skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Went pro? Where did you play?

I was semi-pro Age of X player from 2002 - 2008, Never had chance to switch pro, since AoEII/III(M) were not so hyped and there were little money comparing to W3, SC:BW and Quake3.

Still one of the best memories in my life.
Google Play now has a free “App of the week” section
How to Raise Up Your Mobile App Engagement
As a huge fan of Starcraft and its expansion Brood War, I am really excited.

I bought StarCraft 2 after it was released but I simply didn't like it, maybe I grew older and life was busy then. However, I think it's more about the focus was shifted, when adding fancy graphics effects, the RTS elements are gone, plus added complexity.

I think the remastered version will re-ignite the faded friendship between a group of guys/gals. The original game used to be our bond. However, the bond is fading over the years as I moved overseas, most folks have their own family/people/things to care about.

The best thing is: "Most importantly, the strategy gameplay that StarCraft perfected years ago remains unchanged."

Nuclear launch detected ;-)
I don't understand why Core believes the fees and confirmation times are not a huge problem. Or am I misinformed, does Core have a plan to fix this?
>Oh internet and self-help gurus. Why do you have to be the "best" at everything and get the most of out stuff.

The article's content is ok. But what called my attention was that every single paragraph links to a source, author or better: an amazon book page. Its like the index page of a book on the subject!

pd: 15 mbyte & 420 requests to load the page
Yeah, it's pretty well known that danielkerr (the maintainer of OpenCart) is pretty toxic, and (imho) very questionable in terms of competence.

Some of the other things he has said:

* In response to an accusation of stripping license from copied open source code: "fuck off!" [1]

* In response to a support question about a session error: "are u stupied!" [2]

* some others [3][4][5]

[1] https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20141018114521/https://gist..., which is a copy of https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20141018110346/https://gith...

[2] https://forum.opencart.com/viewtopic.php?t=49240#p237193

[3] http://www.websynn.com/2011/04/11/daniel-kerrs-opencart-secu...

[4] http://www.websynn.com/2012/01/10/opencart-update-daniel-ker...

[5] http://www.techchattr.com/never-use-opencart#comment-1091055...
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say ... there is a simple reason I refuse to engage. Here's how, at an extremely high level, IPCC predictions work :

A = state of the world (co2 levels, climate, current avg temp, ...) "input" so to speak

B = temperature anomaly ("output" of the model)

C = sea level rise, and other consequences

IPCC models work like this A -> B -> C.

They got B wrong. Therefore arguing about how C is really matching quite well is both wrong and, frankly, somewhere between very misguided and dishonest.

This is also a fraudulent way people sometimes defend their models, especially in economics. Sure they got the thing they predicted itself wrong, but out of the 100 things they made claims about using their faulty model, they got one or two right ! See ! They were right all along ...

Particularly bad examples are the many economic models that predicted productivity recovery since, oh, since 2000 at least. They got everything wrong, but they got, oh, say they got the gold price rise right they predicted due to their prediction of rapid inflation. Unfortunately there was a gold price rise, yes, no rapid inflation was observed though. If you believe models like that you will die a poor man.

Unfortunately, no, they weren't. It is perfectly normal for a few out of large amounts of claims to hit bullseye, even if they're based on entirely wrong data. Obviously their results, even the ones that -so far- hit bullseye, have zero predictive power.
Stories are the new News Feed
> A person who understands the notions of necessity and sufficiency, knows what a counterexample is, and knows their truth tables (with or without really knowing the textbook definitions of these things) should be able to function just fine without knowing the names of all the various fallacies.

Not really. They help for the same reason memorizing formulas in math help - they save the work and time needed to derive the formula again and again. That matters an awful lot in real time discussion. Also, if you know what fallacies exist it is much easier to recognize and encounter them compared to when you have to process the fallacy for the first time. You can even think them through in advance and prepare the argumets.
- If it's a very attractive girl I am talking to/hitting on, I am generally more self conscious about my appearance, making it harder to relax during the conversation. I feel that any misstep in my talking will immediately make them disinterested in me.

- There's the stereotype that attractive people are boring/dumb/narcissistic since they can use their attractiveness as a crutch. I am definitely guilty of passing this judgement on people.
This video change your life
I started paying attention to people and discovered a lot of this on my own over the course of three years. At some point i realized that whenever i talked to someone their eyes would glaze over and their face would go stony. Then theyd talk to someone else and their eyes would become focused and their face alive and animated. Laughter. I figured out this was because they didnt care about what i was saying or about my opinions. So i tried various things and looked at their eyes. Sometimes their eyes would become alive again and i could tell they cared. Slowly you learn what people want to hear. And its so true about smiling and body language, people feel uncomfortable if you dont project wellbeing. What you need to understand is that there is no logic in any of it. Humans are machines and the algorithms that they employ for attention and emotion are surprisngly uniform and very unintuitive for autists like me and you. Dont worry about the logic of whats hapenning, just think of what their algorithm is doing. Its verry dificult because you cant verify what people are thinking, you cant debug it and you cant start over -- you have to guess a lot. Overall people want to see big smiles and confident body posture. If you are slouched over people dont like it. If you stand up straight you will be amazed at how differently you are percieved. But it all has to be genuine. If youre trying to manipulate and understand people in a clinical way you will fail. All you need is a genuine desire to bond with people and the patience to pay attention to what seems to work and what doesnt.

I should also add that for me, and probably for most people like me, the process of figurimg out what people like and dont like is also partly a process of self discovery. Im not the kind of person thats in touch with himself. Discovering how your words impact other people will also teach you about how your mind, conciously or otherwise, reacts emotionally to the words of others. Overall ive been genuinely excited to learn about myself amd others and use that wisdom to help enjoy the presence of other people. For me its been a very productive process of growth and discovery. I think framing the problem of interpersonal relations within that context instead of the cringey, manipulative context of internet social tips really helped.
O_APPEND semantics are not consistent for all systems when multiple processes are writing. In early UNIX systems, there was one seek pointer for processes which shared an open file descriptor. This is why multiple commands launched by the shell can write to the same standard output file without overwriting.

But if two processes open the same file for append, in some older versions of Unix they can interfere. POSIX does not guarantee atomicity here. Linux does, mostly, except on NFS. Previous discussion on HN.[1]

This, too, should Just Work.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12220489
This represents a very narrow and naive worldview of what advertising accomplishes. I don't feel as though you're coming to the table with an earnest and open mind. And therefore, at this point in time, the purpose of good advertising will remain elusive to you.
If you're billing your full rate after 32+ billable hours, you are ripping off your customers. I don't often accept pull requests from coworkers after that. They tend to be full of subtle bugs that are hard to spot.
On expert systems specifically no. With the AI winter of the early 90's, not only did expert systems research die, but so did publisher interest in the topic. "Expert Systems" is effectively a dead field of study.

That being said, the field of Operations Research, at least philosophically speaking, has picked up where AI researchers dropped it off. They've fully embraced the idea that human experts can model many systems extremely well, and have built incredible tools to do so: mathematical modeling and optimization, constraint programming, boolsat, graphical models, etc. Effectively speaking, if you think expert systems are cool, the next logical step is to delve into constraint programming, which is a sort of evolution of logic programming. I'd recommend the Minizinc Tutorial for a practical introduction with a nice DSL. Constraint Processing by Rina Dechter is a great intro with a more academic bent. I'd say mathematical modeling has been Ops Research's greatest success, and I'd definitely recommend Model Building with Mathematical Programming by Paul Williams.

I'd also say that Baysians have embraced these ideas (that of building upon human expertise) within the field of Machine Learning far more than other ML researchers have. My recommendations here are probably less helpful...I've only ever toyed with Bayesian learning models, but never employed them professionally. But I would recommend Doing Bayesian Data Analysis by Kruschke. It was very helpful as an introductory material.
Whoops, you're right!
I am going to assume that you don't consider yourself to be exceptionally attractive. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So, with that assumption, if you were able to wake up tomorrow morning and be on par with a "Brad Pitt" lookalike, how do you think that your reaction to interacting with them would change? What about with the other group of people that you currently prefer to engage with? After thinking about that, would you still prefer that things remain as they are?

>Now, if we are talking about opposite sex, then that's a whole another type of conversation.

This matters too, of course, unless you don't plan to interact with them at all in a professional environment :)
What provides standard encrypted channels? Why would such a service not have vulnerabilities?
What's the 'lot of bad news'? I couldn't find anything on HN search recently, except discontinuation of Google talk. Perhaps you confused Google with Uber?
Bloomberg LP makes roughly 8 billion in revenue from selling their terminal to 300,000 subscribers (25,000 per annum).

I feel like the Bloomberg magazine is just a way to reinforce their status as the top disseminator of financial news, so that financial firms don't really think of the other options when looking for new data/terminal subscriptions, because Bloomberg is always "there".

Strange model. It's kind of like, a pretty high quality product you get for free, paid for by the people who purchase the really-really-expensive product.
>- If it's a very attractive girl I am talking to/hitting on, I am generally more self conscious about my appearance, making it harder to relax during the conversation. I feel that any misstep in my talking will immediately make them disinterested in me.

See you in HR's office.
DX stands for Developer Experience
>The White House Office of American Innovation, to be led by Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser, will operate as its own nimble power center within the West Wing and will report directly to Trump

The conflicts of interest are so widespread now, that Trump isn't even trying to hide them. Must be nice to be in a position where you can look after your family while the general public's opinion on you drops further and further.
>It sounds like you're missing render to texture and multipass techniques, the ways to use textures as compute I/O. To do multipass in WebGL and share the results of computation from one pass to the next, you create an offscreen framebuffer for your results, and you render directly to that framebuffer. You can then use the result as an input texture for the next pass (via glCopyTexImage2D) or you can read back the buffer (via glReadPixels) and then you repeat. Using glCopyTexImage2D is much faster because you never leave the GPU.

How are you writing many pixels to a framebuffer in a single instance? frag_color returns one pixel. Even if that OpenCL implimentation works in webgl, you'd still be at only 8 threads, so only 8 pixels that can be done at the same time, then you have to pass in the output to process again. 259200 glCopyTexImage2D calls for a 1920x1080 image since its 2073600 pixels.

I'll definetely look into this more, since that openCL implimentation might hold some answers on how the error distance is seperated to allow for 8 rows at a time.
His book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23492653-the-path
I think he means you're taking from one to give to another, which eventually results in the former being as worse off as the latter was, so the sum total of your "humanitarian effort" ultimately amounts to zero. But that's a guess.
There's TA:Spring project too
I watched a lot of pro broodwar back in the day. Their mechanic ability is insane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbpCLqryN-Q
> So in return for being "liked" by that woman, the listener had to pretend to be interested in her talk entirely about herself for half an hour?

If the intention was indeed to get the other person to tell something about themselves I'd say it's a fair and successful approach. Plus, you could be genuinely interested in the other person's 30 minute talk. The idea that the interest has to be fake seems to be your conclusion.
Im a guy
My pick was Dark Reign. Boy was it ahead of its time. :(
"Logically correct" and correct argument are oftentimes not the same thing. "Logically correct" but unpersuasive arguments oftentimes starts with wrong model of the world to which they then apply logical rules - e.g. ignores reality, rephrases 60% as "majority" and then proceeds to talk about them as "almost everyone", simplifies long complex theory into something misleadingly simple etc.

Kind of like when they logically explain you that x should be better then y, but you tried both and still remember x being a hell. May sound logical, but you know something is wrong.
For anyone else out there who may be a chess imbecile like myself... it took me a while to figure out why black king doesn't take white rook:

It's because if they do, white has no legal moves, but king isn't in check. This condition, where a player can't move, but the king currently isn't in check, results in a stalemate (which is considered a draw).

Therefore, white's baiting of black into that position by sacrificing pieces is interesting.
Multi-Agent Systems of Control
I'm so confused by the endgame. Why did white move its queen to F4? How did the last sequence of moves end in a stalemate?
Finding problem space in haystack is more important than building solution. Because that would mean founders' know why a solution exists as it exists in problem space and how to mould/pivot it down the line and build company around it.
I don't like using a 10-point system because it's so ambiguous, but I guess I'm talking about going from 5-8 to 8-10. The way I mentally do rankings is Ugly - Acceptable - Exceptional, so going from Acceptable to Exceptional.

(For the record, I try very, very hard to treat everyone equally, since the influence that attractiveness has on human behavior is something that I'm aware of and think about constantly. Hence this discussion.)
I doubt it but I imagine the Battle.net servers bursting on day 1 to 10 of the release, as so many people who grew up with this game would give it a play.
http://www.nvhae.com/starcraft/

https://github.com/gloomyson/SC_Js
I had to explain to a ~16 year old why it was called "dialing".
> E.G: wondering why you see electron apps everywhere now ? Because until now making a beautiful, powerful and modern app with a portable GUI was something only a few people would be able to do.

You should really take a look at Python and Qt. Beautiful, easily maintained and well-performing cross-platform apps have been a possibility with this pair for the better part of a decade. Anki is my favorite example, but there are plenty of others.
Edit: I just checked the meaning of 'died down' and it means 'to reduce in strength' not 'to become literally dead'. So, my comment isn't really a correct response to the parent but I keep it here.

Do you really think all those concepts died? IMO, they aren't dead, they have been assimilated. We learned from OO and it's now a tool you can use almost everywhere when you need it. But we also learned to not try to model everything in an OO paradigm.

You can say the same thing for your other examples. You have a phase where the concept/techno is being seen as the silver bullet that will save us all. That brings a lot of adoption. People do mistakes. We (hopefully) learn from them. The hype fades away, concepts are consolidated and assimilated in stable and mainstream tools.

But that takes time. And I'm not sure how things could work differently. Don't we need the hyper-hype phase to experiment and learn about the concept/tech?
Exploring an Elasticsearch-Cluster
I used https://twitter.github.io/scala_school/ to learn, I found it useful.
Dark Matter, Animated [video]
I played Duck Duck Goose when I was a kid in Australia.
I thought of this too. Im not talking about deformities.
That is so sad. What a waste of human potential.
Please read the whole thread, this is the exact point i was making, json is the only way to return tree like data. willglynn was saying you can do it with "with recursive" and i think he was confusing "traversing/inspecting" tree like data with "returning" tree like data.
> Pontiac Aztek

Mother of god. That looks like US version of Fiat Multipla. Which somehow got a cult following for its utility value.
>> I believe that the best leverage workers of the world can have is the ability to live a decent life without the threat of starvation or extreme poverty. This dream is attainable, and worth planning for and building towards as a species.

What do you mean by "ability"? Opportunity? I don't see how any particular economic status of anyone can be guaranteed with regards to what you're saying.

How I see it: The rich get richer and the poor, poorer. Once the rich have all the wealth, they go elsewhere with it. Corporations move to Singapore to save money. Automation will only benefit those who own it. Once things are automated, most people will lose their jobs and won't be able to afford even the things that are produced by automation. The rich aren't going to share, and if they do, they do it with strings attached so they can manipulate the spending and promote their own agendas (which is what they do now anyways).

The biggest problem is simply human selfishness. Because of it, there will never be peace. There will always be people seeking more than they need, always seeking their own survival over that of others, always seeking to crush others to give themselves a boost physically/economically/egotistically/etc. There will never be world peace as long as people are selfish, which basically makes world peace a pipe dream. Sorry to step on toes, but that's life.
But we are imposters. Nobody gives you a manual on how to handle work, children, people, sex, money, life in general. You are suppose to figure it out on yourself, and everybody act like the others know what they are doing. We are literally faking it until we make it for the most basic things in life.
On the whole you're correct and there are many studies that confirm that attractiveness is a big advantage in countless ways. However:

1. attractive is relative. Many, of not most people who are not considered attractive are also not considered unattractive. Just average, like most other people. Being average in looks can be compensated for in many other ways. I know many people who think they're unattractive when they're perfectly average.
2. I believe a strong confounding (or mediating?) variable is confidence and 'niceness'. Pretty people experience less bullying, more positive interactions, etc., which in turn makes them more confident and 'nice' (no need to hate the world, so to speak), which then makes them more attractive. Some of the most popular, nice, successful people I've known were far from attractive, but they were confident and nice. Or even just confident.
I think a better example is using an appeal to authority - settling an argument about a word looking up the dictionary definition.
How to REALLY Avoid Living a Life of Quiet Desperation
The Senate is of Roman origin and definitely not Greek. The form of government it emulates is republican and not democratic. Et cetera.
We used Microservices at my last job, and initially, everyone used the same Maven archetype to create a basic Java application of similar structure: property files, environment variables, filters, etc. It wasn't as sexy as, say, Scala or Node or Haskell. OTOH, there were absolutely no developers who didn't already know Java or could learn our framework in a few months - at least enough to follow and be productive.

This came in handy because everyone could easily jump from one service to another and figure things out pretty easily since, not only was it all in the same language, but also the configurations and bootstrap classes were the same. Once someone figured out something clever, it was easily added to the base classes for everyone else to inherit.

Eventually some of the newer hires got bored of Java and wanted to use things like Node, Python, etc.

At the time I left, it was a pure clusterfuck. It was impossible to write once and easily change the whole filter stack (e.g. an auth filter) since we were now up against at least 5 different languages / frameworks. Developers couldn't easily jump from project to project as needed, either.

Anyway, most of our Microservices were just glorified DB -> JSON Crud apps. Microservices themselves were probably not needed for our customer size - we would have been fine with a 2008-style multi-war project on JBoss.

And yes, even Java, is pretty damn good at spitting out CRUD / JSON data to front-ends. Absolutely no need for the complexity introduced by the half dozen other frameworks.
I'm just going to take a moment to say that Sunday Morning on CBS has been one of my favorite news programs since...well as long as I've been watching television. It was usually on before we went to church in the morning when I was a kid, I'd catch one every now and then in high school, and I later would
put it on my DVR because I tended to sleep through the early morning slot in college. I'm actually super excited to learn that they host segments on their website and I think I know what I'll be binging on this week. Also super glad Mo Rocca is still with them, it really entertained me that they hired him after his tenure with The Daily Show (he was one of my favorite correspondents) and he's put out some great segments on the show since. Alright, trip down Nostalgia Lane over.