skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Aren't you making two claims that are unrelated?

1. Learning a simple assembly makes learning a second assembly easier

2. Therefore, it's more efficient to learn a simple assembly first

The 2nd statement does not directly follow from the first, because the total time to learn two languages can still be greater than the time to learn the 2nd language alone, even if there is a synergistic effect. I'm assuming here that the simple assembly is not useful, and the goal is purely to learn the 2nd language.

Like, let's say learning a simple assembly makes learning the second language 35% easier. Then learning both languages is better only if the second language would normally take 3x more time to learn.

However, if every subsequent language is also easier to learn, and you intend to learn many more languages, then maybe starting from a simple language will actually be best.

Talking about x86 in particular, it's pretty easy to define a simple, teachable subset of x86 and then expand from there.
After a quick investigation, clang (3.9, x86-64) doesn't seem to suffer from the same problem:

https://godbolt.org/g/Uvo7iO
GEMSOS, KeyKOS, ASOS, LOCK, VAX VMM, INTEGRITY-178B, seL4, NOVA... all in the 4Kloc-50+Kloc range for a reason. All simpler, smaller, and easier to model than a full OS. Two survived pentesting by NSA with others during validation way better in defect rate or correctness case than most OS's.

Theo's quote is BS by the numbers and pentest results. Sandboxing done right is way more secure.
Uber Movement
With zero context your comment is without meaning. The only thing that separates it from a randomly generated markov chain is context.

Now, that does not mean the Author is infallible. But, discounting the authors intend is like ignoring a books sequels or even the second half of the text. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCeFbK-WEVE

In the end by discounting the author you are left with the lowest form of criticism, how did that make me feel. Which is not actually about the text, just the person writing.

Getting back to your phrase. Someone can assume line noise has meaning, but they are simply mistaken.
I have one. I wish it would still work with Netflix. :(

Sigh.
It seems like maybe we're already back at that point. We went from trusting the teachers and schools, to adopting a test that measures household income, to hoping that we can trust the teachers and schools to educate our kids in spite of the tests.
You're totally right, I don't know what I was reading >.<
> The percentage of conservatives has declined rapidly in recent decades. We haven't seen an increase in scientific productivity because of that. Science worked just as well back when there were more conservatives doing it.

Is there really data showing the proportion of scientists who are "conservative"? In what fields?
Acknowledging that a bogeyman exists as a bogeyman doesn't legitimize the belief that a bogeyman is real.
You are right. I've long forgotten about read() and write() compat with sockets for very good reason.
I don't lump an eventfd into the same IPC category as those mentioned in parent for the semantic(s) reason you mention and also for it's intended usage.
I'd argue that there's a third option: adoption.

There are children who have already been born, and are subject to the burden of existence.

Instead of creating new humans with the potential to suffer, help support and nurture those who already exist.
> This is not even remotely related to the goals and reasons for art, literature, and film, which exist for aesthetic enjoyment.

Aestehtics is decidedly NOT the goal and reason for art. At best it's the scheme by which art keeps getting funded, but art has always been inextricably linked with ethics, politics, and the human experience. Reducing all art to "things that are pretty" is... reductive.
try to contribute to a modern open-source C++ project on GitHub / BitBucket?
I don't think this is true. Significant numbers of liberals tend to be just as anti-science when it serves their agenda. Some examples: "Monsanto is evil", "GMO's are destroying our planet", GreenPeace (just in general), "geo-engineering is horrible", "nuclear is too dangerous", etc. If you count economics as a science, liberals tend to discount/avoid even the basic principles of that as well. Liberals just tend to have a few more prominent things on their agenda (primarily climate science related) than conservatives so it makes one side look less-uninformed than the other, when in reality they are both willfully ignorant.
> If half the population needs a reminder on why science is good I guess they'll get it.

I don't know if you looked at science lately, but the majority of the science published is actually not-that-great, if not bad. The public SHOULD distrust scientists - as well as most else.
Experts are increasingly politicized. News reports and political groups pick whoever will support (or sell out) their lies and delusions... credentials and background don't matter when consumers refuse to do their own research and hold the news accountable for the truth.
Minor thing: the country doesn't divide "50-50" into two groups. The people who vote divide into those groups. Once you expand to the population as a whole, it's more of a two-thirds "recognizable permutation of reality" to one-third "I don't even know" split. Important distinction. (Non-voters lean pretty heavily left. Getting them off their couches...is a challenge.)

But to the main thrust of your post, I've seen those characterizations of the left, too. I made those characterizations of the left. I was wrong then, and I was wrong precisely because I was evaluating the left positions based on postulates that were horseshit. Not that I would ever make criticisms based on those postulates, 'cause I knew those were loser arguments. It was not until I was able to broaden my horizons and learn a certain structural courage to challenge them that I realized that they were not just loser arguments because those principles were not well-shared but loser arguments because those principles were gross.

Even Reagan (who I view as kind of the beginning of this ideological rot in conservatism) was able to talk about fundamental principles of his conservatism. Whatever Trump's fundamental principles are, he speaks not to them. Nor does a Paul Ryan, for a more establishment conservative. My conclusion is that either those principles don't exist or they are repugnant enough that someone with savvy knows to run from them.

YM, of course, MV. You don't have to agree with me. But I believe, and believe strongly, that someone who does not have or does not speak to their principles, towards the points that orient their moral compass, knows that they are wrong.
Note the U.S. has survived 240 yrs including the existential crisis of the civil war as well as many lesser challenges. It's proven.

The EU has been around for a much shorter time but it is in crisis now as much as it would like to deny it.
There are countries with lots of conservative scientists. Usually, in those countries, the conservative parties don't deny science.
> Bounds checking and panicing are similar mitigation techniques and not an actual freedom from memory-born vulnerabilities

Absolutely. Bounds checking is a mitigation technique to avoid potential footgun when you want/have to use manual array indexing.

In most situations in Rust, you use iterators instead of array indexing. Those are the «actual freedom from memory-born vulnerabilities» and have no associated overhead. Since it is known at compile time that you are not going to access invalid memory, there is no need for bounds checking in this scenario.

Most of rust safety comes from clever compile time checks with no additional cost at runtime. The two main counter-examples I can think of are :

- bounds checking on manual array indexing

- usage of a secure hash function by default in HashMaps

The whole story about safe multi-threading and dangling pointers prevention is totally free performance-wise: everything is checked at compile time by the borrow checker.

> memory safety is still not going to make it free from vulnerabilities to accidental DoS attacks (not even talking about malicious users here!)

You're right, Rust doesn't solve all the problems at once. Is it a good reason to get rid of the benefits of solving the worst 50% of problems ?
> You've just called into question a race car driver's driving ability because you saw them not use their turn signal.

Note that I used the word "choice," indicating that I understood it to be a conscious decision rather than a lack of competence.

> Capitalization and punctuation shouldn't be your signals for quality in a comment on Chaucer and Shakespeare and literary history.

What makes you think I used them as exclusive signals? My claim wasn't that bad grammar made the parent post bad, it was that bad grammar had a negative contribution towards the overall credibility of the post.

> I'm demonstrating one natural outcome of your criticism...

Your reading comprehension might leave something to be desired, but the fact that a weak building may be built on a strong foundation does not imply that a strong building may have a weak foundation. To be clear: I am referring to your "example," not justifier's post, because I do not believe that justifier has a weak foundation, at least not with respect to grammar, which brings us back to the question of why.

Purposefully employing bad grammar in a post about English is a signal both that the writer holds strong and nontraditional opinions about English and that (s)he lacks the persuasive tact to fight one battle at a time. The way I see it, either quality alone could have led to a justified failing grade on an essay for reasons that have nothing to do with the veracity of its core claim.
Reminds of WR 104 [1] binary star system. When the two stars collide in the next 100 years there is a chance earth could be in the path of its gamma-ray bursts that can potentially end life on earth. The cool thing about it is that we won't know when it happens (already has happened because of limit of speed of light) until the gamma rays have reached earth which means there will be just a flash of light and then it's all over and it could happen anytime. Talk about existential thread to life. However, there isn't a very high likelihood of it happening though.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WR_104
Because pornhub stats are skewed towards services that ..ummm ... allow one handed use? Wouldn't that affect iPhone 7 vs 7+ numbers?
The difference is in the way the body acts - and the treatment is completely different for the two. I'm not a doctor, so do a bad job of explaining the difference between the two, but the general gist is that with physical addiction, your body needs the drug to function correctly.

People who want to live die from physical detox.

It isn't that psycological addiction doesn't have physical symptoms: Indeed, many psychological problems have them - anxiety and an upset stomach, depression and aches. Not to mention panic attacks. But the treatment isn't the same at all. You don't actually have to wean someone off of something psychologically addictive - that's why folks aren't weaned off of gambling, for example. And they won't die if they don't have it (suicidal is a different issue).

Pot generally has mild withdrawal symptoms. I'm pretty sure a few get in a bad situation with it - just like folks do with anything else - but underlying psychological problems kind of mess that stuff up.

Yeah, the sweating? Could be anxiety as well, for example. And to the layperson, it would seem like withdrawal symptoms instead of the anxiety coming back. Before his diagnosis, my ex would use about anything to get the voices inside his head to shut up. Friend of mine? Had a lot of trouble not smoking, but also was a bit... off. Brain damage from a car accident + a few psychological issues to boot. In all my years, I've never seen this sort of stuff from a reasonably balanced person.
Great comment. I will also add that the U.S.'s most Denmark-like places, California and New York, are also losing population relative to the least Denmark-like places, like Texas: http://time.com/80005/why-texas-is-our-future/. (There is a longer elaboration on this idea in Average is Over: https://jakeseliger.com/2013/09/13/thoughts-on-tyler-cowens-...) This is another story on or near the front page of HN at the moment: http://www.wsj.com/articles/uncomfortable-truths-behind-cali....

If most Americans are moving towards un-Denmark-like places and voting for un-Denmark-like politicians, I'm not sure how we are likely to be more like Denmark.

Still, I will say that the U.S. has important things the EU doesn't: Everyone speaks English and everyone identifies as "American" before they identify as "Texan" or "Seattlite." A common language goes a long way to creating solidarity among people.

EDIT: Let me add that I live in a Denmark-like place and am not in this comment trying to make a value judgment about one set of policies over another; I am trying to point out some factors that may be more revealing than personal preference, anecdote, or other virtue-signaling efforts.
https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/489f9l/open_source_pro...
I might point out that men are not totally fine. Men are imprisoned at a much higher rate than women, enter and complete college at a lower rate than women, and have a higher rate of successful suicide. Men also bear the vast majority of the tax burden and have few rights in family court. Men also live shorter lives than women.
An Overview of Previsualization (Previz) Software and Methods
Under what plausible circumstances would you consider DNA-based or chemistry-based computation to be a superior solution compared to silicon-based computation?
I've seen plenty of research saying the Republican Party has moved far to the right.

Personally, having talked to people who are Trump supporters and fellow travelers, my experience matches the GP. It's an ideological movement: ideology - not facts, democracy, national welfare, global welfare, humanitarianism, morality or other normal considerations - seems to predict what they support: Climate change denial, Trump, racial and religious discrimination, etc.
It's too bad that you can't voice the opinion that unity is a good thing without getting downvoted or criticized.
Interesting claims, but what are they based on?
Of course. But please be aware, now that I've crossed from one side to the other, parents are getting an increasing amount of flack from the child-free folks. More than once I've been told how irresponsible and selfish I am for having children.

So it goes both ways. Like with many movements, it probably started out with pure intentions and a legitimate grievance, but then it became tribal like every other facet of human society.
that is correct. just a goof.
A proxy won't mingle with the User-Agent header, or with the tracking JS that runs in the browser.
Uber debuts Movement, a new website offering access to its traffic data
Santa Delivered the Drone. But Not the Safety and Skill to Fly Them
Sign-in.. no thanks
> a significant number

[citation needed]
>But why should I be surprised that the right-leaning half of the US voted for the Republican candidate?

Because the Republican candidate deeply disagreed with most Republican ideas. For instance, he openly wants his government to "pick winners" in the marketplace and has repeatedly said he won't cut Social Security.

For the Party to fall in behind him on personality alone, while he speaks one heresy after another against their purported ideology, shows that they no longer have an ideology they preach in good-faith. They've become a bad-faith party, distinct from conservative parties in other countries, who just seek power, connections, and wealth for themselves, and say whatever's necessary to get it.
Use constexpr: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/constexpr

You can't make sum constexpr in this case, though, since it calls a non-constexpr function, accumulate.
> What if, for whatever reason, ethnic group A subsidizes B's existence?

If we were to divide up the country into the subsidizers and the subsidized (whatever that means), why must we pick ethnicity as the dividing feature?

Or, to put the question differently, if America were ethnically homogeneous, would it follow that there wouldn't be a taker/maker split to "damage social cohesion"?

To give an example of a different dividing criterion, how about the disparity between federal tax revenue and federal spending per state? Taxpayers in "red" states get a 4.0 percentage point better return on investment in federal taxes than "blue" states [0]. If one were to accept your claim that "identifiable groups with different socioeconomic contributions" (a condition states surely satisfy!) make welfare impossible, one would have to conclude that the American welfare state is broken because it has states!

[0] https://wallethub.com/edu/state-taxpayer-roi-report/3283/
You'll need 100s of areas if you want to minimise your local storage usage, and micro-managing that would be a PITA. GM announces 'up to 1750mb' to download the part of my country I traveled to in the last month, it's a non-starter.

Compare that to the 179mb/113mb that I need with OSMAnd/Maps.me for the whole country without fiddling. Add to that the fact that OSM's data is significantly better than Google Map's for my country (YMMV) and that there's no such thing as "offline mode not available in some regions" with OSM.
I've been using pivpn[0] for about a year now (first on a raspi, and now on ubuntu 16.04 server). Wraps all the basic commands like client cert gen and revocation. Many sensible defaults.

[0] https://github.com/pivpn/pivpn
My quess would be that Uber use it as a carrot for cities. Let Uber operate and we will give city official data and city planning tools for free.
I think the point of the empirical arbiter is an interesting one. My second paragraph can indeed be used as an argument for the absence of one in philosophy.

But where is such an arbiter in science? After all, science is inductive, not deductive. It can give you lots of good reasons and evidence to believe a theory, but the principle of falsifiability requires that a counterexample
must plausibly exist.

If either philosophical or scientific experiments were to reach an unfalsifiable conclusion, I think we would have a serious problem on our hands.
> I know what you will say. "Just live in the city and use a bike to get to work, faster and costs nothing! (apart from the bike)".

Well I'd actually not say that, because I'm not really saying "kill all the cars". What I'm saying is that "in most cases most probably public transport is equivalent to if not better than autonomous vehicles, so the effort and the risks are not worth them". I live in Istanbul and my school and my home are 30-20 kilometers apart on a straight line. When there's no traffic it'd take ~30 minutes to drive there, and at my usual times it'd take 1-2 hours with traffic. Via public transport it's 30min fixed + 5-10min walking. And in that time I can have my morning coffee from my thermos flask and eat a simit, and I don't need to be alert at all (I'd probably be dead by now if I drove in the mornings).

So TL;DR: for me, I'm perfectly fine w/ your commute, I just say that self-driving is not really a necessary and fruitful burden, however cool it may be, in solving traffic jams and traffic safety problems.
Notice I said "typically" because, typically it is true that a native language runs faster than Clojure, which is what my comment was referring to.
An interesting source of data on this point is scientific fraud. Let's take a look at scientific work which has been proven to be fake. That tells us what scientists would like to publish to advance their careers, without regard to whether it's true or not. Thus any bias in faked research is evidence for political bias in science beyond what is justified by the truth.

A good place to start is with the name Diederik Stapel in social psychology.
at least I don't have to run 300 lines of powershell to remove telemetry and candy crush soda saga from my brand new computer

checkmate
"Skewed" is a weird word to use there.
Oh wow, I never knew about that. Thanks!
I've taken a screenshot of this exchange and posted it to my weblog:

http://www.smashcompany.com/philosophy/where-is-there-misogy...

The next time someone asks "Where is there misogyny on Hacker News?" I'll point to this.
Or stop caring so much that someone frowned at us.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13251451

i also avoid negative constructions.. look through my comment history

you will find it is completely devoid, except now for this comment, of any instances of using: no, not, never, none

do you think plato lacks credibility? have you ever read classics(o) in their original languages? theywereflippantinevenusingspacesbetweenwords(i)

i would ask that if you care to develop an opinion as to my credibility that it be based on my content rather than if i can correctly utilise a ruleset someone else created that i disagree with

but i can respect that some people are unwilling to do so

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classics

(i) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptio_continua
Follow the "web" link under the submission title and then the appropriate link in the subsequent search results. You may want to use an incognito window.
EU law has very limited affect on PTO, wages and healthcare, in fact there is little to none.

If the EU attempted to mandate wages and PTO it would be the end of the EU, you can't have the same wage in Estonia as you have in Germany or Norway or Denmark.

There is no pan European legislation on any of the subjects you mentioned really besides privacy and human rights, and as far as human rights goes countries do have exemptions ;)

Denmark for example opted out of the following EU principals: security and defence, citizenship and police and justice, as well as the Euroblock.

This means that Denmark does not fully participates in the AFJS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_of_freedom,_security_and_...

The only real financial EU laws/policies are those for the Euroblock and a few that were defined in the Maastricht treaty and those in general are very vague like a country should not have a higher inflation by X% for 3 consecutive years than the average of the 3 worst performing members of the union and other such nonsense that isn't really acted upon when the shit hits the fan...
> The situation in the clinical biotech companies I worked at was never that bad because of HIPPA compliance and more focus on networked services like lab databases but still atrocious.

I can attest that academic biotech labs are still pretty atrocious, for the reasons you mention.

Windows XP (or super old OS X installs, pre 10.5) are pretty common on non-networked machines that function as appliances.
It's not uncommon to hear about a machine controlling a $X00,000 device being compromised by malware that road in on a USB drive, despite the air gapping.

Sometimes I feel that it would be better for vendors to use a super minimal Linux distribution for each of these workstations that basically function as an appliance. Not only could the vendor reduce the attack surface for any potential malware exposure, but the one-off nature of the distro and small overall number of workstations would provide a minimal incentive for malware authors to target.
That's because there are still a lot of XP users in SE Asia, and particularly in China.

Netmarketshare doesn't divulge country numbers unless you are a paying customer.

Netmarketshare also "balances" its numbers, so the results could vary a lot according to how much weight it gives to China.