skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The source of the distaste is obvious: breathless hyperbole without much substance to show for it. Posts like yours are a great example of it. In this very comment you write:

> leading the charge on what could be the next major technical revolution

Unsubstantiated hype. Where is the revolution? A common thread among cryptocurrency enthusiasts is that the revolution is coming... except it never does. When you talk about revolution, non-enthusiasts roll their eyes.

> Silicon Valley has been getting fat on the virtually unlimited venture capital power structure and sees this as a threat they've missed out on to their power.

A classic argument from crypto enthusiasts who have to imagine that people are literally afraid of bitcoin. It's laughably condescending and absurd. Bitcoin is not a threat to anyone and most certainly not silicon valley billionaires. Besides, it's not as if SV VCs haven't invested money in bitcoin, it's just that bitcoin is a horrible investment, e.g. 21.co, 120 million in VC dollars flushed down the toilet for a business model that was clearly a failure from the start, but those investors fell vulnerable to the hype and learned a valuable lesson from it.

> Maybe the disrupters are being disrupted

Another sample of breathless hyperbole that causes non-enthusiasts to cringe. Where is the disruption? Bitcoin is a smidgeon of a fraction of the commerce activity happening on the internet, and even with the rising price, bitcoin remains difficult and relatively unsafe to use (for the non-technical masses) and provides zero benefits for most people. Yes, peer to peer transmission of value is cool, I'm not saying bitcoin is useless, but for most people there is no reason to use bitcoin and there never will be. Contrast these facts on the ground with the never-ending blockchain hype and the result is overall disillusionment with blockchains in general.
Why don't they add some hover text?

Then we could avoid all these 'why is it black' posts?
My guess is it could also have to do with the communities. Anecdotally, the limited sample of ruby-istas I have interacted with tend to have more tolerance of churn for improvement's sake whereas the people attracted to python are more interested in stability because they are focused on some other need that the code is mearly an ends to.
I don't know enough about this to comment, but is there any reason it is critically unsound to do so? (within the confines of said theory)
Biggest Online Lenders Don't Always Check Key Borrower Data
Why are blackberries juicier than raspberries?
I could be wrong, but I don't think that there are enough large codebases that use HKT for us to be able to know whether most large codebases that use HKT are not terrible.

I suspect that it is closer to the truth to say that most large codebases are terrible, regardless of language, and that HKT won't save you. (Using HKT may help, some. Using HTK well may help more. But the problem with large codebases is that enough programmers work on it that the talent level tends toward the average of the universe of programmers. That's... not good. It means that whatever tool or technique you choose won't be used well.)
Designing software related to healthcare / electronic medical records requires more thoughtfulness than other kinds of development.
what is the split that has to do with 2vs3? Really it just seems like some devs are still griping about fairly minor backwards compatibility issues. the whole print vs print() is obviously a straw man. but the major one, strings, unicode, and bytes, changes for the good in py3. the fact that people have to go back and "un-hack" their code is time, effort, and more commits but it's for the best.

<rant>
i think the real split is between CPython + C-Extensions and the JIT (PyPy,Numba) gang for heavy lifting in python. I for one wish Guido would embrace the effort of integrating the GILectomy into CPython and make python thread parrallism real for CPU bound work as opposed to the high overhead multiprocessing approach.

Also, including mypy in the stdlib to make genuine optional static typing would make python a defacto standard for much of what it does now without the "we love python but...." production code pain points.
</rant>
Brooklyn Boulders, locations in Brooklyn, Queens, Boston, Chicago.

http://brooklynboulders.com/brooklyn/?prompt-location

https://www.fastcompany.com/3023162/at-this-coworking-space-...
It's important to apply context to this. A minimum wage, among other things, forces businesses to prejudice against lower skilled workers. If the minimum wage is negotiated by the union to $18/hr but you only produce $10/hr due to lack of experience, disability, below average IQ, or you went to a failing public school then you're simply unemployed. If we remove this contractual minimum wage, you're right, it would likely have some minimal impact for the people on the margins of having productivity sufficient to justify hiring them on the union's minimum wage. However, everyone below that level of productivity now has the potential for new jobs, and with those jobs comes skills training and economic mobility. Unions do marginally help their members, but they harm everyone below them on the economic ladder.
Interesting that once there was a trend in tabletop wargaming towards "realistic" probabilities expressed as a percentage (e.g. "these riflemen have a 70% of hitting the target"). I think this isn't as common anymore.

Nowadays, for whatever reason, I see a trend back to the humble d6, both in historical wargaming and fantasy skirmish games. Many wargames use d6 in disguise (see: Bolt Action, SAGA, Warhammer). I think it has to do with two things: the d6 is readily available (though, one has to wonder, why is this an issue when everything else in wargaming isn't as easy to find, like the miniatures and tokens!), and the other fancier dice didn't pan out in practice.
> I didn't realize that the expansion of the universe was overcoming gravity within the scope of a galaxy.

It isn't, at least not according to our best current models, which do not involve a "Big Rip" scenario. See my replies to others downthread.

> Does this also mean that the distance between planets within a solar system will increase? Does this mean that the distance from the Earth to the moon is increasing, and does it mean the planet itself is expanding? Is the expansion of the universe a destabilizing effect on orbital mechanics?

According to our best current models (i.e., in the absence of a "Big Rip"), no to all of these.
Does anyone use 2.x by choice? I've only seen it required as to not break legacy code.
> Maybe it's out of necessity as well since there isn't a vast source of wealth available to fund these crazy, new ideas.

I think it's more out of necessity because of the lack of the comprehensive and (relatively) solid way that you can litigate in the USA and European Union when business dealings go south. Capitalism in the East and the Soviet Bloc countries is improving their lives but it's also shockingly unregulated, arguably similar to the US in the roaring 20's. Back then that meant contracts were enforced at the barrel of a gun, but while the contractual law litigation doesn't work well in those countries, they can handle murderers pretty well so instead they find the cryptocurrencies attractive because it gives them options to protect their assets in a way that is immune to violence or petty theft.

At least that's my 0.02.
And also between small and large deployments.

Systemd has over the sprouted a whole bunch of parts that fit large (cloud) scale deployments.

Where things get messy is when all you want to do is to spin up a gray box on the shelf to handle some internal data, and at that point systemd, and a whole bunch of other "plumbing" that has sprouted within the Linux ecosystem in recent years (often under the Freedesktop umbrella, even though it seems to have a ill fit on desktops), becomes a beast to wrangle into submission rather than an assistant.
Please offer a practical example of how smart contracts are useful.
IDK. I knew an "aspiring" programmer a few years ago who knew how to do things like write to text file and make a "for" loop. He decided he needed to study "algorithms" because he read somewhere. I walked by and he was looking at web pages on "logarithms". So not so sure everyone knows.

I think for most people "algorithm" is a fancy word having to do with advanced math formula or something like that.
Decentralized Alternative to Centralized CryptoCurrency Trading Platforms
This is a seriously naive view of why people vote.

I don't think most people have ever actually voted FOR a candidate in their life. Most people vote AGAINST candidates.

And if the candidate you voted against loses, then there is no subsequent validation of how they did in office, because they weren't in that office.
>Monthly subscription for science fiction and fantasy books

Isn't that the public library?
Alternative view titles:

Zero - The Number of Applications that Can only be Developed in Python 3

or

7456324 - The number of companies that only use Python 2.x

Although these made up titles are slightly tongue-in-cheek, they do server to illustrate that for me at least, I do not have a compelling reason to switch to Python 3.
The very latest fusion reactors aren't efficient either, still under unity. Maybe we'll have commercial fusion power in 30 years...
It's the result of cognitive dissonance. Many closeted capitalists don't want to admit, even to themselves, that the pursuit of money far outstrips other incentives and especially the vague Gavin Belson-esque promises to "make the world a better place". Seeing someone actually make a fortune will thus evoke strong and conflicting feelings almost immediately.
Maybe:
https://cacm.acm.org/news/218536-in-memoriam-charles-p-chuck...
Ask HN: Companies that are environmentally friendly?
Hello HN,

I have been frustrated by the amount of unnecessary paper my company uses since I started working here. Everyone in my office has an aversion to printing two-sided, and lots of unnecessary duplicate copies are made. A proprietary program we use here will actually print your document one-sided even if you changed the settings in the print menu. I am the only one here who cares at all, and it's frustrating.

I just did a google search for "Environmentally Friendly Companies" in an attempt to find a place to work where people actually care about the environment. Well, surprise surprise, in the articles listing the most environmentally friendly companies, my company always made the list. Since I see first-hand that no one here actually cares, this makes me not trust the lists on Google at all.

So HN, I ask you instead: Have any of you ever worked for a first class environmentally friendly organization? If so, where do I apply?
I'm a gay man, imagining a "most ideal woman" would give me the creeps 8-P

I had a long reply addresssing each of your points, but I'll keep it to the essentials:

- A beautiful woman composed from parts may be anatomically perfect, or can be a Frankenstein monster made of stitches of out-of-proportion body parts, even if every part is individually perfect. Knowing how to put together the parts into a harmonious whole is an art on itself - the art of composition. You can't dismiss this skill with "but it looks good in my mind". The difficult part is taking the nebulous, incomplete visual image in your mind and building a physical object that matches how you feel it should look. You speak as if this "execution phase" is trivial, but it's not; it's what distinguishes an artist from a wannabe.

> we have the instinctual knowledge of what looks good and what grabs attention and what improves UX. Thus almost anybody has what it takes to "Design" stuff.

- This is a fallacy. Being able to instinctively recognize whether a design is beautiful doesn't mean that you'd be able to build a beautiful one yourself from scratch. The first is easy as your brain is hardwired to do it; but the second is incredibly hard.

It's not the same to see that a Greek sculpture is beautiful, than to model a beautiful clay figurine with your hands. You'll know that your current wreck is not correct, but won't know of to change it to make it better. It's exactly the same when you try compositing individual elements into a proportional design. No matter how simple or complex are those elements, the skills required to make a good composition are the same, and they are not easy; it takes years to learn them and apply them properly. It's the reason why a professional designer can make better designs than a developer who learns all the photoshop commands.

Seriously, I think you're falling to the Dunning–Kruger effect; it seems that you don't even know what you're missing in terms of the quality of a design, if you think that any amount of basic elements can simply be thrown together without regards of the Gestalt laws of grouping[1] that govern your brain and are the basis of composition, even for very minimalist designs. The hardest part of art is not learning those mechanical techniques for making it photo-realistic, that you seem to value more than it's worth; it's learning these intangible rules and mastering them to make the result graceful.[2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_psychology#Pr.C3.A4gna...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_(visual_arts)

P.S. Learning to draw a photo-realistic image from life (i.e. looking at the object while you draw it) doesn't take years, it can be done in a few days with a good teacher; (metaphorically) half your brain is literally built for doing just that. You just need to learn how to shut down the symbolic other half of the brain which messes with the results. Betty Edwards Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain method[3] is a good way to do it on your own.

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Edwards
Correct The Record and Share Blue cost millions. Maybe the DNC should outsource.
Also in some cases laziness creates loop fusion between chained functions for much better cache locality.
Completely disagree. There's a bunch of "word-like markdown editors" out there. We don't need one more of those.

There's a real market here. Word is huge, and people aren't gonna give it up. This looks to be a good technical solution. Trying to move people from word to markdown is an ok ideal, but not a practical business move.

My advice to the creator, ignore bArray's advice.
they should make the search usable first
Not necessarily. Usually older people vote in much greater numbers than the young.
> Isn't that comparison unfair, given that AsciiDoc gives you more functionality in a curated whole?

I don't see how it's unfair. I think AsciiDoc is much more complex, by just about any metric you want to use. I'm not saying it's necessarily worse by many metrics, just that by the particular metric of getting average people to use it, and not just a random subset of it, Markdown's simplicity is beneficial.

> Nobody forces you do use all of them.

No, but for random internet user there's a real trade-off between what you're trying to accomplish and what it takes to accomplish it, when you're just trying to write a simple comment. Reddit has a link that says "formatting help" below the comment box, and when you click it, it shows every option you have for special formatting with examples in a table with nine rows and two columns, including the header. They could have chosen AsciiDoc, but then they would have to make a decision about what features to elevate to the quick help and which not to, and very possibly which to disallow for their use case.

Markdown is simple for users to use, simple for user to understand, simple for developers to implement, and simple for developers to decide about. That simplicity is both why it was adopted by developers and why users bothered to learn and use it. As I alluded to before, AsciiDoc may have been a better choice in the end, but I don't think it's quite as simple as AsciiDoc does more stuff, so it's better. It's all about the trade-offs, and there's been plenty of discussion on that[1] before, from both sides.

1: Just google "worse is better".
This is covered in the link. Just put a * without a name, as in

def foo(*, x=None, y="")

(Edit) The specific slide: http://www.asmeurer.com/python3-presentation/slides.html#16
I wrote a blog post about the guy behind this website. He claims to be some sort of expert who tried to "study" editor interactions on Wikipedia. He's actually a social media & SEO marketing guy in California who likes to troll skeptics and science people online in his spare time. I analyzed the editing history of the articles involved in this blog post, and show that he is not in any way serious in his interactions on Wikipedia. https://skeptools.wordpress.com/2014/04/16/nothere-wikipedia...
+1 on the community being nice, encouraging and friendly. They really helped me overcome my anxiousness about learning.
How do they die?
> This new type of polycarbonate can be biodegraded back into carbon dioxide and sugar using enzymes from soil bacteria

This sounds amazing, but reading about various awesome breakthroughs has made me a bit cynical since there always is some sort of catch.

Does anyone know any limitations to this method which would make it difficult to scale?
Sounds like a great idea. Or maybe make the bar a link to the relevant story.
As the sauce seems a lot like Mayonnaise, another egg and oil emulsion, a hand blender in a tight fitting cup might produce good results as in this recipe: [http://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2011/10/two-minute-mayonn...]
Launch HN: Py (YC S17) – Learn to Code on the Go
Hey HN! I’m Derek of Py (https://www.downloadpy.com). Py is an education app for iOS and Android that teaches topics like app development, building websites and data science. We're in the current YC batch.

My co-founder Will and I have been friends since high school. We've been frustrated for a long time with the way existing learning platforms teach coding. They tend to be one-size-fits-all solutions that don't make learning to code a fun experience. Also, most platforms don't personalize content based on a user's prior skill level or behavior within the product.

We think personalizing content is key. We customize the content that users see and make it game-like to encourage people to spend more time on concepts they’re struggling with.

We also believe that interactivity is super important. Rather than passively watching a video, we want users to engage with the content. I’ve found from personal experience that I’ll watch an EdX video thinking I understand what they’re saying, only to discover later that I’m struggling on a quiz about the exact same concepts I thought I had learned.

When we first launched Py on the App Store about one year ago, it was named Pythonic because it only taught Python. Over the summer, we expanded to teach more programming languages and shortened the name to Py. While finishing up our last year of college we iterated on the product, developing more interaction types to make learning more engaging, and building more courses.

Excited to discuss mobile edtech and teaching people how to code! Also, we're quite curious to hear about your preferred way of learning...
Show HN: Random Shakesperean Dialogue Generator
A Dark Web service claims to track any phone and read text messages
Given how I keep seeing ever larger Nutella containers I half expect them to begin selling it in 30 litre barrels.
> until someone realized what the ideal shape and features the current ketchup bottle should have

And then someone had the great idea to create "dripless" bottle caps for both mustard and ketchup. Now my hotdogs always end up with a huge blob of mustard on one end.
This isn't as absolute as you'd think, at least in the firms I've seen here in the US. Nearly all have shifted to cloud solutions for some documents at least in the litigation world where I dwell, especially in doc production and discovery. In a recent class action, my team was sent opposing counsel's link to the Box folder with their 4gb+ docs sent over from their client. Which shows that the clients are demanding that their outside counsel use some of the tools that they've embraced.

You're right with respect to internal memos, notes, drafts of pleadings, etc. But I suspect this is changing too as more lawyers want to be able to work on docs from their phones and iPads and remote laptops.
And I can "build a car". But I wouldn't want to drive it.
> Using the arrows keys for the slides has been a standard since the dawn of web presentations, a decade or so ago.

So have arrows icons you can click to switch slides... Such as on Slideshare (coincidentally a decade old!).
I could see some other nifty concept coming alive because of this.
>you are correct, the optics do not seem to be an issue when secretaries are hired to manage the private lives of male CEOs, but the optics of investing in personal life management of the CEO do appear to be an issue of optics here. We agree.

No. We don't. We aren't close. I think you're so tuned to view the world through a particular ideological bent that you are blind to anything else.

This just reminds of dealing with conspiracy theory nuts like the UFO guys, like the 9/11 truthers. With them (and you) it's a constant barrage of red herring and non sequiturs arguments. You yourself are bringing out every single example of what you think is misogyny. All we're talking about is whether or not Marissa deserves to be criticized for her job as CEO. You live in ugly world governed by sexism and I wish you find yourself out one day.
Is there another name for "Cornell Chicken"? I swear I've had it (or something very similar) down here in DC metro, but never heard the name.
So fork it. New name, new UI.

Seashore was a try at this a decade ago.

http://seashore.sourceforge.net/The_Seashore_Project/Screens...
The problem in Keynes thinking on "social services" is that it's impossible to gather all of the knowledge necessary to ascertain what those would be. That knowledge is dispersed among ~320m citizens (in the U.S.) who each have particular wants and needs. And even if you could somehow attain that knowledge in one place, the likelihood of finding consensus on how a particular "social service" should be offered is next to zero. The end result? Nearly everyone disagrees with some of what government implements, which breeds resentment and causes gridlock much like we're seeing today in the U.S.

It doesn't have to be that way. By decentralizing decision making down to a level closer to the individual (if not the individual), more people get what they want. For example, right now there's a federal mandate for health insurance. Not everyone agrees with this mandate, so why not at least push it down a level to the states? California can still have a mandate for health insurance, and Alabama can decide not to. And then, why not push it to the city/county level? If you don't agree with San Francisco's mandate for health insurance, simply move to Oakland. You don't even have to move states, let alone countries.

Why do so many oppose such a solution where everyone can much more easily find a place where they agree with the "social services" offered (or not)?
What's wrong with their search? It's pretty good for a non-Google company.
So, they randomized the creative and made "unique versions". Whee. A real win would be "Nutella 'hires' algo to optimize design aspects to both increase sales and improve label perception both emotionally and rationally". Aka, an optimization. For example, their current label is very busy with poor use of whitespace; what if they experimented with a variety of placements, size, and overall design of various elements, with algo driven optimization and letting the "best" compete for sales and user feedback...

As long as they don't change the flavor, of course. Love that Nutella.