skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> <eyeroll> Standard libertarian/ancap nonsense that confuses interference with regulation

<eyeroll> standard statist nonsense which thinks by changing labels the essence of things changes. See how easy it is to argue a position when you think argument means finding a name to call your opponent?

> Please don't go on about 'privately produced law' or how private roads will replace public roads

Please don't attach your comment on discussion with voices in your head to mine. I never said anything about private law or roads.

> Private business doesn't make myriad of mistakes and keep on going, even being rewarded

Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. Government always do, that's the point. Excepting violent revolution, of course, but you don't want to go there, do you? That's the difference - business very well may escape the consequences of mistakes, just as murderer can escape justice. That happens and nobody would pretend otherwise. But for the government consequences are not even on the menu - like for an executor in state prison, there's not even a question whether he can be accused of murder - of course not. That's the whole difference.

> Have you ever heard of the term 'golden parachute'?

Yes, I did. And a private company can afford only finite number of those. Unless, of course, it is too big to fail - in which case, government comes in, which can force me, the taxpayer, provide the gold for those. I don't like private sharehodlers being fleeced, but what is even worse is when I'm being fleeced even without being a shareholder. And that's what the government does.
Perl is also another interesting language for learning the low-level details of OOP, since its default set of OOP features (as of Perl 5; this all changes in Perl 6) involves manually "blessing" some data structure into an object. Objects are thus just "blessed" data structures (and not just hash tables, either, though those are the most common), and methods are just subroutines that accept their object as their first argument.

Between Perl and Erlang, I think I've ended up learning way more about real object orientation than I did from my dabbling in C++ and Java.
Those reports are usually printed and sent to members. Therefore, even the 2000 pages report needs to be well-formatted and layouted correctly, including addresses, brand images and stuff.

Amount wise it really feels like a dump, yes.
There is also this pandoc extension called schlolarly markdown that has some nice features

http://scholarlymarkdown.com/Scholarly-Markdown-Guide.html
That's very interesting- Thanks for the response.
Funding research is different than funding a specific result. The latter is definitely political.
> If anyone is foolish enough to think china will adopt democracy in the guise of America or Europe is foolish, their culture is so different as so to not even be understandable by most westerners.

I think that's wrong and patronizing, everyone is capable of democracy.
Someone on Twitter posted an excerpt about profit margins from the Southwest Airlines CEO's book. Looks like it was about 7.5%. Or as the book puts it, the lost of just one customer per flight reduces their profit on that flight by 20%:

https://twitter.com/morganhousel/status/856493737308037121
I'm not too worried. The economy will adjust to the aging/declining population via automation, downsizing, etc. The quality of life for the average Japanese person is very high, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

Economists in general are very doom-and-gloom and say that Japan needs mass immigration to balance the population decline, but that would clearly be a mistake. Here's an interesting video on the subject that mostly echoes my views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3BYCK-3jPc
It's now mobile ready
In that it wasn't as such... but it was also totally understandable.

To use a German example: I don't think anyone would argue that the firebombing of Dresden was moral. It was effective... but that's not the same thing.

Of course... this is war we are talking about. So, morality is already about shades of grey.
> "It's unclear if African American candidates are receiving more offers because of diversity initiatives, a lower preferred salary, or a combination of those and other factors," said the report, which was released Thursday.

Is the company size enough to explain this? Companies with diversity hiring are usually the large corporates and these are also the ones that pay the worst.

> Latino and Asian candidates, for example, are more likely to receive salaries that are more on par with white candidates, but they are also less likely to get hired. According to the report, Latino candidates are 26 percent less likely to get hired than white people while Asians are a whopping 45 percent less likely.

I'd guess this is because their aren't breaking things down via country of origin. A recent migrant with poor communication skills will be much less likely to get hired.
According to the wikipedia entry on cord cutting:

A TDG study showed nearly 101 million U.S. households subscribed to television at the industry's peak in 2011, but the number would fall below 95 million in 2017.
In Midori, objects are capabilities. This is possible because type safety is enforced and an object's type cannot be forged.

It's easy to imagine a capabilities system built around closures. For example, a capability to send on a socket could be an unforgeable closure that performs that sending. Are there any systems that work this way?
I think the people that say these things have a very poor understanding of what their own governments do in their name.

If they didn't they wouldn't paint with such a broad brush.
On the happy life
> in which case the question also never arises.

I'm not sure I see that.

If class A and B wrap a C by composition and expose, respectively, `a` and `b`, then I still very much have the choice of which I'm building. Perhaps less so if they wrap a C by reference, so the C can be reused (it's too late at night to be sure I've thought it all the way through).
You are doing her a massive favour for the rest of her life, its easy to underestimate the damage sugar does and after all we want our kids to be happy and sugary treats seem to make them happy
I think the problem is that, yeah, they're messages but very low level messages about the state of the object and not at all about a behaviour of the object in response to a message.

I think, however, they're a good way of building objects where a language lacks object or hashmap shorthand (e.g JS and Ruby). In fact, with Obj-C, if my memory serves right, it can look just as expressive.

Setters (particularly fluent), in that case, seem best for building objects in a readable way where a language lacks a way to pass express keyword arguments.
> The only difference between ShareLaTeX and overleaf I see, is SLs over-the-tops documentation. Kudos again and thanks.

There is also the (awesome) fact that ShareLaTeX is free software (under the AGPL no less).[1]

[1]: https://github.com/sharelatex/sharelatex
> Of course there's some sort of B-tree somewhere in the stack; that's not the question.

You've misunderstood me. I'm literally talking about building a distributed B-Tree or Heap. As in, a Heap which cannot fit in memory or storage of any one node.

Think: S3/DynamoDB is a distributed, highly available HashTable; _____ is a distributed, highly available Heap.
Play HD/UHD Blu-Rays on CyberLink PowerDVD 17
With Macron, the French Will Need an Entrepreneurial Left, Not an Extreme Center
Hi Ben.

Will Academia ever stop impersonating people in e-mail? I receive e-mails all the time purporting to be actually sent by academic colleagues, which are instead form messages sent by Academia.edu.

I know that you're not sending these messages with permission. I know that my dead co-author is not giving you permission to send unsettling e-mails from him.
To be entirely accurate, you're wrong when you say your definition of OOP is the original one. SIMULA-67 predates Smalltalk and its object system is much closer to Java than it is to Smalltalk, although it helped inspire both.

To be more fair, there are two very different schools which interpreted and continued to developed Simula in two radically divergent ways.

One of the schools is focusing on clear division between rigid, statically defined classes that never change (but may extend other classes) and runtime instances, which can contain only state, not behavior. This school does everything exhaustively codify the interfaces exposed by the classes: ensure that a predefined set of messages with a predefined set of parameters for each message (a.k.a methods) is permitted, control access to these methods and in the most extreme languages (e.g. Eiffel) even verify that object state and parameters conform to a predefined contract. This school is obviously not opposed to modifying behavior patterns based on runtime state, but it believes that the object system should not directly support that, and encourages programmers to implement their own mechanism on top of rigid-class object systems: this is what design patterns are usually meant to achieve.

The other school believes that an object system's first priority is giving objects absolute autonomy in parsing the messages they receive and as a result usually ends up with object systems that focus on powerful runtime extension and arbitrary message parsing functionality instead of compile-time strictness.

We could trace them back to their origins and call them the C++ school and the Smalltalk school. We could pin them to their modern champions and call them the Java school and the Ruby school. We could follow their poster boys and call them the class school and the message school. We could go on with type of languages they tend to thrive in and call them the dynamic school and the static school.

I would call either school "more object-oriented" than the other - they just have entirely orthogonal definition of what objects are. I can't even call either of them "better". I much prefer the Smalltalk school to the rigid version of the Java/C++ school (as was practiced in these two languages through most of the 90s and 2000s), but modern languages in this school have started incorporating some of the ML/Haskell tradition to give you much more powerful (and safer!) abstractions to define the way your objects may change their behavior in runtime. Design patterns are no longer encouraged, and if I'm using a language like Scala, Kotlin, Rust, Swift or even C#, I rarely find it necessary to employ a design pattern anymore.
Quitting The Silicon Valley Swamp
I love these kind of articles. Serverless? Some commenter here stated "Even the network is software now" and a variety of related nonsense. Lambda and everything like it runs on - gasp - servers. Networks have always been "software", running on some specialised hardware to make the packets linger less in the boxes they pass through.

Serverless as a name is hokum. Serverless, or rather FaaS, as a concept is extremely interesting though. However, if you are trying to sell it to me as "now you don't need anymore sysadmins or devops, or servers" you missed the mark. Most of time when I look at this stuff I come away with the distinct feeling that what is actually being sold is just another way to lock you in to a specific provider that has aggressively abstracted away the actual server, giving you significantly less control and significantly higher costs, for non-existing security.

I am not anti-cloud (I have been accused of that here a few times) and in fact have happily embraced cloud technologies since day one. I was deploying VMWare GSX Server in production around the time the twin towers came down, when everybody told me I was an idiot, and it would never work.

However, servers are not going anywhere for the time being, whatever the latest dev-fad is. Neither are sysadmins, or Devops. These magic functions still need to run somewhere and wherever that is, it will, by its very definition, still be a server. The more something is dressed up in re/misdirecting language, the wearier I am of it.
Tiny, yet so beautiful: The smallest piece of great Pharo code
Neither is Putin, yet he controls all the press. He's just an elected gang leader. Have something against the gang in power? You might just get shot on a bridge while going to work, imprisoned on account of fiscal fraud, poisoned with Polonium in your tea etc. That is how the Russian mafia works.
Sure. But realizing that objects are just structs with function pointers takes you from a binary "this code uses objects" vs. "this code doesn't use objects" to a more flexible "this code is designed in a more objecty way than that code".

A lot of people think about objects as a language feature, when they're really a design paradigm; and like all good design paradigms, you can use more or less of them depending on how well the paradigm fits a particular piece of code.
>I think people in China are happy to have this huge level of economic improvement for now, and will deal with the civil freedoms later.

I think you're right about the current attitude of people in China. Unfortunately, as I have experienced in software development, often "later" (e.g. the Jira label "Future") means "never."
By the same token, structures with function pointers are just Turing Machine bitstrings with delusions of grandeur.
That's what you get, when you give children an identity resolving around your moral high ground, you being the greatest, you bringing freedom to the world, praising veterans who defend you against constant threats (in itself a contradiction), having a romantic relationship with your flag and the list goes on and on.

You better not take that away, because what defines you if you do?
Sharps knives are only safer when in use. At rest in a drawer, or tub of soapy water, dull knives are safer. I don't see how that's applicable, though :-P

> The question is natural for how it truncates. It so happens the answer is by stopping. You imply it should do so by altering the string. I can see arguments either way.

So can I, and I think that's the distinction I draw. Something is nonsensical if I really can't see any arguments for it. It's counterfactual if things could reasonably have gone that way but didn't.

> For the rest, Truncation is a form of corruption. So I'm not sure where you are taking that line. Was it just my rhetoric?

Truncation is, indeed, a form of corruption. It is perhaps acceptable in more circumstances than other forms of corruption. It wasn't exactly that I thought, from your rhetoric, that you were referring to something else. But on the off chance you were, I definitely wanted to know about it.
What skills are adequate to work as independent React Native contractor?
How many libraries of the React ecosystem do I need to proficient in to claim my self as an independent React contract developer? Currently I know only React-Native, Redux, Redux-thunk but I don't know Redux-sagas, Relay and GraphQL.
Not at all particular to writing. I believe Einstein went on frequent walks too.

A walk through a park or a country path would be even better: greenery and nature has shown to boost creativity in some studies.
In a recent talk by Chomsky, he described US Air Force literature or rather documentation of the Korean conflict. Apparently the bombing was so thorough, they ran out of targets in North Korea. Not only military, but infrastructure and cities as well, as I recall. One of the impressive things about post '53 North Korea is that they did a complete rebuild.
Maybe it's just DRD4-7r gene.
". When we go for a walk, the heart pumps faster, circulating more blood and oxygen not just to the muscles but to all the organs—including the brain. Many experiments have shown that after or during exercise, even very mild exertion, people perform better on tests of memory and attention. Walking on a regular basis also promotes new connections between brain cells, staves off the usual withering of brain tissue that comes with age, increases the volume of the hippocampus (a brain region crucial for memory), and elevates levels of molecules that both stimulate the growth of new neurons and transmit messages between them."

New neurons. The next line about walking being easy tells me you live in a flat area with no obstacles.

"A small but growing collection of studies suggests that spending time in green spaces—gardens, parks, forests—can rejuvenate the mental resources that man-made environments deplete."

Uneven ground. I always look for uneven ground. Walking on concrete, man-made paths is the equivalent of looking at brick walls.
I always wondered the opposite: what's the point of schemaless DB when you're going to have schema in the app? Also, joins.
Coup was probably real but failed and Erdogan exploited it for his own ends. He's a very able and dangerous politician.
Microprogramming is a technology which goes back to the 50s. CISCs were microprogrammed. The VAX was microprogrammed. It was the status quo circa 1980. RISC as a term really dates to 1980 (although the ideas go back to the 801 and Crays machines).

The big idea of RISC was to avoid microprogramming and have a simple to decode ISA which was directly executed by a short simple pipeline. ld/st + lots of registers + C compiler. Awesome.

Indeed in Patterson+Ditzel's version of Luther's 95 theses, they say:

Microprogrammed control allows the implementation of complex architectures more cost-effectively than hardwired control

They say this in the section Reasons For Increased Complexity. RISC is revolting from that complexity, from microprogramming, so how can μops be RISC if that's what they were revolting from?

I think people say this because no one knows what microprogramming is anymore. You might read one paper in a graduate architecture seminar. And no one but no one writes microprograms.

The decode stage of Haswell translates add RAX,RBX into a '150b' μop. If can you read Agner Fog and you'll know how many μops, what the latencies are, etc. These are empirically determined properties of the μop but that's it. You know the Decoded ICache characteristics. But you don't know the ISA.

After all that's done, you're left with maybe a 14-pipestage data path. That's not RISC. Complicated instructions (AAA) get interpreted. That's not RISC. Multiple functional units can calculate 2+3 operand effective addresses. That's not RISC. This all is REALLY not RISC.

μops are micro-instructions, not RISC instructions.

BTW, the alternate decoder kinda wouldn't work so well because the microarchitecture, functional units, datapath, caches and registers are really set up for x86. Folks wanted something like that at Transmeta, a Java processor, but the HW was designed for x86.
>"If anyone is foolish enough to think china will adopt democracy in the guise of America or Europe is foolish, their culture is so different as so to not even be understandable by most westerners."

Taiwan is a clear counter-example to this ridiculous claim. In many ways, ranging from traditional religions to the writing system, Taiwan has preserved more traditional Chinese culture than the PRC has. None of this has stopped Taiwan from becoming a modern democracy with citizen referendums and more tolerance of peaceful protest than any English speaking country I know of.
I'm seeing strong parallels between bundled channels that people don't necessarily want and Monty Python's Spam Sketch,

Cable Companies: "Well there's egg and bacon; egg, sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg, bacon and spam; egg, bacon, sausage and spam; spam, bacon, sausage and spam; spam, egg, spam, spam, bacon and spam; spam, spam, spam, egg and spam; spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, spam, spam and spam; or lobster thermidor aux crevettes, with a mornay sauce garnished with truffle paté, brandy and a fried egg on top and spam."

Consumers: "Have you got anything without spam in it?"

Cable Companies: "Well, there's spam, egg, sausage and spam. That's not got MUCH spam in it."

Ad nauseam...
If you think about, the NSA, GCHQ, etc probably run similar software on their own devices to monitor employees and be able to trace back where any leaks came from. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a commercial company that sells this type of software.
Your definition sounds almost exactly like how an actor can handle messages and state, so it's no wonder that it's easy to implement in Erlang.
Yup. Completely agree. I worked on a project that moved off of qnx because dealing with cost and maintainability issues was too much of a pain.

I don't mean maintainability as in the system itself didn't work. I mean the pain of updating, upgrading, and adding to our system. Maybe the shop I was at just didn't have things set up well, but as a result we were trapped on a specific version of neutrino while trying to interface with modern networked and front end systems. When we can easily upgrade a Linux kernel, apt/yum/pacman install a package, and have more modern versions of our toolchains, it was easy to justify the switch. Not to mention not having to port 3rd party packages we decide to use, which is out of the question for the closed source ones and frankly just a lot of work for the open source ones.

It honestly felt like we were always stepping back 10-15 years in time trying to do something on QNX. And unless there is some hidden community I never discovered in my short stint as a qnx oriented dev, anytime I would stumble upon a forum for qnx stuff it seemed like the last post was from 2008 or so. And don't get me started on their online docs. "Oh this web documentation for <thing> is deprecated. Click this link (that dumps you on the front page of multi-page, hard to search HTML docs) to go to the up to date documentation."

It really is a shame too, because their IPC setup was insanely powerful. And I don't think I ever actually experienced an OS crash. The whole OS boiled down to its IPC concept, and that's what made it so cool and so useful:
- Kernel module? IPCs under the hood to 'plug in' to the system.
- POSIX? Thin wrapper over the IPC stuff.
- Need to talk between your processes? Sure you could use sockets or shared memory like Linux, but those QNX IPCs work fine (and I'd argue they were way easier to use, too).
- Networked processes? Just use that same IPC setup.
- Networked/distributed OS stuff? The OS is built on those IPCs you just networked in the previous bullet.
That was also one of my favorite moments of the day when I worked in NYC, lunch at Washington Square, listening to whatever jazz band was playing and watching people. A thousand times better than Union Square :)
Actually the kemalist factions in the army and police were the guardians of secularism (not quite a secular democracy but close) until Erdogan took care of them.
AWS Training in Hyderabad
I hope going forward humans are realizing that we don't need things, we need social systems which function. That's much more important that the latest doodad or car. It's more important to have good functioning social systems which support the masses and allow them to have some sense of a life... rather than being treated like one night stand employment agreements that we have today... and being in a constant state of being used and under-appreciated.