skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Natural Atlas v2 – Coast-To-Coast Map of the Outdoors and iOS App
I think the opposite, WaveNet already sounds basically human to me but after more than a few sentences no computer generated text looks real.
That would be fine if humans simply walked around consuming plants that would have otherwise decomposed and there were no other resources associated with food production.

Unfortunately, agriculture is a major driver of deforestation (and forests are excellent at actually sequestering carbon in the ground). It also requires trucks, boats, and planes to haul supplies to farms, work the land, move water around, and transport the produce to stores. You have processing and packaging that rely on fossil resources (paper, plastic, metal cans...)

That doesn't even touch on the impact of meat production, which is several times worse for the environment.

Food consumption is absolutely not carbon neutral. You're far better off taking public transportation to work (if available) than walking or riding a bike, if you care about the environment.
Standing desk (any kind, key is to be able to adjust keyboard and screen height separately) with nice thick mat.
The OP has so many reasonable, smart-sounding advice that doesn't work in the real world.

1) "Do not fall into the trap of improving both the maintainability of the code or the platform it runs on at the same time as adding new features or fixing bugs."

Thanks. However, in many situations this is simply not possible because the business is not there yet so you need to keep adding new features and fix bugs. And still, the code base has to be improved. Impossible? Almost, but we're paid for solving hard problems.

2) "Before you make any changes at all write as many end-to-end and integration tests as you can."

Sounds cool, except in many cases you have no idea how the code is supposed to work. Writing tests for new features and bugfixes is a good advice (but that goes against other points the OP makes).

3) "A big-bang rewrite is the kind of project that is pretty much guaranteed to fail.

No, it's not. Especially if you're rewriting parts of it at a time as separate modules

My problem with the OP is really that it tells you how to improve a legacy codebase given no business and time pressure.
Same for me as well: http://i.imgur.com/U0Cl2Sq.png

Win 10, Chrome 58
That's a myth. If someone were to attack your infosec engineers physically or virtually you need to build your company from the moon because only nation states and the 1% richest would be able to afford the ride there.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/ghcq-targets-engin...
#1 Not easy. Prove it. Show a Turing machine programmed with ZFC that can not be modeled by a Turing machine programmed with PE. You can not do so because Turing machines are universal. The fact that you claim this is easy tells me you do not understand what a Turing machine is.

#2 See fundamental level. Penrose claims that what sets us apart from Turing machines is fundamental. But whatever, you've refuted whatever point you wanted to make by saying human's are not logically consistent. Your snark about Penrose not understanding is as empty as whatever point you were trying to make.

#3 Cite a paper showing that objective collapse gives these supposed algorithmic speedups or go home. NOTE: objective collapse theories are an active area of research and are not limited to Penrose by any means. Your claim that they are inconsistent with QM begs for evidence. Cite some or stop spreading nonsense.

#4 Your answer here is completely void of any context to the question: where Penrose says that microtubules are limited to humans. I take it you concede that he did not say any such thing?

You treat Penrose as an idiot missing obvious problems. I think it far more likely that you've misunderstood. Pity your lack of humility might make it impossible for you to understand what he actually argues rather than your strawmen.
I'd add a prerequisite to the top of this list:

- Get a local build running first.

Often, a complete local build is not possible. There are tons of dependencies, such as databases, websites, services, etc. and every developer has a part of it on their machine. Releases are hard to do.

I once worked for a telco company in the UK where the deployment of the system looked like this: (Context: Java Portal Development) One dev would open a zip file and pack all the .class files he had generated into it, and email it to his colleague, who would then do the same. The last person in the chain would rename the file to .jar and then upload it to the server. Obviously, this process was error prone and deployments happened rarely.

I would argue that getting everything to build on a central system (some sort of CI) is usefull as well, but before changing, testing, db freezing, or anything else is possible, you should try to have everything you need on each developer's machine.

This might be obvious to some, but I have seen this ignored every once in a while. When you can't even build the system locally, freezing anything, testing anything, or changing anything will be a tedious and error prone process...
I got dropped in to an AS/400 environment a few years ago. All my knowledge instantly vanished. It was harrowing.

There were so many idiosyncrasies my coworkers knew that I had to learn (anyone know how to push the F22 key?) The terminal didn't function in any way I was familiar with at all (no ls, cd, mv, nothing). The "filesystem" was basically for interoperability while the actual system ran with a concept of "libraries" instead of folder hierarchy.

I ended up having to take basic lessons on the system.

It really gave me an appreciation for "stupid computer shit we all know". It sucks to be in a position of not knowing that stuff. Suddenly the most basic functions becomes monumental tasks.
Foursquare and Reddit: The “front page of the internet” adds location
Symbolically destroying small amounts of resources and depriving yourself and family of a clean environment to essentially complain. Hmm maybe scorched earth is the better description of whats going on here? Salting the earth is done by the aggressor, scorching the earth is done by the retreating party. I think it still fits.
Most Wikipedia/Wikimedia domains have HSTS preloaded in browsers, preventing redirection without a valid certificate.
The problem is, without ECC you won't know if you have marginal RAM. Basic memory tests can frequently pass for hours at a time, only to have a couple bits flip a few days later.

Plus, with tens of GB of RAM, you likely won't even notice, as the majority of that RAM is being used as disk cache, or application data. The best case (but likely the lowest probability) is that the bit flip happens in an executable page on an instruction that gets executed (vs the large number which won't get executed) and the application crashes.

If that happens you will never figure out why your application crashes, but if it happens enough, you will start looking for problems.
I've taken to excessive exercise to combat this. Really knocks me out at the end of the day and I wake up refreshed the next day.
On the other hand, wouldn't it be hard to raise the price after grounding it low? What they're saying is "we're a luxury phone like iPhone."
So, you do modules or somesuch; presumably they have pre-requisites that work in largely the same way? Like for non high-school subjects "read chapters 1-4 of 'intro to $subject' and have a grade C or above on $exam"?

How do you manage expectations for courses/modules/whatever from both sides (teacher:student) without such things.
The image shows some of the problems quite well. E.g. the following things are not clear to me:

[0] I suppose Rhombi symbolize choice. But where are the branches? What if "Already Done" is true? Or does the else-branch enforce implicit fail-state somehow?

[1] What's the difference between parallelograms and squares?

[2] What's the scope of the "For Each Issue"?

[3] Why is the second output of "Copy Webhook" named ("output1"), but not the others? Are they implicit default output (maybe "output0")?

[4] What happens with longer pipelines? Do you wrap or have a scrollbar?

Furthermore the size of the modules have same size, so one gets into rendering issues (e.g. the names of some nodes don't fit the "boxes"). Sorry, I didn't want to sound harsh, I just think that visual programming is not automatically simpler, just because it doesn't use text (at least directly - one has also to name "modules"). You also don't use the "free-canvas" in its extreme form I described (where you can rearrange everything), as you've e.g. implicit edges between nodes, which is a good idea probably, as users get a feeling about the complexity of pipelines by measuring their length (which would not work if there are different lengths for edges).
The fear of dart:mirrors
They would sell this chip as Xeon anyway. It's just another variant.
That's interesting. My admittedly flawed understanding is that the Great Firewall of China isn't implemented with a unified set of policies, but rather varies from province to province, which might help explain your experience and my test results.
did not think of the 'yellow pages for newsletter' approach, but that sounds pretty neat!
Seriously, though. I would love to hear from someone who does this.
I really respect the author for going against the grain this much. I'd like to distill some of the points it makes, because the intensity can make it easier to treat this as an all-or-nothing:

[Ideas posited]
0. Companies that fail rarely fail because of delivery speed (e.g. yahoo mail vs google mail).

1. Investors mistakenly believe working harder is the key to startup success.

2. Investors also have a financial incentive to objectify/manipulate workers, even when those very workers may have negligible equity often they are put under more pressure than the investors themselves.

3. Mission-focused-talk is likely to be disingenuous because investors know most companies will fail, and those mission statements are lofty anyways.

I largely agree with each of these points, however I think the attitude is too gloom-and-doom. If you stay late at work, it's because you chose to. If you're afraid of losing your job if you don't, that's because of market forces.

I also believe that working smart rather than hard helps the investors as much as the individual, so there is a win-win if people are open-minded to it.
Fuzzy searching using Swift
Divide and conquer, or in this case, divide and delegate. Recourse until the call reaches the base case with no authority to delegate, then the work will be performed and returned.
Feedback to the author. I found the writing style of the opening extremely choppy and without flow. Every paragraph was one or two sentences except for one which had 4 sentences (and only accomplished that by being super short, choppy sentences). Stopped reading :(
I has and enjoyed both, but did prefer the lego.
At 53, it hasn't had much effect on me as far as I can tell. The first time I noticed was at about 45, where a SV startup that seemed extremely enthusiastic nope'd after seeing me on Skype.

IMO, there's just not much to be done about it. My skills are about as good as they ever were, and my long experience can be extremely useful. Some employers will hire that and some won't.
When I'm reading (or listening to audio books) I'm processing and reflecting on the content. If the book isn't engaging enough to demand my full attention then it's probably not worth reading.

Multi-tasking is a fallacy. It's not possible to do anything that requires a reasonable amount of concentration with mindfulness and quality if you're also trying to do something else at the same time. To try multi-task is to short change yourself of truly deep and engaging experiences.
This was the mistake that MS made before.

Phone software is so radically different to desktop software that attempting to target the same program to them both makes both worse.
Concatenating Objective-C String Literals
So I would agree that its not intended to be a tool that you could use like yahoo pipes. To the extent that it requires programming, I guess I would agree it requires an advanced user.

Putting that aside, I would say the Nifi is easy to work with, performant with large datasets, and I personally love the notifications I get when tasks get screwed up, etc. I would not suggest using this to expose data flow to your user as its UI is not really geared towards folks who are programming averse (to a certain extent).
Execution context in JavaScript
But to the parent point, all the more reason to open it up, and charge an even higher premium when other people come online and start a bidding war.
Sigh, they don't claim that. You are also arguing with straw men. I wish people would read what Penrose actually argues instead of just assuming he is an idiot (one of the most brilliant minds of this or any century) because he argues against Strong AI.

There are good refutations of Penrose' argument, but I've seen none of them here. Just a bunch of bandwagon hackers assuming Penrose doesn't know what he is talking about and then putting up lazy straw man takedowns.
> I know that he disagrees the human mind is bound by physical laws.

Last I heard, Penrose appeals to quantum woo to claim that the human mind isn't strictly algorithmic. But sources of quantum randomness isn't enough to push you into dualism, quantum shit is part of our physical universe and while there is no proof that the human mind critically exploits quantum phenomena for it's computation, we can certainly build machines that have RNGs exploiting quantum randomness.
I think you may have cause and effect flip-flopped here - Mossberg was the everyman's tech columnist long before Apple became the hot thing to cover.
There may also be some anomalies depending on how it's implemented. These tariffs can sometimes be a bit ham-handed. For example, I can see a situation where tiny solar cells not meant to be targeted are swept up in the tariffs.
That's different though. That's paying for a service (compute time). Not somehow getting money for an open source software library.
Interesting! I agree that some speed-reading techniques seem to push things too far if the goal is comprehension and strong recall.
Did he actually mean to imply more people major in physics? The most recent numbers show physics at an all time high of less than 8,000 bachelor's degrees awarded (1) whereas the computer science bachelor's degrees, restricted to CS departments in engineering schools (no "information" degrees, no CS departments in math or science colleges), were over 10,000 (2).

There was a drop in relative growth because several years before that, the dot-com bubble burst and women fled the field. He says he didn't see that in the NCES tables he looked at, but for pete's sake, that's the first link on Google! (3)

(1) https://www.aps.org/programs/education/statistics/bachelors....

(2) https://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/co...

(3) https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d12/tables/dt12_349.asp
Except its unlikely that "sufficiently random" refers to "do not equal each other" in this context. Its likely that "sufficiently random" means "passes one of a variety of proofs of being statistically random (for example: nlogn repetitions of fisher-yates)". That implies randomness, but doesn't imply "doesn't equal any other deck of cards" except with high probability.
One side will say whether the other side is human or not. The other side is being tested with a Turing test.
>3) "A big-bang rewrite is the kind of project that is pretty much guaranteed to fail.

>No, it's not. Especially if you're rewriting parts of it at a time as separate modules

I guess it depends on what he considers to be a "big bang rewrite." I don't think any of the incremental approach you mention counts as one.
Heh, guilty, although I do get farther and farther each time. Last time I made it almost halfway before I stopped.

The issue is that I'm a "distracted reader" and tend to leave books half-finished. Unfortunately, the likelihood of this happening is a function of the book's length and density: if I can read it in a day or two, there's no time to get distracted, but Infinite Jest is both long and slow. Someday, though.
I really like the idea of a mobile phone that just works with a suite of consistent apps for photos, SMS, email, navigation, and whatever.

I really like maximizing local computation over cloud services.

And at first I thought this might be it. But alas, it appears to be just another pretty and overpriced Android phone. I guess I will continue buying last year's latest and greatest at a 50% discount or more once brand new shiny disrupts it.
On the contrary, we do this work under extreme business and time pressure, sometimes existential pressure (as in: fail and the company fails).

That's exactly why this list is set up the way it is: you will get results fast and they will be good results.

If you want to play the 'I'm doing a sloppy job because I'm under pressure' card then consider this: the more pressure the less room there is for mistakes.

Here is a much more play-by-play account of one of these jobs where management gave me permission to do a write-up as part of the deal:

https://jacquesmattheij.com/saving-a-project-and-a-company

(For obvious reasons management usually does not give such permission, nobody wants to admit they let it get that far on their watch, I did my best to obscure which company this is about.)
It was a "hoax" paper published in a not very reputable journal. More details in this discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14387694
Pokémon Go Is Shadow Banning Cheaters
Your example is much smaller than what people are usually talking about in terms of big-bang rewrites. So maybe you will be successful.

Even so, you're better off doing a step-by-step rewrite, where the new stuff and the old stuff coexists in a single application. That way your users can continue getting incremental benefits over time even if the rewrite takes dramatically longer than you're optimistic estimate.

If you can't figure out how to manage the complexity of a piecemeal rewrite, consider that you may not actually understand the system well enough to avoid making version 2 just as bad as version 1.

Most people overestimate their ability to act differently than they've acted in the past. It's like the unjustified optimism of a New Year's resolution that this time you're actually going to exercise every day. To get a better result than last time, you need to impose some very clear rules on yourself that cause you to work differently.
Show HN: Snapcraft – Free builds and hosted binaries of every GitHub commit
This is why I'm nearly knocked off my bike a couple of times every time i go riding. I rarely give direct instruction especially online however i strongly encourage you to change your attitude and approach to driving before you kill someone.
Pop-ups? Don't be this guy.
Sure, but removing all traces is hard and most criminals are careless, sloppy or dumb.

I mean, if this particular case is real, someone has performed a serious crime, risking years in jail, for a comparably trivial reason and small gain - it's not an indication that the perpetrator is likely to be risk-averse, meticulous and smart.

If we were looking at a forged email as a part of a sophisticated campaign for extracting secret information or defrauding very large amounts of money, then it would be likely that the forgery is done carefully by skilled people thoroughly removing all traces - but for a reason like this? not likely. Heck, digital "intelligence ops" by major governments sometimes leave traces due to some sloppiness or carelessness, it's very hard to be sufficiently thorough.
“Skip Steps 1 and 3” – [Episode #72] Make Money Online
I like my Intel graphics.

Good battery life on my laptop, good Linux support on my desktop. What's not to like?
That's absolutely true, I totally wrote that under the assumption that you at least have some kind of build process and that it actually works. I will add another section to the post.
I did.
I found it a very complex book densely packed with allusions obscure references. I didn't understand it completely. I plan revisit it someday after reading a synopsis (if my 200+ store of unread digital books will permit me :) )

The author of the article keeps referencing DFW's use of marijuana but stops short of condemning it. I think it's worth stating that it can not have helped his health.
Cool idea. You have no input validation on your email capture forms. I was able to submit an empty value for email.
Android devs: You’ve handled activity recreation. What about process recreation?
4am-7am - 11am-2pm, all week, very consistent, extremely stable against perturbations
Swift Summit SF 2017 announced
Given his focus on consumer electronics, it seems probable that he's referring to consumer robots. In that space we have roombas, pool cleaners, and a handful of selfie-taking quadcopters. Definitely niche.
One point I see missing: Colleges are inefficient, have poor quality of life, cost too much, and will not teach you the skills you need.

Financially, there is no way I could afford a CS degree today. People like to make the argument that its 'not much' because you'll get paid your entire tuitons worth in one year of work! But, thats not true for everyone. Infact its not true for many. Perhaps if you already live in silicon-valley-esque areas, maybe. But if you don't, Microsoft, Google and Amazon aren't waiting at the door for you. So what happens when you get a degree, and you don't get a 'good' job out of it right away? You probably end up in retail, putting away your entire paycheck into your tuition when you can't defer it anymore. Or, you get a low-paying 'tech' job that burns you out of the field.

But, even if you can afford it, can students go through with it? If any self-respecting developer went back to college now, after owning a house, having a family, y'know, a life, I think they'd drop out in the first few months, for what we would then count as perfectly understandable reasons. But for students, both colleges, and society, treat them like vessels without need for things like privacy and ownership.

Colleges play the game of forcing students into classes that have nothing to do with their majors. For example, speech classes. Yes, these are nice to have, but I am an adult, and I should be able to choose how I spend my money. In the system today, you are at the complete mercy of what the college tells you to do. Don't like it? Too bad. No warranty, no returns, its gone.

College tuition and overall living amenities are quite terrible in most locations. The state (public) university here charges the same amount as commercial apartments across the street, for a dorm room you share with another student that is smaller than your kitchen. Infact, only one building even has a kitchen, so you're stuck with your meal plans, which are during times when you have classes. Oh, also, if you miss a meal, you don't get that money back.

If you're a male, and want to live near the college, you are at a disadvantage for rent. Girls are more preferred for renting, to the point where these places are girls-only, are cheaper, and are the closest to the campus. Cheaper as in, a few hundred less than a dorm room, and you actually get your own room.

Add ontop that this college purposely built in fast-food restaurants, over-spend on decoration and marble counters for their cafeteria (and other places), have teachers with superiority complexes and are generally incompetent - I don't think its a bad choice to avoid that altogether. Even if you're working at Walmart for years in the cheapest apartments, its still most likely better living conditions.

If colleges actually wanted to invest in education, there are a million ways they could be doing that. Thats not to say that all colleges are like this, community colleges can be better at costs and what you need, but students are never told about any of this. They are given a list of options. "Pick one".