skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I've been clear about my meaning. Can't simplify it any further.

You really haven't. This entire thread is you taking disposablezero's "Relying on error-prone, distracted, slow humans to guide massive killing machines is playing Russian roulette" comment out of context as some moral statement about human beings.

There's a bunch of things humans are worse at than machines, you're the only one asserting that this somehow "devalues" people without any further clarification.

I'm also worse at shoving nails into wood than a hammer is. How does that devalue me?

> [Because certain types of technical advancement requires an element of devaluing people]. That's your quote. What did you mean?

The set of things machines are better at than humans is only increasing over time. Today nobody disputes that a combine harvester is better for the task than a team of humans, but there's a tendency to overvalue human work as machines are getting better.

I've noticed that changing with "handmade" within my lifetime, and we're probably about to see it change with "human-driven vehicle" within the next decade.

> There's a difference between preferring tech to do the driving and saying the human has "less value". You don't see that?

No, I really don't. You haven't defined what you're talking about when you're saying "value" or "devalue", but I will. I'm talking about value in the economic sense. I.e. if you've made a combine harvester instead of needing 50 people to do manual labor for 16 hours a day you've optimized your economy and added net value to our civilization.

I really don't buy this argument that saying a human has less value is a negative. The logical conclusion to that argument is saying that we should unwind civilization and technological advancements until we're all hunter-gatherers again. Because surely the existence of the food industry devalues hunters everywhere.

> In any case, a hostile regard for human fallibility that approaches promotion of the dispensability of humans isn't a good thing.

No, it's the exact opposite. It's saying that we shouldn't waste a human being's potential on some menial task like manually picking corn in a field or driving a car.

To someone living in the future we're hopefully heading towards the notion of someone needing to make driving a vehicle their full-time job will be as ridiculous as the notion of of a human being needing to manually carry freight is today, as opposed to using a truck.
I'd hope a poorly maintained automated truck which crashes would result in extremely heavy fines and lawsuits, to the point where it could seriously threaten to put a trucking company out of business. Make it uneconomical not to maintain the trucks.
Not sure if the door analogy works here.

I can't think of a better analogy, but what if I had a Polaroid camera and go around taking pictures in my property and then throwing those pictures away on the street. If a stranger picks up one (or several) of those pictures, would you consider that trespassing as well?

I'm not saying I am for or against this, but it's definitely a tricky subject. Obviously part of that trickiness is because complex tools (for the general populace) are being sold as simple tools, and so people who buy them have no idea what they are capable of or what is the proper way of using them (securing them with a password, etc).
What's the point? You mention SV and you get clickbait?

The vast widening of differences in income levels in the past 20 years might have might have something to do with it. That, and the fact that it's the cradle of an industry that prides itself on "changing people's lives for the better".
I like the 5" form factor. I don't live in a driving city, so things are in my pocket and used in one hand while walking.

Someone downvoted me, I guess the phone landscape really is a fantastic one and I was wrong.
Community driven platform for Developers and employers
Here's a couple more.

* Inertial navigation, using gyro and accelerometer to approximate movement since last known position.
* Pressure sensor can give approximate Z axis (altitude). This is significant if your X,Y says you're in or near a tall building; combined with the Z, you confirm the building and the floor +/- a few floors.
Automatic braking system prevented further deaths in Berlin attack
> C does have a standard library. It's described in full in the ANSI/ISO/IEC standard for the C programming language, and it's on your system, likely called libc or something along those lines.

What you're describing is the spec and not the implementation. An implementation would be glibc (GNU Libc with open source proprietary extensions) and musl (MIT implementation that strictly adheres to spec). These libraries are updated often.

Meanwhile, Rust offers more than just a specification. It offers an implementation. This is libcore-rust + libstd-rust. This is what receives updates each 6 weeks. It also offers a compiler that comes with it, rustc, which is also what receives updates each 6 weeks.

Rust strictly adheres to semantic versioning, so changes to the API are not allowed without a major version bump. Code that was written for Rust 1.0 will still compile on Rust 1.15. Code written for Rust 1.15 may not compile for a Rust 1.0 compiler though because bumping the second version implies adding new features. Rust doesn't yet utilize a patch version though. There's never been any critical issues discovered in each stable release.

> Frankly, I don't see wide adoption happening in the corporate world until there's an LTS compiler at the very least.

Can't say that I understand why a LTS compiler would be required for adoption. Many in the corporate world are already using Rust, either publicly as an official friend of Rust or privately in smaller projects. There's nothing a LTS compiler would provide that would be beneficial to the corporate world. Semantic versioning and the ease of managing Rust toolchains with rustup has everything pretty well covered.
It's kind of hard to tell with the low camera and no depth perception, but it looked to me like the hatchback did between one and three unsafe things there. An autopilot would presumably just not do these things, thereby avoiding the accident. A good driver would do the same, though.

1) Approaching the SUV too closely (can't be sure of this one, it's possible that the SUV moved into the left lane just prior to the start of the video). Even at the beginning of the video, the hatchback was too close to the SUV.

2) Attempting a lane change while too close to the vehicle in front and the vehicle to the right. Lane changes are the most dangerous maneuvers in highway driving, because they divide your attention and may not be anticipated by other motorists. You want more space than you would normally need both in front and to the side you're merging toward.

3) Accelerating during to the lane change. I'm not sure that this is what happened; it's difficult to tell without stereoscopic depth perception. What I think happened is that the driver of the red hatchback accelerated during the lane change, approaching the speed they wanted once they were in the clear lane. This is very commonly done, but it trades away a lot of safety in exchange for a little time. In any significant traffic, you should complete the lane change first, then accelerate to the desired speed for the new lane.
That's not a reason to use the handbrake over the brake pedal. Typically the brake pedal is more effective (all wheels, ABS) than the hand brake (sometimes 2 wheels, probably no ABS). The handbrake is just for emergencies and parking.
it's so bizarre that you think _ph_ disagrees with these arguments. their parent comment likes nuclear but says it unfortunately always loses in HN discussions, and_ph_ summarizes why it loses.

I clicked your HN profile which says "	Defend yourself. Your mindless, entitled pouting makes me aggressive. As it should."

HN is a place to be civil. it's in the rules. That's why it's better than other places. Please, improve your attitude here and don't have that profile text. If you do, you'll (rightly) be shadow banned for those toxic "contributions" and then you won't derail threads with gratuitous negativity.

Rather than lash out against someone who you completely agree with, you could have just written your comment to read "To elaborate on these points..." and then given your helpful information.

then you would have been upvoted. In the future please be more constructive :). and welcome to HN.
AntiBrowserSpy Pro 2017 License Key with Crack
I just don't understand. I moved out of the Valley because even as a techie, I felt priced out.
There are PLENTY of great places to live in this country that aren't Silicon Valley and cost a fraction of how expensive it is to live in the most contested real estate in the world.
Houston, Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Denver are fantastic places, and you can have your own land (with a yard!) for a fraction of the cost.
I just don't get the mentality here that every other place but the Valley must be Siberia.
This will only end in nano-blood-draws with genotypic personalization built into my online refrigerator all over LDAP.
You're spending at least $800 on any "flagship" phone, it just might be through your carrier contract. I agree, I often wonder why the hell this is supposed to be worth the money. It was not marketed as "not feeling ok and needing to charge four times per day," and as I recall it even ran great the first few months...Until the initial hardware warranties started running out, at which point my aux jack started disconnecting, the memory issues became apparent, etc...
Scaling Medium-Size Databases
In this case, you're redefining "multi-family arrangements" to include the case of children involuntarily separated from their own parents. Which would count as misery and hardship, in any part of the world.
>> some standard of intercar coordination

There is this "V2V" initiative by NHTSA:

https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/vehicle-vehicle-...
Maybe it's the cold weather, as it's happening to iPhones as well
Yes, when I heard about this I was really hopeful it'd help but the performance of the phone is completely unaffected.
Opening a socket to a local MTA and dumping a message to it wouldn't take any longer than shelling out to a local sendmail and writing to its stdin.
In the case of a single-user phone, is there a difference? The phone's owner has authorization to do anything, including spend funds they've previously enrolled into the phone's wallet systems, etc., so it's kind of a moot point for the purposes of this incident.

You seem to be suggesting we add extra layers here so that merely authenticating as the device's owner is insufficient authorization to conduct some actions, and re-authenticating as the owner by using something they know (secret token like PIN/password) instead of something they possess (finger) will re-grant authorization, but users find this constant re-auth very annoying.

Most would probably prefer device makers to allow them to trust the people whom they sleep around rather than input another authentication method all the time. Personal responsibility has to enter into the equation somewhere.

My advice to this parent would be to keep their phone and/or body inaccessible while unconscious.
mysocialagenda.com
You didn't answer my question. Does "library" here mean that you are able to use a hashmap other than the one in std::collections, or not?
> Poland has to consume less carbon.

I thought it was about emitting CO2. If it is about consuming carbon (coal), then we would take black badge for being leader in coal consumption in Europe. Black is ok then. But we are not even a leader in coal consumption.

Colors are just colors, but it seems as if black here suggests pollution (opposite to green on the scale). CO2 does not qualify as a pollutant that easily as NO2, S02 or NH3 for that matter. If anything it should be more on the green end of the scale. But it would make the scale seem nonsensical in that context. Wouldn't it ?

Anyway. I don't buy it.
This blog post was inspired by this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13266627
Microsoft could be first tech company to reach trillion-dollar market value
Haven't found a better translated source yet, but this is trending in Germany. According to some other sources, the system overrides driver controls one second after a collision has occured.
How did you arrange this? Is this something you just sign up, or do you call them and assure them you're enthusiastic about nuclear energy and eventually they relent?
Well, yes. The amazing part is that the Autopilot does things that a competent driver would do.

Very often, humans do not do those things. And despite the carnage that results, over more than a century of experience with automobiles, we have not managed to make people significantly better drivers, nor come up with a licensing scheme that does more than weed out the most obviously medically-disqualified or incompetent people. At least here in the US, you take your drivers test (which is a ridiculous, comic farce) exactly once in your life, after which you can basically drive until you are blind, comatose, or--very rarely--you kill someone. But rarely the last one, not because people don't kill each other, but because it rarely results in a license suspension. We've just tacitly accepted that people are bad at driving.

So yeah, bring on the machines.
> This site explicitly mentions that results of benchmarks mean almost nothing.

Quote?
> What's horribly unsafe to everyone is passenger cars built on truck frames.

Have any examples? The vast majority of new SUVs (which the one in this incident appears to be) are unibody rather than body-on-frame ("truck frame" style).
Considering Rust's target audience, I think comparing Rust to scripting languages is ok. While Rust is aiming to compete in the system programming arena, it also aims to allow programmers who have experience using higher level languages to be able to get into systems programming without having to worry about safety. Rust has many features that make it almost feel like a high-level language and thus makes it much more approachable. That being said, Rust does not aim to really replace Ruby/PHP or Javascript, but rather a be a tool available to those programmers to write fast and safe code when needed.
To avoid this devaluation, I think we'll need to find other ways in which people are to be valued than "driving acumen."

But that should be pretty straightforward; there's a lot of things people can do that aren't "drive a car."
Lessons from 3,000 technical interviews
I agree, but how is that relevant? I only see the first kind here.
The Coquihalla highway (BC-5) is notorious for it's steep hill and the speed limit is 120 km/h in ordinary conditions. I could probably find a lot of highways in BC that are similiar.
I actually heard a similar story within my family very recently. My sister had left her young (~1 yrl) daughter with a phone to amuse itself .. and later received an email from eBay letting her know she'd been outbid - on a car.

I must admit, however, my first thought wasn't about authentication - but on the wisdom of using phones as babysitters.

(Of course, I should say I have no idea whether this actually happened either, or if my sister just realised she hadn't reminded us she's a mother for 20 minutes. I didn't ask, it's drama I could live without.)
you might be interested in ScaleFT, we offer our product in a behind the firewall edition with similar goals/features to BLESS:

https://www.scaleft.com/product/

(I'm a ScaleFT co-founder)
Three Things We Know and Don’t Know About Dark Matter
13 year old game about doing business in space
> startup time

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/sometimes-people-jus...
I recently hit the LG G4 bootloop issue. Now that I am looking for a new phone (and looking at the pixel) I am finding defect problems pretty much in every phone out there.

I think I have come to the temporary conclusion that phones will always have problems even after several replacements. So all I can do is shrug, and ask why they cannot make phones like they used to.
> The fact that someone says on HN "we're backwards compatible" doesn't quite offer the same level of trust as an ISO standard.

Then you shouldn't take the word of a random person but from the Semantic Versioning guidelines. If you're not following the semantic versioning guidelines then you're doing it wrong.

http://semver.org/

> Especially when there are some conflicting reports out there i.e. there are many super-awesome libraries that only work with nightly (I think it's called), because many of those maintainers are early adopters that love to try out new features.

Totally irrelevant. Very few libraries, if any, require a nightly compiler. The libraries that do offer features that require a nightly compiler have those features as optional. Anyway, once the new Macros update releases, the need for that nightly compiler will go away. These libraries are just taking advantage of compiler plugins.
It's possible to come up with FUD regarding anything.
Hype I-FX Virtual Reality Headset
If you're into safety than you should probably go with a functional programming language with low-cost abstractions. Rust isn't an expressive language, its only benefit compared to other general purpose languages is its memory management.
More than once I've also had to kick myself for making the rookie mistake of closing over a loop variable. So something like:

for _, v := range values {
go func() {
// Do stuff with v
}
}

Instead of:

for _, v := range values {
go (func(v string) {
// Do stuff with value
})(v)
}

It's rare enough, and subtle enough, that every instance tends to result in 5-10 minutes of puzzled debugging with stdout printing statements until I realize what's going on. What does Rust do here?

I like to say that Go's strictness is unevenly distributed. Unused imports are illegal, but Go is perfectly happy to let you shadow variables, have closure use loop variables, or reassign the built-in values ("nil", "true", etc.). It's like a parent who locks the scissors away in a drawer but doesn't mind leaving drain cleaner on the kitchen table.
I didn't downvote your top comment, and miss phones with actual keyboards, but Google Pixel and Samsung Galaxy aren't the only phone brands out there. 5" devices still exist. Devices with replaceable batteries still exist. Devices you easily can install custom ROMs on to not rely on the vendor for updates still exist. It's quite possible the combination you like isn't out there, but it's not total monoculture yet.
> What in the world happened to the phone market that the choices have gotten so dismal? We used to have more variety.

We did, but based on your preceding paragraphs, what we need is reliability, not variety. I don't miss keyboards on phones, and swappable batteries don't feel all that different from portable batteries (which are easier to charge).

But, you're not wrong. The devices themselves are incredibly unreliable, and feel like they're getting worse. I wonder if it's because there is now a pressure that you must have a new phone out every year, even if you don't have one ready or if it isn't really all that worth releasing.
Now add the number of hours or days for testing and debugging those 500 lines of code and you get the true amount of time that it took to write 500 LOC. Otherwise I can also write a huge amount of lines of code in a day but pretty much none of it will work correctly, or even run, on the first try .
>Loving how this Graydon person thinks already. Same stuff pjmlp and I are always saying.

Rust was bootstrapped by a compiler written in OCaML.

Like you and pjmlp, Graydon is a massive fan of fanatically strong typing, and most of that stuff was actually in many older languages that lost because C was an optimal solution at the time.

However, at scale, C is no longer an optimal solution. Thus Rust can start eating C/C++'s lunch, and people will stop using C for what it does badly, and using it for what it does well (namely, writing small programs that do one thing and do it well, doing embedded work, kernels, and other bit hacking, and bootstrapping better languages).
For drywall, for lighter weights, let's say pictures, mirrors, not book shelves, there are actually self-drilling and self-threading anchors, you don't need a drill, only a power screwdriver, there are both metal and nylon ones:

http://www.colfert.com/Public/img/catalogo/products/zoom/img...

https://admin.abc.sm/upload/1115/catalogodinamico/prodotti/H...
Yes, though I break it up into different (labelled) sections, so I don't have a large number of files. It may just work for me since I tend to write longish overviews of things (papers, concepts, experiments, etc.).
I sincerely hope there will be such a technocratic solution to this problem. Recall that there was a trend in the late '00s where cities shortened the yellow light time so they could reap greater fines from red light cameras. Having a definitive length of time that yellow lights 'should' be will be helpful.
Is this the first source code with Hungarian notation released to the public?(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation)
I've gotten two remote jobs off the HN "Who's hiring?" thread. It can be a bit frustrating. I applied to every single remote posting on the thread for 2 months in a row. So I guess that's one job per month (maybe I was lucky or unlucky who knows).

Following are some of my impressions but they are subjective and perhaps a bit speculative.

Generally I've found that the attitude of most US companies is that if they are willing to hire remote, they are usually only interested in hiring candidates inside the US - even if they are a native English speaker (I was an American living in Vietnam). This is very different than the attitude that I've gotten talking to a companies in say ... Singapore or Germany.

Another thing that seems to happen is that some companies seem to throw the REMOTE OK tag to their posting without considering whether or not everyone on their engineering team is actually ok with working with a remote employee. I've done several interviews with teams that were REMOTE OK but had no existing remote employees. Usually it only takes one person to veto a hire. That's something to think about if they are looking at both local and remote candidates. Unless there is a really compelling reason to hire remote, usually they will go local (makes sense). You might not even want to work with one of these companies because they aren't set up for remote work... communication takes a bit more work from all team members - not just the remote ones.

Overall I've had a much more positive experience with the HN: "Who's hiring?"" thread than anywhere else. I think this is because the first point of contact is often an engineer and not an HR person. My resume is a bit odd and doesn't have a BRAND_NAME_SILICON_VALLEY_COMPANY or a BRAND_NAME_UNIVERSITY so it bounces right off the HR department. It's very helpful to be able to talk technology with someone in the initial conversation. If I can get a knowledgeable front-end engineer to look at some of my previous work, then I usually get to the coding round.

I had no luck with any of the remote hiring sites: remoteok.io or weworkremotely.com. YMMV

Ultimately getting a remote job seems to come down to:

1. Having some kind of portfolio to demonstrate your competence.
2. Doing as many interiews as possible. Also the more interviews you do the better you get at it.

Good luck!