skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> does more for you than the equivalent dynamically typed code. It's _not_ the same result.

Yes. It does more checking at the cost of imposing restrictions, such as forcing homogeneous containers and conditionals and having less generic, less cluttered code. This is not merely hand-waving, BTW. One just have to take a look at some decent Lisp code, such as arc.arc or some good parts of Common Lisp or Norvig's code from AIMA which is simply wonderful.

As for typing, an old-school ADTs are OK for me (that is constructors, selectors and predicates explicitly defined as procedures). This requires some discipline, because the type system does not do anything for you, but all this is trivial, including writing pattern-matching.

I could argue that strong typing via type-tagging of values (values has a type, not variables principle) is good-enough as long as it comes together with other Lisp's features, such as everything is an expression, everything is a first-class value, which gives one such beauties as the Numerical Tower, but this is quite another topic.

I am also OK with the SML-family languages, love Haskell for its clarity and conciseness and have nothing against them, but... I still think that there are prototyping languages and implementation languages, and I still prefer to prototype in a dynamic-typed language and would still use Common Lisp if I could have a choice or Clojure.
I've never used twitter, am I deserving of some sort of reward or recognition too?
LOL, I was curious if it would work myself, so I tried it and posted the results. It worked for me, too :)
That was my point, yes.

I find it very plausible that they find a maid (there'll be many at the airport, relatively easy to identify), and tell her this was some sort of TV show, go there, do this, leave, we'll all have a laugh, and here's $90 (which is peanuts to a big TV show, even in Malaysia, but, as I said, half a month's salary for a maid there, equivalent-ish to $1000 in the USA, say).

There's nothing suspicious about that maid's story, in my view.
Then I sure you are also well aware of the counterarguments against this form of theodicy.
Show HN: Stanchion – Add priorities to your web app's network requests
Oh wow, taking a shit on Google after they helped you by reporting a critical flaw in your infrastructure.

I'm no longer using CF for my own projects, but you've just cemented my decision that none of my clients will either.
Lost in the Supermarket
> Q: How are ultra-high-net-worth individuals different from run-of-the-mill affluent individuals?

> A: They have this feeling that rules don’t apply to them, although that mind-set is often the key to much of their success. If they’re told something can’t be done a certain way, they think that doesn’t apply to them and find a way around it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/your-money/inside-the-min...
Haven't heard that before, but even if true people often move seats, so it wouldn't be very accurate.
Morse code. Trinary logic. Radio propagation. How to construct an efficient thermocouple from random junk.
HN users condemned US citizens asserting rights at border checkpoints in 2010
If anyone wants to, they can access (cached/archived) pages from any number of services listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Web_archiving_initiati...

My personal favorites are:

- https://archive.fo

- https://archive.org/web/web.php

- https://historio.us

- https://timetravel.mementoweb.org
> but autocomplete is one hell of a drug,

Ah good point. I do remember that when doing C++ and Java.
I'm more scared that it'll be gmail that'll get killed off in favor of inbox.
Thanks for the link, how amusing. This confirms my suspicions.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wallflower

Definition 2
It usually starts at the top, once it has set in it's very hard to get rid of.
That would appear to be correct in my regular understanding of how that term is used.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

I think this George Bernard Shaw quote pretty much explains the guy.

Is he naive or is Google overreaching? Going to be interesting watching this one play out.
The NHS has recently announced an expansion of the trial: https://www.england.nhs.uk/2016/12/hiv-prevention-pregramme/

There was some confusion about who should be paying for this preventative treatment. Both sexual health and prevention is normally part of Public Health and not the NHS, but public health weren't paying. This is because funding to local authorities has been slashed. Remember this when conservative supporters tell you that funding for health care has increased: they're not including the cuts to public health.

This is explained a bit here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/2016/11/update-on-prep/

A statement from public health: http://www.adph.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ADPH-PrEP-...

A statement from earlier NHS: https://www.england.nhs.uk/2016/08/august-update-on-the-comm...
This is far too optimistic - just look at the "History" chart. The average age of 90s hashes when they were broken was 10-15 years. It's equally probable that the "modern" algorithms are just too young for us to see them broken.
> The best way to improve the representation of women in the field is [...] to promote them. [...] To push them into positions of influence.

I am all for equality in chances for all people, men and women, black and white, gay and straight, anything really, but this affirmative action "promote X because she is a women" (or black, or XXX) is something I will fight against with all my being and all my forces until the day I die.

I strongly feel this type of insidious thinking is the most dangerous thing facing humanity today, worse than global warming, the united states, or global war. I will never be silent against this rampant so-called-positive sexism.
What if we start from an assumption though that things are currently not meritocrous? Doesn't that then imply if we want to get to a place of full meritocracy some things need to be done that are different than the status quo?
They're far older than 2000.

My point was: Modern ECC (X25519 and friends) are the only post-2000 invented mainstream algs where any realistic breakage is in sight.
> I can say a lot of things about Google but 'slow' is not something that generally came to mind. So that is surprising.

Perhaps Google's preference for not having their autonomous vehicles driving under trucks or running around San Francisco recklessly chafed at him.
"In my long career, I had never before been in a room like that, and the difference in tone, conversation, respect, and professionalism was unlike any I have experienced."

Back when I was contracting I visited a lot of sites, my heart would sink when it was an all male team, you just knew the tone would be different.
"Unbreakable algorithms"? Save for the OTP - in the mathematical, not the rubber hose sense - as far as we know, there is no such thing.
I use dhIMG Twitter by Dale Hay

https://dalehay.me/dhimg/

There's also tools for ripping Instagram and Tumblr photos :)
You don't have to show ID to enter security. It's just the most convenient way to confirm your identity. TSA is not concerned and not able to enforce immigration laws. ICE can't just walk up to the TSA ID-checker and say "tell me if you see a Jose Morales."
Why? I mean, you took two paragraphs to write "I disagree", but you forgot the ", because".
The event where one line of buggy code ('==' instead of '<=') creates global consequences, affecting millions, is great illustration of the perils of monoculture.

And monoculture is the elephant in the room most pretend not to see. The current engineering ideology (it is ideology, not technology) of sycophancy towards big and rich companies, and popular software stacks, is sickening.
Right now I've got a little EdgeRouter X - it would probably be faster.
This is an interesting area sort of like affirmative action. If we don't cede some ground to the notion meritocracy, might that not delay the length of time it takes to increase diversity in the field? Will this create the best possible computing and technology world possible -- cutting out or limiting half the population? That is the point Rob is subtly making. We may have to trade a little merit now for increased diversity and a stronger future world of computing. To be clear merit is the easiest way to go about things. That said, I have a daughter and am not sure I would want her in my field as it stands right now (high end infosec). It is even more male dominated than typical engineering and dev. Things to think long and hard about.

edit: we are also assuming things are an in general meritocracy in technology amd I suspect that isn't true, but that is a different but relatef discussion.
They won't have been monitoring his laptop. They will have been monitoring the Google laptop he used.

It's an important distinction people are well-advised to remember.
Programming used to be a field with significant numbers of women, including true pioneers like Grace Hopper. IIRC, female computer science majors peaked in the 80s, and have been declining since.

Even with those low numbers these days, a lot of women who are interested in programming and computer science are chased away early on, or they quickly move into more welcoming fields. So it's true that among senior staff, women are even less well represented.

This isn't just a bad thing for the women who are harassed, mistreated, or just made to feel unwelcome. It's a bad thing for the industry. If women are unwelcome, we're throwing away half of the talented engineers before they even get started.

For all those reasons, Rob is right that role models are important. But even more important: we need to stop chasing women from the field. You have to stop the bleeding before you can start improving. The recent stories out of Uber make it clear that the technology industry is at risk of moving backwards if we aren't already.
I think you mean phallocratic.
If you take flying lessons weight and balance is a big part of the training.

The moment arm ("virtual" fulcrum) is an imaginary point where the balance of the plane is and it moves depending on the shape of the aircraft and where the weight is located.

Imagine a long lever with the fulcrum in the middle now imagine that lever is flying in three dimensions. Any weight near or far from the fulcrum makes it difficult to control the lever (aircraft) if the weight is moving or in the wrong spot.

My flying lessons were 25 years ago and I didn't continue but that's the gist of it.
Cool. What if it turned out that in some places there is proof that what's going on is "promote X, because he is a man"... would you then fight against that with all your being?
"this type of thinking is the most dangerous thing facing humanity today, worse than global warming"

I disagree with you, and am curious how you would justify your position.
What will be fascinating to watch is how justice is served here.

Regardless of the wrong Levandowski may have committed, he is still an extremely talented engineer in a field where a 'space race' of sorts is going on between a handful of heavily monied-up players.

On one hand, I think Waymo has ability to financial ruin Levandowski. On the other hand, no matter how tainted he is by this scandal, there are still 10 other players in this field who would be willing to pay him a huge salary. So he could easily get a multi-million dollar salary from someone else.

I suppose what could happen is that other companies would be unwilling to work with Levandowski because if a new employer of Levandowski's happens to develop technology similar to Waymo's, Waymo could sue the new company and say the new company received Waymo's proprietary information from Levandowski. Even if that didn't happened, Levandowskis presence is enough to prove otherwise. In other words, just the presence of Levandowski in another self-driving car project is huge legal liability. And that may be his downfall.

It is, however, sad to think that this technology could be set back a few years because of Levandowski's actions.
This is a nice project. I think it would be great to add references used for the implementations and some tests that demonstrate they return what is expected (or perhaps the same result of sklearn maybe).
Promote has two meanings:

> Further the progress of (something, especially a cause, venture, or aim); support or actively encourage.

And

> Advance or raise (someone) to a higher position or rank.

From my reading of the article Rob is mostly arguing for the first and not for giving them positions of power purely based on their gender. But having women in positions of power is important and we should ensure to at least take away impediments that prevent them from achieving that.
Congratulations, Trump.
I heard they're burning 2-3M/month and on a lifeline at this point. SF is "close" to breaking even.
Thanks
(Geologist) The comments below express my own thoughts and experience far better, and in more detail, than I could.

Thank you very much, HN, for sending me links to all the great non-tech articles over the last few years.
That's not 'surprisingly' good, that's effective only on a small corpus. You can see for yourself that if you try to feed it multiple corpuses with many vocabulary words or proper names, which a Markov chain wouldn't break a sweat on memorizing them all, the RNN has limited memorization ability and what tends to happen is that the less common ones get overwritten in favor of the general grammar of English and the vocabulary of the largest corpus: https://www.gwern.net/RNN%20metadata
Tesla: Capital Raise Now, or Bankruptcy in 4 Months
From what I understand, the Feb 23rd SHA-1 attack was possible because they figured out how to get the internal state (160 bits or 5 words of 32 bits) to match from two separate pieces of data. After that, additional data could be appended to the first two pieces as long as it was identical.

The internal state would play back the same sequence from there on, just like two random number generators starting from the same seed.

Here is a comparison of internal state sizes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-0#Comparison_of_SHA_functi...

SHA-256 is susceptible to this same flaw, it would just take longer because it has about about 128 bits of security instead of less than 80 for SHA-1. It looks like only SHA-3 really "gets it" with a 1600 bit state size.

After all of the effort put into making highly pseudo-random hash functions, it's a wonder that the state size was only the size of the hash. By comparison, Mersenne Twister's state size is 19937 bits (624 words of 32 bits minus 31 bits):

http://www.quadibloc.com/crypto/co4814.htm

Does anyone know why hash algorithms keep using such small state sizes, leaving us vulnerable to this same issue?
Of course I would. I strongly want injustice and discrimination to end in the world (which is why I am against affirmative action in the first place).
To be fair, I think the article is correct in that women are less likely to apply if they feel the are unqualified. Whatever it means or doesn't - I'm pretty sure that it's true, I've seen this before.
Where do you live now?

You could consider getting a job in Europe, working in the same field. Once in Europe it's incredibly easy to travel around. With some employers you get 7 weeks of vacation, and some areas have mandatory 35 hour maximum work weeks, which means you have plenty of free time to travel.
Your "strong feelings" are misguided. As a society or [sub]culture we are not judged on our efforts or philosophies but on our outcomes. And the stakes are higher proportional to the power we collectively wield. If women or other minorities are disproportionately under-represented in our communities then that fact, that outcome, deserves direct acknowledgement, attention, and recompense.
Meritocracy paradoxically seems to lead to worse results overall. Remember that measuring merit is effectively impossible in any kind of reliable and systematic fashion.

Which means its measured by heuristics, and heuristics are very sensitive to preconceptions, stereotypes, etc.
oh ok. What is wrong with being shy. 'none of them were wallflowers' seems like such an odd thing to say. As a shy person myself, hate this .
SHA-2 was originally published in 2001. The digest sizes are also much bigger. I don't think it's really 'equally probable'. There are even cryptographers who think it's not at all probable, ever.
> That might be true, but you'd make your argument more credible if you cited Bloomberg (or anyone else, but BB is who ZeroHedge cites)...

Your statement's not "credible." ZH didn't just cite Bloomberg. The ZH post also includes excerpts from the 93 page report (not included in the Bloomberg article) released by the US senate subcommittee, which was highly relevant.

Is anything in the ZH post false? Please add it to the discussion.

Next time, please comment on the substance of ideas and arguments instead of ad hominem attacks. It was one of the first searches that came back for the topic I was looking for. It added more context than a brief Bloomberg article.
Some people get off on tomb-stoning large amounts of data. Let him have his moment. Tweets are equivalent to taking a dandelion that's seeded and blowing it into the wind.
All that cheerleading for capitalism, and the only micro-nod to inequality is this: "However our wealth may be divided, the mind-boggling amounts you see around you belong almost
exclusively to Americans."

"See around me," indeed.
I would assume that the solution wouldn't be to double down on bias hoping that bias in the opposite direction will somehow result in harmony. That's like a cable news network letting polemics on opposite sides of an issue (as if there are only to ways to look at an issue in the first place) scream at each other for a segment and then patting themselves on the back for their "balance". After all, they "presented both sides"!

If some organization isn't meritocrous in how it promotes people and participation, the solution is to make it so. And it will take time for the effects of the previous bias to unwind.
Well, the trouble with that, we would be asked to believe, is that we all have unconscious biases that lead us to recruit / promote people who are more like ourselves.

In my experience this does seem to be the case.
Diversity is a social issue. Meritocracy is not a good tool to fix social issues.
What do you expect them to do? They're essentially parasite of the Internet, has always been.
>The best way to improve the representation of women in the field is not to recruit them, important though that is, but to promote them. To create role models. To push them into positions of influence.

I find the idea that we should "push them into positions of influence" abhorrent. These are zero sum games, to give them a special advantage over any other demographic is to disadvantage another. This is antithetical to everything most people believe about fairness and equality. And what of the girls who learn that their role models have been given a handicap, pushed upwards beyond their skill by well-meaning but naive men? What sort of message will that send to them?

None of this is even mentioning the basic question of, what do we even get out of trying to "correct" disparities in employment demographics? How do we even know that women as a demographic have an equal interest in computer science to men? If they don't, what do we get out of "correcting" the disparity by given them special treatment, handicaps, incentives, etc?

Pushing people into positions of influence based on their gender is nothing other than deeply sexist, discriminatory to people who don't need to be pushed, and should be absolutely unacceptable to anyone who actually cares about equality.
Absent a reason to believe that there should be more well-known men in computing than women, we have quite a distance to go to achieve a meritocracy.

I haven't heard any plausible theories for this. The best I've heard is plausible theories for why, given existing biases in society, more men are entering and succeeding in the field than women. That's usually used to argue that some individual company or process isn't at fault for having an imbalanced output. But that's hardly a meritocracy when you know you're leaving qualified people behind, neither for the company, nor at all for the field as a whole!

(Incidentally, the term "meritocracy" is from a dystopian essay trying to satirize the concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy )
Not gp commenter, but I think the point is that while yes, having more women (or <insert group here> for a different discussion) would be a good thing, they shouldn't simply be put into these positions by virtue of the "minority" (quoted for lack of a better word) traits ALONE. Rather, would it not be better to have people with <whatever trait> who are incredibly competent / qualified / etc. who would be a better role model to those with <whatever trait> who want to get into the field?
What is the point of diversity? You're just drawing arbitrary lines based on skin color or gender or sexual orientation. If you drew those lines somewhere else say, favorite color/food, political affiliation, mathematical abilities, etc. you'd have a completely different categorization. This is why a meritocracy is so important. There is no smaller minority group than the individual, basing outcomes on anything else is inherently arbitrarily discriminatory.
Yes. It seems to me that they found the front side bus equivalent rather than the 'seat of consciousness'.
Imagine if someone wrote a text like that about males. Imagine someone would point out how incredibly respectful and professional florist meetings are if there is a larger than usual percentage of men. They'd be lynched, called misogynists and sexists.

I deeply resent everyone who contributes to this petty fight among the genders.
You can view many of the letters for free here: http://berkshirehathaway.com/letters/letters.html
The "comforting lie" I was referring to was "this is how scientists actually do it and why you can trust the results".
Test Driving Google Cloud GPUs with Password Cracker Hashcat
> In my long career, I had never before been in a room like that, and the difference in tone, conversation, respect, and professionalism was unlike any I have experienced. I can't prove it was the presence of women that made the difference - it could just be that astronomers are better people all around, a possibility I cannot really refute - but it seemed to me that the difference stemmed from the demographics.

I feel exactly the same way. After undergrad, I assembled a board game group with my male friends. Some girls (girlfriends, invited drop-ins) became regulars, and for a long while, the group was pretty much 50/50. It had never been so good.

Eventually some things happened, people moved away, and eventually the group became 100% male, nerdy guys. It was a pale shadow of its own self. I eventually lost interest in it altogether, and we get together very infrequently now.

It had nothing to do with dating or romance. I never bothered figuring exactly what it was that made the group better. As far as I'm concerned, diversity for the sake of diversity is a noble goal.

Many other professional and educational anecdotes contribute to this last belief, not just this board game example, but it is representative.
People who raise their index finger to lament that, in the best of cases, do it speaking from a place of confidence that in a meritocratic system they are securely competitive. It's a little bit about where that confidence comes from and why not everyone enjoys that confidence.
I am working on a crawler that uses async/await, and from experimentation the list is:

except (aiohttp.ClientError, aiohttp.DisconnectedError, aiohttp.HttpProcessingError, aiodns.error.DNSError, asyncio.TimeoutError, RuntimeError) as e:

I want to continue running no matter what, so I also have an "except Exception", but I have better logging now that I know what the known vs. unknown exceptions are.