skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can anyone explain why it seems like so many new languages are reinventing things that seemingly have little effect, but they seem to be changing them "just because"

We have comments in code for decades now. // and /* */ are easily the bigest standard, with # coming in second. Why '--' in this language? Why "``" in another language i saw recently?

I cant imagine this gives any real benifit to the coder or the compiler, and it seems to be more difficult because now the IDEs have to be configured for a(nother) new comment type, it has be become muscle memory again, its yet another "common ground" peice of code that requires context switching to change between languages...

I get doing new things with the functional features of a language, im all for trying new things and seeing what works... just seems wierd to have so many ways to comment code... such an insignificant part, why change?
Agreed that this is a good practice to inform other buyers that there are counterfeit sellers on the product, but do be aware that it impacts the overall rating of the product, meaning that when you're shopping for something, a 3-star product may actually be the thing you're looking for, since the real rating is drug down by counterfeiters (Amazon eventually kicks the counterfeiters off the listing (usually after a few returns), but afaik, the rating damage for the ASIN lingers).
The Thomas Watson quote (only a market for 5 computers) is a bit of an urban legend:

http://geekhistory.com/content/urban-legend-i-think-there-wo...
Yes, TS does have limits. Its still very expressive compared to most mainstream type systems.
It's actually not that expensive in the South bay, at least compared to SF. I would say it's roughly Boston area rent prices
That depends on purpose, sure, they are fantastic for "catch the moment" but there is nothing else going on for them about photography (video is a different story, at least from what I hear).

On the otherhand yeah, phone cameras getting better and enabling more and more applications is awesome.
To be honest, I haven't noticed this. I think they're mostly onedrive ads anyway, and I have onedrive activated on most of my devices, so that could be the cause.
Haskell?

Some of it's parallelism and concurrency features should look familiar to you (it has an M:N threading model), complete with channels, and some stuff you've probably never heard of like STM. It compiles to a binary, has a type system much more powerful and expressive than Go's, and the community is very helpful.

I will say the compile times aren't very speedy, I assume you want fast compile times in order to type check your code, and for that there is ghc-mod.
What did I bring up again? I'm confused what this about at this point. I feel like you are trying to create cognitive dissonance where there is none.

Read these:
https://www.amazon.com/What-Dormouse-Said-Counterculture-Per...

https://www.amazon.com/Counterculture-Cyberculture-Stewart-N...
Network drives are handled by the file sharing protocol, not the local file system. Fat32 is handled by a fat32 driver that does the correct thing according to fat32 rules.
Amazon itself copies its sellers and customers with imitation products constantly. The irony should not be lost here.
Even the phrase "intellectual property" is highly tendentious. It implies property right where there are none. What you get from the patent office is a temporary government granted monopoly.

Often, as with, for example, spectrum, the people holding the license tend to view the object, and not the government granted license, as their perpetual property.
Oh please, "Surviving..."? Lemme guess, another liberal snowflake article probably written by the same person who wants "How to survive not getting what you want" comfort classes added to their their local college's curriculum. Give me a fucking break
In modern gcc, std::variant doesn't look like a competent replacement for old-fashioned tagged unions.

On x86_64 Linux, it looks like a function with signature `void f(std::variant<int, char>)` expects its (8-byte) argument to be passed by reference, whereas `void f2(tagged_union_of_int_and_char)` passes its argument in rdi.

gcc (-O3) also generates miserable code for calling f(42):

4004f0: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp
4004f4: 48 89 e7 mov %rsp,%rdi
4004f7: c7 04 24 2a 00 00 00 movl $0x2a,(%rsp)
4004fe: c6 44 24 04 00 movb $0x0,0x4(%rsp)
400503: e8 c8 ff ff ff callq 4004d0 <f>
400508: 48 83 c4 18 add $0x18,%rsp
40050c: c3 retq

as compared with calling f2(42):

400510: 48 bf 00 00 00 00 2a movabs $0x2a00000000,%rdi
400517: 00 00 00
40051a: eb c4 jmp 4004e0 <f2>

std::optional seems to have the same disease; the ABI is different from a plain struct containing a bool and the value and you get worse initialisation code. There's also a build time penalty to using std::optional; on my machine, including the code that uses optionals makes my trivial test program take 320ms to compile and link rather than 50ms.

These look like yet more new C++ features that are worse than what they're trying to replace.
Same here. MBP 13" with 16GB of RAM. Fast enough to develop web apps with Rails and JS. It's light and the battery life allows me to go to any meeting without having to bring the charger.

USB-C doesn't bother me, and I guess that in the near future it will be the standard. I just had to buy a new Ethernet adaptor.

I agree that the touchbar is annoying. I summon Siri way too often, but it's not the end of the world. The keyboard is good.

I just think that it is a bit too expensive for what it is, but I didn't pay for it.
Marine aviation is very small, and they are naval aviators, so Marine squadrons do carrier duty. But they are small and mobile, and want to be able to operate from remove patches of dirt. Helicopters in general, and the F35B and V22 in particular are principle enablers of CAP. And Marines generally do not want Air Force over them as they tend to prefer Army and Naval aviator brand of CAP.

The Army is not allowed jets per the same post WWII regulations that separated the Army Air Corps to form the Air Force service branch.
Full screen, non-tactile keyboard is a non-starter IMO.
Grey market imports can be a serious problem, and they're definitely more toward the counterfeit end.
> If it was accompanied by any sort of explanation of what it meant.

Most of the paper is just text, explaining their results in plain English, interspersed with technical vocabulary.

> "OK, I see the author is multiplying a bunch of numbers together? Why are they doing this? [Reads over it 10 more times]... Oh... it's to tell if it's even or odd. Why on Earth couldn't they just say that.."

Using powers of -1 to test for parity is a fairly standard trick, and they explain it right at the bottom of page 2. Did you overlook that, were you unfamiliar with this use, or is the explanation not clear enough? Only one of these possibilities can be blamed on the authors.

Or maybe you were talking about the formulas at the top of page 4, were they are multiplying two of those random parity functions together? That's not really to check whether they are even or odd, it's to prove their mutual orthogonality, which it says in the sentence above. In these transformations, the notation using powers of -1 is very convenient, since it allows to apply simple algebraic transformations. Those would have been very tedious had they used a boolean even/odd indicator.

> They could have kept going and defined a procedure for drawing lines.

They do this: Note that as the images space is discrete, we round the values corresponding to the points on the lines to the closest integer coordinate. They don't use notation for this, because it's not required for clarity.

Basically, I think the ideas in this paper are laid out pretty clearly for someone who is already familiar with the notation and conventions used. Research papers are primarily about communicating ideas to people working in the same field, who don't need to have the basics explained to them. That this makes the results hard to understand for a more general audience, even if they are experts in their field, is unfortunate, but basically unavoidable. Adding links to definitions and examples in introductory textbooks to every research paper would be pretty awesome, but it shouldn't be the author's burden.
Beautiful lyric. I met a man in Berkeley who was playing trumpet on the street. He used to play in Sun Ra's arkestra. He said something that I won't forget: he said that when we're truly "past race" in this country, we'll realize there are more colors, not fewer!
Really? They're pretty clearly public. Would you be upset if someone (who didn't know you personally) linked a friend of theirs to your comment? How about a radio broadcaster announcing "I saw a comment on Hacker News yesterday... here, let me read it to you..."? (Trying to pin down exactly what bothers you.)

Or is it that news articles seem official, while HN comments are off-the-cuff? It does seem strange to me that journalists treat internet comments and tweets as worthy of publication, but it seems to be a well established practice now...
> In 1990 no one thought there would be a global network for anyone and everyone that would change the world a few years later

The people that worked on it certainly had dreams about it. But those dreams might not necessarily have come true exactly.

And there are a lot of people out there dreaming about technologies that will never come true/or are still more far off than believed. Currently VR and autonomous cars are seen as the next big thing, however so were wearables like smartwatches.
The one problem I have with self driving cars is that the software is a single point of failure, so one bad patch (one "mistake") could cause millions of crashes
As an old SA and systems programmer my exposure to 'js everywhere' (node + angular -w- nosql backend) has convinced me that it's best left to hobbyists and experimenters. The same kind of folks that liked the
gentoo linux distribution. If you can make your business run with js front to back good for you. I don't want the pain.

Javascript + the node paradigm is such a bad systems approach that I've never even bothered dealing with learning it to any extent. One look at an async waterfall and nested callbacks + libuv 'transparently' handling blocking routines was enough for me.
Solution: take your money elsewhere. It's not even that difficult or inconvenient.
>I guess I could ignore the top few inches of my monitor but that is somewhat of a pain because of what happens on window maximization.

Windows has lousy built-in tools for laying out windows. Try AquaSnap, or script something with AutoHotKey.
Marble Machine: Music instrument using 2000 marbles by Swedish band Wintergatan
Dare to be remarkable? You need to piss some people off
Crafting perfect Java Docker build flow – Codefresh
This is in Seoul. A news story would be businessmen going to a norabang and not seeing prostitutes
"Like" or "dislike" isn't as big of a question as "possible" or "impossible". Understanding complex legal arguments, which would vary from city to city, county to county, and state to state sounds impossible with today's technology.
> It is disturbing that Microsoft either couldn’t see any of this coming, or just didn’t care what would happen when a significant number of people have their lives turned upside down.

>It is even worse when you consider how many billions of dollars they continue to make by selling software. If you can take all that money, you should be willing to spend some of that money to make experiences that are actually worth all that money.

Why should they care? As you point out, they continue to make billions of dollars selling software. Why should they spend one red cent to improve the user experience? Is it going to improve their profits? No, of course not. So it's wrong for them to worry about any problems their users might have. These users are perfectly willing to throw money at MS no matter what, and aren't going to leave MS no matter what, so MS is right to just take their money and do the bare minimum.

>And if even that wasn’t enough, they basically lied to the user using language like how it would always be possible to go back, everything would be preserved, etc.

Yep, and despite all this stuff, the users keep coming back for more. It's just like whining about an abusive boyfriend: "why won't he treat me better? Waa!"
One could argue that the reason why you're having fun at night is because you can't have fun in the middle of the day due to work.
> In my experience the problem comes when you try to apply static typing to a dynamic system.

As in, because it compiles down to a dynamic system, it's no good?

There are plenty of languages that give us strong static guarantees and compile down to dynamic or untyped languages. Look at Purescript, Elm, etc. They all do quite well compiling down to JS.

Don't forget that assembly isn't strongly typed either, and most languages compile down to that. I don't see anything wrong with a static typed layer that compiles to dynamic code, the interface you're providing is still type safe.
> I know it seems harsh, but when I hear people talk about the "beauty" or "elegance" of Ruby, I just think of someone who started coding in the 2005-2009 era and started out with RoR

I started programming in 1981, I detest Rails, and I picked Ruby for its beauty and elegance. I'm a language geek first and foremost; the syntax and presentation of a language is extremely important for my happiness when working with it, and nothing has so far gotten close to Ruby in that respect, and I've worked in more languages than most developers can name.

TypeScript and Python both looks awful to me. Neither are languages I'll work in given a choice. I don't think you'll find many Rubyists who'd consider them viable alternatives - those who have evaluated both and come down on the Ruby side tends to have strong opinions on the matter in my experience.

> In fact, many reformed "Rubyists" whom I know are switching to other platforms, and RoR jobs are getting increasingly scarce (supplanted by the next large-scale server-side fad, node.js). Not many people seem to be using Ruby for new projects anymore.

My experience is the exact opposite. It's easier than ever for me to find work doing Ruby even while avoiding Rails. I'm too expensive to do Rails even I liked it. Yet I regularly find devops consulting gigs and the like where people are happy to find someone with Ruby skills.

If RoR jobs are indeed getting scarce, I suspect that's more an effect of the number of Ruby developers reaching the kind of saturation that PHP developers did years ago.

But these things are also highly dependent on where you look. I rarely come across people asking for node.js for example. Presumably because my network is tilted towards Rubyists.
Reviews clearly have to take the price into account. You expect different thing from a $40 grill and a $300 one. If Amazon doesn't want explicit price info displayed and they make that clear, fine, but a review can't be accurate under arbitrary price movements.
Strengthening the Microsoft Edge Sandbox
this thread is like that time when there was a post about common lisp and then everyone started talking about clojure
Odd to put it on a table with many other handhelds you were encouraged to pick up and look at.
If you use microprocessors from companies like AMD and Intel, there is a good chance that parts of their design were checked with large amounts of Lisp code.

Example: https://github.com/acl2/acl2/tree/master/books/rtl/rel11

> This directory contains an ACL2 library of register-transfer logic, developed at AMD from 1995 to 2011, and at Intel from 2012 to the present, in support of the mechanical verification of the floating-point arithmetic units designed
during those periods by the respective companies.
7 Simple Steps to Check and Remove Superfish on Your Windows
I've just added Mythical man month to my basket. It was long overdue :) Probably they will agree that there is no silver bullet in tech.
I've been wishing for this for years. I'd add "tactile keyboard".
You know those electronics stores littered around Manhattan that sell flip cell phones for like $10, calling cards, and $15 digital cameras that nobody shops at because it's so obvious what you're getting?

Why does it seem like people lose their sense online? If you're not buying from the manufacturer or a seller you're familiar with, do some research.

And don't buy from anywhere outside the Western world. The rest of the world is rife with liars and counterfeiters. There are still some here, but they are much fewer and are almost always trivial to distinguish.
SQL uses '--' for comments.
And this shows my MS is right to do a shoddy job with the Windows 10 upgrades. If it works out right, they get more money from spyware and adware. If it doesn't work out, stupid users will trash the computer and go buy a new one, so MS now gets yet another big license fee for the copy of Win10 on it, and they still get money from spyware and adware.

What amazes me is how many people still don't understand why MS isn't "nicer" and doesn't care about doing QA. Why should they? It's just going to cost more money, and only hurt their profitability.
Minimum requirements:

2xCore CPU
8Gb RAM
10GB HDD
The first author on this paper does have a great intro book on precisely this area where the notation ramps up more slowly.
Thanks, the podcast was way more enjoyable than watching his film. Less disgusting imagery that would burn into my photogenic memory haha
I've bought cell phone batteries from batteries.com. I haven't gotten anything from them in years, so my experience isn't current, but they had the batteries I needed and they worked OK.
"Helpful" is easy to game with enough fraudulent upvotes.
We're talking about 4,400 jobs here - how much of that can be attributed to one or two of he major layoffs announced in the past few quarters? If Intel or Cisco dropped a couple thousand of their layoff employees in San Jose, thats a pretty big chunk of the dip right there.
> The problem is that it's likely the first realization you'll have a stealth aircraft is around is when it launches a missile at you.

Stealth aircraft still reflect radiowaves, they just don't reflect them back at the source. This can be effectively countered by separating radar transmitter and receiver in space.

It is also possible to use existing transmitters (e.g., FM radio, cell towers) to build passive radar that does not emit anything itself.
I guess Amazon has a software problem: when sorting by price instead of "relevance", both off-topic items and scammer/counterfeit stuff appear. Hint: filter novel sellers selling below market price.
So, Lisp provides static checking that is so early, it precedes your CPU being taped out.
How depression saved my career
> 2. We provide tools to allow the consumer to track the supply chain process. Products shipped with unique QR code, printed at the of manufacture? Users able to verify that this product was actually manufactured by the stated supplier. Could be an interesting startup idea?

Yes, it does sound like a fantastic opportunity! How would it work though? Every single instance of product would have to have its own id that would "expire" as soon as it's verified by an end-user, to prevent counterfeiters from copying a number and running with it?

Even then, it would be possible to copy numbers from products not yet delivered, and use them on counterfeits. Or you have to have a destructive process to reveal the number (like a scratch-off).

There would still be many ways to cheat: opening the boxes and replacing the genuine product with a fake, or the used market, etc.

Still, an interesting problem!
I'm sure you probably didn't mean to be racist, but this is a pretty racist comment. Not only that, but you are tacitly implying that our civilization is superior to all these past civilizations. It's been well documented what these ancients were able to do, specifically the Egyptians. Are you saying they were just simply looking at effects without trying to understand causes (just little playful kids)? are you saying their thinking wasn't scientific? This of the people who brought us writing and mathematics
You have just made two contradictory statements:

1 )That we will see the demise of self-ownership of cars when you state:

>"once self-driving cars make up the majority of cars on the road"

2) Car makers will continue to market car ownerships to individuals when you state:

>"I doubt that traditional car manufacturers, like BMW, Audi, Honda, Jaguar or Mercedes-Benz are pursuing self driving cars merely to offer ride sharing services, after all these companies are in the business of selling cars to individuals"

The problem with inebriation is that people don't exercise good judgement which is the reason they get behind the wheel and drive because they "think" they are OK.

Someone who has a car that has a "self-driving mode" can just as easily get behind the wheel and operate the car in manual mode because in their impaired state they also "think" they are ok to drive.

Self-driving cars don't solve the problem of impaired judgement.
> I don't need the compiler to artificially slow me down

It's slowing you down because you've written code with errors. Those type errors are still in your dynamic code, you just can't see them.

> I spent many years programming in ActionScript 3 and then Java so I feel like I've given typed languages a fair shot.

I don't think you have, you've missed many wonderful modern type system features.

Algebraic types, for one, aren't present in either of those languages and are massively useful, replacing 'null' (with a type like Option/Maybe) and exceptions (with a Result/Either concept) in many languages that have them.

Not to mention, with a language that has type inference, you don't even have to write the type in many cases, and yet you keep the guarantees of a strongly typed language.
Even #1 isn't 100% safe. Ubiquiti had counterfeit product get mixed into their own fulfillment chain. Let me repeat that, they had counterfeit product make its way into their own fulfillment chain, which was then sold legitimately to customers.

Then again, this is the same company that fell prey to Nigerian spammers. Wouldn't go near any of their products as they definitely have some roomtemp IQ's in that joint.
hmm, so ancient Athenians were victims of #fakenews? Or, are these overly simplistic summaries #fakenews? Whoa, so meta.
Very pertinent: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13931474
Spying on your political enemies is a serious threat to democracy.

Not many seem to care, frankly, that the government is spying on them. I have some hope that they might care about America turning into a dictatorship where elections are decided by abuse of power.

On the other hand, I also see many reasons to fear that they won't care, as long as "their side" wins.
Some examples/anecdotes would be interesting. with-genyms to protect the guilty.
Feminist Dystopias in Sci-fiction
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/mar/25/dystopian-dreams-how-feminist-science-fiction-predicted-the-future

Can they happen? Which ones speak to you?

To me, Ursula Le Guin's Left Hand of Darkness was a turning point in how I viewed the world and learnt how to see or even imagine it different.

Le Guin was exactly the salve I needed after over exposure to Robert Heinlein stories. And I do believe that I might have been a different person(possibly infinitely more maladjusted) had I not accepted Le Guin.

What is the value of feminist sci-fiction? Why are there so few of them? (Other than the obvious answer) Do we have a modern Le Guin? Any favourites?
You have to account for selection/hindsight bias.

There were probably many more things predicted by various niche groups, just selectively looking at the few correct ones later does not mean that the overall prediction success ratio is high.