skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
JSX vs. templates is a common debate, with popular JSX options like React and Preact and template-based options like Vue and Glimmer. The reality is that there are hard tradeoffs to both and anyone who tells you one is obviously superior to the other is probably trying to sell you something.

For me personally, templates ever-so-slightly edge out tools like JSX. For one, I subscribe to the Rule of Least Power[0]. Having the full expressiveness of JavaScript is very nice, but it makes it harder for tools to statically analyze and optimize the rendering process. Ember has gone through three major rendering engine architectures now (string-based, DOM-based and now the Glimmer VM) and the simplicity of the templating language has made that portability much easier.

[0]: https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/leastPower.html

More importantly though, there are a lot of people in the world who know HTML and CSS. The fact that Glimmer templates are "just HTML" makes them accessible to people like designers who may not understand all of the fancy destructuring or array mapping happening in your JSX.

Lastly, and this is perhaps just a personal foible, but I have a really hard time mentally mapping more complicated JSX expressions into the final HTML output. It's fine when you're writing it, but reading it later, particularly to write CSS for it, is more challenging for me than Handlebars. I know some people would say that this is a code smell and that I should break that component up into smaller components, but I'd rather that decision be made by me than because I feel forced into it by the muddiness of my render() method.
It's basically a generally passable VOIP client with a Slack built in, which AFAIK no other VOIP service has really done well (including Skype).

The barrier to entry being low, it being free, having mostly all the features people are looking for, and this persistent communication is basically all it is. Before this, gaming communities would often set up a forum (sometimes with a really shitty chat) just for persistent communications outside of games and VOIP, and this rolls all of that into one package that's really easy to use.

I had huge issues with Discord's quality when it was first being publicly used because I was on a latent/lossy connection at the time and it just repeatedly disconnected me and forced me to completely rejoin a Discord server over and over, which implied their engineers had no understanding that the internet is inherently unreliable. That seems to have been well remedied, so actually improving their software immediately puts it 10000 feet above Ventrilo, Teamspeak, Skype, etc from my perspective. I've watched these applications stagnate over the years and it's bothered me pretty deeply.
Testing the Performance of Semiconductors – With Light
That makes a lot of sense. I don't really interact on twitch at all so those features of Discord are lost on me.
NIST Physicists Show Ion Pairs Perform Enhanced &#039;Spooky Action&#039;
I love stories like this one. Reminds me of the the twin prime story from a little while ago. Well written article as well!
https://kite.com/enterprise
Sarcasm? I used rsync for past 20 years...
as you indicated - this depends on where you live - and if you're ready to just fix the problem yourself with solar power. Stating that it won't help is IMO misleading - Tesla is basically offering you all the missing tools to carry a high energy American lifestyle towards being carbon neutral. The footprint you missed in terms of consumed goods or at home, could be compensated by buying CO2 certificates.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16K4gNhy_AN8Eg4Ov3z7p...
Uber Coins Terms ‘Jewbers’ and ‘UberHUE’ in New Diversity Report
Heck, this is great for technical people too. There's the public integrations, but I use the dev platform for private things all the time. Takes some extra coding, but once the interface is built everything else comes free. That plus code steps and I'm set.
Murdoch invested in Theranos ~100M a few years ago https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/29/rupert-murdoch...
You can only consider the investment "failed" if the company goes belly up. Till then, you have to wait to write the investment off (and request a tax credit on the loss). Selling it is a way to proof your investment is now worth ~zero - so you can write it off in the next fiscal year.
I had not seen that before. I wonder if any other interesting numbers are better calculated in alternate bases. Thanks
Yes, it depends on the size of the sequencing panel that was done (i.e. a targeted panel for a specific gene or set of genes versus whole exome versus whole genome). But even for whole exome, you're talking a few hours or faster depending on hardware.

In addition to our company, Genomenon (which seeks to speed up the interpretation time required to analyze the data _after_ it's been computationally aligned and annotated), I'm also friends with another startup down the street, called Parabricks, which seeks to speed up this alignment process (aka secondary analysis) even further.
> The bottom line is, If you get cancer, fight like hell to get your tumor sequenced. Most insurers cover at least some kind of genomic test for cancer these days.

Is this something that has to go through your oncologist or can you drive the process independently?
So you don't have "incentives"

Of course you have incentives. Hospital administrators want to cut costs, doctors want to redirect patients to their private offices, suppliers want to increase profits (and will offer kickbacks to doctors and administrators), etc.

If you have humans, you have incentives. Regulation can change some, but not eliminate them.
You can't put off insurance until you get sick, unless the insurance can't deny you for having a precondition.
Well then you're going to be happy : there's a new Spark-to-C compiler. http://blog.adacore.com/spark-tetris-on-the-arduboy
Maybe that's the one you're thinking about ?

Also, I heard Rod Chapman (at the last AdaCore tech day) say they had great success using 'the' Ada-to-C compiler some years ago. Looks like AdaCore still have the code for it, not doing much with it. You might get the code if you ask nicely (maybe T.Taft directly now that he works for AdaCore) :-D.

If you get any new idea on some combination of Spark, Ada and other tech, I'd send yannick moy an email :-D. Always helpful and insightful.

If you plan on doing your borrow checker as some kind of new static analysis pass for Ada, I'd also look into libadalang, there's some great (open source !) progress there. I also played a lot with gnat2xml but I don't recommend : it works but it was painful...

I also wondered some time ago about a Spark-to-rust compiler. But I'm waiting for my rust skills to improve first.

Anyway, it's very strange to see rust every so often mentionned for embedded software. I get the interest for 'normal' unconstrained software. But after 10 years of large-scale real-time embedded-systems programming in Ada and I maybe faced once a memory safety bug that the borrow checker would have prevented. Mostly the bugs you get are constraint_errors (overflow, underflow, array bounds,...) most already caught by the type system at compile or static-analysis time. The rest are mostly 'real' bugs : logic or temporal. You never doubt of the state of the program when reading the code, such a lower cognitive load... Going back to C from time to time is so painful, especially, when you think of all the help you're missing.

When in need of pointer go for not null access types, when in need for dynamic allocation go for controlled types (scoped deallocation) and storage pools... Everyone (except haskellers...) is missing on so much, it feels like living in the future where the compiler works (a lot !) for you. Sorry for the rant...

By the way I found one of the ways to catch temporal errors (other than uninitialized variables that are caught) in Spark is to use an enumerated state variable and check it all the time (post/pre or in invariants). It's almost always a good idea anyway to have an explicit state instead of some 'nah none will call this code in such sequence...'.

Also interesting : like functional programming or the borrow checker, or strong typing, Spark changes the way you think about your code. You think about how 'provable' your design and code is and it makes code more readable, simple. You can also just start with data flow annotations (also great for safety and security-critical code), makes reading code easier.

I'll be looking out for your next dive back into Ada then !
Out of curiosity, what about it do you think is related?
Abandoned Soviet Energia rocket in derelict hanger, in pictures
Facebook's Recipe for Better Ad Engagement? Copying Consumer Products
>inherently handicapped

With today's assumptions, sure. Who's to say some material scientist with a trickle of funding doesn't find a way to mix in some cheap leftover metal into an asphalt mix and wouldyalookathat, for some reason you can now plus a USB cable into the road and it'll charge your phone. I'm being silly, but my point is exactly that: we just assume it won't work because yea duh, it won't work if we don't investigate it beyond "huh, if you put a car on a solar panel, it breaks. This is impossible, clearly."
> in the history of science, progress with concepts and causality did well where the new methods would need Nevada full of disk drives of data. E.g., space flight navigation is based, first, on Newton's law of gravity and second law of motion, not on fitting massive of data via deep learning.

If you're thinking about conceptual reasoning vs. purely data-driven reasoning, you'd really get a lot of value from reading Ayn Rand's theory of concepts. Yes, she's very unpopular amongst modern philosophers, so all I'll say is you should read her writings and judge for yourself.

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Objectivist-Epistemology...

Two people used her philosophy as a basis for a book on induction and the history of the scientific method:

https://www.amazon.com/Logical-Leap-Induction-Physics-ebook/...

Here's a free taster: http://aynrandlexicon.com/book/conceptual.html
Forgive me if I don't link it, but there is an alternative to the "liberal facts" presented on Wikipedia.

If you want the alt-truth about things like evolution and the Obama administration, I'm sure you can find the site with a few choice keywords. Did you know that abortion causes breast cancer?

Oops, I just vomited a little, sorry about that.
Thank you for posting this.

The article and some of the people quoted in it, like Hinton, seem to think MDs need so much help for diagnosis. Real life isn't House MD. The answer is very often obvious from the history/physical exam and the most basic labs.

Anyways, I don't like the fact that Hinton and others seem perfectly OK with not knowing how the machine is diagnosing. It's machine clinical gestalt.

I also think this diagnosis by machine would be very frustrating. Imagine, as a patient, asking the diagnostic robot: "why do you think this happened to me?" or "Why do you think the diagnosis is x?"

And then not having an answer other than "the imaging and tests are consistent with imaging and tests of previous patients with x disease" - this sounds like a bad answer. That wouldn't be good enough for me, but maybe it would be for plenty of other non-curious parties. Maybe there is this huge group of people who want healthcare from robots with robotic bedside manners. But I doubt it. Hinton is wrong, doctors are going to be augmented by helpful diagnostic applications. We will still have to learn to diagnose on our own but we will have help too. Maybe a robot to help triage cases into "serious/less serious" categories (and with working initial diagnosis) with good accuracy.
> Why hasn't anyone made a more eye-frendly version of the Common Lisp Hyper Spec

I mostly access the HyperSpec using Erik Naggum's hyperspec.el while programming in Emacs, configured to bring up Lynx. A lot of other people probably do something similar, so there has not been much interest in adding CSS.
This iconic French comic is the unsung inspiration for your favorite sci-fi
There is a lot more complexity here than that. For example G&E moved some manufacturing back to the US back in 2013:

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/01/22/265080779/a...

Another article covering the same trend around the same time:

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21569570-growin...

And from the Atlantic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/12/the-ins...

Bottom line is that shorter supply chains, better/cheaper infrastructure, and better quality control has made bigger companies re-evaluate "overall" cost of production and the maintenance tails therein.

And, contrary to popular belief, America is not so far out of the race as to not have a chance.

Edit: One more from Forbes...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmcquaid/2012/12/06/why-appl...
No but you might get malware via a 3rd party exchange.

https://www.extremetech.com/internet/220696-forbes-forces-re...
Having a child is to society what eating food is to the individual.

You can choose not to eat food, but the individual will not last long.

You can choose not to have kids but the society won't last long.

It's in our interest to support the human part of humanity. We do that with breaks, meal breaks, sick time, vacation time, and other things. But it's also in our interest to benefit society, not just the individual. So we incentivize choices which are mandatory to the health and success of our society, such as creating the next generation to replace those aging out of the workforce.
I was discussing something like this with an economist friend recently. His view was that most economists (rightly I think) focus on consumption not production. In theory, you can run a trade deficit forever to keep consuming more than you produce.

Where I think the model probably breaks down is that you can't have infinite debt levels, so your consumption growth is capped by your production growth. I would think you run out of assets (e.g., Manhattan, London real estate) to sell to net-export economies, but I guess there's always financial innovation to bring you new products to sell
This reminds me of a quote from Neal Stephenson's epic Snow Crash novel:

“When it gets down to it — talking trade balances here — once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here — once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel — once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity — y'know what? There's only four things we do better than anyone else:
music
movies
microcode (software)
high-speed pizza delivery”
― Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash
This is because we recently added the ability to specify a blueprint as an npm package, and it hasn't made it out of canary channel yet.

If you don't want to install canary Ember CLI, you can always just give it the longer git url:

ember new my-glimmer-app -b https://github.com/glimmerjs/glimmer-blueprint.git
It's only $235k if you estimate health insurance at $60k + a maxed-out 401(k) contribution and add both of them to the dollar amount of what the engineer makes in wages.

Without, if they work 52 40-hour weeks, it's $156k. Which is good money, but a far, far cry from the "many make half a million" claim.

And since a little bit of "let's actually run the numbers you just presented" reduced the initially claimed amount by nearly 70%, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say the initial claim was not rooted in reality, and probably the real amount is lower yet.
I learned this playing Axis and Allies [1], where there is a rule for 'strategic bombing' [2]: rather than using your bomber to attack enemy troops, you attack enemy factories, where damage is done to the enemy's budget, rather than forces. I never used my bombers that way, preferring to attack armies and fleets, but my opponent, who understood the game much better than me, would doggedly go after my factories. Needless to say, he always won.

[1] http://avalonhill.wizards.com/games/axis-and-allies

[2] http://axisandallies.wikia.com/wiki/Strategic_Bombing
> how about helping to address the rampant industrial espionage on the part of our trading partners.

That sounds like a Trump Tweet. Are there any facts supporting the theory that the US is more of a victim than everybody else?
Excel's filtering syntax (e.g. SUMIF) and this function are obtuse, difficult to use, and very simplistic just compared to a WHERE clause on a sql statement. And this ignores other very powerful sql features like pivot and group by that are exceedingly difficult for excel to produce.
Static analysis does not do a great job of solving the problems with C. It is great for finding 1994-2004 era C vulnerabilities. It's rather useless at finding the problems we deal with today. To do so requires complete intraprocedural analysis and overcoming NP hardness.
Except the status quo of the value-chain may not be representative of the natural settling over time. Design/marketing rest very much on the stability and practical enforcement of "IP" in our current attempted world view.

That is unlikely to play out in the long run. The world is unlikely to consistently enforce the cost of a one-but-no-longer complex process, when a simple/cheaper process produces essentially the same outcome. Minus rarity of material requirements.

What out of "IP" survives? Local trademarks/service marks, sure. Copyright with meaningful global enforcement... not likely. Production of small intricate things/electronics ... likely. Production of easy-to-future-produce/assemble, seems unlikely.
This is actually where free-market thinking matches the real world - unless you find a way to force people to follow your ideology, they'll keep choosing what's cheaper.
I think what they are trying to say is that programming with mutable state, as opposed to pure functional programming, is insanity.
Funny, but silly. Why would people want to live in other places in the solar system? Earth, the Moon, and Mars are the only places that really make any sense at all. Even Mars is iffy because the gravity is rather low, it's far from Earth, the atmosphere is barely there, it's cold, and there's no radiation protection without going underground. The Moon is even worse, but at least it's close to Earth so it'd be really useful for mining or offworld/low-g manufacturing, and it's close enough for quick trips back to Earth.

Venus is far too hot to be useful for anything besides dirigible cities, and what are you going to do there except sightsee the yellow clouds? Maybe it could be terraformed to something livable, but that would take a long time. If that could be done though, it'd be a great place, since it's close to Earth's size and gravity.

Mercury is too close to the Sun and too hot. You could put a city on the dark side, but the city would have to move constantly to stay on the dark side.

The asteroid belt might be useful for mining, as would other places farther beyond, but anything that far out is going to be very cold, because it's so far from the Sun. Also, the Moons of Jupiter are bombarded with massive amounts of radiation from their planet. And all those places have horribly low gravity too, which probably won't work well with human biology, unless perhaps we genetically engineer ourselves to fix that.

Space exploration is great for science and maybe resource extraction, but I just don't see the point of colonization except for a couple of somewhat-convenient places, at least not in this star system. I really can't imagine an "empire" across this solar system. Now it would be really cool if we could explore the TRAPPIST system and maybe find livable worlds there.
Page Fault Demo
Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm not an expert in this field at all, but aren't hard real time systems written so that no memory allocation or release happens during normal operation?

I'm sure there are other reasons why Go would rarely be considered for a hard real time system, but purely from a memory management perspective you could simply disable the GC.

And then of course there is also Rust.
It took only 10 seconds of googling to come up with this:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunchtime-lenienc...

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/study-ugly-people-more-like...
This is a great way to look at it. Few things I'd add:
6. Does the CEO have a strong vision and character? Roughly, are they more like Elon Musk (engineering driven, moves quickly), Jeff Bezos (long term thinker, experiments a lot), Mark Beinoff (business savvy, sales driven) or Travis Kalanick (win at all costs). No matter what companies say, their culture is determined by the CEO - their values, motivations, personality. This is important for startups.

7. What excites the people working there? (the people you interviewed with). Is it passion for company mission? Great colleagues? Big investors / lots of money raised (red flag)? Frat culture? (specific schools or groups) (red flag).
US vacation times are nuts. Honestly I don't understand how people can cope with only total of few weeks of vacation per year for decades and additionally do over 40h per week constantly.

No wonder people burn out.
IMHO, reusable server side validation == forms without widgets (and widgets are nice to have if one feels that JS is unnecessarily complicating what could be a simple static HTML form).

Or I'm missing something?
White House backs repeal of broadband privacy rules
Customers have repeatedly demonstrated an unwillingness to pay a large premium for a made-in-USA tag, and protectionist tariffs don't help you export American products.
My experience is that it seems less common at start-ups, with the caveat that it's my experience and so definitively biased. At least the startups I've been in have been small, tight-knit groups where any socialisation have tended to be group activities, and where there's been little implicit imposing hierarchy, and standing up for yourself tends to be appreciated.

In larger companies, on the other hand, you get all kinds of weird little fiefdoms where getting on your managers bad side is potentially far more damaging because if your boss has sufficient support he will be able to musster a much bigger support system.
On Android you can download faceslim. It's the mobile site with the messages in an app. They used a special user agent to reenable the messages. You even have notifications ! (Manually checked every 30 minutes or so)

Maybe you can have it too by downloading Firefox for iPhone and changing the user agent. (I haven't tried but it's worth a shot)
Google has a market cap of $570 billion USD, and employs 70,000 people.

GM, Ford, and Chrystler have a combined market cap of ~$130 billion USD, and employ 600,000 people.

Google makes a lot of money, and pays its employees well. Unfortunately, it hardly employs anyone.
I've been using Bose QuietComfort 15 for years. Unfortunately, something has broken in them so they aren't as good at noice cancellation as they were when I bought them.
https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/elixir
However, if 10 companies each need to check for fraud they may investigate 10 cases each, but with 10 X 10 that's still more effort.

Or they'll coordinate to avoid the duplication, usually by having some kind of industry society/non-profit that does the checking.
Theranos did not have a product/market fit not because they didn't try but they didn't actually have a working product at all it seems from the article. It's interesting to see they've been kept afloat by big name investors all these years.

edit: why is this comment being downvoted? Theranos failed and now looks like investors are angry. Do you disagree?
I like this quote more in the form: "The difference between practice and theory is larger in practice than in theory."