skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think I can wrap my head around neural nets being superior at games with perfect information like chess or go. But how would you teach bluffing and randomness to a neural net?
Somebody who knows this pattern better than me: are we likely to see Trello shut down within 3 years?
What's sad is this discussion immediately falls along party lines.
I like caddy, but the dreamhost benchmark re apache vs nginx isn't really telling, as it doesn't mention fundamental apache config properties. I'm assuming they were benchmarking an unoptimized MPM/prefork setup, but you can use event-based request processing (and other process models) with apache as well. There's nothing magical with nginx.

I'd also like to see a benchmark vs. H2O which seems to have the most advanced HTTP/2 support right now (its running the nghttp2 web site for some time now).
Ask HN: How do you get and stay motivated?
Would love to know what you do to get and stay motivated?
I don't recall any arrests related to GM's ignition lock fiasco.
No More Fake News to Sway Your Views as 'Pants-On-Fire' Detector Comes to Rescue
Yes, but how do you actually optimize that loss in practice? I'm not saying that a perfect solution with an L1 penalty wouldn't have weights exactly equal to 0. I'm saying that with the optimization techniques that are commonly used, you don't end up with exact zeros.
HipChat is terrible now...
>Third world countries are becoming westernized giving us a continued growth of our markets even though the population might shrink.

Which ones are those? The last thing the world needs is even more consumerist culture.
A common argument against AnCapism is the idea that monopoly will form and eventually there is a sort of superstate.

This is of course a old marxist argument, capital is inherently centralising.

There are however good reason to believe this is not true. In fact, most economist don't follow this line of thinking anymore.

No AnCap would deny that there would be some larger then healthy cooperations but its an acceptable problem that is pretty hard to solve for any system and is often made worse by state based systems.
Query optimization can't be audited in code alone. The indexes you need depend heavily on the database system that you are using in production. Do you know at what point your DBMS stops loading the whole table in memory? Do you know what datastructure and algorithm it's using when you do a LIKE query?

Cache thrashing also can't be audited in code alone without understanding the architecture that the the app is going to be deployed on. It's highly unlikely that the servers will have the same processor cache sizes, memory sizes, and numa architecture of the dev's laptop.

Load balancer is something a developer should know about as well. A developer has to consider the behavior required by the application (e.g. backend session persistence, headers injected, etc).

>please explain, how would dealing with kernel tcp tuning part-time help Joe Random developer write better code?

Joe might learn that connections aren't as cheap as he thinks and maybe it isn't a great idea for each client to require 50 connections for the app to function. He might also learn that TCP isn't very efficient on high bandwidth, high latency, lossy networks and decide to switch to UDP with error correction.

Long story short, a good developer should know everything about the environment in which the app is intended to run. "It performed ideally on my laptop" is throwing code over the wall.

Civil engineers don't design bridges without understanding where the bridge will go. The same applies to software.
> Ok, I really like the approach Rust is taking and appreciate their effort to make low-level system programming safer, but it really is getting ridiculous. Not that implementing a DB system in Rust would be infeasible, but advocating to just rewrite some large projects in Rust is probably not the step forward.

Note that the OP has, afaik, no involvement in the rust project. Nor has he done much hacking on postgres. Don't think the rust people can be blamed for that one.
Arguments like "you don't need generics" or "exceptions lead to convoluted code" or "assertions are only used by lazy programmers" came from Go's creators.

I too am rather surprised to see Go, Lisp and Haskell cited as languages designed by people who are not dogmatic. This may well be true at the micro-level of decisions like "how do you best compile green threads", but at the higher design levels all three languages are very, very opinionated.

I think statement in particular is questionable:

Contrast that kind of discussion with the heated arguments or overly zealous statements you sometimes see from users of the same languages. There's a real disconnect, possibly because the users don't have the experience of weighing the arguments on both sides and don't realize how easily a particular decision might have gone the other way.

What is this implying? The designers of Go and Haskell never make "overly zealous statements" or "heated arguments"? Isn't the history of Go littered with such arguments, the most famous being that Go is simple because it's designed for Google engineers, who can't handle complex languages?

It's definitely true that language communities are often zealous: when library interop is bad they have to be, in order to get an ecosystem of libraries and tools. That's why you see people posting things like "I made a terminal emulator in Rust" to Hacker News but don't see people posting the same for C++ or Java. Those languages have established ecosystems already and need much less evangelism.
IDK. My blog is in catalyst; I really like it for that.
I don't think you understand.

Yes, they are serving their customers, and they are doing it because it is the selfish, self-optimizing solution.

That's the whole point! You have this awesome outcome, where purely selfish people are still doing the "right" thing.

You don't need nice people in order for people to do nice things.
Also combined with governmental tracking so you can be branded a drug abuser forever?
No ability in their wiki to edit subsections individually is very annoying.
>You don't know what you don't know.

That's the point of regression tests. The sysadmin also doesn't know. Unless he's the one writing the tests (and IME he's not) or he's painstakingly regression testing everything by hand (trust me, he's not doing that either), making him a gatekeeper for all library upgrades achieves very little except adding bureaucratic friction.
You'd be surprised how interesting a pig can be as a pet. They show amazing social behaviours, and they also seem to be quite good at understanding simple spoken communication.
Did GM deliberately try to falsify test results, so as to provide incorrect information to the government?

There's stupidity and incompetence, and then there's deliberately breaking the law and trying to hide that you're doing so. The latter gets you arrested, the former gets you shamed (and perhaps fined).
I doubt the vast majority of this behavior is at such a strategic or even conscious level. People are just inherently very tribal, and prone to retroactively rationalizing their choices. That's true in every domain, including programming tools.
Guide to NumPy (2006) [pdf]
> Hospitals have way too much overhead compared with outpatient facilities. The staff is heavily unionized with very high salaries.

Is that a UC thing or what? It's definitely not true of IT jobs at, for example, The Cleveland Clinic.
"Preserving the existing class structure" is not a design goal of the SAT, so to the extent that it does so, that is a problem. A test that didn't have this property would be a better test.

However, I don't think all is lost. Most of the wealthy's advantage is the fact that they actually practice taking the test. It's not clear why poor people don't avail themselves of this perfectly attainable advantage (frankly, how can they consider a few hours of their time more valuable than the many tens of thousands of dollars of scholarships on offer?), but they don't seem to do it. To fix this, let's get more poor kids to take the practice tests. I'm doing that in a very small way. When asked for advice, I tell poor kids and family members to practice, practice, practice. I tell rich kids there's nothing they can do...
I think this is meant to be a "hello world" level puzzle. You literally just click the cells and type to edit them.

Are you sure you can't edit once you highlight a cell? If so that's probably a bug.
Ah, I see. Yes, I agree with you on that.

Except maybe there's a system for which that's really true, and you and I prevent us from ever getting to that system because we reject arguments like this on the basis of form? Oh dear ;-)
>If you follow the history of that particular issue, you'll see that the Go team's (official) view has always been that there are tradeoffs involved

Only everybody who asks for generics knows that, and still wants them to go through and pay the price.

The "we'll only add them when there's a solution with no tradeoffs" is a red-herring, like "we'll add them on a day that doesn't end in -y".

>And I think most people will agree that Go has achieved a lot of success without them, so perhaps most use cases don't require generics after all.

In the same sense C has achieved quite a lot with buffer overflows, so what's the point in something like Rust?
As someone who has been around beef-cattle and also had milk cows growing up, cows are much the same way. They have a lot of personality and are not altogether different than dogs or anything else. Cattle raised for beef have a lot less human interaction and therefore have less "personality". Our cows knew their names and were very affectionate but they also had been interacted with since birth.
How we mapped the world’s weirdest streets
For context here is the author discussing Generics & Go:

https://research.swtch.com/generic
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9622417
Over in Cherokee County, meanwhile, it's $70/mo with Comcast for 75Mbps. I was hopeful for a Google Fiber rollout when they announced it, but no dice.
I imagine it's mostly just playing the percentages. Bet when it has a high percentage of winning, fold when it doesn't. It doesn't need to read its opponents if it can play the percentages perfectly.
This happened within Microsoft too, a lot of engineers who aspired to be Dave Cutler thought that they should start by acting like him.
That's pricy...
I love their response to open issues like: we'd like to be able to delete pull requests.

Response: what a silly notion, no

Or another one I found recently: we'd like to comment on code that isn't within 10 lines of a changed file. You know, because one line change in file a can impact stuff elsewhere. Or even in another project but the chances of that happening are more slim than a tachyon hitting an atom as it passes through earth.

Response: Good idea, here's stuff we did this year, and here's other stuff we do. (aka the non committal middle finger)

It sucks because atlassian products are 80% of the way there, but the final 20% polish never seems to arrive. And its been years.
Language technologies are nowhere near ready to replace human beings
For a year or so, I used to make minor contributions to the Go programming language codebase, back before it hit 1.0. That certainly by no means makes me an expert on it, nor do I claim to be someone of the caliber of Russ Cox or Rob Pike, but I did do a lot of reading on golang-dev and golang-nuts, before the language was settled on 1.0.

There were a lot of discussions on generics, and the language authors and contributors were certainly open to ideas and indeed did their own fair share of research. For example, see https://research.swtch.com/generic from 2009. Indeed, the FAQ entry itself on Generics states 'Generics may well be added at some point. We don't feel an urgency for them, although we understand some programmers do.', and looking at the blame log, that's from 2010 or earlier, and it's stuck to this day.

So, from everything I can see, the creators themselves are certainly open to the concept - I don't see any "you don't need generics" coming from that side.
Condescending sarcasm is unwarranted. People are well aware of what exceptions are, and the arguments against them amount to more than just performance.
> I really want to like Go, but as long as the Go community clings to long-discredited ideas regarding

I'm confused, aren't Go plugins exactly the feature you want? And on that note, it was just introduced as of 1.8, wasn't it?

Seems a bit harsh to criticize a project for not using (during it's development time) unfinished and not production ready features.
I have seen a lot of startups coming out to "re-invent the clinic" essentially by re-inventing DPC. They generally focus on on a wealthy clientelle with the (tesla-like) promise of moving down market. They aren't small concierge physicians, though. It ends up looking a lot more like one medical on steroids.

Not sure if it is a reasonable model yet, since these firms are incentivized to minimize patient contact. In the positive view, it means they want to focus on preventative care. In the negative view, they will get suffocated with hypocondriacs and have to institute limits to care that invalidates the allure of an unlimited insurance-free provider. Plus, these places effectively have to underwrite like insurers to remain profitable which is not easy when competing woth sophisticated giants. Not to mention the risk pf dealing with a very unstable ACA that will likely change the landscape.
Crazy. I pay good money to watch/listen to people on hidden cameras.

Seems like I should disrupt the smoke-alarm-for-noise industry by creating an efficient block-chain marketplace to connect voyeuristic perverts with sharing-economy-landlords.

Everybody wins!
one of the largest players in the project management game acquires another tool and it's a-okay because there's loads of competition; but realistically, trello was one of the competitors to JIRA that actually could hold its own when being reviewed for use by non-developers. JIRA has been the default choice of many companies and while not a monopoly I'd say it's approaching that status.
Smart enough to hunt on BOTH land and sea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar5WJrQik2o&feature=youtu.be...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFzpC_e44Tg
Like what? SourceTree works just about perfectly for me.
They already have a closed source alternative built into JIRA.
Congrats to Atlassian and the Trello team!
Thank you for the kind words.

I promise you Atlassian understands why Trello is so successful. You described Trello's core strength perfectly - and this one of the reasons they are committed to keeping it as a standalone service.

(disclaimer: I'm the CEO of Trello)
> Err, by "very strong" did you mean "makes (a conjunction of) many claims" rather than "resilient"?

Kind of. I certainly did not mean "resilient"!

when speaking of axioms, typically "strong" means "a lot of stuff follows from the axiom". It's in reference to the deductive power of the axiom, usually when taken as part of a larger system of deduction.

So for example, "False" is a really, really strong axiom in most systems of deduction.

Strong axioms aren't necessarily a bad thing. But if you need a lot of strong axioms, you might be saying something about a very specific hypothetical situation...
IMO if a sysadmin wants to have visibility into the requirements.txt that's fine.

If they want to enforce a policy of pinning versions, that's very welcome (though I would do that anyway).

If they have specific, relevant comments about upgrades of specific packages - again, fine (though in practice they never do).

If they want to be a gatekeeper for changes to that file they can fuck off.
Yes, I agree with you that this is not very helpful, especially for larger production environments. I don't know if they might refactor the middleware system to a more dynamic way some time.
3x smarter than a managing director
Hipchat's on premise version doesn't work in an air gapped network with certain needed features (video chat is one). You do not want to know how much they ask per year for the on premise version (for greater than 10 users).
Nope. Wrong.
Show HN: Only one person can view this page at a time
Also revolution. Automation vs labor vs 1848 and all that. Where there is food vs where there are hungry mouths are not obligated to match up as they do now.

It would be interesting to analyze food production capability at various levels of petroleum production and then analyze the probability of those various levels of petroleum production. The days of powering your oxen with some acres of hay are long gone, takes quite a few calories of fossil fuels to generate each calorie of food.

Fossil water is another interesting concept. The east of the USA has more water than we know what to do with, we'll be OK, but the west currently lives off rapidly emptying aquifers, and once those are pumped dry, the population will revert to 1700s to 1800s levels, possibly a little lower. Farmable land minus aquifer irrigated land, will be an interesting math problem for our kids.

The roll forward of progress was heavily advertised and seems orderly. The roll back is going to be completely disorganized and chaotic.
Looking for a web developer for your MVP?
Hi,

I'm a full-stack ruby on rails developer with 5+ years real world experience building applications for the internet. If you're looking to build a startup and need a developer to build the MVP or create wireframes, all the way to launching it - I'd love to chat.

PM me or email me here venuezzdev@gmail.com, you can expect a response within a day.

Cheers!
A common basis for handling this is to discuss what maximises liberty for society as a whole.

If you make a widget manufacturing machine, and it doesn't use much resources, and others can make their own, then there's no reason for society to care that you have your own widget manufacturing machine. Public ownership of widget manufacturing can be done simpy by making another widget manufacturing machine. Liberty is maximized by cloning your machine rather than by seizing it: You get to keep yours; society still gets widgets.

If you make a widget manufacturing machine, and it requires significant use of shared resources - more than your fair personal share - or require more people to operate, then a society that wishes to maximise liberty for all will simply deny you more than your share of shared resources, and deny you access to other workers unless you share control over your widget manufacturing: You are using not just your resources, but the resources of others too, and maximising their liberty involves not handing control over that to you as an individual.

And this is the big gaping contradiction between anarchy and ancaps: Whether you can monopolise resources beyond some reasonable definition of "personal property".

Almost all societies put strict limits on private property because we recognise that enforcement of private property, while it may enhance the liberty of some, will deprive others of liberty. Some societies more than others. E.g. I've in the past brought up the Scandivian countries "freedom to roam" which guarantees extensive access rights to non-built-up private land on the basis that letting a land owner prevent people from walking through their forest, for example, is a massive limitation of liberty on the overall public and only provides very minor additional liberty for property owners in comparison (in Sweden such rights are part of the constitution; in Norway it wasn't legislated until the 50's or 60's because the principle was considered so self-evident it wasn't seen necessary to codify it in law)

So from my point of view, ancap is incredibly logically inconsistent: It wants to enforce property rights, but doesn't want the power structures (the state etc.) are have been emergent from strong property rights.
Okay, I don't like Rothbard, but here I go defending him. The context of that quote is important. It turns out that Rothbard was making the point that arguing over the etymology of these labels is not as important as arguing about actual policies. He concedes that historically those who label themselves "anarchists" have very different and mutually exclusive beliefs than anarcho-capitalists. But he also maintains that they are "without archons" because they oppose coercive rulers.

The entire paragraph of that essay:

> We must conclude that the question "are libertarians anarchists?" simply cannot be answered on etymological grounds. The vagueness of the term itself is such that the libertarian system would be considered anarchist by some people and archist by others. We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at opposite poles from our position. We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical. On the other hand, it is clear that we are not archists either: we do not believe in establishing a tyrannical central authority that will coerce the noninvasive as well as the invasive. Perhaps, then, we could call ourselves by a new name: nonarchist. Then, when, in the jousting of debate, the inevitable challenge "are you an anarchist?" is heard, we can, for perhaps the first and last time, find ourselves in the luxury of the "middle of the road" and say, "Sir, I am neither an anarchist nor an archist, but am squarely down the nonarchic middle of the road."

https://mises.org/library/are-libertarians-anarchists
This is ripe for a Chinese rip-off at those prices.
Considering this is recording (or at lest intercepting and processing in some form) audio in a place where most people have an expectation of privacy, I assume you have to inform the renter that this is on and monitoring....
JIRA is so customizable that it brings out the personality of a micro-manager, even in people who are usually not micro-managers. It's interesting to see how a tool used every day can shape thinking and behaviour patterns.
I don't think this is true? At least for small blinds. If you know your opponent is playing the percentages you could heighten your threshold.
I spent quite a few hours trying to set up Atlassian's dashboard called Atlasboard, it was pretty awful. It relies on git submodules for extensibility. All of the plugins I tried were horrible, both 3rd party ones and the 1st party Atlassian ones.
Android as a Desktop OS? A Look at Android Nougat’s Freeform Window Mode
In particular, with Trump saying that he wouldn't accept the results of the election if he lost, saying that there was foreign influence trying to tip the election could have been rather dangerous.
You CANNOT freely organize yourself in an communism.

This is because as soon as you start "freely organzing" a whole bunch of my property now apparently becomes "means of production" and gets siezed from me.

What if I and a group of other people want to organize and work together, in exchange for wages with fully voluntary other people?
Saving you a click: "Are they capable of conscious thought? Godfrey-Smith treks through some rather testing philosophical and psychological terrain to conclude in the negative. While cephalopods are capable of exceptional complexity in their signalling, the machinery of interpretation is too limited. Humans, perhaps uniquely, have gained the ability to step outside ourselves, to think about our thoughts by means of an unstoppable internal monologue."