skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"He's not politically correct."

It's as if people who rage against political correctness don't understand what it means. It means showing respect and being polite and not using pejoratives. That's all.
Paul Graham's "Keep Your Identity Small" (2009) article is relevant here:

http://paulgraham.com/identity.html
You could also use their Levenshtein distances.
There are fringe wackos on both sides, but only one of the sides had a fringe wacko as a candidate.
Can you state concretely what the third option is that you think he is obligated to do?
Yep, I've used it.

I have to make sure each of the tools is setup to use it, and I have to move the source repos from code to Nexus config, and it doesn't help if anyone does something non-standard, e.g. last I checked installing Angular involved an ad-hoc Github download.

HTTPS_PROXY gets virtually everything in one go.
You're missing the point. Sure, you should make it fil gracefully on unexpected input. But Google shouldn't change APIs in a way hat causes 3rd party apps to fail at all.
We are unwelcoming to people who are factually wrong. If you deny science, basic human rights, if you lack compassion for people who come from less fortunate countries, if you feel you're entitled to things others are not, then yes, I can proudly say silicon valley as well as other liberal enclaves are very unwelcoming to such people.

Lastly, we do not, and will not welcome anyone who elects a man like trump just to threaten others into submission.
I still still still, for the life of me, don't understand why a large number of people have labelled Hillary "corrupt". Someone please explain?

(am I naive to believe that having a private email server wasn't much of an offense, she was just doing her job in the Benghazi case, and that the Clinton Foundation has only ever meant to do good?)
May be that's because left wing areas are indeed safe space to express views. I dare not put a pro-choice bumper sticker in a deep red state.
Speaking as someone who's done these interviews (but was never, for the record, asked about anything other than coding/algorithms): I think the core premise is flawed. The idea that a good developer is somebody who can regurgitate knowledge they learned on Wikipedia in a few hours from memory is just not a good base for determining if the engineer is good. More importantly, a developer who cannot regurgitate the knowledge from memory is not necessarily a bad developer, or, frankly, in any way otherwise distinguishable from the guy who can.
Conjecture: the majority (by far, probably on the order of 75%-80% or more) of programming and engineering problems to be solved in a typical company or typical application will not see significant differences in performance by selecting a naive implementation.

True. And people who clutter their code by using some fancy "StringStream" class when they could've just used a concatenation are also part of the problem!

Saying that programmers don't need a basic knowledge of algorithms is like saying drivers don't need to know how to back up a trailer or do a 3 point turn. Over 90% of the time, you don't need it. But when you do, you really do!
So facebook can just say - curation is useful. We'll offer a variety of curation algorithms, for each citizen to choose it's own, and call it a day.

The only question is whether this would impact facebook's appeal and competitive advantage, but intuitively , it doesn't seem so.
Liberalism is deterministic in so far as it's required for a civil society.

Disagree all you want, but liberal concessions are the result of mass civil rights movements.
I moved to San Francisco from a rural town, and I would feel 10x more comfortable sharing my liberal viewpoints in a small, deeply-red town than I would insinuating something anything less than 100% left-leaning at work here. People disagree in small town Utah, and it would be uncomfortable. In San Francisco you're ostracized. It even makes me nervous to leave my name attached to a comment like this, knowing that my co-workers browse HN and will see it.
I haven't worked at any of these companies so I wouldn't know how often they're performing these computations. My conjecture is broad, of course, and a statistical suggestion at that: it seems unobjectionable to claim that for some companies the "typical application" lives in the 20%-25% "outlier" region most of the time.
I'd say it's the natural reaction to extremes like this on college campuses:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1S3yMzEee18
The underlying issue is that while decentralization makes one more stable and less susceptible to unexpected crises in the long term, centralization is almost always stronger and more efficient in the short term. Diverse food supplies, separate cultures, multiple governments may be necessary for long term human survival, but historically, the monoculture gobbled those up as soon as it has the technology. That, and you could argue that for some problems, large scale cooperation is always going to be needed, and these problems could surface on the very, very long term; i.e., a decentralized world might be antifragile for most problems, but if a meteor hits the Earth, you'd wish it had been coordinated enough to colonize Mars.

The question is how we maintain decentralization even as all short-term goals push us towards monoculture, and without completely destroying the long-term benefits of large civilization (i.e., I'm not an anarcho-primitivist.) And the only answers I can think of are bizarre and science-fictional, but I suppose that doesn't mean they can't come true.
I've never understood the fear of the left taking away the second amendment. All my coastal elite progressive friends enjoy going to shooting ranges and at worst want thorough background checks and possibly a ban on high capacity magazines.

Post-Trump, many progressive people of color are arming themselves out of fear of white nationalists. None of them want a gun ban.
Python 3 – Unpacking Generalizations
Technically, there were also the Anti-Federalist papers - and together, they were a public debate over what the new Democratic Constitutional Republic (more or less) should look like.

Also, yes, they were trying to garner support and interest. Probably.
FreeNAS via rsync to an old leftover ReadyNAS Duo with mirroring.

FreeNAS ui makes this super simple from that end, and, despite being pitifully out of date, the ReadyNAS supports rsync to the extent that I need.
And what if life isn't as black and white as you seem to believe it is?
I'm one of the few people I know who is an enthusiastic supporter of Hillary. I like her because of her track record on children's issues, 9-11 and the Iran deal (among others). I'm also conservative so I like that the last time she lived at 1400 Pensilvania Ave the government was running a surplus.
That's a different issue. The commenter is referring to keys that can take on null.

This style guide entry suggests a course of action in the event that one of these keys currently has a null value.

The style guide isn't prohibiting nullable keys.
>> Don't those widespread calls fall under the callers' freedom of speech? Why shouldn't they be able to call for Thiel's ouster?

For one because he's got his own free speech rights. But more importantly the parent poster was holding him up as an example of why people tend not to stand up for their opinion when it is not popular. Even a popular silicon valley figure was ostracized for supporting the "wrong" candidate among his peer group. That backlash is exactly what people are afraid of.
How Facebook Is Fighting Terrorism with Artificial Intelligence
There's substantial data backing up a lack of support for Trump, and for Republicans generally, for all of those categories to different degrees. And usually for fairly obvious reasons.

Are you unaware of this, or does acknowledging it just make you uncomfortable?
I remember reading an article talking about how people were throwing similar aspersions at Bush and other Republicans in the past decade that when the actual Nazis came along we wouldn't be able to convince people because the word has been bandied about too casually against people who were likely not Nazis in the past.
> What do you guys think?

I think this is nothing new. US mentality has been going very sharply that way for years; two sides of a coin becoming more and more extreme and caring more about hating the other side than about what's good for the country.

People bending over and accepting absurd things from their presidents, or politicians in general, just because they're "on my team".

Roll back a few years. How is it okay that the US ever allowed attack ads between politicians? Presidential election campaigns spanning over a year? "Reelection" campaigns starting a year or two into office?

How is it okay that your politicians can sweep atrocious bills under the rug by giving them fancy names like PATRIOT? In fact, how is patriotism so often used as an excuse - why is it even working?

The US turned politics into a team game. Us vs. them. American politicians have been using the "you're either with us or against us" rhetoric for decades; it then only makes sense that opposition becomes "the enemy".

So yes, I completely agree, it's shameful that people on both sides feel superior to the other. It's shameful that people are unable to recognize they flaw because, god forbid, should they start to think that "their team" has flaws then they'll end up in the other team, and the other team is even worse, yknow?

I could write more about this but I feel like it'll fall either on deaf ears, or on ears that already know this. The election has been a constant feeling of helplessness against a wave of knee-jerk reactions from a majority of people unwilling to hear the other side out. And this happens on both sides. How do you even begin to fix this, when the attitude is "yeah, but the other guys are doing it too"?
It's important to not confuse liberals with leftists. My liberal friends have remained (for the most part) fairly objective and open to dialogue. My friends who identify as leftists...not so much.
Not sure why you are being downvoted... That was very clear for me as I was reading through the answers and the definition for "white fragility" seens to fit well with the case.
Shitposting -> Top insights
> a) compromise and appeasement of evil is wrong, if trump and his supporters act like nazis then call them that

Calling a Nazi a Nazi is one thing, but do you honestly believe that nearly 50% of American voters are Nazis, Nazi sympathizers, or have Nazi-like views?

I don't. I think nearly 50% of voters thought that, in balance, Trump was a better choice than Hillary.

If all Trump supporters are Nazis, then presumably all Hillary supporters believe that one should unashamedly lie rather than admitting that one made a mistake. Both of these conclusions seem equally false to me.
Scandal and Controversy
“It's a lot like political discussion was in Soviet Union, actually. I think the inability to acknowledge obvious truths, and the ever-increasing scope of these restrictions makes it particularly frustrating. And personally, for whatever reason, I find inability to have more subtle discussion very frustrating--things are not white or black, but you can't talk about greys since the politically correct answer is white.”

I wonder if this person realizes the irony of voting for Trump to increase subtle, political discourse.

Assuming that this person is talking about political discussion in the mainstream media (which is where this form of criticism is traditionally targeted), I don't think this person is accurate. The mainstream media encompasses a spectrum from Nytimes, Reason, the Economist to Fox News and Breitbart. To suggest that there's a monolithic 'discourse' out there is false. The fact that this person supported Trump suggests to me that they are less interested in subtle, political discourse, and more interested in having their 'side' be represented with less critique.
> "Have you ever thought about how what you said will impact [minority group]?" will work much better.

To summarize: PC phrasing works better among people who voted for the anti-PC guy? I'm not disagreeing with your thesis, just pointing out that it's not obvious that it should be the case.
Wow, those VPS are really cheap for the amount of storage - what are the upload speeds like?
I've been thinking about it for a while to try to transition from a mechanical engineer to a software engineer but are all the interviews as miserable as HN makes it seem? I feel like these interview structure is a form of deterrent. I had a quick call with one of the recruiters from Apple for a hardware engineer position. He said the interview will take about a week and needs about a month to prepare... I didn't call back because it doesn't even seem reasonable to me.

I've interviewed many times (mechanical engineering positions) for big companies (10K employees+) to small (<50 employees) and they're usually a one day remote and one day on-site interview. There would be a couple of technical questions and some technical discussions but nothing like, solve this Navier-Stokes equation for creep flow from your memory. I don't think any competent manager would even ask that to me.
Third party apps wouldn't fail if they were correct in the first place. Failing gracefully on unexpected input is the way a competent engineer would structure their program.
Here the source comment is reproduced in this old HN discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3156724
I'd love to see some of the ALT.NET passion come back around the .Net core space... but it feels like you can't attend a meeting/presentation that isn't also tethered to Azure demos. I mean, I actually like/appreciate what Azure offers, but it was the feeling that every MS presentation was a sales demo for Azure that drove me away from attending the local presentations several years ago.

ScottGu presents in the Phoenix area with a few others once a year, and I always really enjoyed it. I don't recall what year it was (2012 I think) that pretty much every demo was an Azure demo, that I just stopped going to them, and the local user groups as well.

I'm genuinely interested in .Net core... I love VS Code... but I'm not interested in an Azure sales demo.
Both sides are guilty of this and always have been. If you think name calling and teasing are counterproductive then you must realize that race/gender/sexuality based slurs are all part of that as well. Not only are they counterproductive but they are not things based on choice. It was a choice for people to vote for a specific person for president, that is not true with the issue of skin tone or sexuality.
global warming, evolution, abortion, birth control, LGBT, Size of military, refugees
I read root parent comment as being about the break down of thoughtful exchange of ideas and acceptance of views in a democracy. First amendment rights didn't seem to be on the table.
> It was my understanding that most/all of this unsoundness can be removed by telling the compiler to disallow a bunch of stuff using command line args, is this still not the case?

Nope, it's never been the case, even with all the flags on. It's not about implicit casts, it's about soundness in the actual type rules. Here's an example:

function append(array: Array<Object>) {
array.push("not a number");
}

var nums: Array<number> = [];
append(nums);
console.log(nums[0].toFixed());

If you run this, it throws an exception because String does not have a "toFixed()" method.

> If most of the objects are statically known would it give you a large part of the speed up of a totally static system?

Maybe, but it's hard to say. Once you have a single hole, if you can't check it at runtime right at the hole, then values of the wrong type can spread anywhere in the program.

> In Java and C# there's still some intentional holes in the type systems like the dynamic keyword or casting to object

Right. In the above example, Java and C# would throw an exception when you added the string to the array. This check has some runtime cost, but works.

I believe TypeScript is also unsound around function types, which is harder to address because there's no easy place to know where to add the check.
We've all pretty much given up on the idea that social media will 'democratize' the media. That slippery slope was passed long ago.

I was just reading a book by William F Buckley from 1959 about early American conservatism. Many of the points sound straight out of modern day partisan media:

- Liberal Bias in newspapers and universities: Buckley specifically cites NYTimes, NYPost, WaPo, and other prominent papers at the time all exhibit a noticeable liberal leaning. He also included a number of examples in higher education, especially at elite universities.

- Liberal Mania: Buckley noted that the hardcore liberals have a habit of grouping up on anyone who dares to become a prominent public proponent for Conservatism. They try to get them fired or formally reprimanded by authorities (such as by congress leaders). He also notes a level of smug/elitism. A view point that the left believe they have discovered the correct ideology and anything else is heresies.

- Opponents = Hitler: This was the left's favouritve label for right leaning opponents. He shared a story about how Eleanor Roosevelt famously labeled McCarthy-ism as Hitler-ism. When challenged by a reporter on this label she was asked if she would make the same comparison for this Soviet diplomat she had a known positive relationship with. But she refused - despite the fact he played a leading role in Stalin's purges. It was something reserved for the right.

This was written 58 years ago.

Whether these generalizations are true or not, it's funny how history repeats itself.
What a great example of white male privilege. "My access to toys like shotguns is more important than your rights to abortion/basic human rights as a trans person/..."
If we're talking 2008 vs McCain, if McCain didn't listen to his advisors telling him to play to the base and start taking more extreme positions on everything, I think he would have had a better shot and I'd at least have considered voting for him.

Plus, at least for me, it wasn't so much that I wanted to prove I wasn't racist, but that I wanted America to finally prove that it was no longer true that in order to be president it was required that you be a (usually older) wealthy white guy. It only needed to happen once, for it to change people's perceptions that "this is the way it would always be" and allow for more minority representation in the future.

Which was proven when the Democrats actually nominated a woman for the next election, even if it wasn't the best choice in hindsight.
Immigration laws were already being enforced vigorously. Obama administration set the record in deportation and was often called the "Deporter in Chief". And all of this was done without raising xenophobia and labeling a group of people as hard criminals and rapists.
These positions aren't contradictory; there are a ton of people that voted for Trump not because they're Nazis, but because Trump's terrible ideas about race and sex are just not very relevant to them. They just didn't pay attention to that aspect.

Eventually, people realized that Bush II was a bad president, and that came from the slow, unavoidable accumulation of facts. People that showed up at the ballot box (but not to rallies) for Trump will eventually come around when they see how incompetent he is, how often he lies about easily debunked things, etc. The jokes and insults won't be a productive part of this process.
I agree that conscientious leftists shouldn't turn a blind eye to wanton violence and property destruction at their events. But I don't think it's quite a double standard, when one of the groups of "fringe wackos" in question occupies the highest executive office in the country (slash world depending on your assessment of American power). And as far as representing the whole: nobody voted for the black bloc; 62.9 million people did vote for Trump.
Google API Design Guide
When I hear people talking about the mass unemployment, all I can do is yawn. Wind back the clock 100 years and replace "robot" with "tractor" or "factory machine" and people made the same claims.

They didn't see the jobs that would replace the jobs eliminated by the tractor. Centuries ago most Americans worked (many involuntarily) in agriculture. Most of those jobs were eliminated and replaced with jobs that didn't exist years ago. Even years ago, people were leaving the farm while other jobs were being created...like telephone company lineman or operator.

Certainly jobs will be eliminated by automation. That's easy to see. But new jobs are always being created. The problem is that we don't know which jobs will be created, while the jobs being destroyed are tangible and exist right now.
I think the association between "science truth and reason" and the Democrats/liberals is caused by the Republicans apparent flight from science, truth and reason.

Politics has never had much to do with reason - it's our equivalent of war; conflict by whatever means are at hand; our complex, technological and interdependent society however very much depends on science and reason. Truth has it's own way of striking back, of course.

The thing I found most interesting in the article was "we are worse off than black folks because we have no hope of things getting better."
Not only that, but Visual Studio is based off Visual C++ in the first place.
Bill Maher said something along the same lines. That if people in the opposing camp decide they are going to objectify their opposition as one monolithic group of uncouth people that Democrats would lose in the next election --not sure about that, as the current admin may irk a number of Republicans as well, but it's worth noting that devolving to name calling and other denigrating aspects are not the most likely way to win people over to your point of view.
Felons shouldn't. This will provide a strong incentive to not commit crime. Or at least felons may get reduced BI. Think of it like a probation (maybe reduced for a period of time as it relates to the severity of the crime).

This is a carrot and stick approach to social order.
The Data Platform for Crossing the Enterprise “Digital Divide”
Here's a counterpoint, the website "Professor Watchlist" where Conservatives can report their professors for being liberal:

http://professorwatchlist.org/

What is the point of such a website except to try and ruin people's careers and invite harassment of them? What about all the 4chan and reddit threads dedicated to finding and harassing outspoken liberals?
System calls in Linux are really fast. So saving "thousands" of system calls when /etc/localtime is in cache doesn't actually save that much actual CPU time.

I ran an experiment where I timed the runtime of the sample program provided in the OP, except I changed the number of calls to localtime() from ten times to a million. I then timed the difference with and without export TZ=:/etc/localhost. The net savings was .6 seconds. So for a single call to localtime(3), the net savings is 0.6 microseconds.

That's non-zero, but it's likely in the noise compared to everything else that your program might be doing.
Exactly. When corporations sell "globalization" they mean something other really than "we can all freely travel and be friends" unless "we" must means elites and other corporations.

Chomsky interestingly also predicted the influx of immigrants from Mexico after NAFTA years back: https://chomsky.info/secrets03/

For example he mentions:

---

In addition, cheap US agricultural exports are expected to drive several million people off the land. That’s going to mean a substantial increase in the unemployed workforce in Mexico, which of course will drive down wages.

---

I think there definitely was an influx of poor farmers being displaced looking for work. That didn't happen as an act of God or just randomly as it may seem. It was predicted and expected.