skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel like it's a stepping stone in more ways than one.
There's still plenty we don't know about how our own biology functions outside of Earth's gravity well, atmosphere, or magnetosphere. Long term studies will need to be done, and lunar studies are a much more approachable candidate (cost and mission risk).

We could always go straight to Mars and do the research there, but that is the riskier strategy. We'd definitely learn what we need to, but it opens up more failure modes for any colonization mission, and managing the risk on Mars would be expensive. Mars colonization would already be straining our ability to engineer and fund, let alone doing it semi-blind.
> Which components influence the problem here without ending up only being an influencer on the supply or the demand?

If all the relevant components "just" affect supply and demand then it's useless to analyze supply and demand. Take a step back and analyze those components.
Programming is not a competitive sport. There are many skills involved. No one person has them all. It seems doubtful you can point to any person, or group of people, and say "they are the best."
One option is something like https://www.jacksflightclub.co.uk/ where they'll send you notifications of surprisingly cheap flights to a variety of destinations.
Your first point is incorrect, lambda works with the first syntax for both python 2 and 3. What /has/ changed, however, is the implicit destructuring:

l = lambda (a, b): a + b
l((1, 2))

I suspect there are very good reasons not to allow something like this.

With regard to the second point, I also would have liked a more "gradual" step there, I find myself (especially in REPL environments) often doing `list(map(sth, sth))`. A `mapi`, `filteri` or something like this would probably not be zenny enough.

Both don't pose very strong points for python 2 > 3.
This looks promising: https://www.gitkraken.com/
How simple, though...?

# title

- item1
- item2

some paragraph with an *italic* word

->

<html>
<body>
<h1>title</h1>

<ul>
<li>item1</li>
<li>item2</li>
</ul>

<p>some paragraph with an <i>italic</i> word</p>

</body>
</html>
No, a large project, which isn't easily replaced, whether or not it's near the end of it's life, or anything using a Py2 only dependency
TypeScript 2.3
I am an avid Cloudflare user who of course maintains an exit strategy in case I need to stop using their service for any reason. On the web, this isn't a big deal - I can switch DNS and reconfigure my web server with relative ease, and others can do likewise. Web servers tend to be maintained by people who know what they're doing.

What is the exit strategy for a Cloudflare Orbit-using vendor? If said vendor has shipped a million IoT devices which all answer only to Cloudflare-proxied requests, what do I do if Cloudflare suddenly ceases operations one day? These devices aren't likely to all be in the hands of technical end users. Even with a short notice, it could be difficult to update all the devices in time.

Of course the vendor themselves may be far more likely to go out of business than Cloudflare, but in such a case there won't be any further device updates to worry about. This on the other hand adds yet another point of failure in to the mix.

I can't help but feel that if I was a vendor with a bit of extra money to throw at security, I should throw it at ensuring better practices on my end rather than a service.
Here is a UI/UX comparison of 1.x vs. 2.x:
https://blog.sourcetreeapp.com/2017/01/27/sourcetree-for-win...
I think you're greatly underestimating what it takes to mine regolith in vast quantities, transport it, produce it into something usable, then build heavy structures with automation. You're looking at 10,000+ lbs machines and many of them and with no heavy energy source. You're not running these off solar or a small RTG, so you're probably talking building a nuclear reactor on the moon just to power these juggernauts.

Meanwhile human built lightweight structures are pretty much doable right now with a heavy human rated rocket like the upcoming SLS or SpaceX's upcoming heavy configuration.
Alex Fraser has cables on the outside, and the same issues, if not worse.

https://goo.gl/images/XogwUa
So if the beam is holding a load over a span, then the concrete on the bottom of the beam, which is experiencing tensil force, is doing little? I mean, I assume concrete has poor tensile strength.
Notes: non-free for commercial use and, most importantly, an Electron app.

I don't care about any of those currently, though.
Nintendo's hardware visionary is calling it a day
For context, the recent move in Paris ends over a century of water privatization. The city seems to have managed fine during that time frame. The focus on consumer prices is emblematic of the problem with public water management. Water/sewer services shouldn't be cheap. Prices should be high enough to adequately maintain infrastructure. Water rates in the U.S. are less than half of what they are in France,[1] and as a result, our water infrastructure is in terrible shape.[2]

> You quote the example of communications, in France by law France Telecom had to expand its network to reach any citizen, whether 10km away from the grid or 10m at no cost for the consumer. This led to a great coverage of the territory and very high access to broadband for most of the population.

There is no free lunch. More money spent covering more people means less money invested in improving infrastructure in urban areas.

France is not a great counterpoint to the U.S. model of regulating ISPs. According to 2016 OECD data, France does have higher overall broadband deployment (40 per 100 inhabitants versus ~33 per 100 in the US).[3] But the vast majority of it is DSL rather than much faster cable. According to Akamai's latest broadband speed report,[4] France ranks 52nd in the world in average speed (page 32). The U.S. ranks 14th (page 24). The U.S. has 42% of connections above 15mbps, versus just 16% in France (pages 25, 34).

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/multimedia/documents/state-of-t....

> Take the example of the US, where internet access costs easily $100 a month, has just a couple actors sharing the market in each city, in a proper position of cartel, and where government regulation is nearly non-existent; and oppose this to most european countries where a 100mb symmetrical connection will cost you 30 EUR

The fact that you can get 100mb symmetrical connections cheaply in some places doesn't reflect "most of Europe." Fiber is available in almost every U.S. city I've ever lived or worked in (Atlanta, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Washington, Annapolis--all except Baltimore and Wilmington, but even those have fiber in the surrounding suburbs). But that's not necessarily representative of the U.S.--you need to look at aggregate, not anecdotal data.

Almost 2/3 of the EU lives in: Germany, France, the U.K., Italy, or Spain. According to Akamai's data, those countries all have slower average internet speeds than the U.S. That is consistent with the OECD data, which shows that three of the five lag the U.S. in fiber deployment (counting the U.K.'s FTTN as fiber rather than DSL) and rely predominantly on slower DSL rather than faster cable technologies.

[1] http://everylittledrop.com.au/knowledge-center/the-cost-of-w...

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/us-water-safety_us_56bcf....

[3] http://www.oecd.org/sti/broadband/1_2-OECD-WiredWirelessBB-2...

[4] https://www.akamai.com/us/en/multimedia/documents/state-of-t...
A sounding argument, but:

> You know Earth is a planet right?

Not really necessary...
Please read the comments above about the multiple ways that Kobble can be used. Our use of gists for openly sharing content was entirely intentional.
Thanks for your answer. Indeed! I'm not sure, the main mission of my idea is to offer homeless/refugees a way of connecting to other people (it could be just for chatting or for meeting and offering some jobs in order to allow them to integrate).

The main problem here is that these people won't have an easy access to the internet so it might be easier a website but otherwise I think an app would be more suitable.

(probably worth go to the streets and ask them).
'Vignettes' Invents a New Genre by Enchanting Your iPhone
I really believe (mostly) self replicating robots are necessary for any serious space colonization. Starting with just humans is way more effort than it's worth. Imagine just sending a few rockets to the moon. Waiting a few years, and then humans arrive with a base and infrastructure already set up for them.

Last week's episode of Doctor Who had an interesting take on that scenario:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile_%28Doctor_Who%29
> I like lambda a, b: a + b syntax better than lambda a_b: a_b[0] + a_b[1]

uh, `lambda a,b: a + b` works in 3.6...

> I prefer ... to return lists rather than iterable:

Why? I'm just curious. Iterables are much more flexible than lists, unless you need random access... at which point list(...) works pretty well.
Has it improved the traffic overall now? Is there a barrier in between? Switching lanes are also major problem in traffic congestion.
Exactly. From a skeptical POV, it's much harder to argue something can't be the case than it is to argue something could be the case. Especially for a complex and multi-faceted concept of intelligence levels, which the author admits isn't one-dimensional.
> robots on the Moon are literally 3 seconds away (6 seconds round-trip)

Moon's apogee (point of furthest distance from Earth) is 405,400km [1]. Speed of light is roughly 300,000km/s [2]. Robots on the Moon are 1.35 seconds away (2.7s round-trip). Even with equipment delays I can't see how you could arrive at 6 seconds round-trip.

> Mars [...] is a minimum of 15 minutes away.

Mars' aphelion (point of furthest distance from the Sun) is 1.67 AU [3][4]. Earth is about 1 AU from the Sun (by definition). Also, Sun is ~500 light-seconds away from Earth. Thus, at conjunction the distance from Earth to Mars is not more than 0.7 AU or 350 seconds (5.8 minutes).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars

[4] You could also arrive it using Titus-Bode law [4]: for Mars n=4 so distance is 0.4 + 0.3 * 2^(4-2) = 0.4 * 0.3 * 4 = 1.6 AU.

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius%E2%80%93Bode_law

EDIT: formatting
Original comments of Joshua Kennon:

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/joshuakennon/mail_bag_buy...
Dropbox is just one of the best examples out there of everything that makes a software product solid: do one thing, do it well, don't bother the user, and be profitable.

* It 100% "just works" on all my devices (Mac, Linux, on a server, web, on my phone -- hell, I could stick it on a Raspberry Pi!).

* It integrates seamlessly with my filesystem.

* It has never, not once, failed me or bugged out on me. I've been using this product since it first came out and have not experienced even a minor bug!

* It's not tied to any other platform or service that might have conflicting interests.

* No fancy "smart" features or unexpected behaviour. All options are explicit and behave as expected.

* No fancy UX experiments, just straightforward to setup and use.

* I never have to think about it, it just does its job.

* It's a paid service that makes money (this in itself IS a feature).

It's just better than the competition. The peace of mind and get-out-of-the-wayness is well worth the $10 bucks a month. One of the few products that would be truly painful for me to lose...
On the criticism of treating intelligence as a one-dimensional number, I briefly note that the one dimensional conceptualization is a simplified but useful abstraction. It abstracts over the fairly blatant fact that things can be smarter than other things in ways that we care about. For example, I'm smarter than a mouse, and Einstein is smarter than me. Maybe not along every possible dimension. But for every operational intelligence metric you could come up with, every way of assigning intelligences numbers that was interesting and useful, I would probably have a higher number than a mouse and Einstein would probably have a higher number than me.
> I like lambda a, b: a + b syntax better than lambda a_b: a_b[0] + a_b[1]

It already works this way.

Python 3.6.1 (v3.6.1:69c0db5, Mar 21 2017, 17:54:52) [MSC v.1900 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> add = lambda a, b: a + b
>>> add(1, 2)
3

> I prefer map/reduce/filter to return lists rather than iterable

You can produce a list from any iterable by passing it to `list()`. You cannot take a materialized list and make it lazy though.

> I prefer dict.keys/values/items to return sets/lists rather than iterables, unless I call dict.iter[keys/values/items]

Why? Sets are mutable. What happens when you mutate dict.values? It doesn't make sense.
I partially disagree with what has been said here. Fundamental engineering skills are things you learn at school. Theory over reality, by default, we're all good engineers with a CS degree right? In my opinion you have to implement that theory in real life in order to complete your courses, which is when stacks come into the picture.

Learning a new stack is extremely important for an engineer because it exposes you to a lot of new problems. Things you've never heard of, unless you already got your hands dirty. I'm talking about reading poor API documentations doing reverse engineering work, understanding how to implement a concept and the large gaps between paper and code, how to pick up the right tools for your needs which will save you time and money moving forward, how to integrate, etc. Integration is about %70 of our work today. If you haven't used at least 2 different stacks in your life, you ain't know about integration problems.

So, yes, engineering is a lot more than a set of concepts. I would value someone who jumped into a bunch of different stacks rather than a google-like engineer who doesn't even know how to right HTML (which is a real joke between ex-googlers, we say we didn't even know how to write an HTML page when we left google).
> There are certain things you've either got or haven't got. You can't read a book to be good with people any more than to become a good comedian.

Reading a math textbook doesn't make you a good mathematician either. It takes practice too, and we should be charitable of others who are perhaps trying to practice and improve their skills, no matter the subject.
You're creating a small classified dataset without manually labeling them, in order to train a supervised learning model.

I'm not an expert, but I think that a boostraping technique doesn't imply continually improvement of the model.
I think it means that you tell the compiler what version of Python the original source code is in, so it knows how to compile it. So, if your codebase has f''-strings then the compiler needs to know.

That's my guess, anyway.
Thanks! We went by the recommendation of someone who had already worked with this particular production agent. By working with an experienced agent you essentially buy their trusted network, which takes away some of the worry around working with people whose work you can't monitor on a day to day basis.
>Google Map is known for taking the main road avoiding local whenever possible.

That's not really my experience. At least some subset of the time Google Maps seems to get it into its head that what it would really like to do is take a nice country drive that involves making turns every half-mile or less. I can't comment on how frequently it does this relative to other applications, but Google will definitely sometimes take you on a very convoluted route to ostensibly save 3 minutes.
Not necessarily a bad thing, as it makes programming more accessible to a more diverse range of people as you mentioned, whom may bring other kinds of benefits to the profession. But there is the drawback of a higher percentage of incompetent people. Can't have everything..
One of the best conference talks I've ever seen (from any sort of conference) was Teller gave the keynote at IdeaFestival a few years back (IdeaFestival is a somewhat Ted-esque conference held in Louisville, KY). From what I've heard Teller has only delivered this talk in a few unrecorded keynotes over the years and I'm still grateful I managed to get a front and center seat for this talk.

In the talk, Teller walked through the entire history of a single trick from both directions: his history in finding and learning about the trick, and the history of the trick's development and evolution from magician to magician.

An interesting takeaway is the interesting frisson between the need of magicians to be public figures and broadly advertise (and televise) and yet their need for some secrecy in the details of their work. You can often see the evolution of a trick across advertisements and filmed portrayals of a trick: they are open secrets of a sort, because magicians want an audience. Few professions are so deeply secretive and yet so deeply and publicly documented.

The biggest takeaway, though, was a deeper appreciation for the skill often required to learn a trick, the incredible amount of dexterity and practice required until you can make it look easy, until you can make it look magic. That you can know the entire history of a trick and every detail of how it was performed and not accomplish that trick without years and years of practice.

Teller stated his hypothesis of that talk was that for some tricks, knowing how it is accomplished and seeing a trick decomposed into component parts doesn't lose all of the magic from a trick because you get the corresponding magic of that appreciation of the skill and timing and dexterity needed to pull it off, to run through all of the parts in quick enough succession.

That's something that you can see Penn & Teller often play with in their act, revealing the components of an illusion explicitly, just before or just after combining them in thrilling ways at a full pace. That continues to marvel even knowing everything about how it is done.

I often wonder if Penn & Teller sometimes think the magic field is too secretive for its own good. I think it's interesting how much in their act they seem to imply that the best magic is the magic where you know what is going on and it is still magic to watch; that it is not the secrets of magic that make it compelling to watch but the human skills of elocution and drama and timing and dexterity.

ETA: Obviously a lot of the talk I saw is a little more coldly direct in the article here than as I saw it presented, but I felt like waxing poetic on the same subject.
Many sites do. If you go to Google Flights, half the page is filled with "Discover destinations" with flexible months and parts of the world.
It does, but there's also still some preserved/restored flying for airshows or whatnot. I thought initially this was a crash of one of those.
As the child of an Pak expatriate, believe me I'd love to get there too. Unfortunately, you don't eat a cow like this all at once.
great to know these, thanks!
Looks interesting. Trying to install it on my phone gets me a "Your device is not compatible with this version" in Android's Play store.
What is it you are doing in this app that has special compatibility requiremrents?

My phone has a modern qualcomm flagship cpu and latest android.
same thing we can do to stop the tides, not a damn thing
I thought this is just a lame music playlist. This is even better!
> I take an approach of blast in the morning...

Try to take the emotion out of the equation. You can not control how companies will respond. Blasts have a low-hit ratio, huge time suck. Suggest contacting individual people you can help-- managers, directors, CIO's in companies that use Python. Linkedin search is excellent for sourcing these targets.
The issue with PATH is that the tunnels are extremely old - older than the Manhattan subway tunnels.

Whereas Manhattan subways have two tracks per tube, the PATH has only one. Service is not only slower, but you usually wait significantly longer just sitting on the PATH before it even leaves the station.

Hurricane Sandy also did irreparable damage to the tunnels crossing the Hudson.
Their client and sync support is simple and works very well. Hits the sweet spot of simplicity and features. The other options are more complex. Google still doesn't have any Linux support, so it's off the table for me personally.
I think that the reason jobs did that was because Dropbox refused their offer for acquisition
Grants Up to $1,500 for Visual Artists and Writers in Washington
Being integrated with Microsoft and Google's infrastructure is not a benefit, in my opinion. I've seen these companies make a lot of impulsive, ham-handed decisions with their "environments" in recent years and I'd rather pay for a service that isn't going to mutate negatively in order to coerce me to buy more things from Microsoft and Google that I just do not want.
Even hobby sized projects can be a major chore. Especially if it's wrapped up in a Gtk transition too.
You mean the Van Wyck. It has the added bonus of not having to do the difficult merge from the Grand Central in the Van Wyck later on. But of course: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8AS_tisvQI
Yes you don't have the guarantees of statically compiled/linked code but the entire point of using protobufs is that if you use the generated interfaces, you'll end up with fast binary serialization/de-serialization with type safety. That's a lot better than just using JSON. Which is very verbose.

You could of course make your own protocol and type system and use JSON for transmission. Why bother when this is done for you and is likely going to have the best adoption when it comes to interface definition languages like protobuf or Thrift.
As others pointed out, the cost of moving from 2.7 to 3 may simply be to high. Remember that while much can be done automatically, you still need to test that all your code still behaves as expected afterwards. I was one a project that did migrate a rather large web application and it was pretty painless, but I can easily imagine more complex code bases having issues.

I don't really see the benefit of a Python 3.6 to 2.7 transpiler/compiler though. More realistically I would require that all new code be both 2 and 3 compatible, for when the eventual migration will happen. This isn't necessarily and easy task either, but then you're only depended on the Python project, not some random transpiler that might not see further development.
Thanks, we've updated the link from https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/chinese-and-european-space....
Proper Polish pronunciation:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Pl-Tadeu...
Google bought WAZE in 2013. I wonder why Google Maps would be so much better than WAZE four years later.
This problem is even worse in DC. "Local" policy is effectively a multilateral treaty negotiation. ~5 counties, 2 states, the District, and Congress.
This is an argument fallacy. Conflation of:

actively committing a crime ("stealing cars") v.
passively committing a crime (failing to do something or looking the other way)

Also ignoring intent, People don't unintentionally steal a car. People can unintentionally fill out a form or misunderstand or be unaware of the requirements of the law.

Additionally, theft is ingrained into the fabric of society and religion. Following some sort of government reporting requirement is not included in any religious teaching that I am aware of.
We have improved the wording, and changed 'own' to 'control'. As was stated elsewhere in these comments, we are building an open content sharing platform where users 'control' the data, not us. Since it's in your GitHub account and not on our servers, you can do whatever you want with it.