skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
IMHO it's a wrong approach. Every programming language, just like the spoken ones, has it's common shortcuts and idioms. The fact that they're commonly accepted and used is what makes them easy to understand. Your brain learns to recognize them quickly, often much quicker then the long version. With newbies and programmers who switched from other languages problem is that their brain is just not yet trained to do that efficiently. Instead of investing some time into getting used to the peculiarities of the language that they use, they then try to avoid them as "complicated". By lowering a bar too low, and avoiding using these patterns all together, you encourage people to never train their brains to recognize them effortlessly. And by definition of common patterns, they're, well, common, and they'll keep running into them all of the time. Also keep in mind that you're probably bothering others, more skilful ones, with unnecessarily verbose code which is to them harder to quickly scan through.

I'm not saying that one should go crazy with one-liners or uncommon patterns, but things like ternary operators used with reasonably short expressions in a single line of code are totally valid and should be readable to any average dev out there.
If you claim it's "incompetence" (it's not) then publish the patches that don't break anything but significantly speed up it, for example. Because you complain "it' slow."

It's not what you think it is. It's Python, not a toy language used by nobody. Just first try yourself to "fix" Python and keep its existing users happy by not breaking anything for them, then write about it.
Honestly 5 seconds is an eternity when it comes to modern processors. I'm not convinced that it's a norm and I'm still wondering, what really happens, where that time goes?

"initialising an entire message queue broker, an entire relational database and an entire web server" is just abstract words. Initialization of an entire web server is creating a socket and binding it to 80 port, that's what should be done, but what else happens? Initializing a relational database is something like opening a file. May be read journal, rollback unfinished transaction, but those things could be done after initialization.

I use Java and I'm always trying to improve startup time. Last time I used undertow for tiny project, with jdbc to access remote database. Project started in mere milliseconds and it was much easier to iterate. But every time I enable something monstrous like servlets, hibernate, spring or, save god, java ee, it's always 30+ seconds start time. And I always wondered, why that's happens? I can serve millions of customers in those 30 seconds, I can read gigabytes of data from my HDD and parse millions of XMLs.
>but claiming solutions could exist without breaking back-compat is just not right.

I mean, you have a good point on C extensions but code relying on them (without a really portable API) is almost never going to be forward compatible anyway. (There are still quite a few C extensions not up to CPython 3 yet.)
No, they are not referred to as insects in (correct) English either, they are arachnids - though sometimes people do not make the distinction.

To refer to both insects and spiders & similar in one term you could use the (rather less formal) terms "bugs" or "creepy crawlies". I can 't think of anything more formal off the top of my head.
And the current source of electricity that runs HN is most probably fossil fuels. Does it make HN "petro-website"? It's clearly a derogatory term that serves no constructive purpose. I believe we should strive for zero-emission hydrogen production (which is clearly possible given that hydrogen can be easily used to utilize excessive production from "green" sources) instead of pushing luddite worldview.
> But of course, that's not going to happen.

A few years ago, I'd have agreed with you. I used to be a card-carrying Microsoft hater for many years. And I still agree that the chances of that hapening are small, but given Microsofts changes over the last few years and the stream of open source releases, who knows any more...
> We are far safer with governments and central banks that are accountable to us to varying degrees

Ah, but there's the rub. How accountable are they, really? In the software industry, you find out that if "everyone" is responsible for something, then all too often, no one is. And even if they are accountable to people in general, what happens when they fail individuals? Like this guy who had £440,000 of lawsuit-settlement money seized by Barclays on money-laundering suspicions:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jan/22/barclays-took-...
I am not sure how is that supposed to work. If someone steals or cheats and then launders the money into Bitcoin or whatever, should he have the right to keep it? Presumably, no. That would mean that right itself would depend on the legality of the process with which the wealth was obtained, and that's kinda circular.

I could however imagine supporting right to control your wealth up to the point of the average wealth of a human being on the planet. That would be within the spirit of human equality and universality of human rights.

And in practice, I wish I had at least a right to count my money in public, and publish my salary (without annoying my employer).
Now is a good time as any.

If only now you become worried about politicians lying, boy do I have bad news for you.
I'm saying the political system is far to tribalistic. We all fall for tribalism but it seems to have become way to set in lately.
from asyncio import wait, gather, get_event_loop
from aiohttp import web

async my_handler(request):
handle1 = call_webservice_1(args)
handle2 = call_webservice_2(args)
handle3 = call_webservice_3(args)

await wait(gather(handle1, handle2, handle3), 500)

return web.Response({'finished': True})

app = web.Application()
app.router.add_route('GET', '/test/', my_handler)

loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
server = loop.create_server(app.make_handler())
loop.run_until_complete(server)

Done. Not flask, but if you need to make lots of parallel network calls during a web request why the hell are you using flask?
could someone explain to me why

>>> ranges = [range(i) for i in range(5)]
>>> [*item for item in ranges]
[0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2, 3]

would be better than:

>>> ranges = [range(i) for i in range(5)]
>>> [item for subrange in ranges for item in subrange]
[0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2, 3]
We have a dedicated abuse monitoring team who work on mechanisms to control misuse of our system thereby reducing the chances of our sending IP getting blacklisted. In addition, we recommend users to configure proper SPF & DKIM records for better delivery of their outgoing mails.

Could you please describe the specific issue that you faced along with the complete bounce message or screen shot, by writing an email to support@zohomail.com. This will help us to investigate further. Thanks. ^SP
Those three things are not equal. Life is more important than liberty. Liberty is more important than property.
Cool, I think you completely dodged the point. I never said it was slow because they were incompetent.
Not at all. As a scientist I say we must fight for uncertainty.

The word "fact" has no place in science.
I think 1984 painted a scary, but important fictional picture of what life behind the iron curtain was like, several similar books attempted to deal with the issues of 20th century life in similar fashion, but I think it should be recognized that much of this is no longer as applicable to the discussion we should be having -- the post modern situation has become way more subtle in its presence, despite the loud and brash way it's presented.

An interesting book I read recently about a relatable topic is home the book Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible by Peter Pomerantsev, about early 2000s Russia and the oil boom years, the role of the media, young money, memetic content created by the media and the way all of that affects population, it's scary and some of it kind of can be seen reflecting back on today's western society as well.

I just wish (and was secretly hoping for) that media and oppositional politics recognized the role they played in this fiasco and tried to change their behaviour up to try and change it. I seem to be wrong, sadly.

We're jumping from one nice sounding headline to the next one (like this one!) and we're ignoring much of the actual discussion we should be having, because this is more convenient. It kind of hurts to a large majority being aware of the issues and then just pressing on, choosing to ignore it, because it's more convenient to share a dumb meme about numbers, complain about alternative facts or to watch SNL.

I wouldn't say that this is the end of the leading role of western civilisation in the world (I am not smart enough to make such statements), but it really seems to me that we are opening up our weaknesses to foreign powers that will try hard to exploit them and it's a pretty damaging process.

/rant
Has anyone else noticed the disturbing parallel between Trump's "Alternative facts" and the famous Nixon-era press office claim that "Previous statements are inoperative"?
WW1 was a stalemate, it was only really ended by strike action and mutiny within Germany. Hence dolchstosslegende.
> But is that such a bad thing?

Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting
I'll agree with that. We discuss membership in groups, not ideas. It's signalling and dog whistles all the way down.
Ah, the GORILLAS.BAS world...
git uses semver i think
مقاول كهرباء الكويت 55973501
It's surprising he got away with the term "webmasters".
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=roll+nine+hundred+thousand+dice

Still waiting on my answer :(
Opinions may differ, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_liberty,_or_give_me_de...!
I like this list a lot. I also find myself raging at awful lambda and the lack of switch. No, it wouldn't make the language any less "pythonic" to make them useful.
> most fertilizers are composed of chemicals derived from petroleum

Can you please elaborate further? Yep, in a lot of cases hydrogen for ammonia comes from natural gas. Nope, it doesn't have to be, in fact you can easily get it from water. What other "chemicals" do you have in mind?

> because these techniques are extremely modern

They are, but the concept of "not dying of famine" is also pretty modern if you consider an overall population.

> The problem with fertilizers… killing local ecosystem of bacteria and insects

I believe you confuse fertilizers with pesticides.
We had 'core' promises and 'non-core' promises here in Australia. How politicians use language is quite instructive.
Which is bad for developer centric product design but what about user centric product design?

Honestly feel like I'm back in the IE era at times as I go over to devs and point out something isn't working only to be told "try it in Chrome".

Only difference between the IE era and the Chrome era is the self satisfied grin that they're on the cutting edge when something only works in Chrome.
In other words: Who knows, because we don't know what Trumps foreign policy will be tomorrow. And every day will be like that.
If you're starving and working in a toxic garbage dump, how does a smart phone or cell phone improve the situation? Honest question.

If the government is corrupt, and steal infact money from citizenss, is a cell phone going to put food on your table? It could actually be used against a population. Think mass surveillance, censorship or false news for example.

Also, the OP said the "poorest", from my own observations the "poorest" will not have money for cellphones, electricity or credit. You might be referring to less wealthy people than you, but the poorest?

Look at all the tech available in the US and 50 million still go hungry [1].

I believe amongst technologsits there is a false view that technology "just makes things better". The reality is technology is a tool and it has to be used for the right applications by those of us with good intentions. Modern technology offers potential, it's not always essential.

[1] http://indiafacts.org/americas-most-desperate-why-are-50-mil...
My favourite: https://www.google.com/search?q=metronome
Teach hygiene to children to reduce antimicrobial resistance
Python's semantics are unlikely to ever be fast and most Python users have already worked around its speed issues.

asyncio is new; python3 porting is happening. It seems unfair to complain that no real improvements are being made and also complain that these new things are immature.

reduce being pushed behind an import is stupid, but it's only one import.

lambda is fine, if you're writing in functional style you're using expressions for everything anyway. And you will probably be more persuasive if you can make your points less offensively.

For "bag of data" classes look at attrs.

(All that said, having found Scala I don't miss Python at all. (Except when writing a desktop GUI - PyQt was really nice))
Slightly off topic, but I'd be interested while I have the VPN people here to hear opinions about Softether. I've been using it for a while and like it. But I can't get much independent information about it from a security point of view.
~7000 elements per compound eye according to this page:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/brookfieldfarmhoney.wordpress...
> "- solving some of the issues would exacerbate backwards compatibility."

That boat sailed a long time ago with the introduction of Python 3.

(Ok, Ok my comment is slightly tongue-in-cheek. I agree that backwards compatibility is usually a good idea and should not be broken without a great deal of thought.)
The reasoning from MS perspective is probably that it switches the browser choice because they believe it is the best browser on Windows and the users' decision to switch was simply an incorrect one.
The problem with personal VPN services is that it can be pretty trivial to reverse who the traffic is coming from (eg by requesting the billing address from the VM hosting provider).

This may not be an issue for some people and for those who it is an issue, there are ways around it (I'll leave that part of the post for someone more experienced than I as I don't want to risk giving out bad advice). But it's worth baring in mind when signing up for a VPS in view of running a VPN.
[meta] That's what movio is about, n'est ce pas? [/meta]
>lambda is fine, if you're writing in functional style you're using expressions for everything anyway.

No, I /really would/ like to be able to write:

foo.on_click(lambda: x += 1)

The language not supporting this (when most others do) is just silly.
Most human beings don't have any wealth - or it's negative!
> ... doesn't that at a certain point put it on the same level?

I don't think so, no.

Basic human rights are something that we agree shouldn't be taken away, from anyone, even from prisoners.

Control of wealth is not one of those things, I don't think. There are times when it's fair for your country to take your money from you against your will. There are times when it's fair for your country to audit or freeze your finances against your will, or simply stop you accessing them.

Is control of money & access to the economy important? Sure. It's important enough to be in the Geneva Convention, prisoners of war are expected to be paid, and have access to a shop.

Is it a basic human right? I don't think so.
Introductory Number Theory and Abstract Algebra for Computer Science
Ajman Free Zone
It is a statement which is de jure incorrect but de facto correct.

The timelines were completely unrealistic from a logistical standpoint. India is not yet at a stage where poor people can make their day-to-day transactions with debit cards instead of cash. Being able to deposit their savings in time by the deadline is a pointless irrelevancy if the bank cannot give them enough valid currency in return for their daily needs.

One needs only look at the downturn in India's recent economic figures to see the macro results.
Of course. You can't control the narrative without controlling "the facts".
>doesn't that at a certain point put it on the same level?

No, it's only a prerequisite as a result of the existing economic model. Human rights should transcend that.

I think capitalism is mostly effective at producing good outcomes, and as such it should be supported in as far as it does. But the important thing is the outcomes, not the capitalism.
this whole story is a liberal circle jerk
This is a perfect example of why downvoting shouldn't exist. None of the things you think you saw in the OPs comment are there. He is expressing an opinion that is widely held, here is a good essay on the habit of anti-Trump people of crying wolf:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-wolf/

Trump's spat over crowd sizes is stupid, but reflects someone terminally thin-skinned rather than a cunning well thought out attempt at mind control.

Meanwhile, those of us who have read it will remember that 1984 dwells on hard-left totalitarianism and its habit of doing things like censorship, the desire for unitary thinking, interfering with disagreement by controlling the language and so on.

Your comment doesn't actually rebut anything about what the OP said, but does try to lower the visibility of his views (suppressing speech) and does attack an entire class of speech on the grounds of "divisiveness" and "destructiveness" (unitary thinking).

Trump is many things but hard-left is not one of them. Stupid phrasing today by his press guy aside, Trump's path to victory was built on a repudiation of 1984 style tactics:

• Language control: political correctness, where words and phrases are redefined or suppressed through taboo

• The 5-minutes hate: the establishment against Russia

• Loyalty to the party: in our world the closest equivalent to a vast unaccountable power structure would be called "Washington" or "the elite".

The parallels aren't perfect by any means; Trump loves surveillance just like Democrats do.
You should be able to share data in Erlang's model, because the data are immutable. You just can't modified the shared data.
I've never ever seen a "Don't ask again" option in the ios apps i use. And therefor i also leave 1 star ratings once in a while for apps that keep annoying me with this question (and interrupting my workflow.)

i think it's the only effective thing i can do, the message is: stop wasting my time
Lucky bunch indeed. I'm 9 months in and still missing map(), flatMap(), let alone more advanced FP.
I guess this is a matter of personal preference, but I definitely consider:

users.filter(_.active).map(_.email)

to be easier to read (and not a pain in the ass to type) than:

emails := make([]string, 0)
for _, u := range users {
if u.active {
emails = append(emails, u.email)
}
}
return email

The first style is more explicit about what you want to do, the second style is more explicit about how you want to do it. Go made imperative vogue again, but for me it feels like a throwback all the way to Turbo Pascal. Sure, the Go compiler is really fast, but Turbo Pascal would beat it hands down - on 20Mhz machines with 1MB of RAM.
Sure, and one day the JVM will get TCO just as it's getting value types (which is perhaps an even bigger current shortcoming), but that is a small price to pay for the ecosystem.
Shark Attacks vs. Plane Parts
Here's a thoughtful critique of asyncio, posted some time ago on Hacker News: http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2016/10/30/i-dont-understand-asyncio...

Yes, attrs seems like a good solution for plain-old-data classes. https://attrs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
> I feel kotlin is a bit undervalue. It is a great modern language which can replace java completely.

It doesn't offer a compelling advantage. "Slightly cleaned-up Java with a bit of syntax sugar" is not enough to justify having to make all your tooling (IDEs, profilers, monitoring, code coverage ...) support a new language. And if you are going to make all that effort, why would you not pick a language that offers some genuine killer features in return, like Scala or Ceylon? And it's got a lot of special cases, a lot of stuff in the language that should just be libraries, that I think will make it hard to maintain in the long run (the "CoffeeScript of Java" line is probably fair). If anything it seems overhyped to me.
The Stasi were simply a recreation/extension of Soviet secret police tactics.
Imperva's annual Bot Traffic Report – 1/2 of traffic are bots
No, without shelter you are homeless. If money is for some reason absolutely necessary to acquire shelter in a particular society (which I don't think it is), then it is implied by a right to shelter.
ADVANCED ANGULAR 2 APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP
I remember being able to look up who was in your class. Facebook was so much more enjoyable when it was just university students, it was more fun, playful, and I guess innocent.

Since facebook expanded outside of universities its become more generic, and corporate and lost its "joie de vivre"
Less verbose.

Also, what happens if you have even more nested lists you want to flatten?

Personally I think it should just be

flatten(range(i) or i in range(5))

With flatten in the global namespace
The issue is that you can quite easily imagine a society where everyone is guaranteed shelter, food, and water by the social structure, and money might be used primarily for luxuries. Money-as-a-right wouldn't necessarily make sense in such a society.

It exists in classical liberal societies because liberalism doesn't really have a consistent concept of positive duties, either on the individual or the societal whole. But there's definitely other forms of political thought, liberalism is just seductive because it claims to arise from the natural state of things.
It's not so much the startup time (which is ~60ms), but warmup time. Assuming you're using a JITting JVM, it's compiling. There's now work on AOT compilation in HotSpot (and some JVMs already have it), but it really doesn't matter for big, long-running server apps, which are currently HotSpot's forté.
>Why is it such a problem to move your closure to its own line and give it a name?

What if it cannot have a meaningful name? You don't give a name to every single value in your program, why would first-class functions be any different? Like, there's an idiom in python where you write a function named "wrapper" in a decorator and then return wrapper. Except you put @wraps on it, so the name of this function isn't even "wrapper" anymore. So what was the point of naming it "wrapper" when you could just do ```return wraps(lambda ...)``` if lambda wasn't so underpowered.
Speaking of wealth in this context, I want to have inalienable right of not owning any wealth, because very idea of owning anything harms spiritual progress.
Troubling examples of ‘pseudoscience’ at the Cleveland Clinic
Show HN: English - Polish Dictionary with Prefix-Tree Structure
I found the Go solution for that issue a bit odd - channels aren't for data processing, they're synchronisation primitives. Using them the way they did in the article ruined the piece for me, since it reads like a rather uninformed decision now.