way to absorb the program details into your head. The best understood programs are the ones we can hold in our heads.

Yet it isn't too hard a visual problem to show complex situations graphically. You do this with scale. EEs manage to show complex logic in circuit diagrams (and other diagrams for states) so I see no reason why more complex programs cannot be shown graphically. (cf: background in technical graphics/cartography/gis/programming).

The biggest limitation is the way programmers think. They convert textual code and parse it in their head. Aside from logic diagrams, flow charts (and others) I don't think 4GL programs have really taken off because the source code is the most efficient way to write, read and show software.

When it comes to graphics programmers don't natively grok graphics as they do text and shun such tools. I've noticed that I have to switch modes of thinking text when programming, then graphical for other things. It's a hard thing to do and the precision of programming breaks my ability to visualise and draw.

The scaling idea is simple. You have blocks of code that are represented as Blocky. As you look at more aspects of the program, you scale out and see a smaller scale view of the code represented visually. You do this with maps all the time. The complexity of the data is orders of magnitudes of the landscape is more complex with respect to software. You zoom in and out of the landscape as needed to understand, measure or picture the lay of the land.

The key thing I get from this is the union of primarily textual programmers to people wishing to visually understand has a shallow overlap.
Electoral Fallout
I think devoply overstated their case in saying you can't make money if your group doesn't have it, but it does make it harder, and occasionally impossible. In the worst case, you face an effective catch-22 because your group doesn't provide the resources you need but joining groups that have them takes those same resources.

Also, in practice, people tend to identify with the groups they belong to, so rationally or not, they are more reluctant to leave groups than you are.
> From a practical standpoint, going with 32-bit over 16-bit means not much more than making the datapath twice as wide

Actually, that is more true from a theoretical standpoint.

From a practical standpoint you have twice as many traces to fit on your board and route, you have more chips, higher power requirement, etc.
> "duh, just ban racism, anti-Semitism, ageism, homophobia and gender discrimination".

This sounds reasonable at face value, but not one of these things is well-defined.

Many people interpret uncomfortable but entirely reasonable discussion of sociology and demography (e.g. discussions of wage differences or crime distribution) as racist or sexist or ageist. Many people confuse anti-Zionism or anti-theism for anti-Semitism. IMO it's better to be very conservative with banning such things, because the false positive risk is very high, and there are a lot of important things to discuss around these topics.
[Ask HN] IBM has served a DMCA notice to the GPLed repo of the OpenLava Project
OpenLava is a workload manager, which means that if you have N computers and M scientists, it will decide what program will run in which computer and when.

OpenLava is a GPL'ed version of Platform LSF 4.5, under the GPL2. It was forked by Platform LSF as an agreement with Redhat in 2007, before IBM bought Platform LSF.

According to the project leader, David Bigagli, IBM has decided to target the project by submitting a DMCA notice for the current version of the program on Github (https://github.com/openlava) and now asks that the website hosted on AWS be shut down.

What can these guys do?

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/openlava-users/z4V4oF1tfdY

Update: apparently, on Reddit, there is the guy that was directly involved in the process of releasing some of the Platform LSF parts as GPL:

https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5j3mn2/ibm_is_trying_to_bully_the_openlava_project_a/dbd5ipp/
This is fantastic, can't wait for the web interface.

My only note is that the visual demonstration could be slowed down, or perhaps even static screenshots? For me the fading is slightly distracting, especially in the beginning.

Otherwise, great bot!
> I'm downvoting you

> censorship

> Fringe political ideas should not be suppressed, especially if they aren't even attacking anyone.

Hypocrite.
It is. But compared with FB, HN has two distinct advantages:

a) The scale is small enough that most content can be manually reviewed, or reviewed after it reaches any significant number of views.

b) People in HN are expecting a professional discussion forum and are largely ok with a relatively active moderation. People posting in FB often assume that any moderation by Facebook the company must comport to freedom of the press or freedom of speech laws. This is of course legally nonsense, but it might not be an unreasonable expectation over all. In some ways, because of the scale of online platforms, the societal effects of FB/Twitter/Youtube content policing norms is closer to say, a code about what is allowed or not on-air in radio/TV in a country than a particular set of editorial policies for a particular newspaper.
Just curious, but what would you pay?
I sense a thematic.
Facebook's rules are necessary because of the nature of the beast: When a company is large enough to have to begin to hire outsiders to moderate content, the "moderation culture" (for want of a better term) is lost. In order to communicate this, you need to codify it in a set of rules that outlay exactly what actions take place when. The problem I see with this method is that you lose the ability to have a "why". Why content is left in place despite not meeting the rules, or why content is removed despite meeting them.

Community insiders promoted to moderate have usually demonstrated that their opinions are in line with the culture that the moderators are attempting to promote, which means the sort of rules that lay out exactly what is acceptable versus what is unacceptable are not required.

There's definitely upsides to the moderator-community-gestalt method of determining what content is unacceptable, the biggest of which is that it denies trolls the ability to 'rules lawyer' their way into posting content which is against the spirit of the rules, but not against the letter.

Which system is more elegant? I don't think Facebook's is, necessarily, but even if it were I don't think it should (or needs to) apply to a community like HN.
Ah, you're right, I misunderstood. Editing my comment.
Calling them "regressive actors" only contributes to the "problem", it doesn't help it.
Letsencrypt is hacking this problem, every 90 days TLS certificates are renewed automatically.
I took the MITx MOOC version of MIT's 6.004 (Computation Structures) class. In that class students design and implement in logic gate level simulator a 32-bit RISC CPU.

I was going to try to build it out of 74' series logic as a summer project last summer. Then I did a count of the gates I was using. In the following, a number after a gate type means the number of inputs. My gate count:

295 AND2
8 AND3
3 NOR2
4 OR2
96 OR3
20 OR4
226 XOR2
6 NOT
563 MUX2
161 MUX4
32 D FLIP FLOPS

I'm not including memory for the registers. I would probably not have tried to make that out of 74' series logic.

In terms of chips, it is something like

140 4xMUX2
75 4xAND2
81 2xMUX2
55 4xXOR2

plus a few more.

The project pretty much died at that point.

I could cut a lot of those out by moving some functions from hardware to software. My design includes a shifter than can left or right, logical or arithmetic shift 1 to 32 bits in one cycle. 353 of the MUX2s are involved in that.

I could take that out, add a much simpler unit that can only do logical right shift by 1, add a new shift instruction that uses that simpler shifter, and make the current shift instruction into illegal instructions. They would then trap, and the illegal instruction handler could emulate the missing instructions.

Still too many chips after that, though.

I may still build it someday, but rather than making it out of real chips I'll use it as an excuse to learn about FPGAs.

If any of this seems interesting, I highly recommend 6.004 at MITx.
Hm, maybe someone mixed up their slide? I would imagine with all the online bullying issues facebook has that protecting teens would be a high priority.
Ubuntu Touch and Fairphone 2
May "innovation" is just an irrelevant marketing claim. The claim, whether true or false, doesn't make the product better.
Your Fortran summary is incorrect. F77-style arrays are generally passed as a raw pointer (under the hood.) F90-style allocatable arrays are passed as an array descriptor containing size information, again under the hood.

This doesn't affect aliasing in Fortran at all. Aliasing is simply prohibited, which leaves the compiler free to generate code that gets the wrong answer, if the programmer screws up and has actual aliasing at run-time.
GOLD: Extends Losses on Bear Pressure
I've been eating one meal a day for the past 3 years, usually lunch, and occasionally fasting for a day or two. At first, I would be feel very hungry at dinner and breakfast time, and I'd feel starved by lunch. (I kept going because I kind of liked the feeling when eating that one meal; food tasted so good. Also, I liked the extra time I would have, which I would otherwise spend on preparing food and/or eating.)

My body slowly adjusted, and after the first year or so, it became so normal that I no longer feel hungry at all until my daily meal, and at that time I would feel comparable hunger as before mealtime when I used to eat three meals a day.

It's much easier to delay eating now then it was before. I can easily go 2 or 3 hours after my normal eating time without any build up of hunger at all.

When I hear about how hard it is to fast, and how people have to get "ready" by eating like a pig before their fasting time, I cannot relate to this anymore. I think there is a very universal and very deep mental idea instilled into modern people that they must eat so much. It's ridiculous when you think about how nourishment fits into evolutionary pressure. We wouldn't be able to compete against other species if our bodies and mental capacity weren't equipped to go without food for many days and still perform.

Also, the fact that it took a year before I started to feel normal doing this, makes me think how a human being adjusts itself to different environments, gene expression and all that. My body feels tougher, I have as much energy as I did before, but I'm calmer and less stressed. It's like my body streamlined where it put energy into, so I could still perform just as well as before. Looking back, before I did this, energy was spilling into every random thought and emotion, and I had much more anxiety and angst. Now I can choose to ignore things which before I would obsess over.
Nothing prevents a person from doing that, but that isn't what folks doing scientific computing are interested in, generally speaking. Some are, sure, but in aggregate as a matter of what the "day to day" is, it's just not of much interest.

I mean, maybe I was an outlier, but when I was in academia I wanted to have my models compute as accurately and quickly as possible, and I generally didn't have much time for or interest in the computer coding beyond the necessary implementation details required to conduct my research.

Telling me "implement an extension", then, would have made me roll my eyes and go back to fortran.
"If someone gave you the entire list of cities ahead of time, you could plan the fastest possible route."

Dynamic programming. So it saves time in the end.
How much time did it take?
Certificates at AWS Route 53 are very easy to set up. so you have two candidates, letsencrypt and Route53.
You think Reddit has a lack of "open discourse"? That's strange. While Reddit has problems with brigading and the like, so does HN. So if Reddit has a problem, and HN does not. How do HN and Voat compare? Or HN and 4chan? Or HN and 8chan?
> Teaching a 10 yo something optional needs to be fun, or else it won't happen.

That matches my intuition. But the word "fun" brought back to my mind this epigram by Alan Perlis:

> It goes against the grain of modern education to teach children to program. What fun is there in making plans, acquiring discipline in organizing thoughts, devoting attention to detail and learning to be self-critical?

Unless I have completely misunderstood this epigram, I think the point is that programming, when done well, is not fun; it's work. So maybe if we try to make programming fun so we can teach it to a child, we're setting bad expectations for what it will be like if they pursue it seriously.

So I guess that means that when teaching programming to someone of any age, we do need to focus on fundamentals and the things that Perlis mentions in that epigram. Then, if a 10-year-old kid loses interest, we should just let it go.

Makes me wonder if I and other self-taught programmers of my generation (I was born in 1980) built our careers on a bad foundation. I started learning to program in BASIC on my family's home computer when I was 8 years old, because when just dabbling in BASIC, it was fun. Even tinkering with assembly language was fun. But the important thing to note is that as far as I can recall, I produced only one truly worthwhile program as a pre-teen, and that was one that a relative asked me to write. And that was a serious project, not a diversion (AFAIK, the latter is the definition of fun, as is apparent from some languages like Spanish).

As for Perlis's jab at "modern education", I suppose the take-away is that we need to teach kids early that life isn't fun, rather than trying to make everything fun for them.
Although their views may be seen as rephrensible from my perspective I still see their value as contributors to this site considering most topics that they are contributing to discussion on won't bring up these issues
It's merely the name of the API, even on 64-bit Windows, where it ends up being a misnomer :-)
Would their new slogan be Artificial Artificial Artificial intelligence?
My approach might be called "Risk Driven Development"–the idea is to view software projects as a process of iteratively reducing uncertainty, and to structure your workflow around mitigating the most important risks. Agile is a special case of this, where the main risk is subtle details of customer requirements, but many times this is not the biggest risk in a project. I manage a data science team, and this is almost never our main risk. Instead, we've had:

–Technology risk: the project requires new libraries, some of which may be immature or have show-stopping bugs. You want to identify these by building PoCs quickly, and switch to alternatives early if needed.

–Assumption risk: one project focused on taking a statistical algorithm that was producing "ok" results, and making it better. We assumed that this mostly involved fixing the algorithm. However, the algorithm's performance was actually quite good, and most of the issues were caused by downstream bugs. We would have saved several weeks if we ran some quick tests to verify this early on.

–Coordination risk: if you have a lot of engineers working on different components of a project, you need to make sure those components mesh well together. I usually try to specify the interfaces of each component in great detail before any work starts, e.g. specifying all the columns in a table, or lots of types in code.

–Data size risk. With distributed systems, often you have a system that works on 10gb of input and fails on 100gb. This is usually due to some piece of code that's convenient but not performant. Thus you want to test with large datasets early and often, so that you don't end up baking the convenient but not-performant patterns into your project.
Not for most new accounts, no. A small minority of new accounts' comments get autokilled because of past abuse by trolls, and those often get rescued by vouches.
this guy knows what's up. War of attrition and work ethic and time combo always win.

No shortcuts in creative work.
I'd be very careful here. Perhaps the particular reward is not perceived by the child as a reward? I can think of any number of things that one party might perceive as a reward that would be, to me, uncomfortable or meh.