skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry about that. These annoying posts led to a discussion on the language forum. The Nim community, generally speaking, does not seem to support this militant attitude.
Those are the costs associated with running a bank. It's paid for by giving them access to our capital, that they can use to invest.

Have we forgotten what a bank is for? It's to conveniently and safely store money. Part of that convenience is to withdraw and store money at many locations. If a bank didn't offer that they wouldn't get my money.
Right now it's just a static list of addresses, but there's definitely more planned. One of the current discussions: https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs/issues/3908
The article is basically an unhelpful load of bull plugging a book.

Yes, of course the word 'psychopath' is abused.

Yes of course it's not an either-or thing, and a lot of law abiding people have some features of archetypal psychopaths.

Any psychiatrist would tell you something like this. So, a lot of 'water is wet' type of filler.

>> The Myth of the Born Criminal argues that, rather than genes, psychopaths' most significant commonality appears to be an abusive childhood, which related research has demonstrated can affect the anatomy of the brain in various and profound ways.<<

The book dismisses all those cases (there are some) where perfectly normal families produced complete monsters. A good share of serial killers weren't abused. It's thought that those are just people who happen to express a set of genes good for social predation. Nice explanation in this abstract:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14786010802159814...

Also, the article has howlers like:

>>It never occurred to me that Gregory’s behavior in Kenya could be the product of anything other than his brain, and thus I never asked or inquired about what might have been going on in his life. I ignored the strong, decades-long relationship he had with our boss, the sort of relationship that psychopaths are supposed to be incapable of sustaining.<<

Because whatever goes on in your life of course cannot affect your brain. Why is this sort of stupid dualism even allowed in the 21st century? A person is their brain, and their body, taken together. You can't separate it.
Imagination Computer Services GmbH | IT PROFESSIONAL, SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR, NETWORK ADMINISTRATOR | Vienna | Full-time ONSITE http://www.magiclensapp.com
We are looking for a talented IT Professional (System Administrator, Network Administrator) to develop and maintain our IT infrastructure so as to keep pace with our growth and resource demands.

[ Skillset ]

- Full job's description: http://www.magiclensapp.com/jobs/IT-Professional-2017.pdf

Contact: jobs@imagination.at

Looking forward to working with you ;-)
I strongly disagree. Rolling out a K8s cluster to a production environment without knowing how to "do it by hand", relying instead on helper tools that abstract away the complexity, is deeply irresponsible, even professionally negligent.

Like learning shortcuts in math, you only "earn" automation once you've done things the hard way often enough to know how it works at a low level. That knowledge is critical. Otherwise you're just cargo-culting something you don't understand.
So the worst of us developers out there write tons of tests? We wish. Who cares if it's 80% or 100%, i'd rather inherit a codebase with lots of test coverage than without.
A lot of people here seem to have strong opinions against 100% coverage, so I'll risk their ire with my strong opinion in favor.

If you have, say, 95% coverage -- and most corporate dev orgs would be thrilled with that number -- and then you commit some new code (with tests) and are still at 95%, you don't know anything about your new code's coverage until you dig into the coverage report. Because your changes could have had 100% coverage of your new thing but masked a path that was previously tested; or had 10% but exercised some of the previously missing 5%.

If you have 100% coverage and you stay at 100% then you know the coverage of your new code: it's 100%. Among other things this lets you use a fall in coverage as a trigger: to block a merge, to go read a coverage report, whatever you think it warrants.

Also, as has been noted elsewhere, anything other than a 100% goal means somebody decides what's "worth" testing... and then you have either unpredictable behavior (what's obvious to whom?) or a set of policies about it, which can quickly become more onerous than a goal of 100%.

It's important to remember that the 100% goal isn't going to save you from bad tests or bad code. It's possible to cheat on the testing as well, and tests need code review too. There's no magic bullet, you still need people who care about their work.

I realize this might not work everywhere, but what I shoot for is 100% coverage using only the public API, with heavy use of mock classes and objects for anything not directly under test and/or not stable in real life. If we can't exercise the code through the public API's then it usually turns out we either didn't rig up the tests right, or the code itself is poorly designed. Fixing either or both is always a good thing.

I don't always hit the 100% goal, especially with legacy code. But it remains the goal, and I haven't seen any convincing arguments against it yet.

Open the flame bay doors, Hal... :-)
> But withdrawing and depositing money is a service that costs the banks money to do doesn't it?

It's literally their job. It's their function. Why am I reimbursing them? I'm giving them my money essentially to invest, why am I also paying them to support basic business functions on my money, with my money, while they make money using my money?

It's easy to say "hurr durr why are you paying them for a service they provide, who does that??" but that's missing the point. Banks are a special case.

> I can't see it as morally 'disgusting'.

It disproportionately affects the poor, and for no real reason than 'I can charge this so I will'. Apparently some places charge you to even check your balance? What the hell.

> I don't really know who covers that cost in the UK

The big, fat, rich banks do. Because the total cost of running all their ATM's is a fraction of a rounding error on their yearly turnover.
If true, which this probably is, this is absolutely pig disgusting.

Local police forces are literally legalized mafias, and they lack pretty much all preventive oversight.

Their thirst for tax money and control of the local populace is so evident that one need only google around for cases of murder, cover ups, militarization, steroids.... you name it, local police departments have controversy in spades.

That they are now requiring your password to a digitized and synced database of all your contacts, conversations, and photos..... it shows how thirsty they are for allegiance and control, not public safety.
Reviews of Owlet Baby Monitor
Well it does mention that BBR uses "The RTT is the minimum of all RTT measurements over some time window that is described as “tens of seconds to minutes”." This is a much larger measuring window than previous RTT tracking TCP. At 10s of seconds it is also hopefully enough to tackle the most common forms of jitter and intermittent flows.

At truly bad flow characteristics you need to start some truly weird line coding methods with stream data split over multiple packets with redundant coding to rebuild dropped packets etc, but this kind of thing just kills latency.
> I would certainly go with ignorant. I stay away from Windows and, in consequence, from .NET.

Right, so what specifically are you adding to today's discussion? What drew you to it?
Yes - it's pretty frustrating to try and have an important discussion when 99% of the time it is framed incorrectly from the start.
Ask HN: How are submissions ranked?
What determines ranking of submissions on HN? I've seen a lot of odd rankings, but normally a story that is higher is either newer or has a greater number of points. Right now, the submission on the FCC request for comment on net neutrality is #70 (164 points, 70 comments) and a random paywalled story about a company I've never heard of getting more money than I dream of is #69 (7 points, 0 comments).

What would cause this ranking?
> It's paid for by giving them access to our capital, that they can use to invest.

What capital? The people referred to in this article don't have any savings. Many working class people have no savings at all, and only a few thousand in their current accounts.
Use these habits to start eating healthy even if you're super busy
I was wondering the same, but knowing the kind of DPI equipment that has been sold to Syria, Lybia and other countries I assume that it possible to detect, monitor, tamper and block pretty much any kind of traffic, including IPFS.
Pay individually for a service that could be much better with collective funding. I dont see the good in this approach.
>I have a friend, who literally believes that scientists are either evil people, who's primary goal is to gain power over others by outsmarting them, or, willfully ignorant tools of a predatory political / economic system.

Replace scientists with bankers and you have HackerNews, which in my opinion is equally ridiculous. I guess the lunacy is spilling over. Who'd have thunk it.
That's just looking at the tip of the iceberg, I think. It also improves everyone's ability to patch their applications, although with VM and container automation, it's not as big of a deal anymore.
I moved away from the .NET world less than three years ago and this announcement might as well be written in Klingon or ancient Greek to me.

Now, keep in mind that I actually thought (and still think?) that .NET and C# make for a very productive development environment. I didn't leave due to antipathy; no axe to grind here.

But...

"netcoreapp2.0"? "netstandard1"? "net4"? Huh? What?

From Scott Hanselman's reply:

.NET Core is side by side and it’s moving fast. It’s WAY faster
than .NET (Full) Framework can move which is good. By building
ASP.NET Core 2.0 on top of .NET Core 2.0 (which, remember, is a
SUPERSET of .NET Standard) that means stuff can be built faster
than NetFx or even Netstandard.

.NET Core? .NET Full? .NET Standard? .NETfx?

And .NET Core is a superset of .NET Standard? How does that make sense? "Core" sounds like a stripped-down version of... something? But, apparently it's a superset. Because nothing makes sense any more.

My only point here is: at first glance, this is an utterly bewildering set of choices. I'm sure there's a pretty simple relationship between all these things, but the .NET people probably aren't doing themselves any favors this these naming choices and (what appears to be) fragmentation between .NET development targets.
One point already made by several people on this thread is that code coverage, while helpful, is not enough (and perhaps is not even the best bang for the buck).

In hardware verification (where I come from, and where the cost of bugs is usually higher), "functional coverage" is considered more important. This is usually achieved via constraint-based randomization (somewhat similar in spirit to QuickCheck, already mentioned in this thread).

I tried to cover (ahem) this whole how-to-use-and-improve-coverage topic in the following post: https://blog.foretellix.com/2016/12/23/verification-coverage...
It's also dangerous advice. Seek professional attention first.
Have you seen this? https://jacquesmattheij.com/the-unofficial-hn-faq
relevant xkcd: https://www.xkcd.com/208/
The Admission
In my experience, Google Maps is really terrible outside the United States. It doesn't seem to understand that in the UK, a narrow country lane might have a speed limit of 60 mph, but nobody could ever drive that speed on it. It's constantly proposing insane detours off A roads onto back lanes obstructed by sheep and farm equipment.

Unlike Citymapper, Google Maps doesn't have a notion of multimodal transport: cycling to a train station, for example. Citymapper also doesn't "lose" your in-progress journey if you click the wrong thing or close the app.
In UK local elections last week the UKIP vote collapsed, so one could argue that right wing populism is in retreat. The media narrative is that the Tories have captured that vote since becoming the party of Brexit.
8 Best Google Apps You Have No Idea About
Powerful bonding / lost love, marriage spells, luck charms  27744155475
Silent Service / Red Storm Rising - those were the days
It's been 27 fucking years since 1990, and the civilization franchise is still a glorified boardgame, where the only agency is had by each player.

Totally unlike the real world, where ruling or governing is more about figuring out how to exercise power without getting overthrown.

Such a game would be way more interesting.
If we're being pedantic, a tragedy is _a drama or literary work in which the main character is brought to ruin or suffers extreme sorrow, especially as a consequence of a tragic flaw, moral weakness, or inability to cope with unfavorable circumstances_.

Definitely not a tragedy.
Author knows of this page, but in any case, isn't Mbeddr a reasonable demo/representation of MPS?
A Little-Noticed Target in the House Health Bill: Special Education
That'll create an intermediate dict (due to the unpacking) for Python <3.6 and then another dict. a.update(b) does neither.

It also has different semantics from a.update(b). The unpacking way will explode when both a and b contain the same key, while a.update(b) does not; existing keys also contained in b will be overwritten by the values from b.
Wondershare Filmora 8.2.2.1 Crack with [Serial Key and Patch] – [LATEST]
Even though its history isn't perfect, Clojure's changes are not breaking and it's one of those projects that sets a high bar for what backwards compatibility means.

Clojure code written for 1.0 (May 2009) works just fine in Clojure 1.8 and you'd find it challenging to find an item in that linked document that actually breaks compatibility.
Of course, you could even work around the domain blocking in a variety of way: using uncensored DNS, proxy, mirrors, use of IP address, sneakernet, and so on.
The usual ways of working around domain blocking which has been demonstrated countless times to be ineffective.
How do you test it by brute force? How is the algorithm supposed to know what the right thing to return is, unless you rewrite the whole thing, correctly this time? And, if you've done that, just replace the actual function with the test and be done with it.
GitHub website appears to have stopped working on Firefox
Resources to help independent developers make money
> solid AI mode

Paradox games like Crusader Kings II!
I'm not sure how practical this would be, due to parasitic capacitance.[1]

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_capacitance
React web apps only run in the browser, React-Native apps can run natively on iOS and Android and as web app in the browser.
IBM's Watson 'is a Joke'
Can you talk a bit on how you convert the AST to your NN input?

Do you traverse the AST and send it to a recurrent net? Do you compress the AST into a different representation first?
The manager is hopefully also a developer, and listens to his team Else you have a manager that sets arbitrary quality metrics that the dev team doesn't agree are useful then - and that's a way bigger problem.

In the case of contractor work where a customer actually buys the code and not just the functinoality - it's very tricky. I have never done contractor work so I'm not aware of how contracts are usually written. How do you set a quality metric? I'd be much more comfortable to agree to third party to judge the quality than to have an arbitrary metric in a contract for e.g. ratio number of comments to code lines, the average number of character in symbol names or the percentage of lines of code covered by tests.
#Microsoft Fixes Malware Protection Engine #RCE Vulnerabilityfound by Google
You know all about it at run-time.
Maybe you have an example of how IPFS could so useful to China that it would revert a block, but it seems to me that the reason of existence and purpose of IPFS goes against the tide of Chinese governement preventing it from ever being useful to them.
This is not the Serverless I Ordered
> I'm giving them my money essentially to invest

But what about those people who aren't giving the bank any meaningful capital to invest? What is the bank getting in return in that case?

Or are you arguing that banks should be forced to provide it as a kind of social service even if they don't earn anything? I can understand that kind of point of view.
"If you want to know if your utility classes and functions are sane, unit testing is far better bang for your buck than trying to figure out whether they're being adequately exercised in your service tests."

This is actually where doctests work pretty well as they both document and test.

"If you're trying to figure out which part of a complicated system broke, having unit tests that break on the specific module, or class, or method can be quite helpful."

I don't find tracking down bugs with a repeatable test case to be much of a problem (events in live systems are a different story). It becomes even less of a problem if you sprinkle some assertions around the code that block off invalid code paths.

"Yes, integration tests can be mocked up to look like real world data, and of course you can even feed them real data. The flip side is that their data requirements can be heavy, and they can be quite cumbersome to set up."

Building mocks in unit tests is usually even more cumbersome and tedious.

For overly large sets of real world data I've had some success taking live database snapshots and cutting out 95% of the data before using the cut down to size dump for testing.
There's a 'Sharing' section near the end where two scenarios are compared. Doesn't look like an exhaustive test, rather the opposite.
Hacking
Hacking 0758297744
Martian life very unlikely based on CO concentration readings
Psychiatrists (well, ER doctors, usually) do, in fact, perform MRI's before prescribing meds. This happened to me when I was first diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and I assumed it's not an uncommon practice.

It's easy to think of psychiatry being wishy-washy when all you're considering is mild to moderate depression and the like, but it becomes much harder when you consider the entire spectrum of mental illness. Full-blown mania, psychotic depression, or untreated schizophrenia scream illness in a way that is hardly subjective.
There's a decay algorithm which scores posts based on their points and how long ago they were posted.

There are some good articles about the algorithm floating around if you Google for it.
The discussion was on assumhnetrical accesss to PR and the feedback loop that creates.
Thanks, I'm aware of that as a resource.

That isn't the issue, the issue is that when I play with things I restrict myself to playing with things that I can potentially use in production at some point, I don't have a lot of 'play time' so it makes sense to prioritise things that have a potential return.
Right (been there). Any advice on solutions? What are the good places, how to join?
So basically you're suggesting to make censorship resistance software invisible to people looking to resist censorship as a way to make them more useful and easy to find ?

I would never had found and supported freenet if it was advertised as a cache layer, I would be surprise if the larger population would even comprehend what a cache layer is and how it could help them defeat censorship.
In my opinion some kind of standard is better than no standard. Now is an unavoidable transitional period and if all goes well within a few years most of portable devices will charge through USB Type-C by default. I don't agree with Qualcomm's approach, but it's always like that when some major standard is emerging - big players will at least try to pull some proprietary crap.

I am an early adopter of USB Type-C charging and I've selected my devices with that in mind, so for me it works flawlessly. I have a laptop Chromebook Pixel LS (2015) and a phone Nexus 6P. I can charge the phone with laptop's charger (it has variable voltage) and vice versa. The only difference obviously is that laptop charges considerably slower with phone charger, but I can plug it from either side, which for laptop users is very convenient. When was the last time you could do that with a barrel connector?
I often try to write a unit test just to see whether it's possible. If not (i.e. one of the questions was no) there is always a chance that the design can be improved. E.g. can the interface be minimized to something that is stable, and simpler to test?

Testable code tends to be better (have less dependencies, less state etc) than non testable code. So making it testable is a goal in itself, even if the tests are never even committed.
XXL-JOB v1.7.1，分布式任务调度平台
> It wasn't a case of employing people for charity, it was literally a case of adding more zeros to an already fat bank account.

I don't understand, why is adding zeroes to already fat bank account is morally different from pulling the account from negative to positive?
Apple on path to becoming a trillion dollar company
My last two employers mentioned searching for me online. Or rather, they brought up the results of the search.
It's incredibly frustrating. I've been on the .NET wagon since ASP.NET 1.0 (and ASP before that), and my day to day friction with .NET has been increasing steadily over the last few years as more and more of the eco system starts to support "core".

Looking over an example doc of how to host .NET in IIS (by far the most common approach) really shows how out of control it has become:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/publishing/iis

It's a mess.
I haven't read Popper, and thanks for this quote.

Although I don't quite understand what your objection is. It seems to me that the main difference is between "empirical" science and non-science, so "empirical" is kind-of superfluous (as there is no science that isn't empirical).

Still, I'd argue that science is more than just empirical, as it needs to be sound/coherent as well, not just based on empirical evidence but actively trying to analyse an ddisprove that evidence - e.g. we can hardly say that traditional medicine (or even alternative medicine) isn't empirical, but it's hardly scientific (in fact, the same could be said for much of actual medicine as proper experiments are rarely performed and replicated even more rarely).
Thanks, the site linked here is/should be responsive. What browser/phone? Care to send me a screenshot? (amjad@repl.it) thanks!
I always loved .NET Framework, but I agree, some of the names are confusing and don't make entire sense later on. Like if I want to code ASP .NET Core in SublimeText 3 the plugin mentions ASP .NET vNext, which I'm honestly not sure if that was just code for ASP .NET Core or some abandoned version of .NET (the fact it's not even in your post...) and it's sad. The only one's I know currently are:

* .NET Core - a new spin on .NET Framework for the cloud and such, not always compatible with .NET Framework but sometimes compatible.
* .NET Framework (or "Full") - the .NET Framework we've known and loved, what was a few years ago merely known as .NET
* .NET Standard - the bridge between the two, made after .NET Core so that they could break backwards compatibility to some extent, or they realized "whoops we gotta make a compatibility layer" or some other reason...

I'm not even sure what .NETfx is, nor what ASP .NET vNext was, and if it was just an alpha, all I know is in Sublime Text I don't have sane / easy options. On Visual Studio Code I can just install the "C#" plugin on the other hand and get going. It's not as good as Visual Studio's IntelliSense though.

One nice thing about .NET Core is the ability to develop from any platform and to deploy to any platform. .NET Framework needed Mono for that, I wonder how much of .NET Core will become Mono Core or something similar (if at all?).