skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Property rights certainly requires central calculation and coersion, too.

Look at all the activities undertaken in the name of copyright and patent enforcement. This is "property rights".

Look at cable companies suing cities to not give citizens fast broadband, while they maintain their cartel. This is central enforcement.

A company like Apple can be privately owned. The app store is privately owned. Facebook, Google, Amazon are all privately owned. Disneyworld is privately owned.

The only reason you don't see central enforcement on a huger scale in privately owned fiefdoms is because so far in the real world, people have collectively banded together to have democracies.

Property is a monopoly right to EXCLUDE others from use of a resource. It can range from excluding YOU from changing the color of your FB profile to exclding you from peeing in some woods.

The real relevant thing is how the thing is governed. Democratically (eg employee-run) or command and control (top-down)?

These corporations are technically owned by shareholders in a public stock market. Collective ownership is a major feature of socialism.

Alaska has one of the first basic income checks in the world as the citizens are considered all shareholders in the natural resources of the state.

This "private ownership vs The Government" is a red herring.

Governments exist in all organizations. Rights are those things the organizations recognize as worthy of defending with force, if the peasants are lucky, they codify a consistent policy and enforce them.
I didn't say there was a legal obligation. Clearly we are in agreement that Trump is in the wrong here. We can say Trump should release his tax returns without requiring them or any other citizen to do so.
There is no protection in the trademark law against people using your trademark to refer to you. Referring to you is the point of the trademark in the first place.

This is a clear-cut trademark issue, but it's clear that Comcast is wrong. Registering and publishing at nytimeslies.com without evidence that the New York Times actually lies could be a libel issue, but it can't be a trademark one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
A look through their issues on Github will reveal quite a few "npm supports this feature, yarn doesn't, plz add" entries. There are even more "this works in npm but not yarn, and I'm not sure why", many of which are also effectively a result of features/cases that npm supports and yarn doesn't. I don't have an exhaustive list or anything, but it's right there to see if you're interested enough to dig for a minute or two. It's pretty clearly not a drop-in replacement for npm—at least not yet.

My experience a couple months ago was that almost anything slightly off the path of the most basic use case rapidly entered "here be dragons" territory, such that every problem became "are we doing something wrong, or is yarn broken again?", which wasn't worth any benefits it provided. If you're just installing packages from NPM, and those packages don't do anything even slightly weird, it's probably fine.

[EDIT] a running theme of the issues is that a lot of correctness-checking and edge-case handling is missing or incomplete, in addition to some "strange" npm features not being supported. Anyway, here are a couple examples of what I'm talking about:

https://github.com/yarnpkg/yarn/issues/3433

https://github.com/yarnpkg/yarn/issues/3507

https://github.com/yarnpkg/yarn/issues/2090

(last one has a lovely "why are you doing this?" as its first response, from the repo owner for bonus LULZ)

FAR from the only ones. IIRC one of our issues had something to do with Yarn totally rewriting the package.json of a package installed from a local directory, removing the "main" entry entirely, which broke it (obviously). Maybe it'll be something I use later, but right now I don't really want to have to wonder whether any given problem is due to some obscure breakage in my package manager when I can... just use npm and not worry about it.
GDE Athens Erotic Art Festival 201726 Μαΐου EROTIKES AGGELIES KINKYSECRET.GR
Literally everything you're complaining about is down to differences in abstraction and detail, not aesthetics.

The stuff in square brackets is the capture list. Unlike python, which implicitly captures the full outer scope by reference, C++ allows/requires you to specify which outer variables you want to reference in the lambda, and whether they are captured by value ("=") or reference ("&"). This allows C++ to implement the lambda with a simple static function in most cases, where python needs a bunch of tracking data to preserve the outer stack from collection.

The rest of it is all just following the existing syntax of the language: C++ uses curly braces where python uses bare expression. C++ is typed and requires an "int" declaration on the argument. C++ puts a semicolon at the end of its expressions. You don't have to like this per se, and you're welcome to call it ugly if you want. You're just 30-ish years late to the argument, though.
> I mean, who can really say this isn't a clear-cut trademark issue?

The courts.
> I don't imagine many people put their experiment/education projects in their portfolio

I highly disagree, experiment/education projects aren't necessarily low-quality by default, so I don't see why they wouldn't make it into a portfolio.
A decentralized repository of packages that anyone can help out maintain. Not entirely sure how, but I think that would be the ideal scenario.
That may also be true, but so was what I wrote.
That's still a pretty good deal though. Plenty of companies will never budge on money. They'd rather you quit and just find another sucker.
Maybe he meant someone who is deeply indoctrinated into a set of core assumptions cannot be convinced those assumptions can be changed.
We haven't brought it out of beta yet because there were still a number of rough edges and improvements we wanted to make before then.

Let me compare this to how I decide if something should be released: Is it stable (ie: it doesnt crash frequently)? Did I add some features so I can tell users its better than the last version? If you answered yes to those questions, then fix any major bugs and ship the thing as stable.

You would have been on 3.0 stable a long time ago.

I also would package each of these fairly minor releases as 3.x.. so this release would probably be 3.25 or something.

Why? You mark it as stable so new users (who aren't aware of your process) know they can use this (and you can close the sale). You want people to feel like the project is active, and they're getting a good deal for the license.. which feels like a better deal to you?
- I bought ST2 and will get ST3
- I bought ST 3.0, and received over 30 releases from 3.0 to 3.30.

Yes, well over 90% of Package Control users are running Sublime Text 3.

This is a warning sign. You were so conservative with marking it stable, that the users have made the decision for you. The beta is now your product, and if you break it, that will be your reputation. You no longer have a real beta.
Trump said his steaks are the best, how dare anyone question that.
Sorry, the point was you can still rank them but you can build it into the system itself instead of having to parse it out or reverse engineer any information.
Or 3) you do like golang and erlang and build really lightweight green threads so you get the programming model of approach 1 and nearly the same speed as number 2.

This of course requires extra effort to prevent blocking of OS threads and in the case where the OS expects thread locality. But IMHO it's the superior approach.

The best solution would be if OSes themselves would provide really lightweight threads. And I suspect that they will, eventually.
This task package is used to install the Devuan desktop,
featuring the GNOME desktop environment, and with other
packages that Devuan users expect to have available on the
desktop.

https://devuan.org/os/packages/task-gnome-desktop
They could change it to grey to match a certain other OS's screen of death.
How machine logic infects our tastes
This is fixed in Python 3 with the nonlocal keyword. In Python 2, the idiomatic work-around is to have x be list of one item:

def f():
x = [0]
def add(amt):
x[0] += amt
add(10)
return x[0]
Honestly, I hate to say this but your perspective here sounds more like outright arrogance than anything inherent to the job. You speak about these jobs as if they're utterly beneath you and inflicting misery on your time. I'll reiterate: I have done most of the jobs you mention, and while I certainly didn't feel personally fulfilled by them or buy into the company mission, I didn't spend my time in abject misery - I made the most of it and found that my coworkers could actually be fun, even if they weren't bound for tech or a similarly intellectually exciting field.

I personally don't believe there's anything inherent to any job that makes it meaningful or not meaningful; you admit that your opinion is subjective but then provide a backhanded compliment about the parent being able to enjoy "meaningless shit work"...it doesn't sound like you've conceded that it's subjective there. With a few poignant exceptions, you can choose whether or not to derive meaning and enjoyment from a job, even if you recognize that it's not what you ultimately want to do.
Not really, there are some weird interiors with central dashboard/display only. For example:

Fiat Multipla: https://spct2000.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/multipla-5.jpg

Toyota Prius: http://st.motortrend.ca/uploads/sites/42/2012/11/2012-toyota...

Citroën C4: http://c4owners.org/plugins/forum/attachment/82/1408013737_8...
> In the UK, the motorways have a speed limit of 70mph, and most people actually do it

Are you kidding? Try doing 70mph in the third lane of a non-busy motorway and see how long it takes someone too be dangerously close behind you.
> the Hindenburg was fortunate in that when it came down it wasn't over, say, Manhattan

No, it wasn't really "fortunate" that a disaster which seems most likely to have been (based on the credible hypotheses for the cause) immediately related to landing operations happened exactly at a landing field and not somewhere else.
The main reason of space x existence is exactly the outcome of the OP point
That's commercial achievement, not scientific. The Obninsk power plant has been connected to a grid in 1954. It is useless to assess commercial achievements of the country which didn't have commerce at all. And in general, the question "who was the first" is unproductive, as science doesn't have nationality.
I've said "scientific achievements "made in USSR" which ordinary people still use in their daily lives"

So, yes, basically - commercial achievements for ordinary people.
>Overall, yes

So the creatures who invented the conceptual framework of reason and logic have no way to use reason and logic. Got it.

>Citation needed

Here's one example of his opinions on reason: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQcYZpY9JI0

>Correct, they react to stimuli.

If humans didn't have a capacity for reason, then observing stimuli wouldn't mean anything and we wouldn't be able to transform observation to concepts. His example was people accidentally making a camera obscura by having a hole in the wall. Without reason, you

1. Wouldn't be able to conclude that it was even the hole in the wall causing the effect

2. Would be equally likely to attribute the image to the act of a divine power

And his failings on blank slate theory are not on the genetics side of things, but on human behavior. Much like the conception of the new socialist man, his thinking relies on behaviorism.
I really want to like ST but its search/replace UI has always been completely counter intuitive to me.

I'm used to a lot of different ways of doing search/replace (IDEA, emacs, vim to name a few) but somehow, my brain doesn't seem to be able to become fluent with ST's approach.
Have you ever meditated before? Sometimes in these situations our minds just swirl non-stop and we spend all of our time aganozing over everything that might happened, or has happened.

Meditation can help quiet your mind, and for a lot of people it can lead to being able to appreciate what's happening right now, in this moment.

Nike founder Phil Knight said, "if all you see are problems, you're not thinking straight."

You're probably not getting enough sleep. Perhaps consider taking a day or two to really just rest. No matter how important everything seems, you can almost always take a day or two. In fact, it sounds like you pretty much can't afford not to take a day or two and rest. Really sleep.

I'm a believer in the idea that when we're rested, when our thoughts our quiet, we're able to see the right way forward. When things feel hopeless we're often just burnt, and need to rest.

Phil Jackson, the champion NBA coach wrote a lot about his mediation practice. He had plenty of times in his life were he felt the way you're describing. He said knowing how to breath and quiet his mind saved him from many sleepless nights.

Good luck and remember everything feels better after a solid 8 hours of sleep.
Ioniq Electric and 2017 VW eGolf - both have sufficient range including buffer for my commute (125mi).
> wondering if it's true to the human eye

Not really connected to your main question, but here goes -

The point is moot in the case of the Horsehead Nebula. The image is so dim (in the eyepiece of a telescope) that the human eye cannot perceive colour.

Also, it's a lot smaller in the eyepiece than most people expect - so it's pretty easy to miss.
I'm really excited about links. Links will make things much easier for monorepos.
Ah makes sense. You seem to know what your talking about. Thanks for your reply.
Thanks for the information, hopefully you can move the MQTT to something open in the future :)

Digitransit is very interesting, and all of this is great work!
Side rant: the page has a bibtex entry for arxiv. Look, it's all well and good to publish early and often, but I find I still have some reservations.. I mean, if I use this as a basis for some future work, obviously I will cite it, but I don't particularly feel good about citing an arxiv publication. It completely side-steps the peer review process, and I feel that in the long run, that is bad.

You might say, well working code is working code, and sure I've cited software in the past, and having an article to go with it is even better, but it's getting to the point that people are using arxiv not as a preprint service but as a publishing platform. I find this frustrating for two reasons: 1) like I said, it skips peer review and even allows people to cite rejected papers (for better or for worse), and 2) it makes the race to publish that much more severe -- now if I wait until a conference or journal publishes my work, I'm 6 months behind the guy who just uploads it to arxiv and is already getting dozens of citations in current work.

So, perhaps this is not the place for this debate, but putting aside the fact that preprint does seem like a useful way to "pre-publish", do you think it's appropriate to cite preprint papers and work? What are the implications for computer science as a research field down the road, since "free for all" seems to be taking over as a publication medium?

I know this will come off as being old fashioned, but I'm really worried about where research publication is going in this field. It feels like a knee-jerk reaction to first-to-publish pressure, rather than something that is a well thought-out solution.
I don't think that's a smart move either. There's a lot of value in shipping early ("fail fast, fail early"). It's all about managing expectations, not showing a UI at all isn't a good way to do so.
Let's send them to Venus then.
IMHO: Sublime was once leading the way as a light weight, easily customizable editor. Since then, a slow release cycle and various compelling alternatives like Atom and VS Code, has led many users away. So in this thread you see people not discussing this release so much as the present day dynamic of Sublime and its place among these (arguably faster, better, more customizable) editors.
> And of course Russians perfected rocket technology way in XIX century, using solid rockets as a weapon.

Russians? Not Chinese or British or Americans, but Russians?

I'm amazed on number of Russian myths here.
Is it just me or do the chart lines all makeup Googles typical colors?
The implementation of the coroutines might be complex, but their use is very straightforward -- the code looks almost exactly the same as the blocking code would, just with the awaits in there.

As for the number of threads, when I use Boost ASIO with coroutines I often end up with multiple threads servicing a pool of coroutines, so if there is shared state between them then there is still synchronisation. I use channels implemented on top of eventfd to help with that.

When I converted some network code from callbacks to coroutines the code ended up about 1/3 as long and was far simpler and easier to understand. It also fixed several bugs I simply couldn't find.

The reality is that the callbacks are far more complex to use than the coroutines.
I believe most Tesla YouTube videos include referral links as owners get a monetary kickback for the referral. It wouldn't surprise me if enthusiasts that haven't bought a Model S yet are going to go through one of those links as opposed to an outright purchase from the website, especially if the supercharging limits are known.
yes, intimately
If you want to be 10x, you need at least 10 stackoverflow tabs open to copy and paste from.

I've always assumed people talking about having hundreds of tabs open just don't understand how to properly use a browser. My grandmother, for example, usually has 100 or so open by the time I get a call about her having computer problems.

There's no logical reason I can come up with for doing this instead of using bookmarks.
Wow, it's like Windows 95 again. I used to crash the computers with \con\con links.
You're addressing the wrong problem. The real problem is that you're not talking to the right person.
It's not just the strength that is lacking. The thin shell would buckle long, long before the compressive strength limit was reached. We are talking orders of magnitude.
Yup, I never understand the need to bring a heavyweight thread to bear when coroutines are the actual semantics that most people want.

It's one of my favorite features of Lua and lets you do async-anything in a really nice and clean manner with minimal overhead.
> it's hard to defend the idea that nothing of value can be made there

So you can provide examples of those "values"? But not mythical Soviet microwave ovens in 1941, please.
So less than one incident per year, most with a low amount of casualties, on what I assume was quite a big population of airships. And that is without modern technology, because we've made some progress in flame retardant materials

I find that rather makes the case of bringing back hydrogen filled airships.
For Insider builds it is a Green Screen of Death, to make it obvious it was an Insider build and not a production build.

Certain kinds of boot errors get a Red Screen of Death.

Since Windows 8, I think the Blue Screen of Death is starting to get just as much momentum behind it being called the Frowny Face of Death. I overhead one person even say, "My machine frowny faces a lot these days."
The claim that the domain infringes the trademark can be considered abuse of trademark law.
>If a car is approved in one EU country, it’s approved in all. If a car is denied in one EU country, it is denied in all.

Huh? How does that work? What happens if Germany denies the Model 3, but France approves it? The EU collapses?
> I mean, I don't see a huge push towards generic charging points all over the city despite things moving in that direction.

In London at least, the push is to get less car on the road, regardless if they are electric or not. There is no need to encourage electric adoption, only discourage cars and discourage more the one that are not electric.

I had a breakdown earlier this year and managed just fine over 2 months without the car. We fixed it because there is just no convenient way to go see the family or move children around easily and safely.

The fix for that however is probably coming from a combination of Uber-like services and automated car rental ( as long as they get to your home and back to the rental lot, you can manage the rest of the way ), rather than personal car ownership electric or otherwise.

We are not quite there yet, but considering my last car lasted me 15 years and counting, if I have a next one, it will be my last.

edit: BTW, no blaming Musk. It's not his fault if his products are desirable outside his target demographic.
Why not consider the possibility that Fresco's core assumptions and arguments are flawed? Both can be true.
I never just quit the other jobs outright. I simply started looking once I figured out what was going to happen.

The rest of the time at work, I spend inventing projects to helped me learn some interesting technology. My bosses were happy because I stopped bugging them for work to do.
As much as I like Fresco's vision, it sounds to me like saying: "hey, you know all that code we wrote for Society 1.0 in the last couple thousand years? let's throw all that out and write Society 2.0 from scratch" and he acknowledge that when he says the actual system would have to collapse for his ideas to take place. His spec is beautiful but without backwards compat and no smooth transition route, I can't see it happening.
Ask HN: Freelancing starting out – any tips or tricks?
Thanks
https://vivaldi.com
Windows 7 and 8.1 users were provided the opportunity to upgrade to Windows 10. Per the article, it does not have the bug. Many people who are running the old versions of Windows are doing so by choice.
Intel's Vision for Single Board Computers Is to Have Better Vision
> Literally everything you're complaining about is down to differences in abstraction and detail, not aesthetics.

I'm not complaining. Just pointing out how it's notably uglier, a critical part of being 'Pythonic', which affects both aesthetics (emotional experience) and functionality. That's not a value judgement but an observation.

Python is obviously more limited in power (functionality), which is a product of decisions made about base abstractions. That filters upwards and becomes apparent in both visuals and utility (and as a result learning curves, developer happiness, applicability to problem sets, etc).
Bill Gates, the Internet Tidal Wave (1995)
Concurrency is about how you organize a solution really more than anything. Whether those concurrent tasks execute in parallel or not is a different consideration. Many authors and experts conflate these terms.

You can write concurrent code with pthreads. It may happen to execute in parallel but it doesn't have to. In fact, I believe the early SunOS/Solaris pthreads had a 'green' scheduler where it could all be done in userspace (this is from my own memory nearly 20 years ago). This made them basically "stack switchers" which is what some lightweight coroutine libraries end up doing.

Having written heavily callback-driven code. Threading contexts manually, thinking about object lifetimes, I can say that coroutines have a much cleaner flow to them and can make it easier to write and later read and debug programs than crazy callbacks and contexts.

Object lifetimes are one thing coroutines help with in a big way. I think it's why Rust is so attractive to so many.

Look at plan 9's libthread for example:
https://github.com/9fans/plan9port/tree/master/src/libthread

It allows one to take advantage of nonblocking sockets as a single "kernel execution entity" mechanism across many userspace threads.

This approach works pretty well. The Mongrel2 webserver clearly borrows this approach in their task library:

https://github.com/9fans/plan9port/blob/master/src/libthread...

https://github.com/mongrel2/mongrel2/blob/master/src/task/38...